I agree with you. The problem is 99% of Americans still think there is an underlying 'value' to the businesses in the stock market, that they are buying shares in those businesses like in the old days. Personally, I disagree with them. I believe that the excess under-capitalization of financial assets sold in the last ten years have literally wiped away much of the value of corporate America and we are left with the equivalent of depreciated assets whose values can't grow until we accept the real numbers for losses. And we're not doing that, instead we're sending more cash into hemorrhaging incompetent companies. I think also that if most Americans would agree to value, in their heads and on paper, their homes at 40% off the high they think it is at, we'd have a quick recovery in the housing market. I only say that because I did it. I put my house on the market in March 2008 at 10% off a realistic price (about 30% off what would have been a high price) and sold my house in a day with two offers, one for a bit more than asking. It was the last quick sale in that town, because homeowners after me wanted to recapture the higher price they had in their head. So I got out of my adjustable mortgage before it became a problem. When I look at property now, I see homes that are still marked up to prices paid TWO YEARS AGO. And they are not selling. My niaive question is: why don't we just mark to market? Its an ego thing, I believe. Then there is the next, more inflammatory question. If a worker agrees to change his thoughts and accept his home at 65% of the price he had in his head, and he does the same for his retirement account and any savings he had, and he's willing to go to work the next day, where is the culpability of the government who has now blown his taxes on loser bailouts? Why should regular Americans take the brunt of what is a government sanctioned greed-a-thon? When Lehman Bros head sells his Florida mansion to his wife for $100, without repercussions? Its a one-sided acceptance of reality.