In this morning's Boston Globe, Derrick Jackson appears on the OpEd page with some surprising ways the bailout could be made revenue neutral.
It would seem to me that a congress and white house that was truly willing to negotiate could find some common ground among Jackson's suggestions.
More...
Read the whole article here:
The Nation's Social Bargain With the Rich
Along with pointing out how past and present administrations have destroyed the safety nets for the not-so-fortunate, Jackson notes:
There is more than enough money among the financial elites to pay for the bailout. The Institute for Policy Studies last week calculated that a securities transaction tax of a penny for every $4 invested would add $100 billion a year to the treasury. Had such a tax been in place after the 2001 Enron scandal, it would have added up to the current cost of the bailout.
For the mathematically challenged, $0.01 on $4.00 is 0.25%.
Call it a bailout or rescue, but pay for it with an insurance policy. 0.25% seems a tiny premium.
What is most amazing to me is the thread of comments below the article. All kinds of people seem to want to run to the defense of the wealthy. How short sighted.
I believe the constitution starts as "We the people..." not "We the rich guys.
Some pigs are more equal than others. Sigh.
ARB