UPDATE: Gut hunch tells me that, at the last minute, Obama will find some reason to vote against this bill, and then denounce it as the "Bush-McCain billionaire bailout."
UPDATE II: God love ya, Ed, but you're soft:
As long as the action taken now does not involve coercion, [economist] King [Banaian] believes that the US government can create a free market that will allow proper valuation of these derivatives.Earth to Ed: Taxation always involves coercion. Taxes are not voluntary. So if the government appropriates $700 billion in tax dollars as a giveaway to private industry, coercion is necessarily involved. It is a government-imposed transfer of wealth from one group of citizens to another, just like welfare or agriculture subsidies. Which is why they call it "corporate welfare."
Fundamentally, this bailout plan is about centralized economic planning. It's about Sovietizing the financial industry. It's about government picking winners and losers, an attempt to replace the economic decisions of the free market with political decision-making. It is not merely misguided, it is immoral.
I'm amazed at the spectacle presented here: At her own blog, Michelle Malkin is going hammer and tongs against the bailout. Meanwhile, at Hot Air, Ed is blogging for the bailout.
PREVIOUSLY:
- 9/30: Did Democrats blow the bailout on purpose?
- 9/29: 'Fear is running amok'
- 9/29: Bipartian bailout blowup!
- 9/29: Michelle Malkin, Michael Moore agree?
- 9/29: 'Financial affirmative action'
- 9/29: Republicans: 'Let's pass this lousy bill!'
- 9/28: Bailout deal reached
- 9/27: Is Neil Cavuto racist?
- 9/26: Arnold Kling on the bailout
- 9/26: Ace going soft on Paulson plan?
- 9/26: ACORN bailout?
- 9/26: What caused the crisis?
- 9/26: No bailout, no debate?
- 9/25: Porking up the bailout bill
- 9/18: How Clinton caused the current crisis
- 9/17: Feeling the pain he helped cause
- 9/16: Jamie Gorelick & Fannie Mae
Coercion? I would call it indentured servitude or peonage.
ReplyDelete