Here is a brilliant idea from our "conservative" leadership in response to the credit crisis.
WASHINGTON – The Bush administration is considering taking ownership stakes in certain U.S. banks as an option for dealing with a severe global credit crisis.
An administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because no decision has been made, said the $700 billion rescue package passed by Congress last week allows the Treasury Department to inject fresh capital into financial institutions and get ownership shares in return.
This official said all the new powers granted in the legislation were being considered as the administration seeks to deal with a serious credit crisis that has caused the biggest upheavals on Wall Street in seven decades and continues to roil global markets.
Supporters of this approach, such as Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., argue that injecting fresh capital into U.S. banks who want to participate in the program would be an effective way to bolster banks' balance sheets and get them to resume lending. Taxpayers would benefit because the government would receive an equity stake in the bank in return for providing the capital.
How exactly is that a reasonable response under our Constitution? It doesn't sound like something that jives with American political thought. It does sound like a different political document though:
Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Those words come from the Communist Manifesto, the fifth plank. The White House is now taking economic advice from Charles Schumer, part of which includes the state taking the means of production and credit as we buy up banks, increase regulation and potentially bailout auto makers. What next, buying General Motors and have Uncle Same getting into the auto business? Why not state commune farms? State oil companies? Call Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro, have them over to the White House! What communism failed to accomplish by military force will be finally accomplished by apathy and overwhelming self-interest. In our desire to protect our own self-interest, we are willing what we hold most dear. Of course most people have no idea what ideals we should cherish and what our country was founded on (hint, it wasn't the government holding your hand and correcting every mistake)
WASHINGTON – The Bush administration is considering taking ownership stakes in certain U.S. banks as an option for dealing with a severe global credit crisis.
An administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because no decision has been made, said the $700 billion rescue package passed by Congress last week allows the Treasury Department to inject fresh capital into financial institutions and get ownership shares in return.
This official said all the new powers granted in the legislation were being considered as the administration seeks to deal with a serious credit crisis that has caused the biggest upheavals on Wall Street in seven decades and continues to roil global markets.
Supporters of this approach, such as Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., argue that injecting fresh capital into U.S. banks who want to participate in the program would be an effective way to bolster banks' balance sheets and get them to resume lending. Taxpayers would benefit because the government would receive an equity stake in the bank in return for providing the capital.
How exactly is that a reasonable response under our Constitution? It doesn't sound like something that jives with American political thought. It does sound like a different political document though:
Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Those words come from the Communist Manifesto, the fifth plank. The White House is now taking economic advice from Charles Schumer, part of which includes the state taking the means of production and credit as we buy up banks, increase regulation and potentially bailout auto makers. What next, buying General Motors and have Uncle Same getting into the auto business? Why not state commune farms? State oil companies? Call Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro, have them over to the White House! What communism failed to accomplish by military force will be finally accomplished by apathy and overwhelming self-interest. In our desire to protect our own self-interest, we are willing what we hold most dear. Of course most people have no idea what ideals we should cherish and what our country was founded on (hint, it wasn't the government holding your hand and correcting every mistake)
Heck, we might as well elect Barack Obama. Better the socialist who admits it than the socialist who pretends to believe in the free market and calls himself a conservative. We are experiencing a leadership gap in this country, no one is willing to stand up and tell people the hard truth because the soft lie is so much easier to pass. These seem like small measures, a little here and a little there but they all end up inexorably at the same place. Once the bureaucracy gets it's claws into something, it never lets go.
Dosvidaniya America
No comments:
Post a Comment