Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > California  > The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 101
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?Page 5 of 17    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17)
All you guys keep saying how Bush and the Republicans ruined our economy... This is the politics in power... this should show you we don't need different politics, we need less politics. McCain and Palin ran on this change... to get rid of the politics as usual... you can believe them or not...


But Jack, the _way_ that they ruined the economy was by DEREGULATING it, by _removing_ key protections for investors and borrowers. Now, you might think that it's unfair to deny someone a loan who wants one when they're going to use the money to bet on rising property values and so make a profit, but if they can't afford the payments, it's unfair to everyone else for them to get that loan.

Getting rid of government just leaves us at the mercy of big business. And we already know what happens when we let big business run rampant. We get wage slavery and a ruined environment. But hey, if you insist on wanting to run that risk, I guess that's what you insist on. There are many things that I wish I was wrong about. This is one of them.

Government is necessary. A representative government only turns evil when it is hijacked. If you're saying that you don't want the government to be hijacked by special interests, then you have to recognize who has the means, motivation, and skill to do the hijacking and use the weight of public opinion to move the polls. The Right has Rush. The Left has global warming. Me? All I've got is a recognition that if we don't get off of our asses and start developing more sustainable technologies now and figuring out how to make them marketable, it's going to get very ugly in about 40 years--or possibly less.

I believe that McCain was sincere, but Palin is really just a mean cheerleader all grown up. If he couldn't show any better judgement in his choice of successor, he either wasn't capable of handling the position or didn't respect it enough to give it the thoughtful consideration it deserves.


I'm not discussing this in support for big business...


Not intentionally, no. But I have yet to hear you acknowledge their role in these difficulties or their stake in perpetuating their privilege. You say you want a flat tax. But what is the long-term effect of that tax in terms of the proportion of asset accumulation among different income levels? You say you want less government, but does that mean you want to leave it to people to sue after the fact when their water supply is poisoned?


I'm fighting for the people... You don't take something over to fix it.... especially when maybe, it was your hand in it already that helped screw it up.


Exactly. And whose hands are all over the financial crisis?

But this is what happens in a winner-take-all electoral system. A parliamentary system might prove to be more stable in the long run, but this is the system that we have.


We're turning into a Chinese fire drill


LOL!!!! That certainly true. But do you think it's going to really help matters much if the only people you ask to sit down are those on the Left?
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 102
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 3/28/2009 2:25:18 PM
There we go, Jack. My point is that there are two flavors of kool aid. The pitcher on the Left and the pitcher on the Right.

Please, everyone, stop thinking that the pitcher on the right is plain water just because the flavor is so familiar. (The pitcher on the left is unfamiliar, so you already recognize it as flavored.)
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 103
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 3/29/2009 4:20:37 PM

The they you are talking about started under Clinton.... and it was the Democrats in congress that kept pushing this agenda.... Barney Frank.... Fanny and Freddy... even Obama, as an Illinois senator and community leader... It was the black caucus... I've watched all the news through out all that time....


If you're referring to the Community Reinvestment act, I'm afraid that you've been drinking the cool-aid. Even with the Act, getting big banks to loan to minorities has been a struggle. If you're saying that the stated income mortgages were allowed to encourage lower-income people to buy homes, that might well be so. I haven't researched the motivation for that. However, these instrument didn't get going strong until well into the Bush Adminstration, and since they seemed to provide for open competition and lots of nice income for the moneyed class, they let them run.

It might be that no one could have really foreseen the risks--except for the Savings and Loan collapse during the Reagan aministration. Regulators weren't watching because they weren't supposed to watch. Something that starts out small can still get out of hand if it's run to an extreme, and that certainly happened here.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 104
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/4/2009 9:32:44 AM
^^^^^I agree with a lot of what you say, but the problem is that those social welfare programs create legal entitlements. It would take legislation by Congress to remove these, and there are just too many voters whose ox would get gored. Once enough people come to depend on handouts from the federal government--which come in many forms--it's political suicide to cut them off. In a sense, we've gradually created the rule of the mob, where people elect representatives who vote their constituents money taken from the pockets of people who earned it. By playing this role, they stay popular in their districts, and in time they become professional politicians with very few principles.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 105
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/4/2009 9:45:39 AM

Add the cost of the current budget the mindless war in the mideast, and we have spent at least $200 billion more than without the war. We don't need stimuli, we need much less spending. By cutting out the war, and shifting the welfare over to charity, by means of tax credits to donators, we could save about $4,000 for each person in the USA. That's $16,000 for a family of four people. Is that a stimulus? Yep, and we wouldn't have to do into debt, or incur more inflation for this type of stimulus.


