Tuesday, April 23, 2024

Top 5 This Week

spot_img

Related Posts

Liberals in shock, but it’s a good kind of shock: banks now reliant on GOVT

The real risk of failure is one of the things that make capitalism — and personal responsibility — work.  In fact the possibility of failure is absolutely required in order for it to work.  So naturally, that’s one reason why progressives in government have prevented capitalism from working as best they can, by meddling, regulating, imposing social engineering-oriented policies, and then “bailing them out” —or what they speciously call “saving” them all, when it appears they (predictably —hopefully?) fail.  And that pernicious effort will continue to succeed unless we in the sensible, freedom-loving set, stop progressives

January 31, 2010
Watchdog: Bank Bailouts Created More Risk in System

The government’s bailout of financial institutions deemed “too big to fail” has created a risk that the United States could face a worse fiscal meltdown in the future, an independent watchdog assigned to review the program told Congress on Sunday.

The Troubled Assets Relief Program, known as TARP, has not addressed the problems that led to the last crisis and in some case those problems have festered and are a bigger threat than before, warned Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general at the Treasury Department.

“Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car,” Barofsky wrote.

Barofsky wrote the $700 billion financial bailout has encouraged more risk-taking because bank executives, who are still receiving massive bonuses, figure the government will come to the rescue the next time they steer their ships nearly aground.

“The market mentality now seems fixed that the U.S. government will continue to step in and bail out giant financial institutions,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. “The IG’s findings confirm my decision to oppose releasing $350 billion in TARP funds last year and my recent vote to terminate the program altogether.”

“The SIGTARP’s report is just another reminder of how Congress and the administration have ignored the role that politics and government played in causing the housing crisis and the economic collapse while pursing other regulatory reforms will not fix the underlying problem,” said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the ranking member on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
[…]
The report warned that these supports mean the government “has done more than simply support the mortgage market, in many ways it has become the mortgage market, with the taxpayer shouldering the risk that had once been borne by the private investor.” …

Or in the words of progressives, Eureka!

(1) The progressives (from both parties, but mostly Democrats) meddled in the private banking sector in the first place in their effort to social engineer, and required banks to make stupid mortgage and other loans to people who had no business buying homes or new cars;  (2) Then when that (absolutely predictably) failed, they bailed out (“saved”  —wink!) banks and car companies and the people who took out stupid loans, instead of letting them fail as they should have.  And now all those folks rely on the state.  This is the desired result.

Progressive Dictionary Alert:  In the bizarre world of the progressive’s crapspeak, “saving” really means “killing”.  Any time a progressive politician speaks of “saving” something or “investing” in something, hold onto your wallet and watch out for more government controls and regulations, and higher taxes.

Bailing out companies causes capitalism itself — and personal responsibility — to fail.  It’s really a form of restructuring society.  Or transforming an economy.  To a socialist end.

Five days before election night, 2008, Barack Obama, on the verge of winning, said in a rousing campaign speech that “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America!”.  Few people realized what he meant.  He really did have in mind to “transform America”, and not just in small ways.  “Fundamentally.” 

Having maimed capitalism — and personal responsibility — goes the progressive’s mantra, the grand (and hopefully even grander in size and scope), benevolent government can come along and pretend to be the savior and “save” the individual companies — and people — that would have, and should have, failed.  Rinse and repeat until the government controls everything in the nation and in your life, including even your very life —including what you eat and how you behave (and in Canada, how you speak and perhaps even think, thanks to the progressives’ very successful “human rights” commissions and tribunals, which effectively shuts conservatives up — which is very much a part of the progressive’s strategy).

The goal of the American progressive is to move away (“progress”  —wink!) from the very tenets of God-given individual rights and freedom (or in the parlance of the Declaration of Independence, the “unalienable rights”, “endowed by their Creator”).  The U.S Constitution and the Declaration of Independence is the bane of the progressives’ existence, with its focus on “We the People” and on limited government to preserve individual freedom and worst of all, that part about their unalienable rights to freedom and liberty being “endowed by their Creator”.  And they want to proceed apace (“progress”) with their effort to move away from that —to make all of society reliant upon them, and their state, for they are smarter.  So remove God.  Remove the family.  They want to replace all that and socially engineer humans and their behavior, and society in general, and create nations in their own, better, smarter, Utopian image.  They know better.  They think they can accomplish this through government.  Their government. 

Today, progressive have convinced many in the populace to think that the government can and should be relied upon to fix all problems —even those they caused.  Which is a turn on Einstein’s definition of insanity.  Einstein never defined progressivism as far as I know, so it’s as close a definition as I can come.

Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel
Latest posts by Joel Johannesen (see all)

Popular Articles