Quote Originally Posted by Papewaio View Post
Bigger problem is this is just about shuffling how much debt and talking about reining it in. Leaves two massive problems leftover:
Reality of getting a handle of the debt and working it down.
Perception of how well the US is functioning economically has lost so much gloss that there are suggestions in the market that the US will lose its AAA rating because of cracks appearing. Unfortunately the markets are based more on perception then reality.

The reality is neo-industrial countries are information and service based. Thus the US is in very good shape, all we are presently seeing is the attempts to slough off the dead skin of industries that are out of date or individual companies that aren't performing. One thing that would have been better for the budget and the US in the long term may have been not intervening so heavily with corporations, that includes welfare for ones that are 'too big' to fail... or having learnt the lesson, limit corporations to being smaller then that size and foster more competition.

Maybe have a two types of companies. Much like some banks get government backing... if you self limit your corporation size to a competitive level then you get government bailouts if a nationwide disaster happens... if you want to go for broke, have less controls (laws, size controls, unlimited CEO payrolls etc) then you can have a much larger company but it has to stand on its own two feet.
The ultimate irony is that no single corporation in the US at this moment is truly too big too fail....... Ford, GM, etc. If they went bankrupt it wouldn't destroy the United States. None of the corporation bailouts were truly necessary to the economic safety of the USA. Corporations and businesses fail and are either reborn from the ashes or disappear. This is the nature of the capitalistic system. A failing business simply creates a vacuum which another entity moves into or grows into.