• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

Welfare for Wall Street

By
Stanley Bing
Stanley Bing
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Stanley Bing
Stanley Bing
Down Arrow Button Icon
September 19, 2008, 10:56 AM ET



It was fun to watch all the free market junkies zooming the Dow up 400 points on news that the Gubmint was about to put together a bailout of the financial markets. It will be equally amusing, in a taste-of-bile sort of way, to hear all the reasons why this particular mega-deal is a good idea while similar assistance to individual home-owners is way to socialistic, you know.

At this point, the world seems to be dividing itself into two traditional camps. Camp One is made up of people who want the pain to end as quickly as possible. They like bailouts because, well, if you were in a sinking rowboat, wouldn’t you bail? Most people would. What’s the alternative? Pray? While prayer plus bailing is often enough to save the vessel, bailing-free prayer is less effective.

Camp Two is interesting. It consists, again, of two kinds of people, at least. In Camp Two A, you will find those who have a philosophical problem with Gubmint. They don’t like it. They view any form of intervention as a violation of the precious free markets that are supposed to regulate themselves, in spite of ample evidence that they do not. In this group you will find the very rich who have money in a secure place and also a variety of people who aren’t sure there really needs to be a Federal Gubmint at all. Sarah Palin’s husband, for instance. The potential First Dude. He belonged to an organization that, as I understand it, entertained the idea of Alaska excusing itself from the Union. So there’s that.

Camp Two B is comprised of folks who just want to see the whole thing crash and burn. The system stinks. Let it all go to hell. Membership in segment A and B are not mutually exclusive. You can belong to both, in other words.



When Marx was in full flower in the middle of the 20th Century, there were two types of comrades then, too. Members of Type One wanted to organize unions, pass legislation, elect fellow-travelers, and otherwise work in their own way to change the system in ways to their liking to improve the lives of the People. Type Two was made up of grim-faced doctrinaires who believed that before things could get better under the great new State, they had to get worse. So they opposed all efforts to improve working conditions, raise wages and otherwise make people’s lives better in the short term. Fortunately for our side, both Types have now for the most part been relegated to the dust-bin of history. But the division between fixers and non-fixers is evocative, I think.

As for me, I’m for anything that will make the market go up 400 points in 90 minutes. Who knows. While they’re putting on all these Band-Aids, the patient might just stop bleeding for a while. And even if he doesn’t, we’re might have a lot less blood on the carpets when it’s all over. I think that would be nice.

About the Author
By Stanley Bing
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
0

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
placeholder alt text
Politics
Supreme Court to reconsider a 90-year-old unanimous ruling that limits presidential power on removing heads of independent agencies
By Mark Sherman and The Associated PressDecember 7, 2025
15 hours ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.