Hear hear! Both of these changes would be outstanding.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 106
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/4/2009 9:57:18 AM

In a sense, we've gradually created the rule of the mob, where people elect representatives who vote their constituents money taken from the pockets of people who earned it. By playing this role, they stay popular in their districts, and in time they become professional politicians with very few principles.


All too true. Whether it is corporate welfare under the guise of national security and farm subsidies, or entitlements under the guise of social safety nets, there are a lot of people who make a career out of doing as little as possible for the most personal gain at the expense of us all. It is a rare welfare queen who directly benefits from a Congressman's earmark.

Social Security as Ponzi scheme. State run lotteries. Hell, it's _all_ a lottery for those who can figure out how to rig it.

What gripes me more than people subsisting off my tax dollars, which is certainly irritating when many of them could do better, is people who skim off a disproportionate share of the profits and "invest" them outside the country--especially when they do so in order to avoid paying taxes for the military protection and other services that allow them to do likewise overseas.

In addition to the reforms Funnyface proposes, which I wholly agree with, I would also like to see voting stakeholder representation on all publicly traded corporate boards. That would do a lot to better ensure due diligence on the part of those boards.
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 107
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/4/2009 10:11:55 AM
JohninSD --


California has seen to it that we won't have to worry about that, what with the recent huge tax increases.


:rofl:
(unfortunately so -- that whopping $13.00 a month is more than already spent with Kennedy's wife's ... um I mean husband's tax increases).

Funnyface -- interesting thoughts:

How much stimulation can we afford?


LOL...it will catch up on those not counting the trillions today in gov. What is not obvious to all of the eductated public is that new deal plans (as seen the past) have a life of their own and keep costing down the road (one might recognize it is social security/medicare costs and the baby boomer's retirement that has more to do with the economic crisis we see today). So where is our deal today?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So what about the recent 'legs' and 'arms' to the new administration's plans. Mortgage bail-outs promised and the banks 'toxic' assets being bought up by all you wonderful tax paying citizens?

Any thoughts about you holding ownership of those toxic assets...and will you see profit as bundles are created for resale to private investors?
 strait-country
Joined: 3/12/2009
Msg: 108
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/4/2009 5:46:40 PM
Well lets see, since this post was started, he has sepnt $12.8 billion, none of which was his money. This has accomplished nothing. There have been numerous fortune 500 companies, to recieve bail out money, and spend it frivously, giving corporate bigwigs promotions, but billion dollar jets, etc. Thusly, ONE company has been forced to answer to this, AIG. His spending has surpassed that of the entire country, from the birth of the USA, to his own inaguration. This happened in the first 90 days of his presidency. we are now being threatened with the demise of our own sovereigncy, starting with the retirement of the US Dollar, and being thrust into a world wide currency( without the chance to vote on it, nonetheless). The only way to pay for this careless spending, will be to raise the interest rates a whopping 12-15%, above the current rates. Now, part of his ingenius plan, is to simply print more ,money> we all know what this will do to the value of the dollar. CHANGE!!!! because thats all we will have left when hes done
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 109
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/4/2009 6:22:44 PM
It's interesting to read about the leading lights in FDR's circle and where they got their ideas. The Progressive movement that started toward the end of the 19th c. was a major influence both on them, and on the political movements that developed after WWI in Italy and Germany.

And the New Dealers were quite taken with both Italian fascism and the Soviet system in Russia. Who can blame them? After all, capitalism was looking so old and decrepit. They were tired of it, with all its ups and downs--and restless. And those new forms of government over there were so new! So intriguing! So much about. . . CHANGE!

