I think it depends on the execution of the plan-no matter if the plan is logically/theoretically right or wrong. We, the people appropriate a sum of money to save the economy may be theoretically right but if it is executed in terms of loan to the poorly performed company with super high paid officers then it is not properly executed. To save the A$$ of well-off indidividuals who invested in these companies and high paid executives, why not directly help the poorly performed home owners(even though I am against this also)? Why only helping the rich and the rich entities? It sounds like, the government is believing(or at least want us to believe) that these well-off individuals and the high paid executives will make good judgements over the poorly performed home owners-but, in fact, both are misjudging their means. Why save someone who are willingly going into such a gamble. If the state is to buy up the assets of the failing companies and then resale them when the value go back up(provided that the government guarantee to us that the fund will be used back in tax cut or such-not another war or bomb, then I think this is OK. The city I was born used the state buying tactics in form of a state managed fund during the Asian financial crisis and as of today, the fund is profitable and people of the city are talking how to distribute the fund back to the public.
Even though slightly off topic, I remembered how the US government was attacking Hong Kong's governnment of interfering the free market with state funds during that time. Now it's our own time that our own govenment is interfering our own free market. Note that this double std. of our government is not completely off topic in this case because whatever we hear from the administration, the presented argument may not be completely trusted-we have to evaluate each administration annoucement with highest scrutiny because in the current plan, we are not even sure who will get the benefits at the end-the poorly performed executives, the poorly performed companies, the economy, the poorly performed home owners and/or the rest of the public who may have little or no business in these blamed defaults of the mortgages.
Accountability is also never mentioned in the bill. Those who are responsible for building these risks and crisis knowingly and fail to inform the public in advance should be responsible. It's ronic that we are talking about(actually forced to) saving these money thirst investors and institutions who are only interested in ripping the profits when the market is good while asking the public thru the government to bail them out when the market is bad in the name of saving the economy.
