Um. Okay. No bailout for now.

[xiphias]

So, the House Republicans -- as well as a pretty good number of House Democrats -- have rejected the bailout plan.

I have absolutely no idea if this is a good thing or a bad thing. None whatsoever.

In general, though, if this means that they have to go back and put together a new plan that actually has THOUGHT behind it, one that they can EXPLAIN to people, I suspect that would be a good thing. I was uncomfortable with the "AAAGHHH! PASS THIS BILL NOW SKY FALLING EMERGENCY DANGER WILL ROBINSON GIVE US MONEY THIS SECOND" thing.

I could very well be wrong. Maybe I ought to be buying a shotgun and rifle and stocking up on canned goods -- I have no idea.

. . . I kinda want a .22 bolt action rifle, anyway . . .

Comments

[voltbang.livejournal.com]

Gone? Or gone on paper? I don't retire for 20 years or more. I stuck 75% of my retirement money in low risk stuff a while ago to minize the bust. It'll even out in the recovery. Before the crash, I didn't have the money for 20 years, I still don't have the money for 20 years. If I were retiring soon, I'd be a lot more worried.



Is the scale of "boom" a constant? In my experience, it's not. When boom becomes inevitable, it gets bigger over time. Does putting it off make it go away, or does it just make it happen later and worse?

[felis-sidus.livejournal.com]

Gone as in gone. Can I make enough profit on my remaining investments to end up as well off at retirement as I would have been without the loss? Unlikely at best.

I tend to agree with you re the scale of boom.