Everyone thought LBJ was last of the New Dealers--and he was one to the core--but we seem to have elected another one. At least he and Time magazine seem to think so. But he might want to drop that habit of chuckling when he's talking about the economy. I'm sure FDR never did, at least not in public. Doesn't sit well with people when the economy's hurting. If this President's not very careful, it won't be long before people start talking about the "Bum Deal" or the "Raw Deal."

I doubt Mr. Obama's "stimulus" law is constitutional. No one in Congress even read the thousand-page porker! How could they know just what they were giving the President power to do? Sorry, we don't have kings here. There's this little thing called separation of powers--one of those "checks and balances" we have to prevent the abuse of power. And I'm sure someone will challenge this law in court. But the question is what the Court would do--if anything--if a suit ever got that far.
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 110
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/5/2009 12:59:54 PM
Thursday, 16 October 2008 23:07
The following was in an email that I received several months ago. I was unable to track down the name of the original author (sorry). But I HAVE heard much of what it has to say before in political science lectures while at college. It bears some serious thought....
----------------------------------------
"About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." (emphasis mine - he continues...)

"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these
nations always progressed through the following sequence
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage "

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota... believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase." (end quotation)
-------------------------------------------------
IF that really is so - then the only stage left is #8 - From dependence back into bondage. What might that look like I wonder? Possibly the welfare state becoming openly socialist and increasingly totalitarian - possibly even a dictatorship? One thing is for sure - our civil liberties will become extinct in the name of "the public good" or "safety."
You know, the Founding Fathers saw this coming and cemented our inalienble human rights in the constitution so that all future laws and govt. actions had to keep these in the center of their thinking and rulings. But social progressives constantly want to redefine these rights and the constitution so that it can be "applied" to modern situations. In the end, all that does is make it easy for some dictator(s) to "redefine" our rights and the constitution so that they can "legally" take them away (so much for inalienable). Pretty scary!
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 111
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/5/2009 3:27:34 PM
Don't worry. We have Mr. Eric Holder as Attorney General. When he was deputy A.G. under President Clinton, he was heavily involved in Mr. Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich and of the Puerto Rican terrorists. A 2002 congressional committee that investigated these pardons called Mr. Holder's conduct "unconscionable." Undeterred by this criticism, he stayed busy in private practice defending Islamic jihadists. He's said how proud he is of the law firms he--and his top aides--worked in, for contributing millions of dollars to that noble effort.

This administration's already released two major terrorists from Gitmo, apparently because all the damning evidence against them doesn't PROVE their guilt. At least not with the certainty needed in a regular court, and don't we owe them just as fair treatment as you or I would get? Oh sure, they may go and murder a few thousand Americans--but what's that, after all, compared to the value of showing the world what nice, considerate folks we Americans are?

Mr. Holder also is plumping for D.C. to add a few Democrats to Congress. His Office of Legal Counsel (where the Justice Department's top experts on constitutional law work) advised him any law giving D.C. voting representatives in Congress would be clearly unconstitutional. The OLC had consistently taken this same position since Bobby Kennedy was A.G. in 1963, and even before.

Why? Because the Constitution requires each "State" to name electors--and the District of Columbia ain't a state. But that wasn't the answer Mr. Holder wanted, so he casually overruled the OLC. That's very seldom done, and when it has been, it's been done by having other experts research the issue and present their formal, written findings. But, what the heck.

Mr. Holder's so intent on helping his boss defend our country, and its Constitution, that he hasn't stopped there. Only about ten days ago, he had a lawyer from the Department before the Supreme Court, making the case for a federal law against disguised campaign contributions by corporations and unions. The government claims that last year's showing of a documentary film which attacks Hilary Clinton violated this law.

When several of the Justices asked this lawyer if the law would also ban the publication of politically partisan books, he said it would-- and that even a single critical sentence about a candidate in a 500 page book would be enough to ban it. But hey, so what--nobody reads books these days anyway.

I, for one, am glad our President feels so strongly about defending this country and its Constitution that he's appointed Mr. Holder to help him do those things, which are sort of important. Aren't you?
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 112
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/11/2009 2:30:22 AM
Interesting thoughts all (thanks for sharing these).

It's interesting that state bonds are usually voted on for projects such as schools, but when the feds. want to spend billions (on banks?)...the people have no vote in the matter (beyond their elected officials voting on the matter and majority rule in the legislature).

