Resolved: Federal government bailouts of 3
CORPORATE BAILOUTS DO NOT UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY
Download 343.42 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- AN AUTO INDUSTRY BAILOUT PREVENTS ECONOMIC COLLAPSE
CORPORATE BAILOUTS DO NOT UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY1. THE BAILOUT WOULD ONLY HURT A “PURE DEMOCRACY”, NOT OUR FORM Heather Whipps, LiveScience's History Columnist with an Anthropology degree from McGill University in Montreal, December 8, 2008. “The Big Bailout: Product of a Flawed Democracy,” LiveScience, Of course, in practice, that isn’t always the case. Congressmen and women don’t always vote according to the will of their constituents and people don’t necessarily trust them to. In a pure democracy, public opinion would have squashed the bailout — technically called the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act — quite easily. But it certainly isn’t the first unpopular bill approved by congress, nor will it be the last. 2. PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS BE UNSATISFIED WITH GOVERNMENT. BAILOUTS ARE NO DIFFERENT Heather Whipps, LiveScience's History Columnist with an Anthropology degree from McGill University in Montreal, December 8, 2008. “The Big Bailout: Product of a Flawed Democracy,” LiveScience, The bailout then, as uncertain as its outcome remains, may be unpopular but is still a part of the democratic process as intended by the Founding Fathers, many experts argue. Ultimately it means that the government will sometimes get it wrong, tick people off and make decisions that don’t seem to make sense at the time. They will also get some things right. The Founders simply hoped that the latter would happen more often.
Heather Whipps, LiveScience's History Columnist with an Anthropology degree from McGill University in Montreal, December 8, 2008. “The Big Bailout: Product of a Flawed Democracy,” LiveScience, Is a government that ignores the sentiment of its people what the Founding Fathers had in mind? In a word, yes. Democracy in America was flawed, on purpose, from the beginning. Founding Fathers worried about us. When George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and other early leaders sat down to draft the documents that would define the new government of the United States, it never crossed their minds to create a purely democratic state, historians say. In many ways, the Founding Fathers believed that collectively we could be — for lack of more eloquent words — a gaggle of idiots. 4. WE DON’T LIVE IN A PURE DEMOCRACY BECAUSE IT WOULD ENTAIL TYRANNY Heather Whipps, LiveScience's History Columnist with an Anthropology degree from McGill University in Montreal, December 8, 2008. “The Big Bailout: Product of a Flawed Democracy,” LiveScience, Pure democracy, born in ancient Greece, allows citizens to directly control a state’s decisions by having vote on each issue. In Athens, these votes were conducted among an assembly of 500 citizens not elected to the post but chosen by annual lottery. In addition to the obvious problems of operating a pure democracy in a large, populous territory like the United States, this ancient system was rejected outright because the Founding Fathers believed that the classic majority-rules tenet of democracy could actually become dangerous, allowing mobs of 50 percent plus one to force their will on minority groups. Two wolves and one sheep voting on who gets eaten for dinner does not a democracy make, they argued.
1. AN AUTO BAILOUT IS CRUCIAL TO MILLIONS OF AMERICAN JOBS Daniel Batson, Staff Writer, December 6, 2008. “Bailouts are a necessary evil, but the economy depends on them right now,” THE TENNESSEAN, Accessed 12-13-2008, For automakers, the bailouts will, at once, help them be able to make loans to potential buyers who are currently being denied credit for lack of funds, and give financial backing to institutions such as Ford Motor Credit and GMAC. It will also enable them to at least try and save the majority of the 3 million American jobs that it has created; not to mention the vast supply chain that it employs; companies which include auto parts suppliers; tire manufacturers; engineering firms; etc. The reach is beyond mere Detroit — it comes closer to home, and many other towns across the nation.
Julie H. Davis, AP Staff Writer, December 3, 2008. “Chrysler exec: failure could spark depression, Breitbart.com, Accessed 12-10-2008, A top executive of Chrysler LLC cautioned Wednesday that a carmaker collapse could send the economy spiraling into a depression, as the United Auto Workers union braced for contract concessions. Jim Press, Chrysler's vice chairman, said the U.S. automakers were "down to months left," as industry officials ratcheted up a fierce lobbying push to persuade Congress to approve as much as $34 billion in emergency aid. "We're on the brink with the U.S. auto manufacturing industry," Press told The Associated Press in an interview. "If we have a catastrophic failure of one of these car companies, in this tender environment for the economy, it's a huge blow. It could trigger a depression." 3. EVEN THE COLLAPSE OF ONE AUTOMAKER WOULD MASSIVELY DRAG DOWN THE ECONOMY Shawn Langlois, Staff Writer, December 3, 2008. “Detroit trio hits the road to the Hill,” MARKET WATCH, Of course, that's not exactly true, since a failure of any one of the Big Three could set off a domino effect throughout the troubled car industry, with rampant job losses and potential bankruptcies down the supply chain that would hobble an already traumatized U.S. economy. But instead of coming at Congress with a united front of doom and gloom like they did last month, the auto chiefs, urged by lawmakers and president-elect Barack Obama to come prepared this time around, are poised to offer vastly different perspectives on Thursday. That's particularly true with Ford Motor Co.'s Alan Mulally, who will ride into Washington armed with a roadmap decidedly more upbeat than those provided by his rivals. 4. COLLAPSE OF THE AUTO INDUSTRY WOULD CREATE A DOMINO EFFECT OF DECLINE Jeff Bliss, Staff Writer, November 16, 2008. “Senator Shelby Opposes $25 Billion to Aid Automakers (Update2),” BLOOMBERG NEWS, Accessed 12-14-2008, A GM collapse alone would cost the government as much as $200 billion for costs associated with unemployment insurance and other programs after millions of auto-related job losses, according to a forecast from IHS Global Insight Inc. in Lexington, Massachusetts. A GM shutdown would cost jobs among suppliers as well as at the automaker itself, pushing the U.S. unemployment rate next year to 9.5 percent, compared with current projections of as high as 8.5 percent owing to the weakened economy, said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at IHS. Federal, state and local governments would lose $108.1 billion in tax revenue over three years in the event of a 50 percent reduction in U.S. automaker operations, according to a Nov. 4 report by the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Download 343.42 Kb. Share with your friends:
|