You were elected to bring some order into the financial system, punish the scumbags that got us into this mess, take steps to provide healthcare for all American citizens (not just for you, your brats and your cronies on Capitol Hill but for the 75 million uninsured/underinsured Americans as well) and right the injustices of the Bush administration.
Everything we’ve seen for the last two months seems to suggest that you are way in over your head in tackling our nation’s pressing problems – from having a hard time getting untainted senior officials for your administration to taking steps to fix the current crisis.
If what we’ve seen these last two months is the hors d’oeuvre of the Obama administration we shudder to think of what the entrÃ©e looks like.
Now we read reports that your imbecile ‘did-not-pay taxes’ Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is preparing another stupid bailout plan for the banks on Wall Street.
Respected economists like Paul Krugman have already come down harshly on Geithner’s latest cash-for-trash sophomoric idea. This is what the Nobel winner Krugman had to say in his column in today’s New York Times:
Obama administration, like the Bush administration, apparently wants an easier way out. The common element to the Paulson and Geithner plans is the insistence that the bad assets on banksâ€™ books are really worth much, much more than anyone is currently willing to pay for them. In fact, their true value is so high that if they were properly priced, banks wouldnâ€™t be in trouble.
And so the plan is to use taxpayer funds to drive the prices of bad assets up to â€œfairâ€ levels. Mr. Paulson proposed having the government buy the assets directly. Mr. Geithner instead proposes a complicated scheme in which the government lends money to private investors, who then use the money to buy the stuff. The idea, says Mr. Obamaâ€™s top economic adviser, is to use â€œthe expertise of the marketâ€ to set the value of toxic assets.
But the Geithner scheme would offer a one-way bet: if asset values go up, the investors profit, but if they go down, the investors can walk away from their debt. So this isnâ€™t really about letting markets work. Itâ€™s just an indirect, disguised way to subsidize purchases of bad assets.
Obama, it’s time you got your shit together.
Stop dicking around with asinine plans and let’s see some sensible moves to address the financial crisis.Â
Nice one. It’s only for these things I read your blog. Write more of these as your movie reviews are mere waste for the following reasons
1) Hardly PEOPLE read it (only Google webcrawler reads it for some reason)
2) Even if some jobless people read it, they laugh their ass of it
3) Even if some few specimen do not find it funny, still they dont follow it
4) Finally it mere clogs your server space
You write above: Hardly PEOPLE read it
You are wrong.
Fine, I agree. Many read your blog. And most of them are Indians.
Even I read all your posts. Its fine if you criticise Bolly movies etc but what “irrates” me is the way you criticise India everywhere. Few places atleast is acceptable, not everywhere, like you’ve mentioned Vadivelu in I love you man review. It doesn’t even gel with the post. And it looks so phony, looks as if you desperately trying to pull in comments.
1. But it’s true that the comedy genre in Indian movies is plain awful.
Let’s look at some of the Vadivelu movies in recent years – Villu, Vel, Pokkiri et al. All terrible.
2. You write: looks as if you desperately trying to pull in comments
Oh, come on. If we were so desperate for pageviews, we’d have put titillating pictures of some Bollywood or Kollywood actresses. The SI blog is mostly text.