Is this what the framers of the Constitution meant by 'protecting' the average citizen from their own ignorance?
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 113
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/11/2009 2:04:37 PM
That was the stupidity of our predecessors in giving the Federal Government the power to tax our incomes routinely. What were they thinking?
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 114
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/21/2009 6:45:55 AM
Ace--is that how the Constitution reads though (routine taxation to include increases at the government's will)?

With those filing quarterly taxes (-or- one will note on thier next paycheck increased amounts of federal taxes being taken)-- they might recognize that next year's tax structure is one in which tax increases are seen...anything over $34,900 will be taxed at 25% or higher...

Were the American public (at least 80% of us) promised a tax decrease or no increase during the 2008 elections??

Did you mean predecessors, Ace ... or did you mean new deals and/or steals depending how you view it?
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 115
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 4/21/2009 12:12:37 PM
The Progressives waged a crusade for several causes. These included reining in what they saw as the excesses of capitalism and ending the social harm caused by alcohol. They succeeded in amending the U.S. Constitution to accomplish both these things.

In 1913, the 16th Amendment authorized Congress to enact income tax laws. And in 1919, the 18th Amendment prohibited the manufacture, sale, transport, import, and export of "intoxicating liquors" for "beverage purposes" anywhere within U.S. territory.

Another Amendment repealed Prohibition in 1933 (praise be!) but people liked the income tax so well they decided to keep it around. The argument that it's unconstitutional is pretty ridiculous, considering that every Amendment becomes part of the Constitution. (The only amendment the Constitution prohibits is one that would deprive any state of its equal representation in the Senate.)

So, if the federal government takes your south 40, say to build a dam that will put it at the bottom of the reservoir, it has to compensate you at fair market value. But Congress speaks for us, and if the majority wanted to authorize the IRS to tax away 95% of every income larger than a certain amount, it could.

That's a great deal for people who don't make much. Numbers are on their side--the people with the largest incomes are always a minority. All you have to do is take a few minutes to vote for the gladhanding politico you know will do what you want, and presto! They'll pass a law that makes "the rich" cough up a big chunk of their money, and give it to you! And as long as they're dishing it your way, you'll keep them in Washington as career politicians--you both win!

If you can get the right president, too, you've really hit the jackpot. Congress will dash off a law--oh he!!, why even bother to read it first--that'll solve everything. It'll tax away a trillion or two from "rich" folks (and their kids, and the grandkids they don't even have yet) and give the Prez discretion to spend it on all kinds of stuff that helps you. Especially if you work for the government.
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 116
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/12/2009 7:02:16 PM
Here comes stimulus 2, guess obama has more people to pay off.
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 117
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/16/2009 6:28:32 PM
I think the spending to achieve financial recovery lacks an existence proof. can anyone name a single country that spent it's way out of a recession? If spending money was a cure all there would be no poor countries.

Lest someone is about to take pen in hand and educate this modest poster about the great depression let me remind that Sec of Treasury Morgenthau in 1939 (roughly 10 years into the depression) stated before Congress, "we can find no discernable good result of all our spending". Now I know Benanke and Geithner are put forward as experts on the Great Depression 's lessons, I might recommend they go re-visit their Milton Friedman who won a Nobel Prize who stated unequivocably that it was the wrong medicine...then and now.
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 118
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/18/2009 6:22:46 PM
Awww...yes round two. :-p. Ding - ding.

On behalf of Obama I would just like to say: I wonder if Friedman ever had a 20 thousand dollar night out with his wife, eh? Awwww...the land of the liberty and free lunches and government IOUs. :-p

Beyond this, has anyone considered CA and the Kennedy regime as a forerunner considering the current economic conditions?

Personally, I blame a man called whimpey...his reinforcement of the idea that, "I'd gladly pay you tomorrow for a hamburger today" has had a profound influence on the political powers than be.
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 119
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/19/2009 9:08:54 AM
ONLY IN AMERICA – 2009 VERSION

ONLY IN AMERICA ….MUST WE SPEND BILLIONS BECAUSE WE CAN'T LET CHRYSLER GO BANKRUPT, AND THEN, LET CHRYSLER GO BANKRUPT.

