@Alisa. A lot of the proposals are the ‘I hope this works’ type, because no one’s ever really dealt with something like this before. There’s good reasons (at the time) for doing everything they’ve been doing, that might be looked back upon by history as completely wrong. 20/20 hindsight is a nice thing to have, but we’ve got to try to move forward. I’m not a big fan of bailout either, but I look at it like this “What does the LEAST damage?” Would letting possibly two of the ‘Big Three’ automakers go under be more damaging than giving them loans until things stabilize? I think most are leaning towards that direction, even if it sets us up for a LONG payback and recovery. At least the patient is still alive until they start to get better.

If the automakers were to go under, it’s tens of thousands of jobs there, plus the auto parts companies that depend on them, plus the car dealerships, plus, plus, plus,… It’s a chain of events that can cause more damage than just paying to keep them around. Now if they can just tie some mandated improvements in management, gas-efficiency in vehicles, and process improvements for thei companies, that would at least be a step in the right direction.

My thoughts about current proposals are simply this. I think a moratorium on home foreclosures is a great idea. But is 90 – days enough? Facing a possible foreclosure is a very stressful ordeal. And, the truth of the matter is that if someone is facing foreclosure, there is a very good possibility that they are also facing other life changing ordeals as well. Jobless, Serious Illness, Divorce, Depression, and a host of other trials that make it very difficult “to focus” on dealing with a pending foreclosure in just 90-days.

Tax cuts; I’m all for that!

Aiding ailing industries is something that I don’t fully understand. On one hand, I feel that it is most important to analyze (Six Sigma anyone?) the root causes of these problems and put solutions in place to address these root causes. I don’t think I hear much talk about that. Isn’t there a saying about throwing good money after bad? In the long run, where will it take the economy to just “bail out” but not address the root cause? Also, how are the taxpayers re-imbursed for bailing out failed companies? And I am really thinking about the taxpayers who are just barely making it themselves? Again, still trying to understand this. I wouldn’t want to see thousands of people lose their jobs and I understand that that is what would happen if there was not bail out. I’m still learning. Thanks for listening. Be well.

Alisas last blog post..Will You Be Apart of the Change in America?

Simons last blog post..Best Flash Drive