Senate Releases $350B in Bailout Funds to Obama

Senate Releases $350B in Bailout Funds to Obama

Who's going to get the "bailout" money? Read the fine print and you'll see that a whole lot of it is just going right straight to government agencies and projects. This is nothing but stealing from the achievers and producers to fund more dumb social re-engineering political projects. It's nothing but a massive government tax and spend program using panic to rush through things that would otherwise take longer. Examples mentioned in the news report follow:

"The president-elect's call for a business tax credit for each new job created was jettisoned by Democrats who questioned its value and preferred to use the money elsewhere."

"They agreed to Obama's separate proposal for a tax cut of $500 per worker and $1,000 per working couple."

"More than $100 billion was ticketed for education, in part to help local school districts avoid the impact of state budget cuts."

"Billions more would increase spending for food stamps and unemployment benefits and finance expanded worker retraining programs."

"A written summary showed $30 billion for highway construction, $10 billion for mass transit and rail, and $3 billion for airport improvements."

"And the $825 billion total is virtually certain to grow as the legislation advances through Congress."

"The stimulus measure, meanwhile, encompassed a bewildering array of programs, from money to make broadband available in rural areas to support for scientific, biomedical and climate change research."

"It also proposed an increase in Pell Grants for college students of $500, and would forgive repayment of a $7,500 tax credit that Congress passed last year as a loan for first-time homeowners."

"Another $50 million would be spent "to put people to work making monument and memorial repairs at cemeteries for American heroes," according to an information sheet distributed by Democrats."

 

We'll all be working a long time to pay taxes on the principal and interest that all these government expenses are going to consume.

People are so gullible they'll agree to anything in the name of a "stimulus" even if it's nothing but recycled pork projects that wouldn't fly just a year ago. If we could just get the politicians to quit yapping about the problem, promising the moon, and dreaming up all kinds of sweet sounding public works projects then we could keep more of our earnings and have more to spend and invest on the things we want and need. That would actually stimulate the economy in a meaningful manner. Instead they're talking about what a great thing it is to be "giving" back $500 which of course is just another scam for wealth redistribution - take $15,000 and give back $500 or take $1,500 and give back $500. It's so fundamentally stupid it's hard to believe so many people fall head over heals for it all.

People have jobs when the owners of the jobs need work done. People need work done when they have some useful goods or services to sell for a profit. People with skills to offer compete for those jobs. It works better than anything else ever has even in down turns.

 

The piece you are missing is that people will not create jobs for others unless they need them to do work to produce goods and services to be sold for a profit. There is no charity in it. There is no "make work" in productive society. There is no eternal "free ride" in any economic society except perhaps for the political animals that thrive off the fruits of everyone else's labor. You can talk government "creating" jobs all you want but it's just a shell game!

Business is shaken by the present situation mostly because of the government's actions and the uncertainty of the impact it will have. Some don't know whether to make necessary adjustments or just get in line for the bailouts! People are cautious because of what they read in the news. People are concerned about the retirement savings even though with the reduced value they may still have more than they would have if it had all been put into something like Social Security. Most people haven't cashed out yet so the loss is still on paper for the future yet unseen. It is serious but it's not cause to jump into socialism thinking that will rescue us. It has nothing to do with the real capacity to produce goods and services nor the underlying demand for them if the panic and fear is stripped away. The more the politicians do the worse it gets. Has there been any positive results from the several hundred billion already spent? Who's going to pick up that tab by the way? You grandchildren and great-grandchildren will probably still be paying it.

The root cause of all this was the mortgage defaults brought about by government's insistence that lenders loan money to home buyers who otherwise would not have qualified. Add to that the massive credit card debt people willingly incurred to have all the nice things they wanted. In general we can all see that individuals and businesses have lived high of credit for a long time now. How many times have you wondered how your neighbors could afford all those nice toys with the job they had? The adjustment to reality is necessary. Many companies already saw that and have been reducing their debt to equity ratio to more reasonable levels. Individuals need to do likewise. It may take some difficult times to get through the correction.

The government's solution is more of the same problem that's brought us to this point. They want to spend more money than we have to prop up the economy. They want to use tax money - in advance - creating a high "debt to equity ratio" with the promise it'll be made good in the future. They want to take even more than they have and decide who gets it and for what. Just look at the laundry list in the "stimulus" legislation and you can see how your money will be spent for all sorts of things that have nothing to do with growing the economy. The people calling for all this money are masters at creating a dragon and then slaying it with your hard work. They'll tax you to death without shame!

The only real solution - even if painful at times - is to base the economy on the exchange of real goods and services. There is a demand for it. People want the necessities and luxuries of modern life and they're willing to work for it. But people need to learn to live within their means and, unfortunately, when many don't they and a lot more may suffer for it. But when producers see that market and are comfortable it's worth risking capital to invest in the production, marketing, and sale they'll jump at it. They'll fight each other in the marketplace to be the best. It has worked, it is working even now, and it will work in the future.

 

Nope, my response was to your prior comments. I just used your line to start my "rant":

My comments were to stress the point that government is not the answer but part of the problem. Apparently it needs to be stressed a lot more because far too many people are convinced that government is the answer. If you think this is true then we are in agreement otherwise we're on opposite sides for sure.

Sleep well and be happy - I'm glad I was able to help!

 

The only meaningful role the government could play now would be to reduce its size and scope and thereby our taxes so as to free up more money for real investments in the production of goods and services that people want and need. We're already regulated far too much. People can figure out what to do and how to do it without government. People have been coming up with great ideas and starting up new businesses for centuries. They don't have to have one big centralized office that controls them. They can join together here and there or go it alone. The incentive to make a buck - for needs and luxuries - is the most powerful economic stimulus there is. Our trust in God will carry us through anything good or bad. There are more good ideas on how to do that among the common man in your neighborhood than in all of Washington's bureaucracy put together. Nearly all of them in Washington are career politicians who don't really have to think very hard or long about how to spend someone else's money. At that they excel. At being efficient, productive, creative, responsible, timely, and responsive they fail. Why do we seek or accept their "help" at the cost of our liberty.