Wednesday, October 01, 2008

So earlier this week, the U.S. Congress failed to pass a federal bailout plan that would provide US$ 700 billion to help the economy cope with the current crisis. There were mixed reactions with many not surprised or glad that most Congressmen and women would reject it, as many of the U.S. public feel revulsion for what seems like a giant and costly bailout of the financial sector or even socialism for the rich, as I saw it described in one article. Others were disappointed because they believe that this bailout is necessary, not only for the Wall Street firms and financial institutions, but for the broader public who have borrowed any kind of loans from banks and such. Whatever the real situation is, there is a strong sentiment that the plan was presented badly and that the general public has a legitimate reason to feel disgust and apprehension over this plan being passed. There is also a lot of effort being made by U.S. federal officials like the President, the Treasury Secretary and the two main presidential candidates to convince the public that the bailout plan is absolutely essential for the nation. I think that this is true but not because the wellbeing of the financial institutions and banks are themselves intrinsically vital for the nation's wellbeing. The second article I linked to above, from Time, claims that the majority of the bailout plan is not going to help common people but financial assets held by the firms themselves. I do think what the writer says is largely true and I don't care much about the financial firms themselves. What I also think though is that these financial assets, much of them virtual garbage, comprise so much of the economy that if these firms go down, they will take America down with them.