Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg
. Well-respected economists don't all agree on this point, so why should we?
|
Didn't I just say people have different opinions and come to different conclusions and they should be respected?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg
The key point, as I see it, for legislators is how to do the greatest good for the greatest number without pissiing off the remainder so much that you lose your job in 2-4 years. Hence the bailout, which incidentally BOTH presidential candidates in 2008 were FOR (which might be the last time R's and D's agreed on anything).
From my viewpoint (admittedly somewhat biased within my own economic situation) the worldwide economy is slowly recovering. It will not attain "before crash" status before the end of next year (wild guess) but gradually people are going back to work.
|
The bailout didn't save jobs. This is wrong. All the bailout did was give a large amount of money to investment banks for causing the global economic depression.
We bailed out their gambling debt while giving chicken feed to production based manufacturing.
If GoldmanSachs needs 20 billion dollars the checks in the mail.....Ford and GM needed a few million and they had to be dragged through the ringer.
And as you said BOTH Presidents Bush / Obama love the bailouts because that's who they work for. Look at the second to last sentence of the article I posted above.
Don't be fooled by this notion that the bailout actually helped the economy.....all it did was inject capital into zombie banks that are completely insolvent due to their speculative toxic paper (derivatives).
And if people do go back to work it won't be for the same pay, they are slashing our standard of living, imposing austerity measures, and creating new taxes paid to private for-profit interests. Please, I implore you, read the full article.
1.5 QUADRILLION dollars of world wide derivative debts.