It's deadlock. Only a tiny handful of economists seem to have a clue as to what's going on, and the politicians don't really know who to trust. The Republican plan is direct proof as to the prevailing lack of understanding. However, unlike almost any other situation, deadlock is vastly preferable to a hasty decision. Think of it this way, if an actual plan is push through, Congress will go to recess and not convene again until January. That's four months of suffering under a bad plan.
The other side of the equation is that the chance of Congress passing an effective plan that can deal with the crisis is vanishingly small. There are certain measures that are simply too unpopular to bring up politically. However, the alternative of not doing anything major might well bring about those measures as a result of inaction, and that might be better in the long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tri-ring
I think it is pre-mature and even naive to think a case can be devloped against the present wallstreet fiasco.
The present investment banking system is based on creating profit on investments and as long as they follow anti-trust rules and regulations they are able to basically invest on what ever they want.
|
Hah! This is Wall Street we're talking about. There's almost certain to be something not on the up and up going on, and that the executives can be charged with
. At the very least, many of the companies are guilty of hiding how untenable their finances are from their stockholders. And then we've got stuff like ratings agency collusion and the list of possibilities goes on and on.