Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Is the Bush Stimulus Going to Help You?

By Nomi Prins, The Wip. Posted January 24, 2008.


There's a national economy, and then there's a "people's economy." Guess which one will see more "relief."
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The rhetoric surrounding George W. Bush's economic stimulus package, as boastfully "bi-partisan" as it is (we are, after all, in an election year), indicates a complete lack of comprehension of the difference between this 'national' economy and the 'people's' economy, and the extent of the gap between the two.

The unveiling of his plan was classic Bush: state something ambiguous about a $140 billion adrenaline shot, then have your cronies act as wingmen. Hence, at last Friday's press conference, Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO, Hank Paulson was left fending off uncomfortable questions like: would the plan help "elderly people on fixed incomes?" His answer: "The Christmas season has come and gone."

The national economy, as measured by large scale figures simply does not represent individual citizens' economic circumstances. That's why debate over whether we are in a recession or not misses the point of everyday financial realities for most of the population. According to the standard definition of recession (two quarters or more of a decline in GDP), we're not there. In which case, Bush and Paulson are technically right in saying the economy is simply 'slow'.

But, that's been far from the case if we consider the people's economy (the people - as in all the American citizens who don't fall into that upper percent of the nation's wealth bracket). And very little in the President's, or in most of the presidential candidates' plans, will change this.

The highest bidder mentality of Wall Street and its elite private equity groups has exacerbated the sub prime and regular housing market crisis. As investment banks stuffed loans into packages of toxic speculative waste, actual people lost their homes, hurt further by media attention on those declining home values, which didn't thrill new buyers.

In the process of trying to keep up escalating payments on their homes and home equity loans (backed by falling home values), people increased their credit card balances, suffering requisite late fees and higher rates, and ravaging 401K plans in desperation, during a time in which the values of those plans shrunk along with the falling stock market.

Don't get me wrong. No one would scoff at an $800 tax rebate check in the mail, but at best, it may provide a month of relief. Meanwhile, it does nothing strategically to fix the barrage of corporate gouging that continues unabated and unregulated by the Washington powers that be (including those running for office). Seriously, wouldn't it kill you if your health insurance premium rose just as you were about to cash that government rebate?

Home prices fell by a record 6.7 percent over the year and with legions of unsold homes on the market, they won't be rising any time soon. The largest mortgage lenders are trying to sell themselves to the banks that once funded them. And banks keep writing down loan values on their books faster than you can say "class action lawsuit." Credit card companies are starting to see the late payment and defaults that happen when people have maxed out their cards to pay their rising mortgages.

Unemployment has jumped to 5 percent, or 2001 'recession' levels. And, if more firms fire more employees to 'cut expenses', that number will rise. This means people will buy less, which will hurt corporations, who will then fire more people.

We can debate forever whether the average $300 tax rebate in 2001 that the administration claims stimulated the economy did or not. (We can debate whether a similar rebate will or will not this time around.)

But whatever it achieved for the national corporate economy, it did not halt the rise in basic living expenses, health care costs or tuition. More than one out of five middle-class families have less than $100 per week remaining after paying for basic living expenses. In nearly one out of four middle-class families, at least one family member lacks health insurance. And almost one in three families doesn't have more than a high-school education.

It did not put a leash on credit card companies. American credit card debt has tripled in the past two decades, with African American and Latino households carrying a higher percentage of debt than White ones. Americans over 65, targeted by predatory credit card companies, experienced the greatest increase in debt carried. Meanwhile, industry deregulation means there are no rate or fee caps. Credit card issuers raked in $8 billion of fees between 2004 and 2005. To cope with the rising credit card debt, Americans raided the equity in their homes, whose values seemed to be only rising - until they stopped. From 2001 to 2006, homeowners cashed out $1.2 trillion in equity. Those loans will need to be repaid.

It did not halt the increase in the wealth gap. Over the past two decades, wealth in the top 2 percent of the country has doubled; in the bottom quarter, it has declined.

It did not halt the fraud or questionable lending practices of the housing market players. The list of investigations has just begun.

It did not halt the decrease in average American wages per hour.

It did not halt the unemployment gap between white and black Americans. In general, the black unemployment rate is twice that of whites, more in recessionary times. The black prison rate also rises with the unemployment gap.

