American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan

[WhiskeyGirl]

Obama said Congress should pass an American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan designed to create 3 million jobs. The Democratic president-elect hasn't announced a final price tag on it, but aides said the cost could be as high as $775 billion.

Where are the jobs that create wealth?  I see spending, but who is creating wealth?  Saw mill operators?  Garment workers?  Toymakers?  Basic factory work that people enjoyed in abundance a generation ago? 

Where is value added in spending the $775 billion?  How much in taxes will be generated by that $775 billion?

Many Americans, including myself, remember a time when workers had their choice of many good paying factory jobs.  There were vibrant manufacturing centers in the US.  Factories supported entire communities and families.  These times are gone.  What jobs is Obama proposing to bring prosperity to Main Street?  All those little towns that lost their jobs to offshore factories that pay very little?  Jobs that add long term value?  Maybe every little town will build green energy widgets? 

A large portion of the measure will go toward infrastructure projects, blending
old-fashioned brick and mortar programs such as road and bridge repairs and water projects with new programs such as research and development on energy efficiency and an expensive rebuilding of the information technology system for health care.

I have to wonder how many American can possibly be employed in brick and mortar programs?  R&D?

"an expensive rebuilding of the information technology system for health care."?  Why would that have to be expensive?  What is to prevent those jobs from being outsourced to offshore locations?  The programming?  Data entry?  Testing?  How many Americans will really benefit?  Long term benefits?  Any concerns for the privacy of Americans?  Prevention of information abuse by researcher and government employees?

"Economists from across the political spectrum agree that if we don't act swiftly and boldly, we could see a much deeper economic downturn that could lead to double-digit unemployment and the American dream slipping further and further out of reach," Obama said.

I think with every new bailout, the American dream slips farther away.  Bailouts slip farther away from reality and towards a collapse of the American system altogether.

With the Dollar collapse a possibility, where will Americans turn for basics like clothing and shoes when they go from say $10 to $100 overnight?  Any American production in sight?  Aren't their any jobs for basic needs in the Obama plan for America?  Just keep outsourcing the entry level basic jobs and throw those people away?  

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA?SITE=NDBIS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-01-03-10-15-15

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

The Obama Speech at this site -

http://gawker.com/5122845/president-changes-jobs-speech-decoded

What about those people that are not college bound?  People still need toilet paper, paper towels, shoes and underwear.  Simple every day products.  Where are the jobs for those that are not college bound? 

Simple products are need in the 21st century too.

What does Obama plan for those that are not capable of high tech jobs?

Where is the plan for basic education?  Education has seen lots of gizmo spending for years.  Have test scores improved over the years?  What are the benefits of past spening on bricks and mortar for schools?  All those plush schools, do they graduate smarter students?  What about community support for schools?  When is the local community responsible for the success of local schools?  Maintaining all that brick and mortar?  Educating students?  Making sure they get to school on time?

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

What is "recovery and restructuring" - another code word/phrase?  The restructuring seems to be a code word for what "corporate" America has done for the past 30-40 years.   The stock price bubble...shipping jobs overseas...underfunding pensions...the list could continue for pages...

Would there be a lesser need for recovery if Congress had reformed Fannie/Freddie/Wall Street through common sense and regulation years ago?  Who were the Democratic watchdogs on duty?  Who sat by and watched while the nation went down the road of financial instability?  Perhaps this was the plan all along?  Redistribute wealth by any means necessary?  Bankrupt the nation?  Seems like those same watchguards have something larger to guard.  Will they prevent anyone else from looting, bombing, or in other ways continuing to destroy this nation?

Maybe they will help "lead" the nation through hyper-inflation?  Ensure that the hard work and thrift of generations of immigrants and other Americans is destroyed in a season or a presidency?  Take away the retirement security of generations?  Continue to encourage the "something for nothing" and "entitlement" mentality that has taken hold of this nation?  What ever happened to hard work?

I have to wonder when the Ivy League school of Michelle Obama will release those papers in lockdown.  What did she really write all those years ago?  Are her dreams for America coming true?  The fruition of her plans for a better America?  Will she be the next Imelda Marcos or Leona Helmsley?  Maybe an Eleanor Roosevelt to her people?  Her special interests?  Maybe these papers will remain a mystery for history like the original Obama birth files and school/financial aid papers.

From the news this morning -

The package will also include more than $100 billion in tax incentives for businesses to create jobs and invest in equipment or factories.

How much of this will go for NEW jobs?  Bring or create JOBS in America?  Jobs for everyone?  Or, is this $100 billion for GM and Chrysler?  How much?  How many opportunities will these two companies create for everyone?  Anyone not already employed by those companies?  What will prevent the recipients from move the equipment offshore after just a short time?  Taking jobs and American tax dollars with them?

