Yearly Archive: 2009

Plans and pressure for the "bailout" continue, with each side taking shots at one another. Forget the shots at one another, just look at the facts.

• They promised “The bar that we set is the highest that any administration in the country has ever set.” – that from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. If that's the case, why are "regular citizens" unfit when we "forget" to pay our taxes, and yet they nominate people to be our leaders who's tax accountants can't even figure out how to file their taxes.
• They say the money is a "bailout" to get the economy moving, but most of what they propose will take years to get plans drawn, contracts written and bids reviewed. Remember, after Iraq and "Halliburton", the government can't just give the work to a company that specializes in whatever it is they need done, even if they are the best at it.
• If they want to help people who are being foreclosed on, why not just let the government buy up all the mortgages and let people pay the government back. Oh wait, at what price will they buy the mortgages? If at face value, then the banks and other lenders will get all their money back and "we the people" will be stuck with a worthless piece of paper. Remember, the banks loaned the $250,000, and the property is now only worth $100,000 – nice gift. Besides, the banks only loaned the money because the government said "you have to make homes available to people, even if they can't afford them."
• Giving it a little more perspective, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said, “If you started the day Jesus Christ was born and spent $1 million every day since then, you still wouldn’t have spent $1 trillion.” Let's see, 2008 years times 365.25 days equals $733.2 billion. A lot of money for ???
• If you thought the "Recovery" was going to help "people", then you got another think coming. What should have been so simple is now in excess of 600 pages of "stuff". There is more regular government junk in the bill than "Recovery" stuff. Did we elect dummies to run our government? Don't they understand the difference between fixing something and having a party. Or do they think we are dummies and won't be able to figure this out or are stupid enough to believe their tricks?

Now, mind you, if I have stepped on your toes or hurt your feelings, I'd be more than glad to hear from you using "Contact Me" on the right. After all, these are my thoughts for which I accept responsibility. Not only would I be glad to hear from you, I'd even be happy to discuss this with you. Alas, there are not many who want to do that for some reason.

I'd be asking some serious questions about this "bailout". Saw a news flash that said if they just took the bailout money and gave it to the unemployed…

Just think, there are 8.9 million people unemployed in the United States. The figures come directly from the U.S. Department of Labor. That's the average figure for 2008, but do a little math. They want $800 billion for a bailout. 800 billion divided by 8.9 million is somewhere near $90,000 per unemployed person.

Now let's be honest here folks. If you were unemployed and you got a check for $90,000 for no reason (other than the fact that you don't have a job and providing a roof over your head, and food for your family, etc.) I am sure as breathing that you would spend that on something. Something would be gas for your car, food for your family, some new shoes and clothes, contributions to charities, a couple of movies (with popcorn and drinks).

You probably see where this is going.

OR, the government (that's us (you and me) by the way) could hire you for $40,000 (the other $50,000 would cover the employer's contribution to your health benefits, Social Security and the 10% to run the program (ha! none of you would get the jobs to do that!). Then we could clear weeds, clean streets, mow lawns in parks and at schools (water it too), clean graffiti off walls and light poles, pull down old posters – in general, make our neighborhoods and parks better places. Maybe we could even have some wash BART trains, commuter busses, police cars.

There is a problem with this approach – those jobs would become permanent and probably Union, so they would never go away.

Just give'em $40,000 to tide them over (and then NO MORE) and send the balance to the rest of us – we'll either spend or invest it. None to any elected officials.

Wait a minute! Where's the money coming from in the first place? Isn't this how we got in this hole?