[Marxism] Mumia Abu-Jamal: "The Fear Bomb -- Again!"

[Ruthless Critic of All that Exists]

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:48 AM, Walter Lippmann <walterlx at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Congress is poised to, once again, transfer public wealth
> to private businesses, in a mad dash to re-wrap bad loans
> as new instruments, so that these securities could be
> peddled to new buyers.

How do you counter-argue against the following (from today's New York Times)?

"The crucial point is that a modern economy can't function when people
can't easily get credit. It takes a while for this to become obvious,
since most companies and households don't take out big new loans every
day. But it will eventually become obvious, and painfully so. Already,
a lack of car loans has caused vehicle sales to fall further.

"Could the current crisis lift — could banks decide they really are
missing out on profitable investing opportunities — without a $700
billion government fund to relieve Wall Street of its scariest
holdings? Sure. And is Congress right to fight for a workable program
that's as inexpensive and as tough on Wall Street as possible?
Absolutely.

"But in the end, this really isn't about Wall Street. It's about
reducing the risk that something really bad happens. It's about
limiting the damage from the past decade's financial excesses.
Unfortunately, there is no way to accomplish that without also
extending a helping hand to Wall Street. That is where our credit
markets are, and we need them to start working again."

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/business/economy/01leonhardt.html?ref=business>

What would be a Marxist counterargument to the above?