ONLY IN AMERICA ….CAN CONGRESS FORCE FANNIE AND FREDDIE TO BUY SUBPRIME LOANS, AND THEN BLAME FANNIE AND FREDDIE FOR BUYING SUBPRIME LOANS.

ONLY IN AMERICA ….A MAJOR CRISIS REQUIRES SWIFT ACTION TO PASS A BILL WITHOUT READING IT, THEN VACATION FOR THREE DAYS BEFORE THE PRESIDENT HAS TIME TO SIGN IT.

ONLY IN AMERICA ….YOU CAN BE LEGALLY ILLEGAL

ONLY IN AMERICA ….THE CONGRESS MAKE LAWS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW

ONLY IN AMERICA ….WHERE YOUR VICE PRESIDENT DECLAREs 'JOBS' A 3 LETTER WORD.

ONLY IN AMERICA ...DOES THE MILITARY GET INVESTIGATED BY HOMELAND SECURITY AS POSSIBLE TERRORISTS, WHILE OUR BORDERS ARE WIDE OPEN.

ONLY IN AMERICA , CAN YOU GET A TAX REFUND ON TAXES YOU DIDN'T PAY

ONLY IN AMERICA , CAN YOU CAN BLAME OTHERS WHEN YOU DON'T PERFORM

ONLY IN AMERICA , YOU HAVE MORE RIGHTS BEING ILLEGAL, THAN YOU DO LEGAL

ONLY IN AMERICA , CAN YOU BE 13 AND HAVE AN ABORTION WITHOUT TELLING YOUR PARENTS, BUT MUST HAVE A WRITTEN NOTE FROM YOUR PARENT WHY YOU MISSED SCHOOL.

ONLY IN AMERICA , ARE YOU PUNISHED FOR GOOD PERFORMANCE
AND REVERED FOR NONPERFORMANCE.

ONLY IN AMERICA ….CAN YOU CALL LARGE CORPORATIONS EVIL,
WHILE 99.9% OF THE AMERICANS WORK IN COMPANIES WITH LESS THAN 500 EMPLOYEES.

ONLY IN AMERICA , CAN CHRYSLER GET 10 BILLION IN AID FOR THEIR COMPANY OF 30,000 EMPLOYEES. I GUESS IT IS DIFFICULT TO RUN A COMPANY FOR $333,333 PER EMPLOYEE.

ONLY IN AMERICA ….WE CARE ABOUT 3 GUYS THAT GET WATER UP THE NOSE,
WHILE OUR ENEMIES ARE BEHEADING US AND BLOWING CROWDS OF PEOPLE UP WITH SUICIDE BOMBINGS.

ONLY IN AMERICA ….YOU CAN SAY OTHER INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES WORK, BUT YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THOSE TECHNIQUES ARE.

ONLY IN AMERICA , DO POLITICIANS CONSIDER 'WE THE PEOPLE' ASTRO-TURF

ONLY IN AMERICA , WHATEVER GOES WRONG WILL ALWAYS BE BUSH'S FAULT

LASTLY, HOWEVER, IN AMERICA , YOU CAN ONLY BE PRESIDENT……………………
WHEN THE TELEPROMPTER IS ON!
 Namredips
Joined: 7/12/2009
Msg: 120
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/19/2009 9:16:14 AM
Is this a whining-about-whose-fault-it-is thread, or does anybody actually have a good idea to stimulate the economy? Because I do...
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 121
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/19/2009 10:50:40 AM
I'm not entirely certain it's about stimulating the economy, although that might be a necessary event, is it possible that the term or concept we need is re-finding our balance?

Clearly we are out of balance. We've borrowed too much, saved too little, invested in losers, rewarded bad behaviors etc. Is it possible that bailouts and stumulus are simply propping up the negatives I've listed?

It is sometimes stated by guys in a position to know that there is $5 trillion on the sidelines waiting for a sign it's safe to go back in the water. I see no signs, furthermore, the longer that $5 T avoids our economy, the more likley it will find foreign shores that are friendlier, and less likely to return.

The posters on this board are humble enough, and curious enough, to offer ideas but still open to some coherent explanation of current economic thinking. I think the economy will return when the terms of the new regime have achieved what they want. The question then is "what do they want? what events do they need to be in place before a recovery is allowed?

