For Us

For the last eight years the mantra to deregulate has been sounded loudly. Certain politicians have pushed to do away with regulatory restrictions on financial markets as much as possible on the premise that markets can take care of themselves. The idea was creating a situation wherein markets would have more control over themselves - to police themselves was better. Government would have less oversight and regulation.

People rely on the markets for so many things. We rely on banks for numerous everyday services like savings, checking, loans etc. The failure of banks means any transactions with them are put in peril. When rumors of doom spread investors often begin puling money out of stocks and dangerous practices like short selling, which the current administration and politicians who agreed with them were against regulating, can occur. As a consequence banks may suffer or fail causing businesses to close, people to lose their jobs and local economies to be hit.

When markets fail and investments begin losing their worth college savings can be adversely affected along with retirement savings. Parents may have a more difficult time sending their children to college. They may even be put in the situation of not being able to send them to college at all. With more people forced into lower paying jobs the prospects for taking loans for college become more daunting.

Retirement funds are losers in times of market crisis as well. Nest eggs can dwindle to the point of not being useful to retirees. This can cause people relying on those funds to turn towards family or friends who themselves may be cash strapped. Increased numbers of seniors with no resources and nowhere to turn is not the picture we look towards in the positive and vibrant America we each envision.

This puts the American voters in the predicament of trying to figure out who will do the best job of addressing their current needs and protect them in the future. Regulation could have prevented the current economic crisis and we need to look at who has been advocating most for deregulation. The vote this year comes down to the two major parties as always, but this time the stakes are simply direr.

In the examples of possible scenarios in a failing economy I’ve listed, which segment of society pays the biggest price? The people who foot the bill will be the taxpayers. The people who can least afford to do so are the middleclass and poor.

Who is affected most when retirement savings fail? Who is affected most when college savings fail? When banks and their insurer’s collapse who can least afford for that to happen?

Along the same lines which of the two presidential candidates has been advocating most loudly for loosening trade restrictions? To the middleclass this has meant jobs being shipped overseas. It has meant people who once had good American jobs having to take two three jobs just to make ends meet. This has made savings, mortgage payments, college funds and retirement funds difficult if not entirely impossible to simultaneously maintain not to mention healthcare. Social security coffers were also raided by the current administration to pay debts they incurred.

Conversely which party has consistently advocated for workers rights? Who has consistently advocated for banking regulation and oversight? Who has consistently advocated for the middle class? The Iraq War notwithstanding we need to figure out who will best stand for middleclass; average Joe’s like the majority of Americans.

The deregulatory economic Darwinism of the eighties has failed. We need some measure of oversight and for that we need to look at which party has the record of deregulation and who has been calling time and again for regulation. Should the people who led us into this mess be trusted to lead us out? We each have to make up our own minds about that. Personally I believe it is time for a change and ordinary Americans can do with nothing less.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.