<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flights of fancy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://radian.org/notebook/700bn/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://radian.org/notebook/700bn</link>
	<description>Code. Culture. Clarity.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:11:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Duncan McGreggor</title>
		<link>http://radian.org/notebook/700bn/comment-page-1#comment-767</link>
		<dc:creator>Duncan McGreggor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:11:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radian.org/notebook/?p=84#comment-767</guid>
		<description>That. Was. Hilarious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That. Was. Hilarious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Seaborn</title>
		<link>http://radian.org/notebook/700bn/comment-page-1#comment-766</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Seaborn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radian.org/notebook/?p=84#comment-766</guid>
		<description>It's 5% of US GDP isn't it?  A round number in that sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s 5% of US GDP isn&#8217;t it?  A round number in that sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TelevisionSpy</title>
		<link>http://radian.org/notebook/700bn/comment-page-1#comment-765</link>
		<dc:creator>TelevisionSpy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:09:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radian.org/notebook/?p=84#comment-765</guid>
		<description>Your scenario actually sounds like something I would want to watch. I believe the actual story regarding the $700 billion figure is that the guy responsible decided not only that he wanted a large number, but that he needed it to be be an evenly odd number in that the number was not too high as to make it seem impossible to raise, and not too little to downplay the severity of this issue.  He later took back his words, when he alleged that he had no reasoning for the number, and that it was just a random number that he pulled out and couldn't justify nor debate any claims on why in particular that number.

Now that the number has been set, it's unlikely they will lower it. We've all gotten used to it, and while things didn't play out as we thought they would, I'm sure this isn't the last we've heard of this $700 billion. I bet in a few months time, if not weeks, we'll be hearing for yet another request for this money. At least that's in my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your scenario actually sounds like something I would want to watch. I believe the actual story regarding the $700 billion figure is that the guy responsible decided not only that he wanted a large number, but that he needed it to be be an evenly odd number in that the number was not too high as to make it seem impossible to raise, and not too little to downplay the severity of this issue.  He later took back his words, when he alleged that he had no reasoning for the number, and that it was just a random number that he pulled out and couldn&#8217;t justify nor debate any claims on why in particular that number.</p>
<p>Now that the number has been set, it&#8217;s unlikely they will lower it. We&#8217;ve all gotten used to it, and while things didn&#8217;t play out as we thought they would, I&#8217;m sure this isn&#8217;t the last we&#8217;ve heard of this $700 billion. I bet in a few months time, if not weeks, we&#8217;ll be hearing for yet another request for this money. At least that&#8217;s in my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
