.
November 24th, 2008
02:45 PM ET

Worst of financial crisis ahead?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

A top economist at the IMF, the international monetary fund, told a Swiss newspaper this weekend the worst of the financial crisis is still in front of us. Olivier Blanchard went on to say things won't start to get better until 2010 or later.

These comments came before the government extended the late night lifeline to Citigroup. The president also left the door open for aid to other banks and financial institutions considered too big to fail if they find themselves in the same spot.

But are bailouts and loans, ones taxpayers are on the hook for , really the answer? We are in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. About $23 trillion, or 38 percent, of the value of the world's companies has been wiped out. Three of the biggest Wall Street firms have been brought down. Investors, home owners, and job seekers are all suffering.

Americans have high hopes for a new president and his administration this January. But even President-elect Obama said today, "The economy is likely to get worse before it gets better."

Here’s my question to you: Do you believe the worst of the financial crisis lies ahead?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Economy
November 24th, 2008
02:44 PM ET

Should Obama hold off raising taxes on wealthy?

 Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

There are stimulus packages and there are stimulus packages. Remember the one President Bush, House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid collaborated on a while back? It was $168 billion and resulted in a few hundred dollars in most people's pockets. It did it's job, gave a short term jolt to the economy, but it's effects are long since gone. And the economy is a whole lot worse now than it was then.

Watch: Cafferty: Obama wait on taxes?

Stand by for "Stimulus Two!" Congressional Democrats say they will have a stimulus package ready for Barack Obama to sign the day he is inaugurated. New York Senator Chuck Schumer told ABC's "This Week," this time the stimulus package could total $700 billion. Gee, another $700 billion. And that's a pretty round number in Washington these days. After all, $700 billion you may remember is what Congress committed last month to bailout troubled financial institutions. It's also an amount slightly higher than what the nation has spent on the war in Iraq over the last 6 years. But it doesn't matter, does it? It's money we don't have anyway, just add it to the national debt.

David Axelrod, Obama's chief political adviser, said Sunday that the cost of Obama's economic rescue plan would be pricey. He also hinted that the president-elect may hold off on raising taxes for the wealthy and instead just allow the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010. Despite Obama's campaign promise to immediately roll back the Bush tax cuts for people making more than $250,000, conventional wisdom says it's never a good idea to raise taxes during an economic slowdown.

Here’s my question to you: Should President-Elect Obama hold off raising taxes on the wealthy for two years?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Barack Obama • Taxes
November 24th, 2008
02:42 PM ET

Should obese fliers get extra free seat?

Should obese fliers get an extra free seat?

Should obese fliers get an extra free seat?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The Supreme Court of Canada is upholding a regulatory ruling that people who are "functionally disabled by obesity" have the right to occupy two airline seats on a flight for the price of one.

The ruling late last week said that airlines in Canada can no longer charge an obese passenger extra for an additional seat. The same goes for a disabled person who needs space for a wheelchair or who must be accompanied by an attendant.

This applies only to domestic flights within Canada.

Air Canada and several other Canadian airlines had appealed the original ruling by the Canadian Transportation Agency, but the court refused to hear it. Air Canada will lose an estimated 5.6 million dollars annually on the ruling.

U.S. airlines are not currently required to follow similar regulations. However, it's not unreasonable to expect that obese people in this country might try to make the same argument here at some point.

Here’s my question to you: Should obese people be entitled to an extra free seat when flying?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Airlines