government's role in financial crisis

The opposition side today didn’t contextualize the debate into today’s financial crisis. The libertarianism perspective combine with the concept of small government, which praised by the opposition, doesn’t fit for many developing nations with large number of population in poverty which needs to develop their social justice and welfare, and particularly not fit for many governments, developed or developing, facing the budget deficit in the worst financial crisis. Governments need huge sum of money for the hole of crisis, and that sum of money doesn’t grow on trees, and neither does it come from the “laizze-fair” low-tax small government opposition proposes, and to look into their arguments the opposition side really proposes nothing to address the financial urgency we are emphasizing here. Rich people still enjoy most of what they earn and the poor still poor. The Matthaw Effect enlarges, so does the rich and poor gap. Unemployed citizens rally and demonstrate on the street for raising tax rate to rich people, as it happened earlier this year in France, but a low-tax government would lay back and could do nothing but let people’s anger flames. It is simple not the way an effective or responsible government should take for the overall social justice and stability. The truth is, as libertarian as a government seems nice to be, nowadays many governments around the world are taking stronger intervention in deciding new economic policies to regulate or restore their nations from the attack of financial crisis. As we mentioned our second argument, Obama’s policy includes increasing tax rate to the rich, yet he still wins the vote of many rich citizens in the election. $318billion dollars government revenue will be raised over next 10 year, and this is certainly brings both immediate and also mid-term greater tax return to the State. Compared with issue more currency or borrowing more money from other governments, which either brings inflation or increasing deficit to deteriorate the situation, raising money from tax is creating more surplus into the budget, which will ease government’s financial burden in the right way. We don’t say that raising tax is a perfect or only way to face the crisis, but it is an effective and necessary way out of it. The proposition side stands for a responsible government to propose and act, while the opposition basically do nothing—quote Abraham Lincoln or Adam Smith doesn’t solve the problem. In fact, the financial crisis itself is an inevitable situation out of the control of the Invisible Hand—free market economy has its Achilles Heels—it seeks for protection of individuals, but not society; it seeks for eternal profit, but not fairness. One issue or internal conflict of this debate is the conflict between the interest of a small group of rich ppl and the interest of vast majority, a conflict between individual profit and social fairness or welfare. When market cannot regulate these conflicts because of its profit-seeking and individual-orientated nature, it’s the government's role and obligation to regulate the relocation of social resources for the greater good, and in the context of financial crisis, it is the government's job to raise tax of the rich to get money for public services and the balance all groups of interest toward better economy and better society.