The outrage on the part of Congress– not to mention theconstituents – is understandable, given the size of the billtaxpayers are being asked to foot, Seth Weinstein, principal ofStamford, CT-based Hannah Real Estate Investors, tellsGlobeSt.com.

Furthermore, the proposed plan doesn't address the fundamentalproblem of accountability or of a financial system that has gottenseriously out of whack, he says. "Today, financial engineers thatpackage and repackage derivative products stand to earn 10 times asmuch as the original developers or manufacturers of theseproducts," he says, citing what he says is just one example.

Unfortunately – or not, depending on one's view – it appearsthat the sizable detractors to the plan proposed by Secretary ofTreasury Henry Paulson last week may ultimately get their wish,either by blocking it outright or by weighing it with unpalatablerequirements. Some of the suggested additions to the plan arecounter-intuitive, David Webb, senior managing director –principal, with Cassidy & Pinkard Colliers in Washington DC,tells GlobeSt.com. Capping CEOs pay of companies participating inthe plan is an example. "There is no point of having a program thatdiscourages lenders from participating." Other proposals, though,do make sense – such as requiring the firms to share their profitswhen the economy and their fortunes do rebound. "If the governmentoverpays for these assets that are now under water, it makes sensethere should be some kind of compensation."