It seems like the successful countries - those with jobs and prosperity - encouraged NEW business startups.  What is the Obama plan doing for prosperity?  Microbusiness?  The unemployed?  Those that have stopped looking?  Those that will be made poor by the collapse of the dollar and hyperinflation?  It's hard to be optimistic when the important decisions are being made by many of the same people who failed to guard the national cookie jar.   

He will also designate a chief performance officer and a chief technology officer on Wednesday to help make government more efficient, they said.

Maybe this job will ensure that every email address gets to vote in the new Obama global nation?   Maybe new jobs will be created by cleaning up the voter rolls?  Working on providing national identity cards and ensuring that there are no duplicates?  Other nations did this years ago.  India is working on this.  Why isn't this a priority in the US?

I am still convinced, based on what I observed in the primary elections that the nation (like in some highly populated states), that the voting process is a SHAM.  It's been that way for some time and will continue down that road in the future.

Where is the reform movement in government?  Reform welfare to ensure that no one is collecting more than once?  In multiple states?  Under multiple names?  IIRC, when Wisconsin started reforming welfare, a hugh number of people just disappeared from the welfare roles when the bar was raised and they were required to participate in job training.  I still have to wonder why they stopped collecting and didn't sign up for job training.  How did they plan to support themselves?

Social safety nets, IMHO, work when everyone contributes to their success.  That means that the able bodied work and those that cannot work are taken care of.  No one can do everything, everyone can do something.

Mr. Obama’s advisers said they were still discussing with Congressional leaders the precise plan for phasing out the credit for wealthier Americans. They said no tax increases were included in the plan because it was focused on measures that create jobs.

In my mind, every dollar government spends IS a tax increase.  Someone, like taxpayers have to pay for it.  If they're spending all that money and plan to collapse the dollar to avoid paying, I think that is stealing from those that will lose all their hard earned money to the collapse of the dollar and hyper-inflation.  What is the Obama fortune invested in?  Gold?  Silver?

HOW DOES OBAMA PLAN TO PAY FOR ALL THAT SPENDING?  WHO IS GOING TO PAY?  THE RETIRMENT PLANS OF AMERICANS?  WHAT WALL STREET DIDN'T TAKE, OBAMA WILL IN ELIMINATE IN ANOTHER FORM OF WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION?  "By any means necessary" keeps coming to my mind when I think of the Obamas.  I don't imagine building America, I see destruction and special interest groups.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/us/politics/05spend.html?bl&ex=1231304400&en=99a6130dae16eb41&ei=5087%0A

just my humble and ignorant American opinions

[WhiskeyGirl]

What is missing from the Obama plan?  Where is the plan for repayment of all this money?

I have to wonder if all the alarmists/predictors of doom were correct.  The plan all along was to drive the nation into bankruptcy through Fannie/Freddie.  Where were the people looking after the taxpayer interests?

Maybe the predicted collapse if the fruition of the Obama and other plans to redistribute wealth in America.  It seems like some believe that only RICH people could put money into a 401k or other retirement vessel.  Frugality and thrift didn't matter in this plan.  Only RICH people could afford to save any money.

The focus continue to be spending and I have to wonder why.

How many of those that did not support the reform of Freddie/Fannie have their fortune invested in gold, silver, and other things that retain value when a monetary system collapses?  Did they have any concern for the savings of the average American?  One not in the plan?

Maybe that is the real "restructuring" for America?  Your credit card, student loan, and mortgage debt eliminated through hyperinflation?

What about all those Americans that practiced thrift?  Saved for a rainy day?  It seems like they must be rich and therefore deserve to lose their savings.

Eliminate debt and savings in one pass of the Obama pen.

How many reforms to the US debt monster have those in the new administration blocked over the years?  How many financial reforms have they sponsored?  How have they engaged in nation building?  Nation destroying?

How is Obama planning to pay off this growing debt?  What is the Chinese interest in payback?  Middle East interest?  What will satisfy them?

[WhiskeyGirl]

When the dollar is worthless, what will happen to all the goods that American's import?  Maybe they'll keep coming because of good will?  Good looks?  Fond memories?

What happens when American's cannot afford to import oil?  Oil imports trickle to almost zero?  How long will the nation's oil reserves last?  Oops...IIRC, Obama doesn't like the oil reserve, so it may be the first thing to go in his new recovery and restructuring plan for America.  A little something extra, hidden deep in the bowels of all that spending or future taxation (shock) or wealth destruction or hyperinflation...

Who's looking out for America?   What is the Obama plan for eliminating all that toxic debt?

Does it really matter if you're employed or unemployed if your car runs out of gas and the tanks at the gas station are empty?  Does it really matter if you have no oil or gas to heat your home?  Generate electricity? 

How long before all the alternative engery goes online?  Maybe before we freeze or die in the heat?

