@Foxfyre,
Much has been said how it would be cheaper for the government to insure those holding the bad mortgage paper (sub prime) than to buy it outright. The problem with that has already been mentioned, the government is the only one who can logically give such assurances, and therefore the tax payer is definitely and permanently on the hook for the toxic MBS (Mortgage Backed Securities). But I think Paulson has a good idea: The government takes charge of those assets then holds an auction where the government starts the bidding on them at 10-15 (maybe as high as 25) cents on the dollar (at which it will actually buy those assets at that price). Many Buffet types will recognize an opportunity and, sensing undervalued securities, will bid up the price and buy the paper. This invokes market forces, transmits some clarity in the securities price, and keeps the securities off the Federal balance sheet.
The Beauty of this is that is does not allow the likes of Frank and Dodd to get our government into the sub-prime MBS business. Remember that part of their plan, if the government bought this paper and ultimately made a profit on it, is to take the profit and place it in a fund for "affordable housing". Does this sound at all familiar to anyone? Can you say Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Actually this is even worse. This is what happens when government gets involved with the people’s finances. Do you really think that if the government was so lucky as to make a profit on the MBS , Barney and Chris will send a check to or even provide a tax credit for, say education expenses, to those taxpayers whose necks were on the line given the government's original purchase of the MBS?
Another thing, Congress seems to want to gravitate towards "keeping people in their homes". This is just politician speak to curry favor with the masses and generate votes for specific candidates at the expense of all tax payers. It is well known that people who lost their homes and who will soon lose them were either going to lose them soon or never could afford them to begin with--this is a "Cold and Hard" analysis that is also the truth. The trouble with these misguided congressional efforts (perhaps a redundancy in description) is that they prolong the quest for the bottom of the housing market. Since it was the tanking of the housing market that started this whole mess, these actions prolong the very financial crisis that is headline news.
JM