I doubt I have a bigger brain than you do but I will attempt to answer your questions based on the numerous articles that I have read on the subject.

If you ask Congress they approved more than the minimum needed to avert the crisis.  The bailout is to be paid in two installments, $350 Billion that Paulson has been distributing and early next year if he (or his successor) needs more (and I'm sure he (or she) will) then he (or she) will return to congress to ask for the rest of the bailout money.

That's impossible.  If there is money available the banks will find an excuse for need it.  There are actually stable banks that are applying for bailout money just so that they can buy up other banks.

This was one of the major blunders that congress made when they passed the bailout, they didn't ask for enough oversight over how the money is to be used.  The bailout bill was sold to congress as a way to buy up the mortgage backed securities, to date I don't think the Treasury Department has bought any of them, instead they opted to buy equity stakes in the banks.  Because Congress didn't ask for any real oversight all they can do is bitch whine and moan over how Paulson is misusing their money, but when you hand someone a virtually blank check you don't get to dictate how the money is to be used.  Idiots.

I have a feeling this one will depend on who you feel are the end-users and who you ask.  If the end-users are the struggling home owners who are defaulting on their loans, then no they haven't been helped.  If the end-users are small businesses looking for loans to make payroll, I don't think they've been helped either.  If the end-user are banks looking to buy up other banks then some of them have been helped.

Again this depends on who you ask.  If you ask me I don't think any bailout should have been passed, but since this one was I certainly don't think it should be used for the automakers simply because the bailout was for banks and the automakers aren't banks.

Your idealism is showing.  Mine shows rather often as well if that makes you feel any better.  The real question here is did you vote for anyone who was in favor of this bailout?  If you did then remember this when they are up for re-election and vote against them.  The only affect we can have on this situation is to pester our representatives with phone calls and e-mails and failing that with our votes when they are up for re-election.

I have to admit that I wrote those questions rhetorically.  My wife was tired of me yelling at NPR on the radio and suggested I stop preaching to the choir (her).  So I posted here.  Perhaps just a bigger choir? 

Government is the biggest waste machine ever.  That's why I laugh at people who suggest raising taxes.

Or when someone suggests that the Government 'take over' some previously privately run concern ... often with the rationale that it would cost less with Uncle 'Efficiency' Sam in charge.

Zubaz, the word is that Leo Berman's proposal for a tax-free holiday is picking up steam. We may get that second half of that original 700 billion back.

Lame Ducks no longer have to worry about the constituency that got them to the position.

A Modern Parable.

A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (Ford Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race. On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 7 people steering and 2 people rowing.

Feeling a deeper study was in order; American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 2 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 2 people rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program', with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rowers. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses. The pension program was trimmed to 'equal the competition' and some of the resultant savings were channeled into morale boosting programs and teamwork posters.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid-off one rower, halted development of a new canoe, sold all the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses. 

The next year, try as he might, the lone designated rower was unable to even finish the race (having no paddles,) so he was laid off for unacceptable performance, all canoe equipment was sold and the next year's racing team was out-sourced to India .

Sadly, the End.

Here's something else to think about: Ford has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

TOYOTA has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the US. The last quarter's results:

TOYOTA makes 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses.

Ford folks are still scratching their heads, and collecting bonuses. and now wants the Government to 'bail them out' . 

IF THIS WEREN'T SO TRUE IT MIGHT BE FUNNY

I had hoped that sentiment came thru in the post...guess not

At one time UAW fought an oppressive management...guess they gazed into the abyss too long...and became the thing they fought against.

So much so that they actually asked for ownership stake in GM as well as a position on the board in exchange for some concessions on the UAW contract.  I don't know if that deal actually went through or not but it just screamed conflict of interest.  Had I been a due paying UAW member when that deal was announced I would have been screaming bloody murder to get the the UAW president and his cronies fired for suggesting such a thing.

Oh it did. I was trying to just add to it.

Personally I feel this happened as soon as the UAW attacked Ford the first time.  Ford paid his people well.  UAW just wanted all the power.

Have you read about how the banks are refusing to tell congress how they spent the first 350 billion, so congress is throwing a fit and saying they might not release the other 350 billion until given specifics on how the money is spent?