Maybe there is some short term emergency measure in the works to use American sources? 

Maybe there is some contingency plan hidden in the Obama recovery and restructuring plan for America?  The media just didn't think it was important to let us know?

JMHO

[WhiskeyGirl]

"These are America's problems, and we must come together as Americans to meet them with the urgency this moment demands. Economists from across the political spectrum agree that if we don't act swiftly and boldly, we could see a much deeper economic downturn that could lead to double digit unemployment and the American Dream slipping further and further out of reach," said Obama.

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=107126&catid=188

Other mysteries I would like answers to ~

Who are the "leading economists" that Obama refers to in his speeches?  Who is part of the "spectrum" and when and where did they agree to these things?  Are there transcripts?  Can the public listen in on their discussions?  Are they willing to be named in public?  Who is part of the Obama insider list?  What are their accomplishments?  What policies are they known for?

Who is on the list of economists that have other solutions?  What other solutions are possible?  What alternative views is Obama passing up?  Any the promote sound fiscal management?  Any economists not from Wall Street?

What is the Obama "secret weapon" for managing the national debt?  (I read an opinion that seemed to be certain that Obama had a "secret weapon" that he was going to unleash on the public after being sworn into office)  Unfunded entitlement programs?  Where does he see the debt in two years?  Four years?  Ten years? 

Does the spending go to Obama and the debt to the post Obama administration? 

If Obama would make loans to states, what are states to use for collateral?  What happens when a state goes bankrupt?  Who gets stuck holding and paying for all that debt?

When does he see Americans paying taxes to pay for these massive debts?

I'd really like to see something about the Obama dream/solution for the nation's debt crisis.

[WhiskeyGirl]

Here's one person reaching into a bygone era for hope.  Where are the words of hope today?

One hopeful sign is that President Obama has given the matter significant thought. In a campaign speech in March, he talked about regulating the derivatives markets and raising the capital standards for banks. If that speech becomes the template for reform, it’s a promising start...

March 2008?  Maybe Obama has given it some more thought and decided against change?  Decided against a new beginning for America?  After reading for the past year or so, the best description I would ever give someone of 'derivatives' is a kind of gambling - 

"Derivatives are a system, a kind of logic, a limited number of successful professional gamblers probably use.  However, most (citizens, executives, Congress, etc.) are not smart enough to understand what a 'derivative' is and why most bets fail.  That is why, the problems with Fannie/Freddie, TARP, banks, and other financial institutions will containue to fail.  That is the heart of the problem - why the American taxpayer and nation is on the losing end, probably close to 100% of the time.  Deriatives were never meant to have winners - the game was all about 'fees' and bonuses and raising the price of stocks...not about sound financial practices.  An American ponzi scheme spiraling out of control, 'hope' for the future already sicked into the void.

Should Americans continue down this carefree road for the small percentage of loans that do not fail?  What do the good loans in these packages look like?  The ones not in foreclosure?  What are the characteristics of those borrowers?

“Investors have lost confidence in everything: the regulators, the system, the oversight of Congress, the fairness of our markets,” says Arthur Levitt, a former S.E.C. chairman. “How do you restore that?”

I haven't seen efforts or words to restore confidence, just efforts to 'reinflate' the bubble with more gas.  Gas = taxpayer money.  The bubble is beyond repair.  The bubble is in shreds and the balloon is still falling, and deflating...

George Soros...took to the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal to warn that nobody was thinking big enough: “The longer markets function without supervision explicitly aimed at maintaining stability, the greater the danger of an accident like October 19, 1987.”

Anyone remember the landmark 1987 Securities Act? It never materialized. And did anything happen in 1998, after Long-Term Capital Management nearly went under and a similar dance took place? Many of the same players strutted on the same stage...

Any new blood working on reform?  Same players?  Any reform of derivatives?  Fannie or Freddie?  Community Reinvestment Act?  Vote fraud?

http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/wall-street/2009/01/07/Wall-Street-Needs-New-Regulations

just my humble opinions

[WhiskeyGirl]

From the Obama speech today -

To give our children the chance to live out their dreams in a world that's never been more competitive, we will equip tens of thousands of schools, community colleges and public universities with 21st-century classrooms, labs and libraries. We'll provide new computers, new technology, and new training for teachers so that students in Chicago and Boston can compete with kids in Beijing for the high-tech, high-wage jobs of the future.

Do the Chinese have the same wage scale as workers in the US?  Same benefits?  Taxes? 

Do businesses in China pay the same taxes as those not in China?  Are businesses in China subject to the same environmental restraints as they are in the US?  Regulation?  Is the playing field level? 

Is this an apples to oranges comparison?  Will the American standard of living (dream) continue to decline?

