09-22-2008, 09:25 PM
Reviewing this, and considering all the financial mega-plate-shifts in the last eight or nine days, makes me wonder if it's not a bail out at all. It's a power grab.
Not unlike Roosevelt's lend-lease deal with Europe, when it was going broke fighting WW2 and starved for supplies and treasure, before the U.S. officially declared. As a direct result of economic bailouts made during that time, the U.S. emerged from that deal with the balance of economic and diplomatic power having permanently shifted in favor of the U.S. federal power. Europe has been a military dependent and economic client ever since.
I suppose it could even be argued that the speculative market has no business being in the business of something as fundamental as housing, shelter. If the federal government (we as a society, taxpayers, policy makers) wants to promote mass home ownership as a symbol of stability, domestic tranquility and national economic security, then we should all own it and distribute the risks, as a nationalized institutional enterprise, instead of leaving it to big-stakes casino owners and depraved gambling addicts.
I'm not saying I believe this hypothesis, or support a nationalized housing market, just thinking out loud. Is it a massive social-federal power grab, disguised as a market bailout?
Not unlike Roosevelt's lend-lease deal with Europe, when it was going broke fighting WW2 and starved for supplies and treasure, before the U.S. officially declared. As a direct result of economic bailouts made during that time, the U.S. emerged from that deal with the balance of economic and diplomatic power having permanently shifted in favor of the U.S. federal power. Europe has been a military dependent and economic client ever since.
I suppose it could even be argued that the speculative market has no business being in the business of something as fundamental as housing, shelter. If the federal government (we as a society, taxpayers, policy makers) wants to promote mass home ownership as a symbol of stability, domestic tranquility and national economic security, then we should all own it and distribute the risks, as a nationalized institutional enterprise, instead of leaving it to big-stakes casino owners and depraved gambling addicts.
I'm not saying I believe this hypothesis, or support a nationalized housing market, just thinking out loud. Is it a massive social-federal power grab, disguised as a market bailout?