Imprisonment in Recent Financial Collapse - Assignment Example

Legitimacy of Trial and Imprisonment in Recent Financial Collapse While the intellect of a person may bring prosperity or disaster to his personal life, this may bring even severe consequences to masses if collective intellect of experts in a particular domain of knowledge fails to respond emerging situations. However, in case of collective failure of intellect it is hard to place the responsibility over a group, same goes with the recent financial collapse and we see no such liability is placed over a body of experts.

Should the people responsible for the recent financial collapse be tried and imprisoned is not an easy discourse. It requires serious deliberations and solid evidence to justify the blame. Even for those who argue for a trial and imprisonment of responsible it not easy to earmark such individuals. As a matter of fact there is no individual or a body of experts who are wholly responsible for the recent financial crisis. It was actually a turmoil created out of wrong policy decisions by financial experts and advisor of majority of firms, banks and other financial institutions in pursuit of even greater profits and bonuses.

The result was a collapse of economies at global level where banks refused to lend and firms begin to downsize their manpower. The situation resulted in heightened joblessness and social insecurity. Restoration of financial strength required an intervention by respective governments as in case of United States it was the Bush administration who responded with a financial relief program for major firms, “The Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP -- to provide these financial institutions with funds to survive the turmoil that they had helped unleash.

  It was a distasteful but necessary thing to do.” (Obama, 2010). Yes, the intellectual crime can be termed a serious crime and the responsible should be tried and imprisoned but only if it was a deliberate crime that can be attributed to an individual or a group. However, if it is not the case and there is no one to take the burden of this heavy odd to world economy then we have to revisit our approach to the issue. The best response to an intellectual failure is to redress it intellectually.

Recovery from the recent financial crisis, no matter to what an extend we have recovered, is also featured through the help of the same experts, intellectuals and firms. If masses were troubled due to the worst financial slum of the history they also owe to the efforts of the financial experts who find a way out to restore and regain the financial strength. Nevertheless, if some organizations or individuals who were suppose to protect the financial integrity and economic structure and they could not meet the expectations can be interrogated for their failure to avoid any such mistakes in the future.

Even then if some segments find it indispensible, a mechanism of penalty can be designed to intensify the sentence. That is what American president has uttered a year ago while imposing a Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee, “And that is why, through this fee and broader reforms that we seek, our goal is not to punish Wall Street firms, but rather to prevent the abuse and excess that nearly caused the collapse of many of these firms and the financial system itself.” (Obama, 2010). So, the crux of the matter is to learn from the mistakes in a healthy manner while keeping the social threat intact.

There is a lot of doubt in the imposition of financial collapse’s responsibility and the benefit of the doubt should serve to mediate. Let’s not beet the bush anymore and find a way ahead. Works Cited Web Publications Obama, Barack Hussein, “Remarks by The President on the Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee.” whitehouse.gov. Office of the Press Secretary, 2010, Web. 11 June, 2011.