The nation has been equipping schools, community colleges and public universities with high tech equipment since the 70's.  Has it been working?  Have children been left behind?

Perhaps there is something else missing from the American classroom?  Attitude towards education?  Attitude towards academic achievement? 

No longer can we allow Wall Street wrongdoers to slip through regulatory cracks. No longer can we allow special interests to put their thumbs on the economic scales. No longer can we allow the unscrupulous lending and borrowing that leads only to destructive cycles of bubble and bust.

"we" or "I", is that the question?

When they tried to reform fannie and freddie,
I voted present,
I was not a reformer.

...the scale of this plan is unprecedented, but so is the severity of our situation. We have already tried the wait-and-see approach to our problems, and it is the same approach that helped lead us to this day of reckoning.

...Our government has already spent a good deal of money, but we haven't yet seen that translate into more jobs or higher incomes or renewed confidence in our economy...

...Every American will be able to hold Washington accountable for these decisions by going online to see how and where their taxpayer dollars are being spent...

Capitol Hill has thrown TRILLIONS of dollars at the problem with good intentions...it hasn't helped, or so I've been told.  Maybe it just takes time for this bad debt to work it's way through the system...maybe it's time to close the purse strings and look for some major restructuring through bankruptcy...just another opinion.

Can American's really expect to see higher paying jobs AND compete with workers in China and/or India at the same time?  Can American based businesses really compete with business in Asia?  Wages?  Benefits?  Taxes?  Regulation? 

I'd like to know how the government plans to pay down the existing debt.  How long?  What's the game plan?  Who do we owe, and how much?  When will this information be online, along with the spending details, so that I may track the progress?  When will I be able to see the 'real' cost of all these programs?  A "Truth In Spending Law" in action? 

That is not the country I know. It is not a future I accept as president of the United States. A world that depends on the strength of our economy is now watching and waiting for America to lead once more, and that is what we will do.

I've been reading that the global model with the United States of America as the financial engine is dead--in the American and non-American media.  There is no strength or money left in the US economy.  America is bankrupt.

The US is just a little nation in the global ocean.  This sounds like the US has a gun to it's head.  If Americans don't spend, the Obama administration must.  The loan sharks know where to find the White House. 

Who's going to pay for all this spending?  Is this icing on the cake of financial collapse?   Keep American's distracted from the bleak future that's right around the corner?

Is the rest of the world watching the US dig a deeper hole in the ground?  Planning to scavenge the best pieces for themselves?

Americans are tapped out, overextended, and deeply in debt.  The nation is broke.

How can American's lead when they are bankrupt?  Trillions of dollars in debt?  In my mind every trillion dollars in debt is one year of misery for the nation.  From what I've read, the nations debt (no doubt hidden by Wall Street 'hocus pocus' accounting) is over $50 trillion dollars in deficits, unfunded, underfunded, and missing trust funds.  That over fifty years of misery ahead. 

Maybe we have to keep spending or risk Wall Street bankers facing jail or capital punishment in foreign nations?

Is there a success story of a nation that spent it's way out of bankruptcy?  Hyper-inflation?  Is there a tested road to financial stability?

Are the Chinese being encouraged to buy toasters?  Pasta makers?  All those other things?  Are they being encouraged to spend money?  Go into debt that will take them 45-50 years to pay off?  Learning to whip out their China Express cards?

Do Chinese students graduate with a share of the national debt, equal to say a $450,000 mortgage, hanging around their necks before they go on their first job interview? 

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/01/obama_warns_of_worsening_econo.html

Why not focus on new jobs?  Energy jobs?  Green jobs?  Federal building rehab?  Home rehab?  Practice frugality?

Cancel the rest of TARP?  Wait for a return to taxpayers of the first TARP funds, in order to fund those other things?  Healthcare?  Schools?  Technology?  Savings from the modernization of federal buildings and homes?  An in/out of taxpayer money?

Who's on the list of special interests that get those well thought of green jobs?  The short list of winners?  Who were the losers?  Who will replace Haliburton?

Why shouldn't American's start saving like those in other countries?  Paying off their debts instead of spending?  Clinging less to the material things in life?  Focusing on the spiritual aspects of life?

just my humble opinions

[WhiskeyGirl]

January 8th, 2009 10:59 PM Eastern

What Would Reagan Do If He (Rather Than Obama) Were Our Next President?

By Jon Kraushar

It remains unclear exactly what Obama is proposing to stimulate the economy but best I can tell it’s a dog’s breakfast of 60% government public works projects (that Obama unbelievably claims won’t include “pork” aka wasteful spending and earmarks) and 40% tax cuts (mostly one-time rebates and tax credits) which will likely spur more Americans to saving (as the Bush tax rebates proved last year) than spending. In the beginning, Obama said his total economic turnaround plan would cost about $775-billion. But lately he is suggesting that the plan will cost $800 billion which means that he is really heading for $1-trillion mark.