It did not halt the life expectancy gap. The rich live longer than the poor by 6 years.

It did not halt the deletion of employee retirement plans. Only one out of five private sector workers has a traditional pension. It did not replenish the Social Security system. None of the candidates has addressed pensions or social security in any meaningful way - saying 'we'll fix it' is not meaningful.

Bush acknowledged that "continued instability in the housing and financial markets could cause additional harm to our overall economy." However this is a convenient excuse to push his last economic hurrah - making his tax cuts permanent. The president behind the biggest corporate tax breaks in two decades also wants to "bolster business investment and consumer spending." That doesn't mean he cares about the average person's quality of life.

But, we don't expect more from him. From the 'candidates of change' however, we should demand more meaningful policy that truly enriches the main street economy.

Cap credit card rates and fees, and make credit card companies offer repayment schemes at lower rates that aren't designed to further screw borrowers. Remove prepayment penalties for primary homebuyers and make banks proactively extend offers on loans with reduced interest rates (now at 2005 levels).

(Note to my bank: how come you're not passing on the love from today's 75 basis point rate cut to my mortgage rate?)

Get rid of insurance companies as an impediment to affordable health care. Either shift the burden of retirement risk back to the corporations that get the tax breaks, or don't give them tax breaks. Increase the education budget dramatically, so that more minorities, working poor and middle class can get advanced degrees. Tax private equity titans at the same levels as regular citizens.

Place the focus back on the majority of the population: increase collective wealth and not the wealth gap, and GDP will follow - on a more stable, long term platform.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: economy, recession, stimulus package

Nomi Prins is a senior fellow at the public policy center Demos and author of Other People's Money and Jacked: How "Conservatives" are Picking your Pocket (Whether you voted for them or not).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Read My Lips
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 24, 2008 12:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You cannot BORROW your way to prosperity. If racking up debt was good for us, we would all be rich under the Bushies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» This is NOT a Ron Paul site... Posted by: aka_bozo
» RE: This is NOT a Ron Paul site... Posted by: PirateJesus
» RE: This is NOT a Ron Paul site... Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: ead My Lips Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: ead My Lips Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: ead My Lips Posted by: JSquercia
As an elderly person on a fixed income...
Posted by: Sojourner on Jan 24, 2008 12:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and there are a lot of us. Printing more money at a time when inflation is up substantially will not help. Inflation is the devil. Fortunately, the business community and the FED also hate inflation.

But when an administration screws the pooch because his GOP allies sent us to war while spending like drunken sailors, we all get to grovel. Thank you GOP, for worse than nothing. You want us to sing and dance while we hurt?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You better wake up and face reality Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Wouldnt it be great Posted by: gulu
» yawn Posted by: war_on_tara
» RE: yawn Posted by: martyk
could be wrong, but hearing things...
Posted by: ellie on Jan 24, 2008 4:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
sometime, somewhere this past week when georgie boy was talking about this great $800-$1600. cash giveaway, I could have sworn that the comment made by an 'official' was that it would be sent only to people with incomes greater then $40,000.00 per year...

reason was that a follow up study from the last big cash giveaway, a large percentage of people who make less than the $40k mark, used the cash to pay overdue bills, the $$ was not spent the way it was intended, to buy more 'stuff' a la the famous 'go shopping' comment...

if this is true, please help me out...

anyone else hear about this???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It will fix nothing Posted by: UnEasyOne
» Bassackwards from reality. Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Bassackwards from reality. Posted by: Joshua Holland
» So, that means that... Posted by: aka_bozo
No
Posted by: kelt65 on Jan 24, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Personally? Not at all. I wasn't stupid enough to buy a home the last few years, any tax relief will get sucked into paying off my outstanding debt to the IRS, and I wouldn't spend it on consumption anyway.

