Fix It Again Taxpayer ?

Does anyone really believe that bankruptcy isn't a sign of weakness? Perhaps the wisest possible move in the real world, and I can understand hoping to avoid a stigmatization, but if it's not about blaming but accurately assessing a situation?

If I had young adult children, say, undergoing it, as a parent I might tell them many things, but that bankruptcy is not a sign of weakness ... that would not be something worth saying.

Have you ever lived in a small American town -- well small in relative terms, but self sufficient enough (hospital schools farms groceries) -- that has the traditional 3 car dealerships? You know then -- why the need for all 3 necessarily when the trucks are stacking up on the lots?

I understand initially jobs will be lost, and maybe thrice down the line to suppliers, sellers and financers. People currently driving Jeeps, say, might have troubles in years to come finding parts or service. But if the market says thumbs down, is it really necessary for America to have Ford, Chevy and Chrysler? Why not pare down now and face the pain, rather than subsidizing a brand that in the real world, people probably aren't going to continue to buy after bankruptcy -- if they've learned something here. And the brand wasn't selling that well to begin with, right?

Remember the squawking from Main Street family businesses when a Wal Mart would approach a community and build on farmland on the outskirts? Liberals seem to hate that store, but if you live in those towns and have been in one, wow the choices. Not wooden toys sure, but there is a lot of fun and convenience to be had with wisely chosen products. Sure, made in China.

My point is: you can't protect the Mom and Pops from competition forever. People buy where they think they get the best deals for their dollars. If your product is better -- like Amish furniture over Ikea, say -- people who care will save and quietly choose that.

But if your child wants some cheap entertainment on a hot summer day -- like say a super soaker or sidewalk chalk -- that Wal Mart can provide via a Chinese factory to what was traditionally small town Americana, why not give the people what they want?

The answer is, they have. Wal Marts now successfully co-exist with Main Street businesses that either specialize or compete with more personalized service and special order products. On numbers though, they lose.

It doesn't take a card-carrying economist to see that sometimes the hard choices mean letting change happen, with no heroic outside interventions. If hedge funders and investors lose, they lose. They're overrated to begin with. If workers lose too, well they'll be ok. In the long run, it's better to make the hard choices early and adapt, over dragging it out.

There will be pain, and it might be to innocents who made poor choices or were otherwise unlucky with their lot. Some regions will be affected more than others. But you can't stand in the way of evolution, and indeed, one might say this is an evolutionary cycle we are currently in.

Afterall, the Fourteenth Amendment might not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's social statics, but the market is what it is.