The bailout

It’s been all over the news and I’ve been watching the developments over the last few days but I still have my reservations with the plan. Over the past 80 years we have created a number of social programs to help fellow Americans that were unable to reach acceptable living standards. The degree of these programs varies based upon the scope and many are short term programs with specific eligibility requirements.

To my knowledge, we have never created a social program for failed businesses. Government incentives and grants have been given to businesses that work in specific fields. They needed short term support because the initial cost of operation were far too prohibitive. The businesses in the bailout plan need long term support because they had a failed business plan.

I want to know whether it would be more expensive to pay for the social programs for the individuals that would be affected if these businesses should fail or if it would be cheaper to bailout the businesses.

I don’t know if anyone else has actually looked at this issue from this viewpoint. If it would cost more to bailout the businesses we should let them fail. If it would cost more for social programs we should do the minimum to keep businesses in the financial sector alive. Additionally, the legislation should include provisions for fully recouping our investment. This investment would be one in our neighbors next door and across town – we’ve just got to make sure that we make the right decision.

If the bailout is passed in congress and subsequently signed we should quickly create further legislation that would prevent this from happening again. All business is a risk – the taxpayer shouldn’t pay the price when one of them fails – no matter how big or old they might be.