Let's see if this makes sense: you provide someone who's deeply in debt (from spending too much) a little cash so they can spend more for a month or two?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oldfreedomdude
Posted by: oldfreedomdude on Jan 24, 2008 4:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You actually said it, why not immediately institute single-payer universal health care a la Kocinich! That would help people immediately, and give them REAL confidence that the US is finally going to do something to make people's lives better. Knowing that an accident or illness wasn't going to leave them destitute would really convince them that they could go out and spend a bit more. A trickle down rate cut is just another gift to the rich, and may help pay one months fuel bill, but not much more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: oldfreedomdude Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: oldfreedomdude Posted by: abbadon2007
No no no
Posted by: PJT on Jan 24, 2008 4:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excuse me? Why are all the people suffering because they have houses they can't afford and credit card debt that exceeds their capacity to pay back? Were all these people forced, under duress, to take on these responsibilities? Were people herded down to the loan office and ordered to sign for zero-down balloon mortgages on half-million dollar houses? I am sorry, but my belief is that the little people have been just as greedy as the grandees. I say NO to the stimulus and no to bail outs. Let the market figure out for itself where the bottom is, and then let the people figure out how to do simple arithmetic next time. I was raised by depression kids who never owned a credit card and who never bought anything but a house on credit. They survived and flourished. Don't give me this crap about "victims."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No no no Posted by: c&s mom
» Couldn't agree more! Posted by: historystudent
» RE: Couldn't agree more! Posted by: OUTinMinnesota
» Congratulations Posted by: OUTinMinnesota
» Do you know any poor people? Posted by: thistleblower
» RE: Do you know any poor people? Posted by: Patriot of the USA
» RE: No no no Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: No no no Posted by: Patriot of the USA
» PJT Off Base Posted by: TruthBeTold
» RE: No no no Posted by: cruzcontroll
» RE: No no no Posted by: JSquercia
Secretary Paulson
Posted by: JSquercia on Jan 24, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Secretary Paulson's remark "the Christmas Season has come and gone " or words to that effect ranks right up there with Marie Antionete's "let them eat cake" .
What an arrogant , unfeeling ASS but I guess when you work on Wall Street where they are handing out millions in bonuses to CEO's of Firms who LOST BILLIONS you think you are a different breed of cat .
In a perfect world the thousands of employees laid off at the firms who just REWARDED their
CEO's with Bonuses and in all too few cases Golden Parachutes would storm the castle and lynch the offenders from the nearest Lamppost .
Neither the absolute lack of responsibilty nor the lack of empathy that these creatures exhibit should surprise us . Just remember these are the people that Bushco wants to handle your Social Security .I think Paulson's
attitude basically sums up the feelings of the wealthiest among us as they continue the upward migration of money from the Poor and Middle Class to themselves aided and abetted by the Rethuglican Party . There are to be sure exceptions who exhibit some sense of shame
but they are as noted the EXCEPTION . Nothing so illustrates the slavery of the GOP to their wealthy patrons as the recent defeat of a bill in the Senate that would have changed the way the compensation of Hedge Fund Managers is treated . They currently are taxed as Capital Gains and thus pay 15% on them . The bill would have considered them to be ordinary Income and taxed them in the same manner as wages of the lowly or the Unemployment and Social Security Benefits . A solid phalanx of Republicans prevented the change and so as Warren Buffet said these people will continue to pay a lesser percentage in taxes than their Secretaries .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Secretary Paulson Posted by: ReformerRay
The business of goverment
Posted by: cisc on Jan 24, 2008 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is the common good of ALL the people. Their business should be infrastructure, education, a healthy economy. One must never speak ill of Saint Reagan of the GOP, after all he defeated the Soviet Union with just a firm stance so that we all could come out from under our beds just in time to go back under them because of the islamofascist! Truth is the Soviet Union was brought down economically by a war they could not afford that served absolutely no constructive purpose to the Soviet economy. The neoconservative dream of endless war to anchor our economy and keep us in oil will be our destruction. We can follow the advise of Grover Norquist and drown what is left of our goverment after defense in a bathtub and we can follow the poster above, tough cookies to the unsophisticated, the poor, or the just plain unlucky but the simple fact is-we all go down together. Those people who are not near as smart as they should be have more than likely paid their fair share into the system but they have not been well represented. It is a constant source of amazement to me that people who would shake a Bible at Darwinism have so little charity of the heart and believe so firmly in survival of the fittest. The first act of Christ was to throw money lenders from the temple, shocking. Christ was a revolutionary for justice and a friend to the weak,the ill, and the helpless. We are a nation that extracts from the weak and the helpless and piles up at the feet of those who would "keep us safe". Two thousand years of history and we still havn't learned not to be so gullible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bread and Circuses Posted by: Artkansas
Can I use my Monopoloy Money to pay the rent?
Posted by: xvictor on Jan 24, 2008 6:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush and the rest of the political gang behave like we have tons of money stashed away for a rainy day. Guess what? There is no money. The printing press is our new Fort Knox. Inflation will rise. The dollars will be that much worthless. The public will be deeper in debt. We are the public. We will pay thru the nose for this "stimulus".