In sum, most of Obama’s “jolt the economy” plan relies on the government to select  and oversee spending projects that it claims will stimulate an economic revival. That is a notorious recipe for disaster — in case you hadn’t noticed how well this same approach turned out in centrally planned Communist and Socialist economies.

Reagan compared government to a baby having “an alimentary canal with an appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.” Reagan said, “Government does not really solve problems; it subsidizes them. And it does not produce a dime of revenue. It can spend only what it takes from the pockets of the working men and women of this country.”

This is new Reagan stuff for me!     

Reagan said that, “…growth, prosperity, and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not from government down.” What this means is giving money and power to the people, not the politicians.

Reagan defined as “the backbone of our country: Americans helping themselves and each other, reaching out and finding solutions—solutions that government and huge institutions can’t find.”

Reagan famously said, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” At a time when Obama is saying the opposite, what do you think?

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/01/08/kraushar_obama_reagan/

Seems like some old time wisdom and an alternative point of view...

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

"Our Schools and Infrastructure Are Crumbling"

What exactly does that mean?  When I look around my community, I see new schools, schools being rebuilt, and maintained in good condition.  I see a community that takes an active role in schools, and considers education a priority.  The community pays taxes needed to keep the school system in good shape.  The community is responsible.  I see good libraries.   I feel pride in my community. 

Why would anyone, including Obama, use the "we" to describe all schools?  Maybe he should speak only to those schools he is familiar with.  I am proud of my community.  I think the community is responsible for maintaining the school system.

What does Barack Obama see when he looks around his community?  Crumbling schools?  What did he do to remedy this problem?  Or, maybe he doesn't see a problem?  The community doesn't see a problem?  Or, make education a priority?

Is money necessary to instill pride and responsibility in people?  Communities? 

"We" when used by Obama, does not reflect every community in this nation.  I am reasonably certain others feel pride in their communities and the educational systems.

If the schools are crumbling in YOUR community, what are YOU doing about it?  Are you asking your leaders why?  Mayor Daley, why are the schools crumbling in Chicago?  What could possibly be more important than Chicago's children?  Where is the money going?

If the schools are CRUMBLING in Illinois, what is Illinois doing about it?  Blago?

What is the point of rebuilding schools and other infrastructure if people and communities do not take responsibility for these things? 

I think the global village does not care what happens in the small community.  The global village just wants money and power, and shelling it out to special interest groups.

Obama and his "our schools are crumbling" does not speak accurately of every community.  I am proud of my community. 

Responsible people maintain roads, schools, and bridges.  "We" from the lips of Obama doesn't speak for everyone.

just my humble opinions

What does the community need more hospitals for?  The for profit model, or not for profit model should be able to build them and make some money!

imho

[WhiskeyGirl]

Put Bernie Madoff On The Public Payroll!
Date 13/01/2009
Fleet Street Daily | By Bill Bonner
Paris, France

Tuesday, 13 January 2009

A natural Deflation of asset prices in the financial world...eading to a natural Depression in the economic world.... with an army of public officials Determined to turn things around.

Their approach is the old ‘hair of the dog that bit him’ technique. The world has had too much credit; they propose to give it even more. With $10 trillion in “stimulus” efforts all over the planet, they’re not giving only a hair of the dog; they’re throwing in the whole damned kennel.

These efforts are not going to work. Why not? Because you can’t help an obese man by giving him another helping of dessert. And you can’t cure an alcoholic by offering him free drinks.

If the feds were paying attention, they should listen up here:

The cure for a slump is a slump.

A real correction corrects. Cold turkey. Rehab. Debts are paid off, worked off, or written off. Prices fall to the point where they make sense again. Consumer items become affordable; an ordinary person can buy a house. An ordinary investor can buy a stock... or an apartment building... and get a decent return on his money. An ordinary businessman can make a profit from operations; he doesn’t have to count on stock options and rising share prices in order to make a living.

The way to cure a correction, we repeat, is to let it do its work. But that’s not going to happen. We’ll explain why it won’t happen tomorrow. Today, let’s continue to look at what will happen – more quack cures!

Our colleagues in London tell us that the English are proposing to “tax savings to force people to spend or invest, rather than just sit on their money.” That’s right, they want to stimulate world trade by forcing consumers to buy more tennis shoes from India. If they don’t, they’ll have to pay a tax!

Another wonder drug was proposed by two former Bank of England economists. They want the government to buy houses that go into foreclosure and then rent them back to the people who couldn’t pay their mortgages.

...

