http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122161274563645947.html
Regardless that McCain and Obama disagree on plans and philosophies; they both agree that the next president needs to change things up on Wall Street. They both believe that regulators need to tighten regulations on the amount of funds in the financial institution. Along with this, the financial regulators need to be better structured. Although Obama and McCain have both said that there will be changes on Wall Street, they have not mentioned any details about what they are going to do with this situation nor have they made any radical plans.
“The financial crisis has laid bare the inadequacies of the U.S.'s system of financial regulation and its inability to respond in a systematic way to the troubles of large institutions.” This statement was just demonstrated in the last few days. With Lehman Brothers going bankrupt, the US helping AIG by bailing them out with $85 billion dollars and Merrill Lynch makes a deal with Bank of America. With all of these occurrences, the stock prices took a dive. Therefore, the next president needs to take a hard look at what needs to be changed with our financial system.
Senator McCain has made mention that there will be access to all banks and financial institutions books and accounts. McCain believes that by doing this it will take some of the risk and speculation out of the market. “Americans put a lot of trust in the bankers and brokerage firms of Wall Street. Government has a clear responsibility to act in defense of the public interests, and that is exactly what I intend to do. (McCain)” Since the Wall Street crisis, McCain has come out with a TV ad demonstrating his beliefs in honesty and fairness.
On the opposing side, Obama comes out of this accusing the Republican for being like an ostrich, sticking his (McCain) head in the sand. Obama mocked the Senator McCain proposal for having the idea “to create a commission to review the events that led to the crisis.” Obama continues by saying that FDR and Harry Truman took accountable for their actions and looked at the events themselves they did not need a commission to look at the event for them. Finally, Obama mentions a plan for identifying situations and practices that could threaten the financial system before it gets to the point of catastrophe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I read recently in "Don't think of an elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate" by George Lakoff that people have become "value voters." Instead of voting their interests, for the candidate that would promote policies that would concretely help them, people are more likely to vote their values, for the candidate whose ideals align best with their own. For example, blue-collar workers benefit from Democratic social welfare policies, but in instances where their "home" values are conservative, they will vote for Republicans who reflect their morals. From this perspective, who has reacted better to the situation on Wall Street: McCain, emphasizing values of honesty and fairness; or Obama, putting forth concrete measures? Is this another paradox of American democracy: that people will vote against their interests to express their values?
Post a Comment