Tyrone on the Bailouts

"So if you're "opposed to financial bailouts," as a libertarian, you're not for the market. You're saying that one scheme for governmental disposition is better than another."

Has Cowen no concept of law versus intervention?
Is he being serious, or has something rattled him?

The decision to save AIG at any cost is not going to look "less bad" than bankruptcy very soon.

Arnold,

I make a similar argument at more length here.

Can we draw a distinction between a pragamatic libertarian (say, the version of Thomas Jefferson who wanted the Louisiana Purchase) vs. the ideological libertarian (say, his pardons for many violators of the Alien and Sedition Acts)?

I like the idea of the government doing the Louisiana Purchase, not just defense and legal system to protect property rights. I realize expanding the power of government to do these types of trades means that bad trades will probably happen, and the bad could outweigh the good.

But some good can only be had by concentration of capital. With the advent of the affordable automobile, without oligopoly seen in railroad finance, the government would have to step up to build the roads and highways infrastructure, and afford freedoms and choice of transport to the individual.

I guess a purist would call me a hypocrite.

Thinking of bailouts as pure intervention is clearly wrong, though; bailouts have already been in the policymaking zeitgeist for decades, as Sumner might say. Everyone expected bailouts, and bailouts happened.