Where Did The Number $700,000,000,000 Originate?
What calculations brought us to this earth-shattering number?
Was it a complex calculation with standard deviations, a fancy regression, an extrapolation from an array of economic variables, or even the basic addition of all the unstable assets?
Want to know where it came from? Get ready to puke. Answer below the fold:
“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.”
Hat tip: Tammy Bruce
UPDATE: Number corrected, tx CR, must have been Freudian.
Posted by Kathy
September 29th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Yeah, I found out about that this morning, too. Propaganda is all this is. The markets need to equalize. Their rise was due to the housing bubble. The bubble burst and now the markets are correcting.
Frank got up and played his “poor people” card and basically said this is for people to keep their own they couldn’t afford in the first place.
And all it’s going to cost is $700 billion. Well, even if we aren’t the ones who will be paying that back, how angry are the young people who won’t be able to afford their own homes because they bought all these others going to think when it’s their turn?
September 29th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
When in Danger
When in Doubt
Run in Circles
Scream and Shout
Yet another thing to remember any time ANYBODY in some government agency starts spouting numbers. Most of them they just make up to support whatever action they are trying to get done.
September 29th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
P.S. You need one more set of triple zeros on that number to make it match what they are asking for.
September 30th, 2008 at 5:59 am
Is that for real? They just made it up!
September 30th, 2008 at 7:05 am
Yup, they just made it up. And the worst part is, their plan is likely to cost at least twice that.
September 30th, 2008 at 7:40 am
What if they don’t need to do anything?
Change the Mark to market law by exec. order, and all this will go away on it’s own!!!
September 30th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Bush doesn’t seem willing to do that, RP. I suppose this is one of those moments where you can really see the difference between 3 legged conservatism and “compassionate” conservatism.
The problem is, I don’t see how it is all that compassionate to keep slapping bandaids on a supurating wound rather than apply the antibiotic that kills the disease that’s causing the infection and then slap on the bandaid.