On the Bailout

A few thoughts come to mind:

1. The price tag of $700B seems preposterously high, but I think it represents the total debt the government is willing to assume. What it doesn't seem to assume is that when housing prices rise, the government SHOULD be able to sell some of these properties/mortgages and get some of this money back. I don't hear this addressed much. Am I off base?

2. This scares me to say, but I agree with Chuck Shumer on something. Rather than sign up for the whole enchilada ($700B), why not sign up for portions of it, say on a month to month basis?

3. I do think some of Sebastian Mallaby's thoughts are worthy of merit, especially some kind of restriction on firms' ability to declare dividends if they take the money...dividends represent shareholder return that is NOT reinvested/used to retire long term debt. No firm taking US government money to remove bad debt from its books should be able to declare a dividend for a year.

4. I believe that Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke are adults...and adults are what we need right now to get this ship into the center of the channel.