It is said the government will never go broke because it has all kinds of valuable assets lying around and that the "full faith and credit" of our government will never dull. I don't know about you but I don't think there's a market for the Washington Monument or the Lincoln Memorial. And if the Washington Monument ever does get sold, how do you think our people will react if the buyer wants to move it Siberia or to Dubai??? Bush and Clinton had the right idea to sell White House bedroom rights to raise cash. I say convert the Pentagon into a world class bordello.

The government owns much real estate but gives it away for pennies an acre to big business interests. Meaningless assets if they're going to be given away, eh???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rimchamp77
Posted by: rimchamp77 on Jan 24, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It should be noted that our system of government mandated gatekeepers that severely restrict competition and self sufficiency is not free market. And the mergers that restrict choices of job opportunities and wages are also not free market. There is definitely a double standard: free markets for cheap labor and a huge safety net for large corporations that have government mandates guaranteeing them high incomes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: rimchamp77 Posted by: Crazy H
Little People Greed?
Posted by: Ethical1 on Jan 24, 2008 6:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before we start casting everyone rich and poor into the greed net, think about this...

Were my parents herded down to the mortgage lender and forced to sign on a loan they couldn't afford? YES! After working many years to attain their American dream, they retired with a home paid in full. Over the next 10 years, their medical bills overwhelmed their ability to pay.

As depression kids, not paying a bill was unthinkable. They refinanced their home to pay off hospital bills. The hospital, doctor, and pharmacy bills continued to accumulate and soon they did not have enough money for everything. They lost their house of over 40 years and were forced to move from "suburbia" to a "low income" area. It killed my mother in less than a year.

If you don't have your own savings accumulated, pension or not, here is your future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Little People Greed? Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Little People Greed? Posted by: wagadog
Will the 'stimulus' help me?
Posted by: Sunfell on Jan 24, 2008 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will the 'stimulus' help me? In a word, no. Why? Basically, it's a bandaid on an arterial wound. People need long-term help, not a trifle tossed at them with orders to head to the local bigbox to buy more Chinese imports.

I would rather see my wages go up the $800 or so a month that has been lost over the past 30 years. I'd like to see the middle class grow again, the rich taxed fairly, and corporations reigned in, rather than preying on people like they're doing now. Doing stuff like that might take longer, but in the long term is far healthier for the future of this country.

We're not too far from civil unrest if this slide keeps up. As more and more people go over the edge into poverty, more pressure builds up, because those who are sliding into poverty right now retain the memory and education of the middle classes, and they're not going to lay there and take it. Great disparity means great despair, and despair breeds desperation. People think we're immune to such things, but we're not.

For my part, if I get a governmental handout, I'm going to do something radical with it: put it into savings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a DEAL
Posted by: weslen1 on Jan 24, 2008 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To pay for these checks, they are cutting the amount of money that normally would go to the states. OKAY!! #1: States will cut SSI. Disabled and elderly get a cut in their checks. #2 States will cut pay to doctors who treat Medicaid and Medicare Patients. More primary care physicians will close their doors or at least close their doors to Medicaid and Medicare patients. #3 States will cut heat assistance to the poor. AGAIN. They've already done that even as the price of heat was doubling and tripling LAST YEAR. More seniors and sick and disabled will die of pneumonia due to having to turn heat down some more for the rest of the winter. I wonder if any of our "leaders" have ever had FROSTBITE. I did. Two winters ago. I worked for the next 5 months in misery until they sent me home with no way to earn my rent and buy food because I could no longer wear my shoes. I ended up spending 21 days in the hospital from May 8 to June 23, having a bypass to save my foot and 5 months on home care before I recovered but unable to work ever again. Then this past year, I've had angioplasty, got a stent in my heart, and spent a total of 13 days in the hospital suffering 2 severe GI bleeds and now because of the LAST cut in pay to doctors, am unable to get a new doctor after the one I'd been seeing for the previous 2 years closed HIS doors.
They say food stamps will be increased, but only temporarily. But you can bet your life, the other cuts won't be temporary. Once the states cut these benefits they will not raise them again when state money gets restored.
And the REASON for all of this? So the congress can give MORE tax BREAKS to businesses.
AREN'T WE LUCKY?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What a DEAL Posted by: cherylholmes
The correct question!
Posted by: carbon-based on Jan 24, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a pretty simplistic article addressing a complex subject. Will an $800 tax rebate help the very poor?. Maybe that is the wrong question. Maybe the question should be will the tax rebates keep the businesses in business and help with employment. That is how you help the poor - get them work. $800 or $2,000 will only help for a limited time. Also consider that unemployment rates vary greatly by state - so how does one address the real problems areas. See

