Vail Daily letter: Lesser of two evils
December 5, 2012
After reading all the stories and letters about the recent election, I feel the need to set something straight. Obama has spent, spent and then spent some more. However, it was the preceding presidents and Congress that supported deregulation in our financial system. This led to toxic mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations, causing the housing bubble to burst, and for our economy to teeter.
People criticize the bailouts. but they don’t understand is that without them, credit markets would freeze. No one would get a loan, and deposits would stop earning interest, or disappear altogether. Everyone, especially the middle and lower classes, would suffer immensely.
Without the ability to borrow, jobs would be lost at alarming rates, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of people the financial system employs. Our government allowed Lehman Brothers to fall, and our economy is still feeling the effects. If more institutions were to go under, a domino effect would ensue.
So yes, Obama has spent, but the bailouts were the only alternative to a global economic disaster. The resulting debt was the fault of the financial system for their irresponsible behavior, and the failure of our government to regulate and prevent this behavior. Might I also add that Romney opposed financial regulation?
Furthermore, I resent the recent implications made by certain letter writers and columnists assuming that all who voted for Obama are some combination of gullible, irrational, or feminist radicals. There are educated Democratic voters out there, believe it or not.
This is not to say that Obama has made all the right decisions, and he should have stopped spending a long time ago (before his health-care plan, in my opinion.) He has broken promises and has consistently shown an inability to spend within budget.
However, Romney infringes on women’s rights and supports deregulative loopholes that allow corporations and financial institutions to make immense profits at everyone else’s expense.
As per usual, this election was about the lesser of two evils. The crash of 2008 and the resulting on-going recession (for most of Europe as well) was caused mostly by wealthy conservatives in power (like Romney) that refused to put profits behind the interests of tax paying citizens. So, is it really that preposterous that Obama won because of the priorities of the people?