"Theory Post: A Compromise" *UPDATED*

Imagine this…the entire United States of America is counting on you to formulate a solution to our current economic crisis. Peoples’ jobs, salaries, taxes, homes, property, cars, loans, stocks and pensions all rest in your hands to do whatever you want with them. Being biased, of course, plays a huge factor in determining a plan to fix the economy; however, you are a representative who has been elected by the people to represent the best interest of the people. Thus, forget about your needs and wants. You must be the best representative of the people that you can be.

Conservatives versus liberals in a wrestling arena, brawling over the issue of the economy—yikes! Two polarized opposites, especially in politics, are inevitably going to have an impossible task when trying to generate a compromise. Keep in mind, there are also an innumerable amount of fluctuating representatives and candidates who vary from their party’s ideology on a particular issue. For instance, in the initial debate about the Bailout bill fourteen of California's representatives voted against the passage of the bill. It is certainly not an attribute of democrats to vote against government intervention in the economy. These types of politicians make life that much more confusing when trying to reach a compromise on an issue.

Let’s take a step back and study the broader scope of the economic crisis and examine how Liberals and Conservatives would customarily want to solve and economic crisis. It is widely accepted that Conservatives believe in the free market system and competitive entrepreneurship. In the eyes of Conservatives this creates more jobs and higher standards for living than the Liberals’ accepted economic system. Liberals favor government regulation of the economy in order to provide and even playing field for all businesses. Now, one may think to themselves—how in the world are we supposed to come up with a compromise between two such polarized positions? Frankly, we have to come up with some sort of solution or stepping stone towards fixing the economy because it is certainly not going to fix itself anytime soon.

The recent issue posed for this presidential election, being the Rescue bill, was a fairly non-polarized, agreeable issue between the two candidates. Both McCain and Obama supported the passage of the bill; however, Obama has a more precise plan for tackling the economy if elected than McCain's plan.

Obama's economic jumpstart plan includes the creation of jobs through organizations such as the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, tax relief for the middle class through his plan "Making Work Pay", and the protection of homeownership through his universal mortgage credit plan.
McCain's economic jumpstart pln is vague and unthoughtful. His national website only focuses on his past experience as a Senator and his past contributions as a Senator.

McCain and Obama also agree that they should stabilize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because they are both influential in the housing market. While both candidates agree that the passage of the Rescue bill was a good idea, but McCain has yet to inform the public on how else he is planning on revamping the economy if he is elected President.

Aside from Obama and McCain, the Conservative and Liberal parties have very opposing stances on how the government should deal with the economic crisis. Liberals want government intervention in the economy whereas Conservatives do not want any government intervention in the economy. My theory on dealing with the economic crisis is that it has to be dealt with…Liberal or not, everyone should agree that this extreme disaster requires government involvement in the economy. Thus, I agree with the Rescue bill because desperate times call for desperate measures.