Pay attention!

Tonight,( 3 Mar 09) many ideas, comments and questions were presented at the symposium, Obamanomics: Socialism vs. Free Market Capitalism. However, I felt, and several others voiced, that the forum was attempting to direct the conversations towards the failure of the big banks and corporations, who to blame for these failures, and why they happened. The demise of these megalo-..institutions is indeed, something that should not be ignored or something that will just disappear or self resolve overnight, in weeks, or perhaps, even years. However what should be done apparates in the form of idealism for almost every individual or affiliation who has an opinion on the matter, simply because there is no concise right or wrong answer. There will be no winners in the game of free market capitalism or socialism, when there is no team with clear, logical objective. Therefore, a balance of the two concepts must be kept in an open mind. The question is now, which was brought up, should government step in and begin to regulate the private sectors, such as President Obama is implying with his 3 trillion dollar stimulus deal or should the people not have to pay for the mistakes and failure of these massive spending institutions? Government regulation- one entity controlling the business' and banks decisions leaves no room for the individual, private controlled entities to make rash decisions and overspend the means allocated them (similar to the american middle class and the trend of 2ND and 3rd mortgages) or for that matter attain the "american dream" of wealth and luxury. In turn, should we leave these spenders dry? Attack with the "not my fault" attitude? Will that approach decimate the debt or reform the monetary system? Astonishingly enough, health care was brought up surprisingly late in the evening, with many universal health care supporters contributing thoughts. One man, introducing himself and stating that he came from Mexico attested that the universal health care concept would be simply providing basic human rights. One man claimed he works for his health care and doesn't want to be supporting health care for those who do not contribute, this set off some flares. These are all decisions which people want to be made. Should we be concerned with rebuilding such a capital wealth hungry system? Should health care be provided exclusively to those who can afford a $500 deductible? These are decisions that will definitely affect our future with enormous capacity. A point brought up by a university student (one of a few, actually), as the threat of a depression becomes more realistic each day, "would it really, be such a bad thing?" Humans have been through many tribulations, and "humans are resilient." We naturally demonstrate vigilance in the inevitable hard times. "Maybe, by experiencing such an event, people will come out better" and more closer to their absolute potential. There were conservative, pro capitalist arguments and a surprising amount of pro socialism arguments. Sadly, the argument I did not hear, save the 'resilient human', or even speak on behalf of, was the pro humanist proposal.Really, what are we all fighting for the rescue of?