Listen, here's why they say we should do the bailout:
Getting those debts off their books should bolster those companies' balance sheets, making them more inclined to lend and easing one of the biggest choke points in the credit crisis.Now maybe I'm being naive here, but rather than buying up someone else's bad debt (often made by people who should've known better), how about instead the government sets itself up to do this lending they're so worried about, at least for the time being (perhaps the government's "company" can be bought out by a bank a few years down the line).
Why should taxpayers spend more money (that we dont actually have) to buy the bad loans of a failed bank, when they could instead spend that money on good loans to financial organizations that havent failed? Plus, I can guarantee you that the financial workings of our bank will be far more transparent than those of the institutions BushCo is currently proposing to bail out.
2 comments:
Yeah, I'm in agreement with you. I feel this is a somewhat slippery slope. I hate to see how businesses are anti welfare unless it's CORPORATE welfare!
Yes, the people who least need the help get it, and the people who most need it do not. And those in the middle get to pay the most.
We've been getting a twenty-plus year con-job from the Republicans, and once again their marks are about to deliver the goods. Free markets may be the only good solution to unfettered money-making, but that doesnt make them good for the overall populace.
And while people may hate paying taxes, after this debacle and the Iraq war, I dont see how we're going to have much choice. And for what?
Another con job.
Republicans convinced us that taxes were bad, but taxes were not the problem, wasted taxes were, and nobody has been better at that than the Republican Party - no welfare queen ever lived as high on the hog as the corporate welfare kings of America, or with as much impunity.
Post a Comment