|
|
|
|
|
|
by beingfamous
6338 days ago
|
|
|
If I remember correctly, the Swedish government nationalized their financial system in a way to ease the pain from the credit crunch, and it worked out well. The main argument against these series of bailouts would be that it creates inflation of the currency. Of course, this is only be thought of now when we're attempt to fix infrastructure across the nation, or saving the jobs of workers, instead of bailing out banking systems too large to fail. American businesses are operating at an unlevel field, partially because the criminalization of vertical integration (the Japanese do this for their automotives), compared to other nations in the world. My 2c. |
|
|
In reality, it's way, way, way more complicated, and the debate borders on the useless, because how and what is nationalized, and how the nationalized assets are managed matters a lot, and nobody ever discusses those.
Right now, I see no great reason to believe that the government is staffed by people particularly likely to even try to use their brains to decide what to nationalize or how to run it, let alone succeed. Right now what I see are a bunch of politicians running rampant with no regard for reality... which always has the last word.
That's my problem with the bailouts. Putting politicians in charge of our companies to solve problem the politicians credibly created in the first place (without admitting it, and I fear they actually believe they are blameless, not just putting up a front) doesn't seem like a recipe for success.