Federal Reserve announced a plan to work with other central banks to alleviate a global credit crisis. The Dow Jones industrials surged more than 100 points.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071212/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/wall_street
Why is it OK for banks to be on corporate welfare?
2007-12-12 04:54:45 · 8 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
- So much for the so-called "free market" -
2007-12-12 04:55:37 · update #1
LOL! Not the worst point to make.
Many years ago, the conservative columnist George Will expressed concern that we "socialize losses" in our economy. The rationale is that we don't want the whole economy to tank, so we bail people out. One can agree or disagree with this rationale.
there is something to be said for making people live with their bad decisions. god knows I'm living with mine!
Also, I don't know the nature of the plan - what, if any, funds are being used. So "corporate welfare" may not be the right term. I'll have to check it out! Thanks.
2007-12-12 05:00:47 · answer #1 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I trust the comments by utilising Joe S and Vince. On a present day holiday out of the US, I got here upon an engaging assessment. In our u . s . there's a feeling that our equipment will grant for every physique who needs to strengthen their very own economic fortunes. it extremely is cautioned in this question that anybody can in simple terms "pull themselves up by utilising their bootstraps." it extremely is this style of nicely-liked perception that it is going without question. right here the belief is even unthinkably prolonged to the wealthy. yet different extra socialistic international places (any of them,) have not got this thought so firmly ingrained into their psyche. hence; someplace else, it extremely is extra possibly to discover extra social compassion than in the US. The proposed bailout replaced into/is in simple terms that: a bailout with organization as prevalent. Like youngsters ambitious one yet another, possibility taking will consistently proceed unabated till somebody gets harm. and then while it extremely is attainable for company leaders to shift the blame and accountability they'll accomplish that. Our equipment isn't turning in the two ethical coaching or powerful hassle the two by utilising legislations or stockholder accountability to those company leaders. the money went to intense possibility mortgages using requirement for boost in an atmosphere while there replaced into extra funds than investments. it extremely is a topic with our fiat forex, there isn't any shrink to the quantity of funds which would be revealed. The equipment isn't working and correction to company welfare is basically a factor of the answer. it would desire to be time for a return to a optimal and heavily learn the desire for a constitutional convention. Our shape is so previous and old that it includes provisions for which the founders could be sued had they blanketed them immediately. although in todays atmosphere i'm uncertain a fairer bargin would desire to be struck. maximum heavily, is for us to benefit what we could like from our lives and what we are keen to resign to get it.
2016-10-11 03:31:28 · answer #2 · answered by menachekanian 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why is it that the housing markets weren't as bad as liberals said, and the credit crisis wasn't as bad as liberals said, when the markets turn around, they're somehow "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps"?
In case you didn't notice, the DOW has surged 4000 points since Clinton's recession (2001).
That looks to me like the market driving itself. Funny how that works.
2007-12-12 04:58:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Won't happen - just like the credit cards. Remember that the last step before the fall of a democracy is dependance.
2007-12-12 09:37:56 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Funny that you only mention the susidizing part to say its not free market.
2007-12-12 05:04:40 · answer #5 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They will keep sucking at the Government T*t as long as the money flows.
2007-12-12 05:01:57 · answer #6 · answered by Guerilla Liberal fighter 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It has to get worse for it to get better.
And with constant government handouts, don't expect it to get better.
2007-12-12 04:58:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It is obvious to me that you don't know squat about economics.
2007-12-12 04:59:14 · answer #8 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