People from my side of the political-economic spectrum believe Obama is a statist interested in a generational remaking of the economic system.

Charitable and informed leftists believe Obama seeks some Voltaire-like, simpler, gentler, humble cottage in the meadows new world order.

Killing small and medium sized business while subsidizing easily-tamed corporate giants through carrot and stick seems to argue for my side at the moment. The only reference to France this guy brings to my mind is King Louis VIII who was heard to say "I wish mankind had a single neck so I cut could cut it with a single stroke".
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 122
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/19/2009 12:23:28 PM
This is a planned failure to create another crisis in small business and then the government will step in to finance them as long as you do business the Obma way and don't oppose the health care bill.

"Never let a good crisis go to waste" Rom Emanuel, White House Chief of staff.

Now they have the power to induce selected crisis in areas they want to control.

If you don't think this is a Fascist systemic takeover of the economy I feel for you. To those of you that support his policies, you will make America just another mediocre country.

4 years of this and America will not be free. Thought police are headed your way.

Government rejects another CIT bailout
By DANIEL WAGNER and STEVENSON JACOBS Associated Press
July 16, 2009, 12:30AM

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration drew a line in the sand on financial bailouts Wednesday by denying emergency aid to CIT Group, a struggling commercial lender on the brink of bankruptcy.

After days of round-the-clock talks with regulators about a possible government bailout, CIT said those negotiations had ceased. The company said its management and directors were “evaluating alternatives.”

The decision not to save CIT is a defining moment for the Obama administration's financial rescue program, headed by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. By withholding aid, the administration is betting that CIT's likely failure won't pose a critical risk to an economy weighed down by rising unemployment.

New York-based CIT, which had earlier received $2.3 billion of bailout money, is one of the nation's largest lenders to small and mid-size businesses. The company has warned that its failure could imperil about a million corporate borrowers — from Dunkin' Donuts franchisees to retailer Dillards.

The Bush administration paid a price for its decision not to save investment bank Lehman Brothers, which had eight times more assets than CIT. Lehman's collapse helped spark the financial crisis last fall.

Asked about CIT, a Treasury Department spokeswoman said in an e-mail that “even during periods of financial stress, we believe that there is a very high threshold for exceptional government assistance to individual companies.”

But the decision could come back to haunt the administration if CIT's failure proves devastating to the company 's many small-business borrowers. Small businesses are considered crucial to economic recovery, employing about half of the private-sector work force.

With its assets deteriorating and dangerously little cash on hand, the news left CIT with few options outside of bankruptcy.

A bankruptcy filing would wipe out CIT's shareholders and the government's $2.3??billion stake. But CIT's clients would not automatically lose their lines of credit, banking analyst Bert Ely said.

Still, with other lenders to retailers already under strain, many CIT clients may lose their financing options.
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 123
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/20/2009 10:17:27 AM
Watch the video

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/17/glenn-becks-goldman-sachs_n_237481.html
 Izarith
Joined: 4/14/2008
Msg: 124
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/22/2009 9:55:03 PM

What are your thoughts about the new stimulus package and how are you going to spend that $13.oo extra per pay check each month? Vacation plans? Getting that new big screen you had your eye on?


I love how people like to make jokes about how The people in the US government are a bunch of idiots. I mean I get the joke and it is funny and very true to say the least. But I always feel so compelled to remind people that anything that happens in America happens by the people for the people.

If people did not gleefully endentured themselves to Bank lent credit. We would not be in this mess.

As it stands now the only reason why your trash still gets picked up once a week is because China thinks buying California is a good investment.

Are people going to have to starve before they realize that having a good credit score only means that you and a domesticated dog who waits on his master for food have to much in common?

TA!!
Izzy.
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 125
view profile
History
The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?
Posted: 7/24/2009 12:16:03 AM
fzrhusker -- Interesting how Ospendo picks and chooses which banks to bail out, eh?

Perhaps CITI didn't have enough CEOs that contributed to his campaign? *wink*

Iz -- You don't have to worry about how to spend that large stimulus now. We had a tax hike that most realize on their pay checks or will realize when it comes time to file.
Show ALL Forums  > California  > The latest stimulus 'deal' -- a deal or a steal?