Tear Down Or Renovate ?

The problem with people's homes is that they often become too comfortable.
People think that because it's the way they've always lived, they should continue living the same lifestyle.
Sometimes problems arise or people out grow their homes or the homes just become outdated.
When this happens, people often decide to renovate.

The decision to renovate is often based on one's needs and their ability to turn what they already have into something that they want.
If the foundation and structure is still good and the final value outweighs the cost, renovation is a good idea.

But sometimes the structure and foundation are so badly damaged that the cost to repair the old building is not an option.
Even trying to patch this type of structure would be a foolish waste of money, time and effort.

The best option becomes completely tearing down the old structure.
Rebuilding it's foundation.
And starting from scratch.
Sure it may be more costly than the patch method, but the final product (with the needed updating) will have more value and a better chance of lasting through the next storm.

If a simple carpenter knows this - why is the Obama administration having such a hard time figuring out that the old banking paradigm was a failure?
Even a 2 trillion dollar patch won't solve the problem.
Maybe we need to tear the old system down and start from scratch.
At least that way we'll know that we have a stable environment in which to live for generations to come.