Letters
Host Kai Ryssdal reviews letters from our listeners reacting to the bailout plan and what they thought was missing from it.
Letters in a computer with red mailbox flag (iStockPhoto)
More on Commentaries
TEXT OF STORY
Kai Ryssdal: Nothing like a $700 billion rescue package to get those cards and letters coming. And we weren't the only ones getting them either. As we mentioned yesterday on the program, congressional offices were swamped with angry calls from their constituents about the bailout. That public outrage helped topple the bill yesterday. And a lot of people wrote to us to say there's gotta be better way.
Eric Carlson's from Portland, Oregon.
Eric Carlson: I think we need to stimulate the economy through multiple channels, easing credit flow on the banks' side and debt relief on the consumer side. ... On the consumer side, we give directly back to the taxpayer and the other half goes to establishing a "green" power industry creating hundreds of new jobs.
What's happening now in the financial markets is often compared to the lead-up to the Great Depression. There are a whole lot of reasons that might not be a good comparison, but Peter Haweyluk from Parma, Ohio, said one lesson from history could us some good right about now.
Peter Haweyluk: I believe that the only way the government can ensure the creation of new jobs is for the government itself to create those jobs. The last time the United States experienced an economic catastrophe of this magnitude (in the 1930s), that is exactly what the government did.
At the moment, House and Senate leaders are talking about bringing some kind of package up for a vote in the next day or two. David Franklin from New Orleans said it would be great if the new plan would concentrate on how we got into this jam in the first place.
David Franklin: While the bailout may loosen up finances and markets to restimulate the economy, I am concerned that none of the plan addresses the cause that started the whole crisis. We still have millions on the brink of foreclosure, rates are not low to help these individuals out and home values are still falling in important regions of the nation.
Larry Brown from Romney, West Virginia, had debt on the brain and how a lot of it, like we have here, can be a bit problem.
Larry Brown: When I was a kid, there was a little country called Japan that tried like the dickens to be like us. They more than succeeded riding high until the bubble burst, throwing their economy into a complete meltdown. But for the past 20 years, they've been digging out of financial ruin and now have one of the highest per capita savings rates in the world.
If you have a thought yourself about the bailout or about our coverage of it, let us know. It's Marketplace.org. Click on the link that says Contact.
Comments
Comment | Refresh
From Cary, NC, 10/01/2008
I was offended by the on-air characterization of people who are against the bailout as people who are out for "revenge" against the bankers and are willing to pay for it.
I am not petty, a simpleton, or vindictive. What I am is believer in reaping what you sow. That's a premise of a free market economy. The market will correct itself. This is a correction. It will be a very painful one. Unforunately, the actions of the greedy people who wrote bad loans and the people who TOOK the bad loans because they were either greedy or irresponsible with their own finances (it takes two to dance) will come back to hurt me and my family.
However, the only way for these groups to learn is for there to be consequences to their actions. It's the same lession I teach my children, I just never thought I'd have to be teaching it to wall-street moguls and congress.
Let the irresponsible banks fail, let the irresponsible homeowners be foreclosed upon. Let the banks and companies that were financially responsible thrive and grow, becaused bailing out the bad companies keeps them in business and penalizes the companies that have been operating responsibly.
Let the lessons be learned and remembered.
From Modesto, CA, 09/30/2008
I was listening to "Marketplace" tonight, and I was amused at how the press, even at NPR, still get it wrong. I am referring to the poll question: "Who do we blame for the failure of the bailout vote?" How clueless can you be? The question should be: Who should we thank! As usual, the poll question itself is off the mark, and proves how the information we receive from the press is always manipulated by the questions asked, and how they are framed.
From NH, 09/30/2008
I don't think that the speech by house speaker Nancy Pelosi swayed any Republican in their vote yesterday. Many members of both parties did not like one aspect or another of the proposed bill, the votes were just not there to have it pass.
And as far as blame for this whole mess goes, i think that there is plenty to go around and the break up of blame should go something like 25% Republican, 25% Democratic, 25% for the banks/financial institutions and 25% for "we the people" for taking those loans that we knew we could not afford and knew we did not deserve to get. Its the whole thing of wanting what the other guy has; the new car, the big screen TV, new computer.
From appleton, ME, 09/30/2008
It's a HOAX! The "liquidity crisis" you're comparing to the great depression" is a fraud! This was proven today when the stock market rebounded from its losses yesterday with an increase of about 5%. Corporate media who are asking who to BLAME should be asking who to THANK for the failure of the bailout package to pass in the Congress! During the crash of 1929 the stock market fell by 80% and did not recover for 10 years. In this one the stock market dropped 4% then recovered the next day. In 1929-1940 bank failures led to a snowballing run on banks which led to many other bank collapses. No one can lose their deposits in a bank crash today because deposits are insured by FDIC. In 1929 there were people who borrowed to buy stock who lost everything when the market declined. Today there are limits to how much can be borrowed to buy stock. The solution to today�s sub-prime crisis is not to give unlimited money and power to the President, or his Treasury Secretary. The "bailout bill" in fact would worsen the problem by increasing the national debt, and interest payments on it. In 2003, the President asked for unlimited power over war and peace because we were threatened by a �mushroom shaped cloud� if Iraq were not invaded, which was a complete fraud. Today's threat is just as deceitful as 2003 was. To solve this "crisis" we need to change a lot of rules, but we should not reward incompetence by paying billions of dollars to losing gamblers in the Casino of Wall Street Let's give thanks to a handful of Congressman from different wings of different parties and saw through this fabrication. Fool me once shame on you! Fool me twice shame on me!
Post a Comment: Please be civil, brief and relevant.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. All comments are moderated. Marketplace reserves the right to edit any comments on this site and to read them on the air if they are extra-interesting. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting.
You must be 13 or over to submit information to American Public Media. The information entered into this form will not be used to send unsolicited email and will not be sold to a third party. For more information see Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.