Is the Atonement of Christ a Bailout?

This last US Presidential election posed a philosophical and spiritual choice to the American voter. Gov. Romney of Massachusetts ran on a record of restructuring. Conversely, Obama like Bush, ran on a record of continued bailouts

While Romney worked for Bain Capital, he worked to save failing companies. Instead of just throwing money at a failing company, Romney identified profitable and unprofitable parts of a business, he cut the unprofitable parts away and kept the good parts. Thus, in saving the company, the business returned to long-term health, productivity, and profitability. Romney did the same thing during the 2002 Salt Lake Olympics and while Governor of Massachusetts where he balanced the State budget, insured everyone in the state, and had the lowest unemployment and best schools in the nation.

Bush and Obama have been employing a different strategy. By just printing more money in a failing economy, there is no real change. When the economy, or General Motors, or an individual welfare recipient gets bailed out with QE-style bailout money, there is no motivation to change or restructure or repent. Thus the person receiving the bailout just continues with the same failed behavior that got them into their current situation.

I wonder how many Christians consider Christ's atonement to be more of an Obama-style bailout vs. a Romney-style restructuring? Unfortunately, some people's view of Christ's sacrifice tends to be more bailout-minded with little expectation to change, repent and improve.

According to LDS belief, Christ's Atonement allows the believer grace and power for real repentance and real change. Christ's sacrifice is about becoming a new person, born-again, and through Christ being made a more profitable servant.