Friday, October 10, 2008
700 billion dollars that would have actually helped.
As you may know, the United States Senate, last week, passed a Economic Rescue Package that went to loan lenders. Loan lenders such as banks, mortgage companies and even insurance companies. This is intended to increase liquidity in the economy and increase lending and spending. Once the lending and spending increase, inherently the economy goes positive. This was also the intention of the stimulus program earlier this year. Give people a rebate from their taxes and have them spend money and the economy will turn around. I have a better idea. Give the 700 billion dollars to the people. The low people, the majority of the people. 700 billion dollars in 1 year would pay 20 million people $35,000.00. I don't know if you can do the math on this, but 20 million people is 6.6% of the American public. The unemployment rate is about 7%. Hmmmmm, if we really want to increase the economy, we want to increase spending. If we increase lending then we are increasing debt. We are in an economic downturn because people have been taking loans that they can't pay for. So we think $700 billion is the answer, so how should we spread this money out. I've got it, give it to the bankers so the people can take out more loans they can't pay for. Yes, I'm a genius. We saw this same type of thing happen in the 30's. The government can take their money and make government jobs. I've heard that the country has some major infrastructure problems. How about creating jobs to fix the infrastructure. This will create a lot of money flow into the market, sell a lot of houses, and if you use American Made Material (AMM) then you will create thousands of more jobs and this then makes over 20 million more tax payers and billions more in tax revenue. Build highways and bridges with AMM, build more power plants with AMM, reinforce the American power grid with AMM, and we could even employ government workers to build refineries and sell them to the oil companies using AMM. The government could even hire researchers, 100's of thousands of researchers and engineers for developing new green energy. I know what you are thinking, this guy is crazy, this would never work, but it did once upon a time when the economy did the exact thing it is doing now. Lack of liquidity, running on banks, and government influence on the market. I guess I am just to simple of a thinker.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
You should probably check your facts before you blather. I read your blog and you are all over the board. At the bottom of the page you say the government shouldn't help poor people but at the top you say we should give the money to the poor people. You should stay on topic, you may be more convincing. You may want to look at what you are saying bout creating all these government jobs because that was tried during the FDR administration. It didn't work then either. He had a recession inside a depression in 1937. The only way we were able to recover is because we had a war that we supplied armorements to the Allies. That put people back to work. They also put a restriction on items people could buy so people couldn't just spend. After the war was over there was a huge increase in the economy because the restriction was lifted. The other thing that happened was that the Republicans and some concervative Democrats killed most of the FDR New Deal policies, look it up, don't take my word for it. In fact, most economists now agree that he may have extented the Great Depression with his policies. Most of the infrastructure jobs that he created were in the heavily populated areas because that is where most of the votes came from, so rural areas didn't get help. As for you senopsys of the debate, you are right that you didn't hear anything new. I was dissappointed also but you need to remember that the moderator Dan Blather is a Liberal and picked the questions that were going to be asked. What did you expect from a setup like that? What I will tell you is if you listened you would have heard Obama say that only 50% of the small businesses will see a tax increase because of his $250,000 cut off point. How many of the small businesses do you think create new jobs? I would suspect that the top 50% of those would be the ones creating the new jobs. While I agree that the current administration hasn't stopped the spending, I can't agree that John McCain because of his record will do the same. He hasn't taken any EARMARKS or PORK for his state. Obama took $900,000,000 for his state and Biden has already signed up for more for his state this year. Palin actually killed accesive spending in Alaska and gave money back to the people. She has had a surplus in her state much like you said Clinton did when he was President. While I agree with you that Palin has only been in office a short while she has run a state that had a larger budget than Bill Clinton did in Arkensas. I have a question for you to answer. Who Am I?
I am under 45 years old,
I love the outdoors,
I hunt,
I am a Republican reformer,
I have taken on the Republican Party establishment,
I have many children,
I have a spot on the national ticket as vice president
with less than two years in the governor's office.
Who am I??
I am Teddy Roosevelt.
Let's talk about your idea of a majority vote. You understand that no new legislation could pass such a standard. You may want to look back at the years proceeding the current economic problem. I know what you are going to say, the Republicans were in charge. The only problem with that is that the Democrats blocked a bill from even hitting the House floor that would have put higher regulatory standards on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Here is a video clip of your good friend Billie talking about how he was trying to get more regulation on Fannie and Freddie when he was President.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O6iEoGgQFc
This economic crisis could have been avoided along time ago but certain people didn't want the money to stop. Both Chris Dodd and Barney Frank blocked any opposition. Barney Frank was having an affair with one of the executives of Fannie Mae. Chris Dodd received a sweetheart deal from Countrywide and he was the top recipeant of money from the institutions. Obama was number 2 and people like John Kerry was on the top of the list with Hillary Clinton in the top 10. Bush warned about Fannie and Freddie in 2001. Allen Greenspan warned about it in 2003. John McCain warned about it in 2005 but Obama was silent. If you know how government works you know that the minority can filibuster and the majority would have to have 60 votes to override it. The Republicans didn't have 60 votes and couldn't get any Democrats to switch. The votes were straight down party lines. That is why we are in this mess. You may be interested in this link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&NR=1
The American public has a choice to make this election year and it is going to be a important one. It really doesn't matter if Obama gets in office and makes a bigger mess because he will blame it on Bush anyway. The only one running for office this election cycle that has a proven track record of reform is John McCain. I am sorry you can't see it that way but you should do some real research before making comments that you can't back up. The proven road is lowering taxes to corporations so that more jobs will be created. No poor person has ever given a paycheck to another poor person. While tax cuts for the poor sound good the fact is that will not create jobs. The tax rate for corporations in this country are the second highest in the world. The current rate is 39.25% and Obama wants to raise that. Corporations can move to Ireland where the rate is 12.5%. In fact the US Corporate tax is 50% higher than the OECD Average.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/23470.html
Until the people of this country understand this problem Corporations will continue to leave this country. Here is another report showing that countries that have higher corporate tax rates actually take in less tax revenue than countries with lower corporate tax rates.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/23470.html
These are the facts. Vote John McCain this election.
