Several reasons to oppose this bailout plan. First, consider how much the 'experts' really know. A mind-boggling excerpt from Forbes makes it clear:

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."

Second, the government cannot be trusted not to change the rules as they see fit. Student loans, auto loans, and credit card debt are already being piled on the bailout plan instead of mortgage debt only. I read yesterday that Acorn, an organization involved with leftwing voter fraud, was slated to get 20% of the bailout 'profits'. And the short selling ban, which itself is un-American in my view, was presented/sold initially as limited to selected financial companies. The ban has now been expanded to include companies like IBM, General Motors, Hercules Technology, and Zales jewelers. In other words, even at these early stages, we can see the govt changing rules as it sees fit, all for the 'common good' of course

Third, we're already reading about how after this plan passes, with govt firmly in control, we must do "everything possible" to keep homeowners in their homes, even those who irresponsibly took mortgages they could not afford. What does this mean? 1% subsidized loans, forgiveness of debt, deferred payments, all paid for by taxpayers. The costs are unknowable, even to the most informed.

Barney Frank is one of the chief architects of the bailout legislation. He is on the record in 2003 as stating:

"These two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis," Frank said. He added, "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

So someone with colossal poor judgement and utter lack of foresight on this crisis is now in charge of developing the "solution"

And with a new President, Paulson and Bernanke may well be out the door in several months. Perhaps new Treasury Secretary Paul Krugman will be in charge of the bailout plan come January.

These are a few of the reasons why I believe this bailout should die on a vine, for the good of our economy, and to preserve our freedoms. As with every giant government power grab, the downside to no govt intervention is being wildly exaggerated (worse than the the 1929 depression!, zero money for loans, etc), when in fact, it's unknowable. Loans will continue to be made to creditworthy individuals and businesses as long as the risk/reward is profitable. Our economy will take some lumps either way, particularly in the financial and real estate sectors, but that too will pass.

I urge you to reconsider your opinion on this bailout

Maybe Bernanke is the equivalent of the second coming of Adam Smith, but this is not all Bernanke; it is as least as much Paulson, plus a great many more fingerprints. Even were Bernanke to sign off on the plan, we'd be well justified in wondering whether that public political act represents his best considered opinion. And finally, the brain surgeon analogy is shaky at several levels. Neurosurgery stands on the back of neuroscience, a body of reasonably consistent, experimentally derived information that combines with practical experience to produce an art whose effects are largely predictable. But economics is not a comparable science; instead it is one where even basic principles are fought over, let alone explanations of complex phenomenae. And the art of managing huge financial systems is even less reflective of "a body of knowledge." In that sense, most interventional economics is voodoo economics. So, a large degree of skepticism over the power of Bernanke et al. to act in an effective fashion seems to me to be quite reasonable.

So we should listen to the economic experts like Bernanke who have studied past economic crises?
How about Ben's mentor, Alan Greenspan, in recounting the build up to the Great Depression:

"When business in the United States underwent a mild contraction in 1927, the Federal Reserve created more paper reserves in the hope of forestalling any possible bank reserve shortage...The excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy spilled over into the stock market - triggering a fantastic speculative boom. Belatedly, Federal Reserve officials attempted to sop up the excess reserves and finally succeeded in braking the boom. But it was too late: by 1929 the speculative imbalances had become so overwhelming that the attempt precipitated a sharp retrenching and a consequent demoralizing of business confidence. As a result, the American economy collapsed...The world economies plunged into the Great Depression of the 1930's"
Quoted from "Gold & Economic Freedom" 1966

The sad truth is that both Ben and Alan know exactly what got us into this economic mess, but neither have the guts to propose anything other than a short term "fix" which will only delay the ultimate day of reckoning.

I think the analysis you quoted, Frank, displays a certain narrowness of vision. Many people, not just economists, peg the 1929 Crash as the start of the Great Depression. I believe there were two other factors as well:

The insistence on punitive reparations from Germany after Versailles weakened the entire European economy; and

Smoot-Hawley exported the aftereffects of the crash and essentially internationalized the Great Depression.

Not a negation of your larger point by any means, but the Crash did not inevitably lead to the Depression. It was exacerbated by diplomatic an dpolitical factors.

Oh. Maybe it does play into the larger discussion after all.

"economics" is NOT a "complex" theory.
It's only made that way by folksw ensuring their perceived value to society with obfuscation. Kinda' like lawers.
I've endured far too much "economic theory", from far too many demonstrably WRONG "experts",
(especially the academic variety- "instructing" whole batches of aspiring "professional" TV economists) to buy into the "It's too complicated for you mere mortals to understand." crap.