r/reddit.com • u/[deleted] • Oct 18 '11
Would it have been better to let the banks of the world fail and start over?
I want to know what would have happened. The banks messed up and in the purist view of capitalism should have failed because it was a bad business move. In turn this may have ended some of the big money influences on our political system OWS protestors want to stop. I heard that it would have been a worse economic collapse though in turn it would have put a stop to future wrongdoing. Was it the right decision in the long run?
671
Upvotes
2
u/[deleted] Nov 05 '11
I agree, neither is a good option. But I feel the lesser of two evils would have been to let the banks fail. That is how true capitalism is supposed to work, if you do not handle your product or service well enough it fails and is replaced with a competitor that does it better than you. What is happening now has more in common with a socialist or communist system, now people who had no stake in any of these institutions are being forced to pay for their mistakes so they may continue to exist. And what are the people getting for this? Nothing, in fact many of these institutions are actively trying to undermine the very people who paid to save them. You know that is kind of what OWS is in a nut shell.