Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh I see, so government intervention is fine on one hand but not the other.
The option I am advocating is not allowing this country to go down the friggin' toilet. "Interwoven" was probably one of the few accurate things that ever came out of Bush's mouth.
Do you understand the difference between money, capital, and a product that no one wanted? Do you understand why we got off the gold standard? Do you understand how monetary policy is pretty much what caused the great depression. Saving the auto industry isn't what kept us from the GD II. Keeping people confident in our banking system did. Ford was still viable and they should have been rewarded for taking the steps needed to be that way in the wake of the economic crisis. They would have most likely bought a lot of that production equipment and put many of those workers back into a job. Other companies the postured better would have stepped in to buy out the other equipment and facilities.
It's called industrial evolution and we had a chance to move past the tired old products we've been offered from some of the auto companies. Tesla for one was looking to make their mark. Something innovative. But of course their product may not have been wanted either. Instead all we got was fear tactics about how if they fail nothing will ever take its place despite the overwhelming evidence throughout history otherwise.
I don't understand how people can believe in evolution and dismiss industrial or economic evolution. Imagine what would have happened if god had stepped in to save all the dinosaurs when that big ole' asteroid wiped out 90% of the species on earth. I think you'd be SLCPUNKASOURUS and you'd be gobbling on some 3,000 ft trees. Instead, look, here you are chatting with me on the interwebs!
You're attacking back to avoid the question. Answer the question: Should we just have let it all fail? All the banks? What do you think would have happened then? Can you answer?
Without a bailout these industries would have failed, others would have taken their assets and creasted new sustainable businesses, just like the buggy whip industry. Is this a hard concept?
You're still not addressing the point at all. Your not accepting the reality of situation.
So you sincerely believe that when a dozen or so global banks go under and dozens more of national banks fail that the market would just "take care of it"? That the ripple effect of GM failing, and therefore all the spokes on that wheel (parts makers etc), would not have a domino effect on the economy in tandem with the massive bank failures?
Plenty did (and plenty have paid back btw), and economists have emphatically stated that if we allowed them to go under we would be in the next great depression.
Despite evidence to the contrary by people who are much smarter than you and I, do you REALLY think we should have let them all fail? Is that what you are advocating?
You're still not addressing the point at all. Your not accepting the reality of situation.
So you sincerely believe that when a dozen or so global banks go under and dozens more of national banks fail that the market would just "take care of it"? That the ripple effect of GM failing, and therefore all the spokes on that wheel (parts makers etc), would not have a domino effect on the economy in tandem with the massive bank failures?
I've got a bridge to sell you...
I am addressing the issue, you don't like the answer, better yet you can't refute it.
The short answer is yes. You think what we have is better? An 18% real unemployment rate? It weould have been the same except bad businesses would have been put out of business.
Saving the auto industry isn't what kept us from the GD II.
Nobody is saying it was, Mr. Strawman, but given the shaky scenario, and the interwoven nature of our economy, allowing it to fail would have proven disasterous. Both W and Obama were very clear in their intentions: To restore the financial markets, provide capital to businesses in danger and slowly unwind the failing companies to avoid further calamity. Any other time I would have frowned on this, but clearly this is not "any other time."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
