Bottom-Up Vs. Top-Down Bailout

The Fed says that the economy will take much longer to turn around than the financial sector that not only reaped huge profits from years of unregulated leverage finance that drove the general economy into the ground, but is also receiving huge money from The People to bail The People out.

A reliable evaluative measure on the effectiveness, and real confidence, of top versus bottom bailout is the equity index.

When the treasury used capital from the bottom up (the stimulus package), the Dow peaked. When treasury used the capital from the top down (the stabilization Action Plan), the Dow index hit the bottom, clearly indicating the empirically proper course of action for a quick and stable recovery for EVERYBODY.

So, how come we are not doing that?

It is because it does not fit the Hamiltonian model of political economy--welfare for the rich in priority that cultivates the practical philosophy of "buy the greed, sell the fear."

Greed and fear are not a healthy basis for buidling a just and equitable society. It is not a philiosophy of freedom. It is a philosophy of dependancy. It is not a philosophy that provides, but deprives.

If the model does not work for The People, The People should throw it out.

Application of the capital from the bottom up not only hastens a recovery of the broader economy but the net worth of The People as well so that the least amount of value is lost from The People to the elite.

Where the top-down application of capital produces stagflation, recession, and devaluation of The People's worth to service the greed of a few that, in turn, instills greed in The People, bottom-up application nourishes growth and adds value to the savings, the net worth, not the net greed, of The People, who then have "nothing to fear but fear itself."

Obama/Biden!