Once a bubble in one sector has burst, you can’t re-inflate it...After the bubble in the tech sector popped in 2000, for example, the feds manned the pumps. But they couldn’t get the tech stocks re-inflated. The Nasdaq never recovered. Instead, they pumped up a huge bubble in private debt – with gassy bulges in housing, finance, commodities, emerging markets and many other sectors. Now, that bubble has burst and the feds are, once again, pumping harder than ever. This time, they’re blowing up the biggest bubble in PUBLIC debt the world has ever seen.

Even Le Monde has noticed:

“The governments of the entire world are beginning to create mountains of debts in order to finance their bailout plans, their stimulus programs and their budget deficits caused by the recession. Even so, the rate at which the US and European countries borrow on the financial markets is near the lowest in history. It is only barely above 2% for 10-year loans to America and slipped under 3% for the German equivalent at the end of 2008... Some economists ask themselves if a bubble in government debt isn’t in the process of forming...and they ask themselves what will happen when it eventually explodes...”

We think we know what happens. The whole system of imperial finance gets flattened.

But at least if they’re going to do the wrong thing, you might as well do it well. It is a documented fact that neither the present U.S. Secretary of the Treasury – Hank Paulson – nor the incoming man – Tim Geithner – had a clue about what was happening last year. They didn’t seem to understand how America’s system of imperial finance – the system that undergirded expanding world trade – actually worked. They seemed completely surprised when it began to crash. Clearly, neither is competent to manage such a system.

http://www.fleetstreetinvest.co.uk/daily-reckoning/bill-bonner-essays/bernie-madoff-public-payroll-35417.html

Just keep spending money the nation doesn't have.  When does Obama and his administration think the nation will start paying back all this money?  Where is the money coming from?  Taxes on people who save?  What's wrong with promoting a balanced economy?  An economy that is sustainable?  A firewall to prevent the domino effect that seems to be gripping much of the global economy? 

A savings philosophy? 

Change has to start somewhere.  After the collapse and destruction of the United State, I hope a reformer comes to power.  Someone, who has the best interests of the nation in their thoughts.  A call to action from an honest reformer.

just my humble opinions

[WhiskeyGirl]

I forgot the 'punch line' to that last post -

...Why not turn to a man who does know? In all the world, there is one man who has proven that he knows better than anyone, not only how it works... but how to work.

That man is Bernie Madoff. Instead of putting him in jail, put him at the Treasury.

[WhiskeyGirl]

There are pictures and more comments at the site -

"The 11 Most Depressing Moments Of The 2009 Detroit Auto Show"

1.) Dead People

On the first night of the show we went out to a restaurant near Cobo to grab some food and do some work. We wandered out around 11 pm and noticed flashing police lights. We have to thank the jerk who said "Don't mind him, he's dead" and made us turn to see the lifeless body lying in the cold Detroit street because we'd have otherwise not noticed. We told the interns he was "sleeping" just to make sure they didn't go home with nightmares. Instead, we did.

http://jalopnik.com/5132122/the-11-most-depressing-moments-of-the-2009-detroit-auto-show

Was "he" a taxpayer?  Beyond recovery?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Aid cut may spell Albany layoffs
Mayor Jennings says federal stimulus funds can help city fight blight  
 
By TIM O'BRIEN, Staff writer
First published in print: Thursday, January 15, 2009 

He also said he expected President-elect Barack Obama to focus stimulus resources on cities to help reduce the blight of abandoned buildings.

"Demolishing buildings are expensive," he said. "We don't want to demolish our historic buildings."

He also suggested the proposed Albany Convention Center should be considered for federal stimulus funds.

"They want shovel-ready projects in Washington. That's about as shovel-ready as anything. We've been working on it for seven years," he said.

http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=760093&category=ALBANY&BCCode=&newsdate=1/16/2009

What caused all those buildings to be abandoned?  Business flight?  Lost industry?  No jobs to replace the ones sent offshore?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Focus: Obama gazing at a desolate future

Sam Fleming, Daily Mail
16 January 2009, 1:47am

Despite the Wall Street bailouts, George W Bush's 2008 tax rebate, and a near-zero interest rate policy from the Federal Reserve, the world's biggest economy is showing no signs of exiting its nosedive.

America's housing market entered its downturn two years ago, yet the pace of decline just seems to be accelerating.

When will the market hit bottom?

In short, what started as a property and financial sector slump is snowballing into a wholesale economic crash.

Earlier this week Fed chairman Ben Bernanke acknowledged that yet more drastic measures are needed to put a stop to the 'bleeding'.

Simon Johnson, senior fellow at Washington's Peterson Institute for International Economics, argues the US may be heading into something akin to the 'lost decade' that followed Japan's property collapse.

This is partly because American consumers are hoarding cash after allowing their finances to become hopelessly over-extended during a debt and asset bubble.

This savings rate will need to be ratcheted from near-zero levels back towards historical averages of 8% or more.

