I hear what you're saying, but I think a lot of this fear mongering is starting on Wall St. by interested parties seeking a bail out.

If everyone wants to get their money out, it's obviously a problem. But I don't believe it. I think we're being lied to, as Wall St. is trying to pull the wool over our eyes one last time.

The reckoning day has arrived when these financial institutions have to realize that those debts are only worth $0.50 on the dollar. They could skate around that before, and blame apparent debt on new accounting rules. Now that the banks need to have the cash for their customers, they STILL don't want to admit that their assets are worth bupkis. Trust me, someone is willing to buy that junk. Maybe at $0.40 on the dollar instead of the $0.50 it's really worth. Their solution? Sell it to the feds for $0.80 on the dollar instead. Hooray!

I mean, I think it's all bullsh*t. Even if there is $500 billion in toxic debt, that represents $250 billion. Fine. Let them all take that hit-- these banks put together have the resources to deal with losses of that magnitude. But they'd prefer not to. So get some PR together to talk about the illiquid market for this debt and go hat in hand to Washington.

To the last point about Kroger not meeting their payroll? Well, I'd rather have the feds make GOOD loans to companies like that rather than take over BAD loans. The feds will be able to sell those good loans when this mess sorts out. Those bad loans will be on our books forever.

If the credit market is seizing up, the Fed need to get into the commercial lending business for the short term. But they won't have to. I bet Warren Buffet would be very happy to loan Kroger some cash. So would GE. Good companies will be able to borrow money should the "real" banking system seize up. There's no real danger that Kroger can't meet it's payroll, that's just more fear mongering from Wall St. insiders interested mostly in saving their jobs.

I have to agree with .

This bailout involves the government (us taxpayers) buying toxic financial instruments at a cost greater than their value. The bailout is intended to reflate the balance sheets of lenders and to eliminate some of their liabilities (principally CDS contracts). Everyone agrees it's a bad idea unless it's the only solution.

AlaskaSense claims that immediate and catastrophic damage will occur to the financial system and the economy unless the bailout is enacted at once. But the examples he provides don't support that judgment.

Liquidity crisis: The central banks have already proved, over and over during the past year, that they can inject as much money into the system as is called for.

Damage to investment bank customers: Investment banks don't have customers; they have clients who pay them fees for financial advice and for selling newly issued stock to the public, a tiny activity in the overall financial market (that is, a couple of IPOs and buyout firms may have to wait a year).

Regional banks: There is no evidence that regional banks are having liquidity problems, and the Fed can provide them loans directly or through J.P.Morgan-Chase or Citigroup or Bank of America all of whom are primary dealers, broker-dealers, as well as commercial banks if they do.

Retirement trusts and mutual funds. They don't need investment banks to trade stocks. They need a stock broker and a stock market. There's no evidence that either is in any danger of vanishing.

Commercial paper. The principal source of short term money required by corporations is the money market industry. It currently holds around $3 trillion. The government has stepped in and now, insures the industry. The runs earlier this week -- which weren't all that great -- will not likely be repeated. The money continues to be available to businesses.

In the end what we've got is an industry which is pulling out all the stops to try to panic the public and thus, the Congress into adopting a poorly thought out, unnecessary, and rash bailout plan to save its hide. The last thing we should be doing is going off half cocked without the information necessary to make an informed and careful decision.