Is the bailout needed? Many economists say it's not
by Kevin G. Hall, McClatchy Newspapers
A funny thing happened in the drafting of the largest-ever U.S. government intervention in the financial system. Lawmakers of all stripes mostly fell in line, but many of the nation's brightest economic minds are warning that the Wall Street bailout's a dangerous rush job.
President Bush and his Treasury secretary, former Goldman Sachs chief executive Henry Paulson, have warned of imminent economic collapse and another Great Depression if their rescue plan isn't passed immediately.
Is that true?
"It's more hype than real risk," said James K. Galbraith, a University of Texas economist and son of the late economic historian John Kenneth Galbraith. "A nasty recession is possible, but the bailout will not cure that. So it's mainly relevant to the financial industry."
In other words, another money give away to rich people. The rich have a socialized right to be rich, after all. It's just so obvious. After all they are rich so they should be rich. And since they are rich and should be rich it's everyone else's responsibility (not theirs, mind you) to make sure they remain rich. That's all the Bushies are doing. Just passing out the money to the rich before they leave office.
McCain, of course, more than approves and, I think, enjoys playing the games for fun and profit. After all he (or his wife) is very rich and he knows he deserves it and so should we'uns.
And the Democrats are just so blind that they are unable to even ask an intelligent question nor look into the problem on their own. Except for a couple individuals, the democratic mass acts like acceptance of the administration's statement of the problem is a given. Even Obama can't muster a decent question or two and is preparing us for another capitulation like FISA.