You are speaking of historical generalities; I'm referring to this specific set of circumstances.
We appear to be discussing two different things.
I believe the intention was, and is, to execute a strategy to avoid a crash, then later, withdraw liquidity to restore the balance. I believe they are taking short-term steps that have risks; they are not sure they will achieve the desired result. I also believe they have made mistakes in execution, simply because they are improvising in the face of the greatest economic crisis since 1929.
I believe that what others see as design is just the culmination of a series of mistakes, bad policy, and greed. What's more, where governments failed, that the people themselves are responsible for that failure: "In a democracy, people get the government they deserve."
In this tragedy, the innocent will suffer with the guilty, and many who should pay will not.
I do not believe paranoid conspiracy theories: many acted wrongly, but there was no grand plan, no design.
Nobody listened to the warnings. In the end, it was simply the failure of prudence, common sense, citizenship and courage: neither the people nor their leaders ever rose up and said "NO! STOP!"
Not until it was too late. If they had, things might be different.
---
It's easier to blame shadowy conspiracies. That way, no one has to accept their own responsibility. Failing to accept responsibility created this problem in the first place. Why stop now?
Jim |
