It's not quite as succinct* as Common Sense, but I guess it got your attention.
You may be hearing grumblings from certain quarters about the dangers inherent in the "Geithner Plan" to deal with "toxic assets" -- which a functionary in the West Wing named G. Orwell has recast as "legacy assets."
Some of us call them "impossible to value assets that will be artificially revalued at government expense to ensure the financial system continues operating." But I digress.
Anyway, the grumblings are out there. It would be easy to say they're from the "Far Left" or from the "Far Right," but they seem to come from a lot of places.
Jeffrey Sachs gives a nice "what-if" explanation of a possible outcome. And if you think "possible, but not likely," may I point out that -- in Sachs's scenario -- any shareholder of Citibank should CLAMOUR for the bank to do what Sachs suggests. Possibly more useful than Sachs and his piece are his links to other critical pieces; they give you some good thinking on the topic.
I'm formulating my thoughts and opinions. As you might expect, they'll be highly critical [even if I support the plan. "critical" is my middle name. . . . well, not really. It's Geoffrey. Bit I digress.
*btw, the word succinct is pronounced:
- sək-ˈsiŋ(k)t ["suk-singkt"].
Don't fall for any of these new bullshit dictionaries that will accept the HORRIFIC
- sə-ˈsiŋ(k)t ["suh - singkt"].
They're wrong and appalling. If you've pronounced it that way, you've fucked up. Nothing wrong with that; we all fuck up on something, me especially. But just suck it up and accept that you're wrong.
You will be more successful if you accept your mistake. And that's NOT "suh-sessful" . . . .
When I hear "suh-singkt" my dick goes all flaccid [and yes, it's "flak-sid," not "fla-sid"] Jeeeezus Christ, don't get me started. . . . . .
Where's Wee Willy Safire when we need him?
how do I end up here when I start a post so nobly?