Hey, is it overly cynical of me to say that the failure of the $700 billion bailout, while itself a good thing, may be simply a prelude to an even worse, more hasty and onerous action a bit further down the line? Sure, the people may be clamoring against the corrupt world of finance now, but is it for the right reasons? And, when things get worse before they start to get better, will the same moody mob that is public opinion swing to making furious demands that Congress do something, anything, to fix the problem.
That’s one issue. The other is, is this really significant? After all, the $700 billion would barely scratch the surface of the real systemic problems, and methinks that it is a mere drop in the bucket when it comes down to inflationary pressures and the like. Is it not really just decorative, one way or another, a way for politicians to make it look like they’re doing something, while the Fed prints untold billions to “lend” at its discount window? I see folks at LewRockwell.com celebrating… has anything really changed?
This is what has changed. As recent as last night, it looked like the US government had totally repudiated the people, openly and absolutely.
Today, we find out that the US government set on each other like wolves, and this was mostly killed due to the partisanship of a Republican Congress that wants to distance itself from George Bush AND the Democrat rubber stamp machine.
I’m not sure what it means, but it looks like the two sides are at each other’s throats.
They probably will introduce something more ‘red’ to please the democrats that voted against it. The turn down was really quite a surprise for me, though.
So considering that the stock market is clearly dropping, would this be a good time to buy [select] stocks considering that we aren’t deluded into thinking that the failure of the bailout will lead to the death of our firstborn?
What really makes me mad about this whole situation is the blaming by most of the free market. In what sense is the financial industry a free market??? I place a lot of blame for this attitude on the supposedly free market republicans. They claim that they support the free market over and over again when really they are corporatist socialists. Now the crowd on the left gets to blame this crisis on 8 YEARS OF DEREGULATION. Which is totally outrageous yet the public seems to be buying this explanation. How is it that when things go wrong it is only freedom that causes it and never regulation?
I’m upset by the fact that most public free-market advocates don’t emphasize liberty as it is. Sure, talking about how the free-market is better than the regulated market is helpful, but they seldom step up and say bluntly “We have the right to do whatever we want as long as we don’t aggress others, despite the effects”. I can’t see why most successful people have no quarrel with others’ unhindered reaping from their benefits.
I hate it when masses claim they have a right to take something they don’t own. And I hate it even more when laws hypocritically and fervently punish thievery on the same grounds without even considering “social” taxation itself as theft.
Nation? People? Poor? I barely know 0.00…1% of my nation’s people, I can barely stand some of them, yet I owe them something. That’s odd.
If I want to give something for free, I will, but don’t force me. Politicians should say this.