I agree with George Will when he said in his column today:
The president says: "The homeowners deserve our help." But why "deserve"? The principles of "compassionate conservatism" are opaque, but they might involve liberalism's premise that Americans are so easily victimized they must be regarded as wards of government." (I don't agree that is "liberalism's premise" by the way, but it seems to be government's premise in the housing market). And George Will says:
"Perhaps Washington's intervention in the subprime problem reveals the tiny tip of an enormous new entitlement: People who voluntarily run a risk, betting that they will escape unscathed, are entitled to government-organized amelioration when they lose their bets. The costs of this entitlement will include new ambiguities in the concepts of contracts and private property."
Yes, I too believe government bail-out for people taking risks -- like some of my relatives -- is a foolish road to take. I know my relatives knew better. They were thinking in the short-term sort of like when someone purchases a Hummer. Should we buy back all the Hummers or, better yet, give these people gas vouchers?
I can't believe I agree with George Will! Shit happens. By the way, don't say "shit" in your Miami Herald comments on their blogs. It won't post.
2 comments:
an enormous new entitlement: People who voluntarily run a risk, betting that they will escape unscathed, are entitled to government-organized amelioration when they lose their bets.
Government has been providing this "entitlement" to S&L investors and assorted other Wall Street types for years. What's so "new" about it?
when the dust settles it will be revealed that in fact "people" are not being helped, only the banks that encouraged the ridiculous loans and lending.
Once again, big business is helped while the struggling middle class is screwed.
No bail out!
Post a Comment