"A leading US senator says both parties in Congress have reached agreement on the outline of a $700bn (£380bn) bail-out plan to revive the finance sector.
Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd said they had reached "fundamental agreement" on the principles of a package though he did not give details.
He said Congress could act in the next few days to pass a bill on the subject.
A main concern for Democrats and Republicans has been who will bear the brunt of the cost of the package.";
Full story;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7636542.stm?lsm
"The bail-out has been under scrutiny with politicians on both sides nervous about the deal being rushed through too quickly.
Of particular concern has been the issue of pay for the bosses of the firms in question, as well as concerns over the cost of the plan to the US taxpayer.
But both US Federal Reserve head Ben Bernanke and US President George W Bush have warned that without a deal, it would cause a significant set-back to the economy as a whole.
Those in favour of the deal have argued that:
* The deal would boost global financial stability
* Increase investor confidence
* Prevent a global slowdown
* Encourage banks to lend to each other, and beat the credit crunch
Those with reservations have said the bail-out would:
* Cost the taxpayer too much money
* Benefit bosses of firms who have taken huge risks
* Increase state debt
* Give too much power to the US Treasury"
IMHO none of the positives are certainties (and if these things do work, people aren't sure to what extent they will work at). The negatives are all very real and certain though.
Some most recommended comments from the BBC peoples debate on the matter of whether the US should bail out the banks or not;
"Forty million Americans can't afford health insurance; the minimum wage hasn't been raised in 10 years and the country has one of the worst poverty levels in the developed world. Yet as soon as the rich squeal $700 billion is magically found. America needs a second revolution.
colin craig, Stratford"
"The US bail-out is doomed to failure unless there are strict rules put in place.
A US woman banker has been paid $40+ million bonuses while 20,000 have lost jobs in the business.
The money NEEDS to be protected from the likes of George Soros who speculate & force & manipulate circumstances so they can gain. He made over $1billion from UK taxpayers by selling the £ & forcing it down & then profitting.
$700 billion unprotected, the sharks/hyenas etc are just waiting to grab a piece of it
Iain Connochie"
"NO!
They are attempting to STEAL from taxpayers to cover the elite's bad debt. This is a swindle, a sham, and if passed the final nail in America's coffin.
Many, many Americans are outraged and upset.This is theft, and if the BBC had any integrity left, they would use all those skills they were taught in journalism school to uncover the deeper story lurking within.
Eli, US"
"The billions of dollars would be much better spent on providing the capital needed for an alternative banking system, the "Ordinary People's Bank". There are plenty of computers and buildings left over from the failed banks to provide the infrastructure and indeed plenty of people with the expertise.
This way the taxpayer will make a modest dollar as proper banking is inherently modestly profitable. The toxic loans should stay where they are and poison only the gamblers who made them.
jonathan lucas, malaga, Spain"
"NO! NO! NO!
If the crooks on Wall $treet really believe in a free market, then they should suffer the consequences of their miscalculations and malfeasance... in the same manner that they expect to enjoy profits.
And the 700 BILLION dollar corp-rat welfare bailout from the U.$. taxpayers will prove to be a feckless effort. What about the worthless derivatives and other leveraged $cams? Eh? I'm talking about 600 TRILLION to one QUADRILLION (1000 trillion) dollars of worthless paper!
Guy Fox, Key West/Tampa Bay, United States"
"Great choice for the American tax payers. Support the bail out or face economic melt down. Either way, you pay.
[lewvdc], London, United Kingdom"
US economy will be a mess – with or without the bail out.
Without the bail out, the shareholders will suffer; many are rich individuals or states (ie China) outside America. With the bail out, US taxpayers will suffer, maybe not half as severe as in the previous scenario as one would hope the rescue plan would dampen the stress in the market.
The best rescue plan for America would be to get out of Iraq & Afghanistan, which will do wonders both for its economy & politics!
[Hilary277]"
etc.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jsp...95203#paginator
What are your opinions on this whole mess now that the US has agreed to bail out the banks using taxpayers money?


