The Senate last night passed their revised version of the "bailout." Rest assured, it's not a rescue but a bailout indeed. The House will get to vote on this pork-laden bill now. Some Republicans may now jump back over the fence to support it because it includes tax cuts for various entities, which have nothing to do with the bailout plan. This is pork, and it ought to be turned down.
The problem is that Republicans can never have a voting record that turns down tax cuts, even if the rest of the bill is fiscally irresponsible. The American economy doesn't need platitudes or ideological bents right now, we need common sense.
If the solution were simple but required slightly less government regulation, Democrats wouldn't pass it because they are for increased regulation. This would happen even if the solution were common sensical. What we need now is not platitudes, but common sense.
The Common Sense Fix is advocated by Dave Ramsey, financial expert and consulted by economic experts. Congress does need to act, but not in the form of a $700 billion loan. Some economists are calling it investment, but the government hasn't always been so good at long term investment. Check out Dave's plan, which pulls expertise from some leading economists and has some surprising recommendations for common sense compassion as well. The plan is actually gaining some steam in Washington. Hopefully, the House will reject the newly formed bailout bill and adopt this one instead. The redemptive angle here promotes common sense.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Posts
8 comments:
I'm right there with ya. I support it too, and have made much noise about it. And while it is gaining a lot of underground steam, I'm worried that our House Reps will not listen to their constituents and follow suit with the Senate. I'm proud of the nays in the House from the junk bill that was voted on earlier this week, but I can only pray their resolve holds strong. I fear it cannot.
There is some good stuff in there. Much of that stuff, from my understanding, is in the package deal of this bail-out.
Unfortunately I think this situation is far messier and complicated than can be fixed by "common sense" in a one-page PDF document.
Doubtful that convolution and pork will fix it either. The legislation that has been recently passed is loaded with things totally unrelated to the crisis. Common sense and cool heads always prevail. It is during times like these that our Congress passes the worst of its legislation. Mark my words, in the years to come we will be regretting this.
I agree with you Kevin.
Sometimes, complex problems can have a series of simple solutions.
How exactly are tax cuts in this Senate bill going to affect us for the good?
How exactly is 700 billion dollars of debt helping us in the long term?
Because you can't have a healthy long term without a series of healthy short terms.
You also can't have a healthy long term without some unhealthy, cleansing short-term periods.
Did you know that 90% of 5-year periods and 100% of 10-year periods in the stock market's history have made money?
Did you know that more millionaires were made during the Great Depression than any other time in American history, both by gross number and by percentage?
And all this is despite the nearly devastating effects the governments of the time had on the economy. A free market economy works best when the government doesn't feel the need to constantly have their hands in it. Unfortunately, that runs counter to the way our political system works, a system where the voter essentially demands of a candidate or incumbent, "What have you done or will do for me?"
The sky is not falling. Rushing to fix problems without prudence, real as those problems may be, does not result in proper legislation. The stock market took a huge hit even today, the first trading day after the bailout was passed. It will come back up. Take a step back and look at the long term.
Absolutely Kevin, you can make money in a bad economy as you pointed out. But people also lose money in a bad economy. This isn't utilitarian where whoever makes the most money in this economy wins or was right. It's about real people with real issues.
Were we to sit back and let "the market work itself out" who is know how many more jobs were lost and homes foreclosed. I'm not willing to take that risk, even if
it includes going against capitalistic principles.
By the way, why don't more Christians realize that the Fall has effected economics too? Capitalism is not the end all be all, nor is socialism or any other economic system. They are both flawed with glimmers of truth in each. If what is necessary goes against capitalistic tendencies then so be it, if what is necessary is true.
Daniel,
Good points, for sure.
Capitalism ought not be sanctified, but it is important to think through the lens of personal responsibility.
1) What role should the govt. play in personal financial foolishness? Why is it the govt's job to bail out adjustable rate mortgages? For my view on this, see how Proverbs handles the issue of money.
2) Banks can be institutions of wickedness, as I think you're getting to. I don't disagree, and that's why I'm not opposed to govt. intervention (to a degree) in the markets. Govt. can be an institution for God's justice in the world a la Romans 13.
My overall argument is this: While the economy is complex and multi-layered, it did not require foolishness, ignorance, panic, and a lack of historical perspective to solve. Congress and the President are guilty of all of these things. 1 John says that perfect love casts out all fear.
You noted earlier that the problem is too complex for a simple solution on a piece of paper. I think that's a logical fallacy. If a simple, pragmatic, and compassionate solution is tenable, why does it matter how complex or not complex it is?
Post a Comment