Change is Needed for the Economy

The current economic crisis comes at difficult time, yet completely perfect. So many Americans have been crying for change in this nation and now we can determine who handles important crises such as this one for our future. As a student attending a major research university in the South, the future of the economy and how its changed by this election is very important to me and my fellow students (those who are next in line for handling such issues). Throughout my following posts I hope to make others aware on all sides of this conflict and develop greater insight myself. As of today, I'm concerned our country is headed into one of the worst economic situations in our history. Even Alan Greenspan says "The current financial crisis in the U.S. is likely to be judged in retrospect as one of the most wrenching since the end of the second World War" http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/03/18/economy/. The Great Depression, times following World War II, economic pitfalls of the 1970s, and now current problems show an obvious kink in the system. But is there really that much of a system? In March of 2008, President George Bush made the comment "What goes up must come down." Sounds great in theory, but everytime the economy goes down it brings major consequences for the nation's citizens and industries.
The Republican party supports individuals to be in control of their own economic decisions and encourages a system of deregulation. They tend to believe the private sector of business is more capable of helping low-income citizens than the government is. Purely based on the current economy and the bailout plan, it doesn't appear that the private sector, at least the exposed sector, had intentions of helping the poor by giving "low-rate" loans to home buyers and selling mortgages (backed up with no collateral) to the market. Tricking buyers who don't have very much money, but allowing private sectors to succeed, doesn't seem to do much for the poor.http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8834
The Democratic party favors higher minimum wages, low-cost education, and regulation by the government to impose such platforms. The major concern with such stances is as follows: Is the government spending too much on social and economic programs? Is it too controlled, not allowing for a competitive market between corporations for succession beyond a certain limit?
In relation to the bailout plan, although not passed; it is essential to form a plan to shape the face of the U.S. economic future. I don't think the plan should only serve to bailout those responsible for the crisis. Obama suggests using the plan to help those struggling to stay in their homes and McCain is encouraging an increase in federal deposits for banking, both which prove to be important alterations. Everyone is suffering from this crisis, and the government, who clearly needs to step in and make changes not just attempt at reversing them, should encourage a plan that helps the majority. The U.S. needs a substantial amount of debt reduction, not just modification. And by helping those struggling to stay in their homes-it is important to remember all of those buyers that payed only interest to recieve a large payback on real-estate property they could not afford (also cheating the system). Many sides and individuals of both party's have manipulated the "deregulated" system currently in place. The problem is greed and that is what happens when no one is there to regulate.http://www.rgemonitor.com/blog/roubini/