Thanks Chris and fellow geezer in Paris!  I posted it late at night Central Standard Time and others in Europe were probably at that very time working on their posts which covered similar ground.  I really cannot complain when superb writing by Jerome, afew, and others grabs all of the attention.  It is not personal and I wouldn't want to compete with them.  But I do think that my proposed solution at least places the question of the opportunity cost of spending $700 Billion in what is likely to be a failed attempt to save financial parasites in the context of what alternative uses could certainly do.

I have updated the plan, cut the size of the proposed equity loan in half and re-contextualized the argument in terms of what has subsequently happened, but the faxes continue to flow.  I suspect this is the least used avenue of communication to congress. If nothing else, I hope to seed the idea widely amongst staff.

The reason this very reasonable approach is unpalatable to congress at this point is, as geezer in paris noted,  due to the nature of campaign finance.  It may be that a squandered $700 Billion is the cost of getting real attention in January for campaign reform.  I just got a strong letter on the subject published in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette.  I am gratified to see others on ET recognizing what a crucial issue this is.

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."