Socialism VS. Capitalism

[Toronado3800]

Don't forget the destruction of the rest of the world's economic capacity in the 1940's.

 

[MikeK]

[...]Obama did not by choice not take over the banks. He had no option to.[...]

If Obama did not choose to bail out the banks they would have failed and gone into receivership. The FDIC, which is a government corporation, is the receiver of the banks.

I didn't mean Obama would personally assume control of the banks but Government (via FDIC) would-- as in the example of Iceland. And, as it turns out, the Icelandic government did the right thing in taking control of their defaulted banks.

 

[kaz]

[...]Obama did not by choice not take over the banks. He had no option to.[...]

If Obama did not choose to bail out the banks they would have failed and gone into receivership. The FDIC, which is a government corporation, is the receiver of the banks.

I didn't mean Obama would personally assume control of the banks but Government (via FDIC) would-- as in the example of Iceland. And, as it turns out, the Icelandic government did the right thing in taking control of their defaulted banks.

That...is socialism. As a capitalist I would have let them fail. And BTW, they would not all have failed. So, government drove the banks to default by forcing them to lend money to sub prime (socialism) and then underwriting the loans (socialism) and then when they failed, bailed them out (socialism) or he would have taken them over (socialism) because he has the power of government to control other people's money (socialism). And that...is how he picked a less then socialist answer....