More Bailouts, More Regulations, More Government: Obama's Chump Change

Obama's economic team seems to confirm at firstlegislators ignored the people and worked to find a
glance that all his talk of "change" really means moreway to ram it through anyway. The Senate added
of the same - "more bailouts, more governmentbillions of dollars worth of enticements to help get it
intervention, more addressing symptoms rather thanpassed. So, even though handing over $700 billion to
causes - along with greater deficits, and massivereckless companies on Wall Street seemed like a bad
increases in government spending," which our illustriousidea, adding an extra $6 million tax break for makers
leaders in Washington superstitiously believe canof children's wooden arrows helped smooth things
restore us to economic health. As with all superstitions,along.
no logical argument or historical evidence can shake itTreasury Secretary Paulson had told the nation that
away. Besides, it gives them reason to spend, whichthe bailout money would buy up bad assets from
they love to do anyway.banks (like nonperforming mortgages and "toxic"
There is nothing our "masters" in Washington: Obama,mortgage-backed securities) in order to revive
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, or Barnanke at the Fed caninter-bank lending. Everyone (administration officials,
do to improve the situation, but they can prolong it, andcongressional leaders, the media, state sponsored
that is what they are doing.economists) agreed that it was the right thing to do.
Although they don't understand how we got into thisAfter it passed, they changed their minds. First, they
situation, we must, in order to find our way out of it.postponed buying up the bad assets in favor of
No novel theories, just a layman's understanding of ourexchanging government money for bank shares, even
present economy, what should be done next, andif banks didn't want to sell. Then Paulson just
some important ideas that have been forgotten byabandoned the idea of purchasing the bad-assets. So
Americans for far too long, a true free-marketthe "rescue" plan's solution that was vital to save the
perspective - specifically the ideas of Ludwig vonnation, no make that the world! was forgotten with
Mises and F. A. Hayek - explain our crisis which manyPaulson later admitting that he knew from the
economist and financial analysts do not fullybeginning it was the wrong solution.
understand, and which the usual theories fail toNext consumer credit needed saving, so that "millions
adequately explain. These ideas are not new.of Americans," as Paulson said, could "finance
They've simply been neglected.everyday purchases." So, it's a healthy economy when
As usual, government officials first misdiagnosed thepeople are "financ[ing] everyday purchases"? Well,
problem, giving themselves a pass and blaming othersaccording to Paulson and the government it is.
for the problem. They looked at the Great Depression,Therefore, the obvious answer is to prop up an
but got the lesson wrong. Next, they told America thatunsustainable system based on borrowing and
the government needed to follow the sameconsumption instead of encouraging people to live
wrong-headed policies that prolonged the Greatwithin their means as the market is trying to do.
Depression in order to save us from the current crisis,Government officials, the sound economist that they
creating, as Gerald Celente calls it, "The Greatestare, usually can't see the obvious, but German
Depression."chancellorAngela Merkel did correctly warn in
Beginning with massive bailouts, they are prolongingNovember 2008 that Washington's policy to create
what the market would have cured in a shorter time.and borrow more money would simply sow "the
Despite the people's overwhelming rejection of theseeds of a similar crisis in five years' time."
Bush administration's "rescue plan," Congress passed itAmerica, having the wonderful "choice" between
in September 2008. Why? According to the Center forObama and McCain, who both agreed on the
Responsive Politics, the securities and investmentcongressional bailout package, voted for "change."
industry contributed $53 million to congressional andWell, it felt good at least. That's what matters, even if
presidential candidates in the 2008 election. Thosereal choice isn't permitted. So, by the end of 2008,
voting for the "rescue" plan on 29 September receivedWashington had loaded onto the American people a
53 percent more money in campaign contributions$7.7 trillion debt.
from banks and securities firms than those who votedAnd they're just starting.
against it. Surprise. Surprise.Inspired by Meltdown by Thomas E. Woods Jr.
Despite rejecting it at first, because it had to pass,