It is awful, there is no question. I’m the last one with answers. The more I read the less I think I know. But I think we need to focus less about who is getting over on us as opposed to what the best thing is for the economy and for all of us. The same rationale applies to the President’s housing solution. I think great arguments can be made that it is a bad idea, that housing needs to find a legitimate market imposed floor and all of that stuff. But too many seem to focus only on the injustice to them – that I too feel, believe me – that what is best for the economy and best for all of us. That seems like a more pressing priority to me that whether someone is getting over.
Same is true with the auto industry. I know it sucks but we have to consider (1) the economy and (2) national secruity implications of not making cars. Because those folks historially been able to turn that capacity to feed a war machine (that I pray we never need).
Moral of the story: we all need to spend less time on who is getting over and more time trying to solve problems.
The steps we are taking have the exact opposite effect we all desire. If you reward failure, why would auto makers change?
We have over 80 years of evidence that government bailouts stifle creativity and stymie markets. Why do you think the markets have responded so negatively to the actions taken by both presidents and congress?
So Ron, where were you and other trial lawyers when the former preseident advocated tort reform (for the economy) and limited immunity (for national security)? Could you have thought more abuot solving those problems and less time about the injustice to your clients (and your pocketbook)?
Alton, we argue about the efficacy of caps and other types of limits on the trial system all the time on my blog (Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog) and in dialogue with Walter and his readers ere. These are legitmate points of conversation and have been extensively debated. The disagreement among reasonable people is well chronicled. Obviously, you know this because my comment does not suggest that I am a trial lawyer, – you knew this already. But we can also discuss other topics on this blog This one is what to do about the state of the economy and what to do about these troubled automakers. Any chance we can do this?
4 Comments
It is awful, there is no question. I’m the last one with answers. The more I read the less I think I know. But I think we need to focus less about who is getting over on us as opposed to what the best thing is for the economy and for all of us. The same rationale applies to the President’s housing solution. I think great arguments can be made that it is a bad idea, that housing needs to find a legitimate market imposed floor and all of that stuff. But too many seem to focus only on the injustice to them – that I too feel, believe me – that what is best for the economy and best for all of us. That seems like a more pressing priority to me that whether someone is getting over.
Same is true with the auto industry. I know it sucks but we have to consider (1) the economy and (2) national secruity implications of not making cars. Because those folks historially been able to turn that capacity to feed a war machine (that I pray we never need).
Moral of the story: we all need to spend less time on who is getting over and more time trying to solve problems.
The steps we are taking have the exact opposite effect we all desire. If you reward failure, why would auto makers change?
We have over 80 years of evidence that government bailouts stifle creativity and stymie markets. Why do you think the markets have responded so negatively to the actions taken by both presidents and congress?
So Ron, where were you and other trial lawyers when the former preseident advocated tort reform (for the economy) and limited immunity (for national security)? Could you have thought more abuot solving those problems and less time about the injustice to your clients (and your pocketbook)?
Alton, we argue about the efficacy of caps and other types of limits on the trial system all the time on my blog (Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog) and in dialogue with Walter and his readers ere. These are legitmate points of conversation and have been extensively debated. The disagreement among reasonable people is well chronicled. Obviously, you know this because my comment does not suggest that I am a trial lawyer, – you knew this already. But we can also discuss other topics on this blog This one is what to do about the state of the economy and what to do about these troubled automakers. Any chance we can do this?