[kansando]

Right. And allow the economy to go into a long-term depression with 25%+ unemployment. A government "for the people" does not have a choice in this matter. The real problem is that bankers/speculators have so much power on the outcome for people who are not at all related to the industry.

[megamark16]

The point isn't whether or not the government should have intervened, the point is that because they did we can't blame Capitalism for the outcome of that specific action. A purely capitalist market would have let the financial crisis run is course, right or wrong. At least, that's how I see it.

[chrischen]

The thing is the US isn't purely capitalist.

[darjen]

strangely enough, that's not what happened when harding kept his hands off the market during the major crash of 1920-21.

and why did the bankers get so much power in the first place? there is a LONG history of government centralizing, cartelizing, supporting, and regulating the market's major financial players.

[moron4hire]

You write like you have a crystal ball and can see the future. There is no telling what "letting the banks fail" will do for the long term. However, we do know that increasing national debt to the degree that has been done is not good.

[danek]

There is also no telling how bailing out failed businesses will help us in the long term either. Intuitively it seems worse to me. And unfair--what about all the other banks that didn't screw up by leveraging 35:1?