#29 Blackadder – On many points, I agree. My concern is that bailing out the banks, or bailing out the investors results in the same thing…limiting someone’s losses. They may appreciate it, but they (if smart) will not just leap back into investing.
To me it’s about finding the group(s) that will trigger the fix to the economy and giving them money. Essentially, to me, that is giving money to the non-rich person/family. They will spend it (solving the problem of those who hold on to the stimulus) and it will in and of itself, stimulate the “right” businesses. This isn’t about making banks or insurance companies whole, it’s about making the grocery stores whole (if you catch where I am going…where the common “man” spends their money). Stimulate the commodoties and that is the surest way to fix things. Don’t give it to banks or the rich who MIGHT give it to the common man, give it to the man, and let the man decide what in our capitalist system is worth buying (I don’t mean to imply a negative on capitalist).
I’m sure my comments will be decried by some as socialist, but all I’m saying is that the tax cuts at the lower end will revitalize the core of our economy, and that will work it’s way back up. To continue to fund trickle down (which didn’t work before in this kind of economy) is just asking for the wealthy to have more options. If capitalism is good, then give the money to the people and let them spend it where they will, and the companies that deserve it, who have earned it, will get it. Then we don’t have to worry about giving money to companies that have lost the public trust, have not embraced competition, or who have squandered their position.
It’s not that I want to be socialist, but I want to reward the people (since we are spending THEIR tax money) who will in turn spend it on the most worthy companies. If your company didn’t get anything, maybe you (as a company) should think about that…
That’s where I am going.
Jack