http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/state_unemployment/

for some interesting comparisons.

Bush should be looking for ways to stimulate the economy which entails breaks for business.. That should be combined with some sort of limits on executive compensation but that is a subject that wont happen today so it's not part of this effort.

As for elderly on fixed income - how about an exclusion from ALL taxes..sales and otherwise - how about NO premiums or deductibles for healthcare.. That would be instant relief!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The correct question! Posted by: EdinIowa
» Someone Else Off Base Posted by: TruthBeTold
» RE: Someone Else Off Base Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Someone Else Off Base Posted by: Patriot of the USA
» RE: Someone Else Off Base Posted by: carbon-based
Dr No. Dr Who Who am I ?/
Posted by: flymulla on Jan 24, 2008 6:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is the Bush Stimulus Going to Help You?
Me? I have no idea. This is the reality on over the streets one every minds.

I thank you
Firozali A Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania
East Africa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Jan 24, 2008 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A Vote of Confidence Amendment will enable the American voting public to dismiss and hold over for criminal prosecution any elected official who fails in their obligation to serve the people of the United States.

VOCA, now

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is a bank bailout
Posted by: lamar on Jan 24, 2008 6:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This "stimulus" is a bad idea. The market should be allowed to correct itself even if that causes pain to lower income folks with dubious mortgages. I'm not going to sit here and lecture people about financial responsibility. This issue is much deeper than that.

If the government bails out mortgages and gives people cash the result will be to sure up the bottom line of banks, not working folks. Foreclosures won't happen and prices will be artificially supported. The result will be to "lock in" the housing bubble prices. Lower income folks will be excluded from buying a house because the prices will not have fallen and credit will be impossible to get.

I suspect that the poor are helped by allowing the housing market to crash. There will be cases of hardship, no doubt. It isn't a pretty picture no matter how you look at it. But the reality is that we've been borrowing and borrowing based on the value of a market that doesn't exist. The only way to get out of the crisis is to remove that phony value.

We have a choice: We can let a few poor and middle class folks suffer, hoping that families and friends will pitch in, or we can artificially prop up the market and effectively keep the vast majority of low income people out of family housing. Let's not pretend this is anything but an indirect bailout of the banks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The rest of the story Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: The rest of the story Posted by: EdinIowa
Reincarnation exists!
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jan 24, 2008 8:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George Bush is Herbert Hoover come back to life. (And Harry Reid is the reincarnation of Nevell Chamberlain ....)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who is getting rescued first? Bond insurers?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 24, 2008 8:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Welcome to the world of Shadow Banking - now put into the spotlight by massive collapses.

ReallyBearish pointed to the CDO bailout - and for what that means, see Regulator offers hope for bond insurers, UK Financial Times, yesterday

"Already, exposure to collateralised debt obligations has resulted in tens of billions of dollars of writedowns at banks across the globe.

"The guarantee [from bond insurers] has allowed banks not to write down the value of these positions," said analysts at UBS. "If monolines fail, the guarantee is worth nothing and these assets have to be written down. This is the latest development for the mortgage crisis and is another negative for banks."

Concern about the health of bond insurers has been one of the triggers for the sharp collapse in the value of equity markets round the world in recent days.

Reflecting the severity of the fate of monoline insurers, the issue has become a key debating topic at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. This marks an extraordinary turnabout from previous years when the issue was considered to be far too specialist to command any wider attention."


