The total figure is approaching the 600 billion already committed, to which must be added the 700 billion from the final plan, that is to say: 1,300,000,000,000′-$ ($1.3 trillion) or, to put it another way, 150,000,000,000,000 pesetas (150 trillion pesetas) is the approximate cost of our excesses. Everyone’s. Because those of us who bought the securitisations or compulsively took out loans in one form or another, whether we realised it or not, are just as jointly responsible as the securitisation firms, the credit rating agencies; or as the companies that recklessly offered mortgages to the insolvent, and they, in turn, are to blame for embarking on the purchase of a house without knowing how to swim or having a life jacket. A explosive cocktail Financial markets, speculators, the credit and property bubbles, with a dash of terrorism and new geopolitical orders, a good splash of oil speculation, and all served up in a long drink glass made in China.
However, it is highly likely that hundreds of billions of dollars could be saved if some Americans were able to keep their jobs and their dignity, and thereby avoid the foreclosure of their partially paid-off homes. Even so, most of the repossessed properties will end up in public or quasi-public hands, which will then put them back on the private market according to criteria that are, for the time being, inscrutable. And they will have more than earned it.
European banks are breathing a sigh of relief because only those that acted like bloodsuckers, exploiting the now-defunct property developers by recklessly concentrating their risks, will disappear from the map. It seems that only the savings banks (mostly Spanish) and the odd reckless, second-rate little bank will 
sacrificed by the law of natural selection. Banking with a capital 'B' seems to be spared from extinction if Father, Son and Holy Spirit They dry and iron the wet paper they’ve been piling up on their balance sheets. Now all that’s left is the easy part: reinventing their core business, as they have done time and time again, whilst negotiating the upcoming regulations downwards. Beads of sweat were already trickling down the faces of big names in suits and ties in the sumptuous offices of the most prestigious organisations, for example at UBS without going any further. It was only a matter of weeks, or even days, before those beads of sweat became apparent to the general public. And the ground would have given way beneath their feet, and beneath those of their millions of customers too.
Massive interventionism in the name of the most extreme form of liberalism: socialising losses and privatising profits.... these are truisms that will remain just that, but it is essential that we learn from this historic mistake made by everyone. In my view, the action taken by the most powerful nation on the planet is not open to criticism, but rather vital. To judge the solution on the basis of its fairness is to forget that there is no better one. There is no alternative; or rather, the alternative is so harmful and regressive that humanity cannot afford it. 
It is the only one, although unfair a way for millions of people to survive the widespread poverty and famine that would have led to the collapse of our economic system. The Great Depression of the 1930s would have been child’s play compared to what the whole world would face if the most globalised house of cards in history were to actually collapse, since time immemorial. Even as we consolidate the foundations of the System, at the expense of all the inhabitants of North America and those affected by the coordinated interventions of past and future central banks, we may well have to weather something akin to that depression. But it will be a far lesser evil.
Throughout the 20th century, there was endless theorising about whether or not it was advisable to intervene in Mr Market. There were eminent theories to suit every taste. But they all spoke of a market in its purest form, and none of them envisaged that our own abuses would distort it to the point of absurdity. So much so that market self-regulation would endanger too many lives and make Intervention with a capital ‘I’ imperative. The theory worked until very recently but, as always, reality surpasses fiction. In this case, reality has surpassed economic theories.
Perhaps Obama has lost his appetite for winning the election, and for McCain, defeat would not be quite so bitter if it were to happen. Or vice versa. The fact is, the post-Bush landscape is more daunting than ever for the future most powerful leader on the planet. 
But the path has been laid out, and now all that remains is the journey through the desert itself.
The identification of loopholes, provisions, coordinated interventions, bailouts, vultures and other developments in the greatest multi-crisis in history were leading us towards the the light we sensed at the end of the tunnel even a year ago, when hardly anyone knew the meaning of subprime. However, let no one be under any illusion: We haven't come out of the tunnel; they've just turned on the lights. Powerful spotlights that reveal its filth, its winding nature and its immense length. We now realise that we would probably never have made it out unscathed, even if we had glimpsed a light at the end of the tunnel. 
Now we know what lies ahead, and this should serve as a lesson to us not to get ourselves into another dead-end situation again.
Meanwhile, in a grotesque turn of events, those analysts in their suits continue to recommend investments left, right and centre, justifying them with academic reasoning without the slightest sense of the absurd or of ethics.
Call me soft-hearted or naive (or worse), but I am proud of the coordinated global response that has continued to this day and of the action taken by the Trio Calavera backed by the Democratic opposition.
11 September 2001 and 18 September 2008 are two dates that have changed the world. What a 21st century lies ahead of us. A clean slate—unfair and accursed—and a hopeful and blessed new beginning.