What's the point of talking about this one huge mega bailout (aka 700b bailout) if we also....

[Locut0s]

are going to have individual bailouts of each mega cooperation that teeters on the brink of bankruptcy. In the end seems like to me these individual bailouts are going to add up to something similar anyway, the AIG bailout and money already given to other financial firms is already in the hundreds of billions. Now we have the auto industry bailout and just recently talks of bailing out CitiGroup. Yet they are still talking about the idea of a grander overarching stimulus packages in the 3/4 of a trillion dollar range. Do you think this is something we will actually see happen or will we just keep seeing these emergency packages for individual companies / industries?

 

[SickBeast]

Bailouts are a direct contradiction of the free market George Bush touts.

I suppose I shouldn't have expected any different from him.

It was his own policy that forced the banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them that created this mess to begin with, and now he just bails them out. The amount of money involved is unfathomable. It basically gives the banks a free pass to do whatever they want.

I think we will see the government do anything it can to save the world economy right now, and that includes all sorts of things, including more bailouts.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Bailouts are a direct contradiction of the free market George Bush touts.

I suppose I shouldn't have expected any different from him.

It was his own policy that forced the banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them that created this mess to begin with, and now he just bails them out. The amount of money involved is unfathomable. It basically gives the banks a free pass to do whatever they want.

I think we will see the government do anything it can to save the world economy right now, and that includes all sorts of things, including more bailouts.

Actually it was Bill's, but I'll let it slide because by passively allowing it to continue, he actively sanctioned it (well he would have been killed by the democrats come 2004).

Most people hate Bush, but all for the wrong reasons. This is a 100% valid reason to hate him, because he allowed this feel-good legislation ("America is so successful we can afford to take chances! Warm fuzzies!") to continue to exist.

 

[sandorski]

Bailing out the Banks/Credit Markets was to prevent a 1929 Panic situation. Beyond that is kinda dodgy as Bailing out other Industry hasn't really been tried, though I suppose the Chryslet bailout in the '80's kinda applies. It seems to me though, that Bailing out Supply is more a continuation of Trickle Down(Supply side), whereas a Stimulus package is more Demand sided. Governments pumping $$ into Infrastructure and other projects would stimulate the Economy while maintaining a more "natural" Market by not tinkering with Success/Failure of Individual Corporations. Pour Cash out to the Masses(through Projects(Employment), not Cheques) and let them choose where to Spend the $$.

As mentioned before, I really think that Mailing Cheques out is not really all that helpful though. You must Do something. Employ People, Buy Supplies, Build something People can see tangibly. Increase Confidence and get People's focus off their Fear/Worry.

All that said, the Auto Industry Bailout might still be necessary. That Industry's situation has come to a head at the worst possible time when Bad News feeds on itself and creates more Bad News as a result. I think it's good though that the Government has been dragging it out with them. The situation is serious, but not near as serious as the Banking situation was and it is important not to get caught up in the moment and throw $$ all wiilly nilly. Unlike the Banks, the Auto Industry requires some Obligations for accepting Bailout $$.