Please join the Enosinian Society for our next and last debate of the year today at 8:00 pm in The Honors Building, 714 21st St. NW, to debate
Resolved: No firm is “too big to fail.”
Proposition Speaker: Alex Shoucair
Opposition Speaker: Justin Snyder
During this current economic crisis, we have witnessed an unprecedented government intervention into the marketplace, particularly within the financial industry. These government “bailouts” of financial giants are designed to prevent a total economic meltdown which proponents believe is an inevitable consequence of inaction. Spending billions of billions of dollars to prop up these firms has prompted a fierce debate over whether these interventions are a prudent use of taxpayer money. Some contend the soaring costs of government rescues not only enlarge the federal deficit by sustaining failing industries, but also create a problem of moral hazard and a culture of irresponsibility. Others believe the price of not intervening to save a firm whose collapse could have dire consequences for an entire economy is a far greater cost to society than the billions of dollars required to save these institutions. This debate will center on the economic, social, and philosophical questions that arise when the government intervenes to save a firm from failure. Are “bailouts” incongruent with American free market beliefs? Or does the government have the right and responsibility to stave off collapse for firms it deems too important to fail?
I KNOW you all have something to say about this. Come out and share!
Resolved: No firm is “too big to fail.”
Proposition Speaker: Alex Shoucair
Opposition Speaker: Justin Snyder
During this current economic crisis, we have witnessed an unprecedented government intervention into the marketplace, particularly within the financial industry. These government “bailouts” of financial giants are designed to prevent a total economic meltdown which proponents believe is an inevitable consequence of inaction. Spending billions of billions of dollars to prop up these firms has prompted a fierce debate over whether these interventions are a prudent use of taxpayer money. Some contend the soaring costs of government rescues not only enlarge the federal deficit by sustaining failing industries, but also create a problem of moral hazard and a culture of irresponsibility. Others believe the price of not intervening to save a firm whose collapse could have dire consequences for an entire economy is a far greater cost to society than the billions of dollars required to save these institutions. This debate will center on the economic, social, and philosophical questions that arise when the government intervenes to save a firm from failure. Are “bailouts” incongruent with American free market beliefs? Or does the government have the right and responsibility to stave off collapse for firms it deems too important to fail?
I KNOW you all have something to say about this. Come out and share!
No comments:
Post a Comment