Sorry, I put the rong link in for the second study.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1466.html
The government shouldn't hold our hands all the time. But AIG exects showed why the rich cannot be trusted with blank checks. They do not use money wisely. That's why Wall Street is like it is. I'm pissed too. Hope you guys are doing well up there!! Love Brandy
I have to say, if the person who wrote this comment ever checks here again, I completely disagree. I did not ever say that the government should give money to the poor. I am pretty sure that I said the government should "Give the 700 billion dollars to the people. The low people, the majority of the people. 700 billion dollars in 1 year would pay 20 million people $35,000.00." I did not say the poor people. I said Barrack Obama was taxing the rich and giving it to the poor. This is in programs like increased welfare, unemployment and "free" healthcare. Secondly, FDR did this because it was the only way to increase spending. Do you not think that if this would have been done before 1937, 5 years into the GD, that it would have turned it around before it was way to late. He started with banking reform laws, which did not work. it only made it worse. Bad idea. It was the emergency banking act which was written mostly by the hoover administration. Yeah the hoover administration. no wonder it was a bad idea. The next thing they did was the economy act which proposed to balance the federal budget by cutting the salaries of government employees and cutting pensions to veterans by forty percent. It saved $500 million per year and reassured deficit hawks such as Douglas that the new President was fiscally conservative. fiscally conservative unlike your beloved John McCain, but I will get to that later. He also passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act to Increase Farming. Increasing Farmong, the largest part of the economy in the 30's, would definately turn the economy around. The act made farmers artificially raise the price of their product by lowering the amount the were producing but they started making money within 2 years. The AAA was deemed by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional but it was replaced by a similar act that has been modified but is still in act today. The New Deal also repealed prohibition and by the sound of your comments, you are the standard American that enjoys a nice alcoholic beverage once in a while. then as you go a little further into the New Deal you find the Keynesian Economics policies. The rural electrification administration, that brought electricity to rural areas, and the investing in infrastructure where the reasons the economy increase so dramatically from 1932 to 1937. The 1937 recession happened because the government prematurely stopped the course of action and tried to balance the budget instead of helping the people. Then, yes WWII broke out and we stayed nuetral for as long as possible and made tons of money off of it, therefore increasing jobs.
Now to your next point, I don't know if you read my entire blog or just the spots where I was bashing McCain, but I don't like either of them. You don't have to convince me that Obama will run this country into the ground and make the people who voted for him sorry and of course blame it on Bush, which it is his fault but Obama won't help. But i do love the fact that you have been brainwashed by your conservative media, probably Rush or Hannity both of which HATED McCain before he won the ticket, that he has never taken "pork" or "earmark" spending for his state. I must tell you that he did take some, nothing like Obama or Mrs. Palin, but he did add on $10 million for the University of Arizona for an "academic center" named after Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist. He also added on $14.3 million into a defense appropriations bill to
create a buffer zone around Luke Air Force Base in Arizona. So I guess that is evidence against it oh yeah and he also back a more recent bill with about $150 billion in earmarks called the "Economic Rescue Plan," or what I like to call it the "No Banker Left Behind Bill," or the Bush, Obama, McCain Bailout (B.O.M.B.) BILL FROM HELL.
Finally, I am still confused if you think I am backing the Democrats. You spend an awful lot of time defending your beloved McCain against the evil Democrats. I said at least 5 times that I am voting for Bob Barr. I don't know if you are just retarded or you can't read but Bob Barr is not Barrack Obama. Bob Barr is a former Republican Congressman from Georgia. Libertarian is more "Conservative" and "Fiscally Responsible" than the Republican Party. So as far as your comment "you should do some real research before making comments that you can't back up," I tell you that you should probably read before you comment. The following ("The proven road is lowering taxes to corporations so that more jobs will be created. No poor person has ever given a paycheck to another poor person. While tax cuts for the poor sound good the fact is that will not create jobs.") is exactly the thing that I said about Barrack Obama saying he was going to tax the rich and give it to the poor like he was Robin Hood. Are you going to set there and tell me to stay on topic across six blog entries made across2 weeks and you can't even keep your thoughts straight in one reply composed in one setting? You really need to think before you type. But, although we disagree, I appreciate some feedback, I can at least tell that my efforts are not going unread.
P.S. It is spelled Arkansas.
Post a Comment