How can American consumers 'hoard' cash they do not have?  No job?  No money?  Bush stimulus check?  Obama tax cut (really a FUTURE tax increase-imho)?  Maybe they need the money to feed their families...

Unbelieveable that anyone would call failure to spend "hoarding" - perhaps it's a case of priorities?  Hmmm...gym shoes from India or food for dinner?  Heat for the house?  School supplies?

America is looking to Obama to provide some answers. Congress was yesterday considering an $825bn (£565bn) fiscal stimulus package drafted with his transition team. The proposals would cut taxes, bolster public spending and investment in alternative energy, and create or save 3m jobs.

But no one should exaggerate their likely impact.

Johnson, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said: 'The right way to think about the fiscal stimulus is the private sector wants to save a lot and not spend, so you should buffer that by having the public sector spend more.

'That doesn't prevent the adjustment which you need at a macro level, but it softens it and pushes it back.

'If the government did nothing, you would have a harder, bigger, faster fall. See the 1930s for details.'

Still falling...

In the US, the public sector has been spending at an alarming rate-Social Security Trust Fund is empty, the government is broke and the spending spree continues.  

The $825bn plan is inadequate to plug a $2trillion gap in economic output, and proposed investment plans need to be spread over a longer timeframe, he argues. What's more, as Bernanke warned this week, a fiscal stimulus alone will not solve America's problems - there also needs to be a cure for Wall Street's ills.

Is that $2 trillion is output or perhaps wealth creation?  Jobs that no longer exist?  No more factories to send to foreign countries along with the jobs that used to be in the US?

Is there likely to be reform or change for Wall Street?  Anyone looking out for taxpayers?  The future stability of the US?

Torsten Slok, a New York economist with Deutsche Bank, said: 'The banks are simply not lending. Getting the banking system back on its feet is the top priority.'

I know one person that has needed a 'payroll' loan for the past few months.  Alternative is closing up and losing everything.  They've also cut back and asked every one to pitch in with expenses.  They didn't have a problem getting a loan.  Who are the people who are having a problem getting a loan?  Maybe I'm not in the inner loop and fail to see the problem.

Obama will try to inspire Americans next week with a vision of better times ahead. But the abiding message is likely to be a bleak one for America - and the rest of the world.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=467010&in_page_id=2

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

I wonder how long it will be before taxpayers have to put out the $301 billion plus the $118 billion...

The government also will provide Bank of America protection against the possibility of unusually large losses on an asset pool of approximately $118 billion of loans, securities backed by residential and commercial real estate loans and other such assets, which have been marked to current value.

Bank of America will absorb the first $10 billion of losses while the government will share losses from there, up to $10 billion. If that pool of assets sees losses of over $20 billion, then the government will absorb hits on 90% of them.

A similar guarantee was provided to Citigroup: Uncle Sam is on the hook for $301 billion of assets, with Citi...taking the first $39.5 billion of hits, and then the government absorbing 90% of the rest.

Citigroup said this finalized what was announced with the government on Nov. 23.

"With these transactions, the U.S. government is taking the actions necessary to strengthen the financial system and protect U.S. taxpayers and the U.S. economy," the government said.

 

How are taxpayers being protected?  I'm not tracking with the group.  It seems like when the "U.S. government" guarantees something, it's a sure sign that taxpayers will be stuck holding another empty bag.  TARP, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. 

Where'd all that money go?  How can the U.S. taxpayer continue to make good on all these debts?  The nation is tapped out.  Why doesn't the U.S. Government ensure that all these banks use sound lending practices?  Wouldn't that be a better way to protect taxpayers?  Stockholders?

Who's looking out for the best interests of the U.S. as a nation?  Taxpayers?  Citizens?

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/us-government-backs-over-400/story.aspx?guid=%7B7A56B898%2DB9BD%2D405B%2DBA65%2D309703E0B4EC%7D&dist=TNMostRead

just my humble opinions

[WhiskeyGirl]

Why does the US government keep spending money on bailouts?  On TARP?  Has anything been done to clean up all the lending practices that got the banks and others in trouble?  I haven't read about anything.

How will they reform the industry if some of the key players are in government?  Who in government blocked reform in the past?  Who served on the boards of Freddie and Fannie?  Is it likely any reform will come from this group?  Any efforts to lean the nation on the path of financial security? 

Or, will the nation continue on the route to self-destruction?  Currency collapse?  Who's going to pay for all these bailouts?  How many generations will be paying the ongoing bailout bill? 

With new woes emerging in the financial sector, the US Senate cleared the way for president-elect Barack Obama to access the second half of the $700 billion financial rescue fund. Almost as soon as the cheque was cleared, outgoing Treasury secretary Henry Paulson began negotiating for funds to prop up Bank of America.