This is where the bailout is going - a bailout of banks and private equity funds by the U.S. Treasury. Fire up the printing presses - we need more greenbacks...

Why did this come about? A shady and deregulated banking system and a lack of government oversight:

"Insurers, like most of the world's big banks and investors, underestimated the risks associated with complex bonds backed by assets such as mortgages. When the level of foreclosures on risky mortgages rose sharply last year, it fed through to higher than expected defaults on CDOs."

For more on what's going on at the upper tiers of finance and private equity, see Bond insurance crisis looms on Wall Street: Insurers of housing debt exposed to $125-billion in the shaky U.S. credit market.

Let's see... Bush is proposing a $150 billion bailout... coincidence?

As for everyone else, you'll have to suffer so that the wealthy can avoid any losses from this mess. Student loans? Credit card debt? Home and small business loans? "Let them eat cake."

As for some radical notion like raising the minimum wage and letting the billionaires eat their losses, well - that's certainly not on the table.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Solving an Energy Crisis with Inflation
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Jan 24, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
High gas prices have trimmed the excess cash off the top of the economy. That's what popped the housing bubble. Most people cant afford to make deep cuts in gasoline usage. (Ironic isnt it? Cant afford to make cuts...) So they made cuts elsewhere... namely their mortgages.

Between our oil imports and the cheap Chinese goods, I do think it is safe to assume that most of this economic stimulus money will go straight out of the country. Wow that's some stimulus!

We have to cut the trade deficit. What they are planning will not do that. Therefore it will only exacerbate the problem. The economy will and must collapse under the burden of such a large deficit. It's a basic law of economics, and they cannot fight it forever. Obviously Bush and Pelosi and Bernanke could care less if the economy falls apart, because they will live happily within their isolated little pockets of wealth.

So, how do they prevent a total meltdown? First thing they need to do is stop bailing out the morons at the expense of responsible people. There are two kinds of americans out there:

1. The kind that lives within their means. They balance their own budgets and dont live in debt. They have some kind of savings.
2. The idiots who commute 80 miles a day in a giant SUV. The idiots who bought $2000 a month mortgages on $3000 a month incomes (or less!). The idiots who spend $10 a day on starbucks and other places like that, instead of saving and investing. The idiots who get xrayed all the time then are shocked when they get cancer and go broke. The idiots who let themselves be injected with mercury. The idiots who think fluoride is good for them. The idiots who trust a bunch of liars with their 401ks, and then are surprised when they lose it all. It's quite a long list...

Everybody knows about these two types, and everybody knows that most fall into category #2. And why not? For too long these dumbed down yuppies keep finding a way to get by by living beyond their means. It is baffling that they are able to do it, but unfortunately it only encourages more people to do it.

Everybody knows what I'm talking about. There's a 1000 variationsto the same old story. John opens a bookstore, Joe opens a fast food joint. Joe laughs at John because Joe's business is doing sooo much better than John's. So the bookstore closes down and another fast food joint opens in its place. As a result, people get dumber, fatter, and more gullible. But they have more choices on where to eat! God forbid they cook something then read a book.

This is the vicious cycle that needs to end. Sooner rather than later. That's what recessions do. That's why we always have them. To give the economy a chance to clean out all this filth, so that maybe something more logical or rational can take its place. Maybe those fast food joints will be replaced by bookstores? Who knows. Maybe something better. All I know is this needs to happen, for our own good. Everybody in category #2 needs to be wiped out financially. Because that's what they are. They are broke, and someone else is paying for their profligancy. Who is paying for it? Category #1 of course! How are they paying for it? Through currency devaluation and resource depletion. Energy costs are up across the board. Food prices too. I have to pay more money for everything I buy because these reckless morons have killed MY currency. My savings are worth less. The idea that the government is going to come in and bail out these morons just makes me sick. They need to be cut loose before they drag us all down.

