Display:
Well, in the diary I advocate essentially, doing the equivalent of rescuing already the homeowners.
That would be as cheap as rescuing the banks, and could have some other nice features.

Even in the US this perhaps would have worked. There are about 10 Million home owners in trouble. About 1 trillion $ were spend to rescue the banks. With 100000 $ cash, probably most home owners could avoid any trouble.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers

by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Fri Jan 23rd, 2009 at 01:58:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The money should be issued as vouchers, redeemable by the first lender who would then toss it down the line to all the slices. That would have a double resolvency action: houses saved and liquidity injected.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Fri Jan 23rd, 2009 at 02:07:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You are so right. Quick~! Where's my time machine?

And, I will need a great powerpoint document to show to all those who made the wrong decisions and gave free bail-out money to the people who caused the problem (and probably the solution) in the first place.

Oh, and a super-incredibly great powerpoint doc on ethics and society, the needs of the many and so forth. You think that it will be so good that those 10% with 60% of the assets will allow 20% of their assets to those 50% who only have 0% of the assets?

How about a 'rousing round of Kumbaya, at least?

Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.

Frank Delaney ~ Ireland

by siegestate (siegestate or beyondwarispeace.com) on Sat Jan 24th, 2009 at 11:57:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series