8 ms·

Perhaps for you. For others, its about putting abstract ideas and free market worship ahead of real people and real consequences to these abstractions.

mattmaroon 18y ago
For some, probably. But I think most people these days aren't free market ideologues anymore. Even Alan Greenspan isn't.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
davidw 18y ago
The solution is pretty evident: help out those who need it with some money from the government, health care, retraining and so on. I.e. "save people", not "save jobs".
jerf 18y ago
You're running on the unstated assumption that the bailout will work. This is not safe to assume. Tossing people out on the street can still be more merciful than bailing them out, if the bailout fails and you still toss them out onto the street, only into a worse situation. Or, if you further distort the economy to bailout the poor auto workers, you may toss out millions of other people onto the street instead, only not in one recognizable group. The idea that this bailout is free, harmless, and guaranteed to work is wrong on three counts. It's not a choice between "Save their jobs" and "heartlessly cut their jobs", it's a matter of figuring out where the pain goes and how to minimize it, and there are more stakeholders here than just the autoworkers. Raising taxes to save the autoworkers will drive other businesses out of business and drive other taxpayers over the edge into bankruptcy, and the fact that they are not easily visible doesn't make that less true. Failing to raise taxes means that much more debt, which has its own consequences. (Regardless, you can't get away from opportunity costs.) I believe in free market optimization precisely because I believe it is the most merciful and the best for the autoworkers and everybody else in the medium and long run, and the more you dick with the short run by stealing money from the productive to pay for the unproductive, the worse the medium and long run get.

mattmaroon 18y ago

For some, probably. But I think most people these days aren't free market ideologues anymore. Even Alan Greenspan isn't.

deleted 18y ago
[deleted]

davidw 18y ago

The solution is pretty evident: help out those who need it with some money from the government, health care, retraining and so on. I.e. "save people", not "save jobs".

jerf 18y ago

You're running on the unstated assumption that the bailout will work. This is not safe to assume. Tossing people out on the street can still be more merciful than bailing them out, if the bailout fails and you still toss them out onto the street, only into a worse situation. Or, if you further distort the economy to bailout the poor auto workers, you may toss out millions of other people onto the street instead, only not in one recognizable group. The idea that this bailout is free, harmless, and guaranteed to work is wrong on three counts. It's not a choice between "Save their jobs" and "heartlessly cut their jobs", it's a matter of figuring out where the pain goes and how to minimize it, and there are more stakeholders here than just the autoworkers. Raising taxes to save the autoworkers will drive other businesses out of business and drive other taxpayers over the edge into bankruptcy, and the fact that they are not easily visible doesn't make that less true. Failing to raise taxes means that much more debt, which has its own consequences. (Regardless, you can't get away from opportunity costs.) I believe in free market optimization precisely because I believe it is the most merciful and the best for the autoworkers and everybody else in the medium and long run, and the more you dick with the short run by stealing money from the productive to pay for the unproductive, the worse the medium and long run get.