Awwww.... why me?
I don't believe in such simplisms such as simply "Doing Nothing". Rather, I believe in "Doing the Best Thing". If the best thing is to do nothing, then I will do nothing, but if the best thing is to do something, then I will do something.
The author brought up Y2K. I didn't stockpile either, not because I thought doing nothing was the right answer, but because after analyzing the situation and what people were doing about it, I decided that there was no cause for worry.
The author also brought up 9/11. I still believe in military action towards Afghanistan. To not go after the culprits behind the Twin Tower terrorist attacks would be pure lunacy. What would that tell them? "Hey, it's OK to attack America. They're not going to do anything about it." However, I did not agree with invading Iraq. Afghanistan, yes. Iraq, no.
As for this mortgage crisis and the bailout proposal, ordinarily, I too would against government bailouts. However, these are not ordinary times. As I have mentioned in another thread, when a wound is not too severe or when the patient is still strong enough to heal on its own, it's best for (free market) nature to take its course.
However, there are times when our patient is so ill or that the wounds are so severe that to heal on its own simply isn't an option. I believe we are at this point. Remember the Great Depression? Remember today's 700+ point market drop? When we become too ill or too wounded to heal on our own, we seek help. The economy, to me, is no different in this sense.
So, I would agree with the case to do nothing earlier, but not now. There are no standing laws that says a free market economy can heal itself from every wound and illness. Sometimes, it requires government intervention. The lack of government invention is partly what got us into the Great Depression, and government intervention is what got us out of it.
Frankly, I'd rather not take the chance that simply "Doing Nothing" will actually work.