What should the government do then? For god sakes start by rewarding the people who save, rather than the people who lived beyond their means and are now swimming in debt. Because, obviously, the people who save are the people who are responsible. The govt needs to stop screwing the people who live responsibly...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I just read...
Posted by: mstenger on Jan 24, 2008 8:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that the rebates will only be $300 per person. Of course, the repukes wouldn't stand for increasing food stamps or unemployment benefits, but John "Boner" of Ohio was successful at getting the tax rebates for upper middle class people who make $150,000. Pelosi caved, as usual, and the repukes keep screwing "we the people."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I just read... Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: I just read... Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: I just read... Posted by: sre
» RE: I just read... Posted by: ordaj
Clear Evidence of Real Intent
Posted by: lamar on Jan 24, 2008 9:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The plan is to limit the 'tax rebate' to individuals making $75,000 or less ($150,000 to married couples regardless of kids). You say, well, they certainly don't need the money. But remember, this is supposedly about "stimulating the economy." It's a cheap farce.

Why? People who make more than $75,000 pay off their credit cards. The debt crisis affects people who can't make their minimum payments. How much more evidence do we need that this is a sleazy credit card bailout that will hurt the poor?

Your complacence is being bought for $300.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take Responsibility
Posted by: Southern Gal on Jan 24, 2008 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My parents taught me to live within my means. They said if you don't have it don't spend it, because you are responsible for your debt. We have become spoiled by credit. Instead of saving for what we want, we get instant gratification in getting it, along with the exhorbitant interest on that credit card. When I bought my house I bought less than I was told I could afford, because I wanted to be able to pay the house off more quickly and to keep the house if something happened to my job. I also worked while I was going to college. I knew that I needed further education to get a decent job and support myself and my family. We are responsible for our lives. I'd like to see the Republicans reap what they have sown. I'd like to see them get the full blame for this recession and for this economy and accept that responsiblity. Let Wall Street, the corporations and the banks take the fall. The problem with all of this is that innocent people suffer. I hope that the Democrats will come to their senses and propose incentive packages that help the poor, low and middle income families. I'm sure that Congress and the White House will say that it adds to the debt. It's funny that the Iraq occupation and corporate welfare add to the debt, but that is rarely mentioned. It's just the social programs that help real people that are discussed as adding to the debt. It's an imperfect world and people must take responsiblity for their own lives. We can wait for the bought and paid for government to right the wrongs, the lobbyists to consider the rights of the rest of us in their financial schemes, and this country to resume it's role as a democracy, but don't hold your breath.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Get real! Posted by: Basenjis
» RE:Life for the very poor Posted by: aka_bozo
I just can't sympathize
Posted by: ot on Jan 24, 2008 9:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As usual the blame for the current economic state of affairs gets placed on the "evil" bankers and corporations.

Why doesn't anyone ask why all these poor "victims" of greed are in such dire straights to begin with? Did anyone force them to rush down to Best Buy and purchase that big HD TV on credit? Did anyone force them to buy that gas guzzling SUV on credit? Did anyone force them to join a bank where they have to pay ridiculous fees on every service when nearly everyone these days has access to a credit union? Did anyone force them to apply for a mortgage on a house that they would not be able to afford once the interest would reset to a rate that could only go up?

No!

These are not victims of banks, but only of their own stupidity brought about by a liberal education system that is more concerned about someone's feelings rather than the ability to read, write, do arithmetic and think critically and a culture where it is ingrained in everyone that it is their social duty to consume!

How pathetic.

I have never paid a fee to a bank in my entire life, haven't paid a penny in credit card interest in over 10 year and live well below my means. There is absolutely nothing remarkable about me or my abilities with the exception perhaps of being able to see through all the bullshit.

I am not a victim. And I don't need a Nanny State to save me from myself.

The real blame and the solution belongs with each and every individual.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I just can't sympathize Posted by: carbon-based
» Shame on You Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: I just can't sympathize Posted by: Astroboy
» RE: I just can't sympathize Posted by: JSquercia
Take Responsibility and I Just Can't Sympathize:
Posted by: lamar on Jan 24, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You seem to want to defend the banks and moralize against those who made bad decisions. Surely you realize where all this "stimulus" money is going? To the banks.

Taking responsibility ALSO means that banks take responsibility and lend within their means. Apply those very basic free market morals to all parties.

Save the "personal responsibility" schtick for your grandkids. We both probably agree that the stimulus is a bad idea. It's just that "personal responsibility" is not really a factor here.

