>But doesn't your approach of reducing govt income and spending in a time of recession put the financial burden of recovery on those who can least afford it while leaving more money in the pockets of those who are better placed to survive.
>
>Those who are better placed to survive worked their behinds off to get into that position and should have the choice of which charities they contribute to without having a redistribution of their wealth mandated by the government.

I agree completely.

Some people didn't decide to use the stock market to gamble their life savings away trying to make a quick buck.

Some people didn't play the real estate pyramid scheme game.

Why are they (the ones who are still solvent because they didn't gamble) going to have to go into debt to bail out the ones who went for the quick bucks?

Banks should be left to fail. Will that make existing housing go away? Nope. you can bet bankruptcy courts will see that they are occupied in order to keep them up as assets.

US Automakers deserve to fail. There are plenty of automakers willing to build sensible vehicles.

Insurance companies are next on the massive bailout chain (mark my words). Let them go too. Nationalize health insurance to protect health and let the rest of the chips fall whereever.