READERS WRITE: MORE LETTERS ON THE ECONOMY

Money troubles

Responses to “Private enterprise worship exposed,” Cynthia Tucker, Sept. 17.

Too much interference is problem with economy

The problem with the crisis is not unfettered capitalism or a lack of regulation. Rather, the problem is too much interference in the economy. The irresponsible lending was caused by two things. First, interest rates were lowered because the Federal Reserve can pump money into the economy. This is something that is possible only with fiat money.

Second, the lenders, especially Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, knew that they could always run into the protective arms of the government if their bad loans ever came home to roost. These are both egregious interferences with the market, and as such, they are not capitalistic in any way.

Neither are they policies that Ayn Rand would condone. Rand was against government bailouts at every level and was a staunch supporter of the gold standard. So please, do not blame the current crisis on Rand or capitalism.

ROBERT S. RAHM JR.

Snellville

Companies were bullied by the government

Cynthia Tucker sees the collapse of mortgage companies as a failure of the “free market.” The companies she refers to, however, didn’t freely make all those risky loans that got them into trouble. They were bullied into it by the government, which now turns around and blames them for the massive defaults. A market in which companies are controlled by legislators, bureaucrats and volumes of regulations is not in any rational sense of the word “free.”

JOE WILLIAMS

Douglasville

Think about the real reason you have a job

If there was no private enterprise, Cynthia Tucker wouldn’t have a job. And if politicians were in charge of the capital markets, none of us would have a job.

JACK FRANKLIN

Conyers

Punish those who put us in this mess

When I see news reports about the U.S. government assuming all of this debt related to the housing market meltdown, I cannot believe there is no discussion about sanctions against those who got us into this mess. Those of us who were prudent and —- even more —- our children are being punished by the greed and recklessness of those who, for example, did not properly vet loan applications or who bundled the mortgages into the various complex derivatives that have collapsed.

We will be forced to pay higher taxes to offset that debt. Why should the individuals who got us into this mess get off scot-free, in some cases keeping their multiple mansions, yachts and other luxuries? The intervention by the government was probably necessary, but why can’t we get back at least some of their ill-gotten gain as a lesson against future shenanigans?

PETER BRECKE

Atlanta

Don’t hold the taxpayers accountable

Please do not allow this bailout without careful consideration for the taxpayers. As a carpenter, measure twice, cut once. Carefully measure the consequences before you allow this bailout to proceed. We must have oversight and regulations. Those corporations who created the mess should be held accountable, not us taxpayers.

DAPHNE REIDER, Atlanta

Demand should be for real portion, not pittance

Does anybody have any idea how much $700 billion really is? They keep saying it is our money, taxpayer money. Well, I for one want some. Now!

Think about it. If each taxpaying citizen were to receive an equal portion of this $700 billion, we could pay off our mortgages and credit cards, pay for gas at the pump and feed our families.

This would be one heck of a stimulus package, as opposed to the pittance they gave us recently. If we trust this government to buy back all that bad debt of business and then do something with it, do they not trust us, the taxpayers, to do the right thing with our fair portion of that money? It is time for taxpaying citizens to demand that government give us a real portion, not a pittance.

WILLIAM E. LYNCH

Marietta

After such bad advice, this crisis is no surprise

Eight years ago, we were informed by a Realtor and a mortgage company that we were pre-approved for a $300,000 loan regardless that our annual income that was only a third of that. Ironically, my response was, “Who is going to help when we can’t pay it?” It amazes me how many Americans have not been financially responsible and have taken misguided advice.

Then again, with the “interest-only” loans and furniture ads with “no payment until 2013” being available, it is no wonder we are in this crisis. Creative financing programs only further fueled the greed and selfishness evident in today’s society and now affects everyone, even those of us who were smart enough to avoid them.

CHRISTINE EYMOLD

Acworth