In the wake of the Federal Government effectively bailing out a privately held bank financial institution our tax dollars, an intervention technique that is almost never used, maybe we should be asking if that’s really the best use of our tax dollars in this economic climate.
We’re now on the hook for years of risky investments and bad decisions by a private financial company like Bear Stearns. Funny how when times are good and profits are soaring, mega-companies don’t want anything to do with the government.
Regulation is bad, capitalism knows best, etc… But when their stock price is falling like a lead ballon and bankruptcy looms large, the government has a responsibility to come in and bail them out.
I’m no financial wizard, but it seems to me like that’s the worst kind of public-private relationship. The private companies and their CEO’s get all the benefits, and we the taxpayers are left holding the bag when things go downhill.
I live in the Washington Heights neighborhood of Milwaukee, WI with my wife Jen, our daughter Emerson, and sons Carter and Colton.
Dan – this post flies right in the face of everything you have previously stated.
You see, conservatives – REAL conservatives believe this intervention is horrible. The government should not intervene here. The problem began long ago, though, when government intervention STARTED this entire crisis by forcing lending institutions to lend to non-qualifying individuals.
Remember this example when you think government should start solving our problems, please!
Too partisan, not partisan – I just can’t win :)
As for the gov. forcing investment banks like BS to give non-qualified people loans – that’s the first time I’ve heard anyone claim that. BS didn’t give mortgages and wasn’t forced to provide loans to anyone. Unless you’re referring to companies like Fannie May or Freddie Mac that provided *government* backed loans to low-income individuals, but that is completely different that investment banks like BS buying up risky loans – and no one forced them to do that.
As for the government, this bailout is a result of the administrations policy decisions and not an ideological or political stance, so I wouldn’t say that this is the gold standard of why government shouldn’t get involved with social services, etc.
But agreed, the government shouldn’t be stepping in here.
Too partisan, not partisan – I just can’t win :)
:)
Why? Follow the money! Campaign money does wonders.
Dan,
I’m surprised to see that, on this issue, you’re in agreement with Mark Belling.
The government saving companies from the consequences of their bad decisions is foolish and expensive.