I guess that's why our fearless leaders decided we only need to spend 25 billion on them... only a ~50%/capita expenditure compared to our neighbours to the south... ::shakeshead::
Don't worry. Our fearless leader says it's not a bailout. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081010.wharper_criticism1010/BNStory/politics/home)
What the government is doing is spending public tax money on insured mortgage papers held by the banks, so that they'll have 25 billion of capital to re-lend to the private sector.
So... the reason that this isn't a bailout is that these mortgages are not determinably in default?
I'm not sure what you mean by pork-barrel electioneering. It's one of those terms that gets thrown around a lot without me actually seeing any sort of definition or common usage.
In this case, handing out glad-handy money just before an election in order to shore up declining support in the polls. You are correct that it's hard to really call it "pork barrel" as it doesn't really provide any solid regional benefit to a geographical area.
Well, considering the rates we currently pay, it bloody ought to be. Also, I do hope our regulations would have kept us in good stead. Now if only I were making money again and could afford to pay my debts, I might be able to get a mortgage before my wife gets sick of me and moves back to New York.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 06:23 pm (UTC)Now only if our economy wasn't so tied to the US economy.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-15 03:31 am (UTC)And China.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-15 03:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-15 03:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-15 03:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-15 03:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 06:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 06:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 07:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 07:09 pm (UTC)What the government is doing is spending public tax money on insured mortgage papers held by the banks, so that they'll have 25 billion of capital to re-lend to the private sector.
So... the reason that this isn't a bailout is that these mortgages are not determinably in default?
no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 07:32 pm (UTC)So I totally read everything wrong (or maybe there was a $25 million figure showing up for something different).
I don't see this as necessarily being a bad thing mind you.
It's not a bailout because the banks will not go under without it. Mind you, it's not like that is what makes it a good thing.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 08:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 08:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 10:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-15 03:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 09:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-14 09:13 pm (UTC)Lee.