Devoting nearly 20% of his speech to the topic, …[President Obama] acknowledged the public loathing of bank rescue efforts. He explained the role of credit in creating and preserving jobs. And he took some requisite, and wholly justified, swipes at executives for their outrageous pay and perks. But most important, he stated unequivocally what no one in the chamber wanted to hear and what he did not want to have to say ”” that even more money might be necessary to restore the banking system to its former self.
He was right on all scores. Nothing is more important to the livelihood of Americans than getting the credit spigot flowing again. Without it, all other efforts to revive the economy will fail.
And yet, if Congress were asked today for more funds for banks, the likeliest response would be a resounding no….
But there is no valid rationale for opposing a round three if it becomes necessary.
RE: “But there is no valid rationale for opposing a round three if it becomes necessary.”
Considering the reasoning for the bailouts — too big to fail — their’s really no valid rationale for opposing a round 100 if it “becomes necessary.”
Go for it!
I will use another person’s words to relay my thoughts:
“Who among us would ask our children for a loan, so we could spend money we do not have, on things we do not need?”
Indeed.
Don
Does this “bailout” include new banks that came on board just before or during this money handout? Just wondered!!