The July 11th The New York Times' article (see link above and below), "Bank Bailout is Potent Issue for Fall Faces," states that even though banks have paid back the government to the $700 billion for the Troubled Asset Relief Program approved by the Obama administration in the fall 2008, most voters confuse TARP with the stumulus package and are, thus, are rejecting incumbents in recent or upcoming elections. Read the article and comment on the article and why there is such anti-incumbent sentiment throught the country.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/us/politics/11tarp.html?_r=1&hp
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Voters are still not seeing results from the economy. when the average joe watch CNN and reads that the bank bailouts have been payed back with interest people wonder why unemployment is high and houses are still being lost? that make voters dislike politicians they help out the banks but not the people that put money in the banks i cant vote for a corrupt politician
ReplyDeleteReginad you gave a good point, but a big problem like the one we are facing takes several years to recover and to see results. The banks were abusing the power that they had for many years. The solutions is not letting them go bankrupt because it could created chaos. In my opinion, I agree with the politicians who voted for the bank bailout because the government, as responsible for citizens and problems that occur in the United States of America, should take actions about all the issues that the country faced. In this case, they did a good movement approving that program because if it wasn't for that the country probably could faced a big problem like they did in the 1929 when the Great Depression occurred that lasted more than three years. Thanks to this, the banks didn't go bankrupt, it stabilized the economy, and a lot of people keep their jobs. Lastly, I think the bailout prevented that worst things could have happen and we are still recovering.
ReplyDeleteLuisrojas009 I agree with what you said, the government is responsible for the well-being of the people and so they had to do anything in their power in order to protect them. Reginand, though the average Joe may not see the direct benefit of the bank bailout and unemployment may still be increasing in some area, however the characteristic of unemployment is a tricky one, unemployment is person who are seeking jobs but not apart of the workforce. Becaue of the bank bailout more jobs were opened so more persons entered the workforce, resulting in more person being characterise as being unemployed. If the bailout provided jobs for everyone seeking jobs then that would resulted in inflation which is too much money chasing too few goods as everyone had a job. However, economist would rather have an increase in unemployment than inflation as this is worse to the economy. To conclude the economy is actually getting better which can be from the increase in the labor force.
ReplyDeleteLuisrojas009, i completely agree with you. when it comes to a country like the United States, things really can not be seen on an individual scale, they have to be viewed from a wider angle. The government made the right choice, even though it was risky - but really at that time, every and any choice was risky. it came down to deciding which was ultimately worse for the country and its citizens; higher unemployment or inflation. and like peta-gay said, the bank bailout would be more likely to provide jobs to those who had already lost theirs than to let more people become unemployed, which might have happened if the bailout did not take effect and help revive the United States.
ReplyDeleteI think the reason bank bailouts and stimulus packages are not popular with voters is because we did not see any immediate changes and it makes politicians seem like they have a hidden agenda when the banks seem to get better and the rest of the people are still stuck in bad situations.
It is going to take a while to get the economy to where we want it, but it is slowly getting better and more people have moved from unemployed status to employed status.
-Belkis Choiseul-Praslin
belkis i don't agree with you or anyone who think it was a good idea to bail out the corporation. Maybe if the government didn't bail the companies out this country would have gotten a new start, a better start, maybe we could have gotten it right this time. With this bailout all I see is unemployment continuing to rise, people loosing their homes, their cars, and their everything. Without the bail out more than likely companies would have bought companies doing bad and we would be in the same exact place we are now exept the government could have used the 700 billion dollars to help its people. I mean there are thirty million people out of work and 700 billion dollars. Do the math. That's roughly 23,500 per person. That could help people get by for a while until they land on their feet. I tell you people don't forget who help them or who hurt them.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with the person who said it was a good idea. Although many person may wonder why the government would chose to bail the banks,I think it was infact a good idea. People might argue and say that the government should help its people with the money rather than the bank, who persons have loans with, credit card and who charge for all ridicuolous reasons. Why then would the government use tax payers money to help them? Honestly speaking as wierd as it may sound this help stabilzie and cushion the economy tremendously. It does not mean that unemployment will rise. There will always be unemployment and under-employment, no matter how much the government help its people, they will not be able to help every unemployed cutuzen. So helping the bank with their situation and helping them with their financial situiation will in the long run will help the citizens. It will take a while but eventually will happen.
ReplyDeletei don't agree from neither nor point of views1 the reason is the government is for no one but themselves they will try to do anything to get to whats they need. the bank is trying to get better like jeery said with this new bailout we will only rise our problems. the bank bailout and timpulus wont be popular because the people lost their trust in the banks, not only that the whole economic system.. everytime it's always a new change for better unemployed people but it cannot resolve.. for so long they been struggling. even if the banks have paid back most of the money, and the bailout is widely credited with having helped to prevent a financial calamity. the whole system need to repair.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion Professor, i strongly believe with the assit of the Stimulus package, it has help bailed out many franchises, businesses, and major corporations by expadning the money out to them so the C.E.O's can have maintain their Revenue which then can help their company expenses, and gain profit as well. But, on the contrary, thisw country is still in a great deficit , and needs to pay back many other countries from their borrowing in the past, and not to mention,we're approximately 7 to 8 trillion dollars in the whole. But due the country's reccession, the stimulus package people in the workforce remain on their jobs, but there still not enough to restore the fact that many jobs are still declining many works. On a person note, for enduring being laid off a job, I've currently structurally unemployed, I want to be able graduate with a Degree, so the Economy happens to get better in the next maybe 5,6 7 years I will be able to gain a career, and work at the skillful level that I'm in.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the bank bailout was a good and necessary move that had to be done sooner or later. It was a risky move and it still hasn't reached it's complete potential since some banks still need to payback the money but it was the best idea that was presented and it had to be done. I have read some comments of people disagreeing with the bank bailout because there is still 300 million people without employment but then again imagine our banks where we keep our money, loans, jewelry, etc. going bankrupt as well as all the other companies and franchises that have already gone bankrupt. I believe it would've been complete chaos and that the number of people without jobs would've increased drastically because if the banks who are suppose to take care of your investments and help you invest more are gone then who is going to help you. The Unites States citizens just need to be a bit more patient, it took several years for our economy to get the way it is now and it's going to take several years to get it back on it's feet and that may include some risky and not completely effective moves to take place.
ReplyDelete-Veronica Suarez