At least one author at the Wall Street Journal believes the Wall Street bailout will actually bailout Main Street, as the saying goes.  As an aside, how many people live no Main St. anymore?  Here's what the WSJ had to say:

The $700 billion financial rescue that Congress votes on today must surely rank as the least popular legislation in modern times. Most Members want it to pass, though not with their vote after it has been trashed so relentlessly in the press as a Wall Street "bailout." And yet it deserves to pass because in reality it is an attempt to shield middle America from further harm caused by the mistakes of Wall Street and Washington.

This paragraph proves what libertarian/conservatives have been saying forever.  When government and the "free" market mix together, the free market is distorted and no longer really exists.  Hopefully, it is common knowledge by now that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were government creations in the first place, intended to lend money to subprime candidates for homes.  I still see no justification for trusting that same government to get us out of the mess it burdened us with by "regulation," "deregulation," or whatever you want to call it.  No matter how you spin whose fault it is, the end result is that government failed in its ambitions to control market mechanisms.  By intervening, all it did was distort the market.  In the words of the WSJ writer, the bailout is supposed to "shield middle America from further harm caused by the mistakes of Wall Street and Washington."  Despite admitting that Washington is involved, the writer makes the classic leap of faith based on the myth that government can actually solve problems to claim that the bailout will in reality help those in the middle.  If Washington was involved in the creation of the "crisis," what justifies letting Washington fix it?  We know this will just lead to more crises in the future because of the merger of private and government avarice, which leads directly to the sort of crony capitalism that we have here.

If the WSJ really wants to help middle America, then leave middle America alone without the harsh taxation that results from more government.  Instead, middle America is what will bear the burden, and the attempt to "shield" it will only lead to its further exploitation by government hacks who are responsible for the mess.  Is it too much to ask to let the free market work and punish those wrongdoers with economic failure?  That's real justice.  When the free market fails because of government intervention, then we're all worse off, and, unfortunately, more government regulation and coercive taxation will only lead to more of the same.

Check us out: thejtandbearshow.com/Audio.html

 

Check out the latest show:

The JT and Bear Show 09.14.08

Check out Obamalujah and Red, White, and Blue on Youtube:

 

 

Discuss the issues in our new forum:

 

Ground Zero

Email us: jtandbear@thejtandbearshow.com

Check out our myspace: http://www.myspace.com/jtandbearshow

Join our facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/groups.php?ref=sb#/group.php?gid=15305890845