Id do it again, proclaimed Bush, speaking to the annual convention of the National Automobile Dealers Association.
The bailout, which ultimately totaled $85 billion, was originally begun during the waning days of the Bush administration. With a specific rescue effort rejected by Congress, the former Commander-in-Chief decided to tap into a separate, $700 billion fund Capitol Hill did approve for the bailout of Wall Street and the banking industry.
Sometimes circumstances get in the way of philosophy, said the ex-president, during his speech in Las Vegas, referring to his normal stand in favor of free trade. If you make a bad decision, you ought to pay, he said, referring to the collapse of both General Motors and Chrysler.
But Bush also noted that coming on top of the failure of Lehman Brothers, the meltdown of the banking industry and the collapse of the housing market, a painful shift in policy was needed.
I didnt want there to be 21 percent unemployment, he stressed, echoing forecasts at the time that the loss of GM, Ford and the automotive lenders also covered by the bailout could lead to the loss of 1 million jobs.
The former president has kept a low-key profile since leaving office in January 2009 though he did call the bailout the only option in his 2010 book, Decision Points leaving his successor to field much of the criticism.
In that book, the 43rd President argued that, The immediate bankruptcy of (Chrysler and GM) could cost more than a million jobs, decrease tax revenues by $150 billion and set back Americas Gross Domestic Product by hundreds of billions of dollars.
http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/07/10342178-bush-on-auto-bailouts-id-do-it-again
This got me to thinking about which of our current candidates would have supported the bailouts too. Not just the auto bailouts but the bank and insurance company bailouts as well.
What do you think?
The bailout, which ultimately totaled $85 billion, was originally begun during the waning days of the Bush administration. With a specific rescue effort rejected by Congress, the former Commander-in-Chief decided to tap into a separate, $700 billion fund Capitol Hill did approve for the bailout of Wall Street and the banking industry.
Sometimes circumstances get in the way of philosophy, said the ex-president, during his speech in Las Vegas, referring to his normal stand in favor of free trade. If you make a bad decision, you ought to pay, he said, referring to the collapse of both General Motors and Chrysler.
But Bush also noted that coming on top of the failure of Lehman Brothers, the meltdown of the banking industry and the collapse of the housing market, a painful shift in policy was needed.
I didnt want there to be 21 percent unemployment, he stressed, echoing forecasts at the time that the loss of GM, Ford and the automotive lenders also covered by the bailout could lead to the loss of 1 million jobs.
The former president has kept a low-key profile since leaving office in January 2009 though he did call the bailout the only option in his 2010 book, Decision Points leaving his successor to field much of the criticism.
In that book, the 43rd President argued that, The immediate bankruptcy of (Chrysler and GM) could cost more than a million jobs, decrease tax revenues by $150 billion and set back Americas Gross Domestic Product by hundreds of billions of dollars.
http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/07/10342178-bush-on-auto-bailouts-id-do-it-again
This got me to thinking about which of our current candidates would have supported the bailouts too. Not just the auto bailouts but the bank and insurance company bailouts as well.
What do you think?