Corporate bailouts remain unpopular with the public, however. A Gallup poll last week found that 62% believed Congress should block the release of the $350 billion left in the Tarp until there was more control over how the money would be spent.

Any controls?  Or, just more empty promises and words from those that knew there was a problem back in 2005 and failed/refused to participate in reform?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5536998.ece

Was this a planned failure to topple the US government and currency?

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

Losing the public's support

Convincing the American public to support more rescue measures may be tough.

A majority of those polled say the government's financial bailout for troubled banks has not worked so far and six in 10 don't want Washington to spend more money on the rescue, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday.

President-elect Barack Obama will have to decide how to parcel out the remaining $350 billion to all the jockeying interests.

In a nod to congressional Democrats, Obama's officials have already committed to spending up to $100 billion on assisting homeowners facing foreclosure, while Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Tuesday that banks will need more capital injections.

However, Obama said it's crucial to help the banks and get them lending to consumers and small businesses again.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/16/news/economy/Tarp_take2/?postversion=2009011716

Why not focus the cash infusions on banks that remain sound?  Why keep pouring money in these failed institutions? 

Who are these people or companies that need loans?  Perhaps they are not good credit risks? 

Aren't there any banks in America that maintained sound practices?  Aren't failing?  Why keep pumping money into leaky sinking ships? 

Has anyone worked to patch the hole in the past?  Any one successful? 

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

Good ideas, questions, and concerns...
(not sure if this is for real or meant as humor)

Strange Days on Capitol Hill
Republicans for Obama, Democrats unsure.

by Stephen F. Hayes
01/26/2009, Volume 014, Issue 18

House minority leader John Boehner started his press conference on January 15 sounding like a teenage girl who had just found out that her boyfriend like totally hooked up with her best friend.

"Oh. My. God."

Before he continued, Boehner glanced at the talking points prepared for his statement on the $825 billion stimulus package proposed by Democrats in the House of Representatives. "My notes here say that I'm disappointed." He was looking for something stronger. "I just can't tell you how shocked I am at what we're seeing. It's clear that they're moving on this path along the flawed notion that we can borrow and spend our way to prosperity."

Boehner asked how NASA was going to spend $400 million fighting global warming, if ACORN would qualify for community development grants, and whether federal money should be used for waterslides.  He wondered why taxpayers were providing handouts to universities with billion-dollar endowments.

Good questions!!!

"I want to know how digital TV coupons are going to stimulate our economy," he said, pointing out a Democratic proposal to help citizens who still watch television using an antenna convert to digital next month. "I just read last week that 94 percent of the people who needed a converter for their digital--to receive their digital signal--had already gotten it. And so if there's only 6 percent of American TVs that still need these, how could we possibly spend $650 million on this?" It's a good argument. How indeed?

What I read/saw in the media suggested to me that Americans are unprepared.  Are all the converter boxes made offshore?  Made in America?  Maybe it would be cheaper just to drop ship free ones to every American?  How much will those converter boxes cost when taxpayers are still paying for them fifty years from now?

It is quite a moment. While Republicans are embracing Obama, Democrats are expressing skepticism. Harry Reid says he doesn't "work for Obama." David Obey called Obama a "crown prince." Barbara Boxer insisted they weren't "potted plants." Barney Frank wants him to challenge Republicans--actually, Frank called it fighting the "savage beast." Bill Nelson called Obama's comments on the economy "mumbo jumbo."

read more here -
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/019ewgle.asp

jmho's

[WhiskeyGirl]

Weak Dollars, Weak Presidents

By Stephen Moore & John Tamny from the December 2008-January 2009 issue

When John F. Kennedy ran against Richard Nixon in 1960, he declared, “we can do bettah,” and as the pro-growth candidate called for a faster economic growth rate (5 percent) and a stronger dollar. Kennedy’s declaration on monetary policy was bullish and unequivocal: “This nation will maintain the dollar as good as gold at $35 an ounce, the foundation stone of the free world's trade and payments system.''

As the late Wall Street Journal editorial page editor Robert Bartley wrote in The Seven Fat Years, “inflation always creates winners and losers, redistributing wealth. When currencies collapse, capital becomes scarce for entrepreneurs and businesses. Workers are thus bitten twice by inflation; first through the reduced value of their earnings, and second with investment slowdowns that make it impossible for employers to increase their wages commensurate with rising prices.”

With the dollar at historical lows, it’s often remarked that fixing our inflation problem will be painful. This couldn’t be further from the truth. A stronger dollar right now would increase wages, lower prices at the pump and the grocery store, and drive investment back to these shores. It is the best stimulus plan of all and it costs nothing.

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/01/27/weak-dollars-weak-presidents

Does spending trillions of dollars and printing money strengthen the dollar?

Spending the nation out of a depression/recession/job loss scene is really a good thing?  Just ramp those presses into overdrive?