If you are a lower income person with a family, this stimulus package will help keep housing prices at bubble levels, and you won't be able to afford one. I'm not talking about buying out of your range. I'm talking about maintaining the bubble to support banks that lent with bubble prices as security acts to keep poor people who want to live within their means out of houses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Great idea! Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Great idea! Posted by: ot
Zero Confidence
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jan 24, 2008 10:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have ZERO confidence this "stimulus" will help the eco-no-money at all.
At least the economy, stupid, will keep Republicans out of the White House. (But then we will have to deal with Hillary. God help us all!)
Oh, what am I saying? We will get another Republican to be our Fuhrer next time around too. It is inevitable, especially with the vote-rigging the Repugnants will easily get away with because of the economic chaos that will be complete near election time this year.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Zero Confidence Posted by: Knot_Rich
Ron Paul's Plan
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Jan 24, 2008 11:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ron Paul's Four-Point Comprehensive Economic Revitalization Plan

I know the pro-war zealots would shred 2a, but hey at some point we're going to have to bring the troops home because we wont be able to afford to keep them deployed all over the world, and they sure as hell aint gonna work for free!

As for 1b, I dont think the estate tax should be repealed completely, but the cap should be raised to somewhere around 50 million.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: on Paul's Plan Posted by: lamar
You all just don't get it
Posted by: ot on Jan 24, 2008 11:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems as though I have been mercilessly derided for my previous post (see 'I just can't sympathize').

But most everyone has completely missed the point. And that point is that I am in total agreement that banks cannot be trusted BUT I am actually doing something concrete to fight back by not allowing them to profit from me and profiting from them instead. All I ever see here is bickering, blaming and naive hope that somebody else will save us.

So act!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will this "stimulus" action work?
Posted by: willymack on Jan 24, 2008 11:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, sure, just as well as it did last time. Not content with the abject failure of bushinomocs first time around, the chump-in-charge wants to fleece ordinary Americans AGAIN. As usual, nobody will have the guts to stop him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Come ON... It's free money.... Posted by: aka_bozo
How about a Hand Up, Not a Hand Out!?!
Posted by: djnoll on Jan 24, 2008 12:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When FDR took office in the middle of The Great Depression, he was facing a devastated nation and he needed to find ways to recover the balance and health of a nation devastated by uncontrolled banking and corporate interests. Not unlike today. Now BushCo and every prominent GOP or leading Democratic presidential candidate has advocated for tax rebates and tax cuts for corporations. As one poster pointed out, financing recovery with more debt is not sane or the answer. It is time for us to get a hand up,not a handout!

When you listen to John Edwards on this issue he advocates putting people back to work and encouraging green businesses and education. He is looking at not only how to help people make a living wage, but also at solving the problems of global warming and ending corporate welfare. He is suggesting modern solutions to problems that need immediate attention, by using such old fashioned concepts as hardworking Americans to rebuild our national infrastructure; supporting new green entrepreneurship; and education for our young people that actually teaches them to think. He has been advocating the end of corporate welfare and ending tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, something that Hillary or Obama has skirted in their answers to this problem. Yes, tax rebates are welcome by the electorate in an election year, but they are not the answer when it puts our country further into debt. It is time for tax increases, by ending tax cuts and investor loopholes for corporations, so that we increase our national revenues, instead of letting these moneyed entities and people live off the rest of us without paying their fair share.

see http://www.standanddeliveramerica.com for the article "It is time to tighten your belts, America".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Leave it to Beaver
Posted by: sre on Jan 24, 2008 12:34 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you remember that old sitcom? I think that what's coming at us will make the great depression of the '30s look like an episode of "Leave it to Beaver". No "stimulus pakage" is going to help. Just my opinion, though, and what do I know?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deb
Posted by: debmcd on Jan 24, 2008 1:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If people spend the rebates at all what are they going to spend it on? They will pay their bills which means the money goes right back to the rich elite. Or they will buy the only things available any more in America, foreign made goods. Then the money heads out of the country, again not helping our economy. Why not spend on infrastructure projects and create jobs instead of or in addition to the hand out. Many people, myself included plan on hanging on to any rebate dollars because I just don't trust what the elite are saying about how resilient and strong our economy is. My life may depend on that 800 dollars in the near future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We didn't even talk about Foreigm Investors
Posted by: Peacekeeper on Jan 24, 2008 1:32 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We want those Arabs to Invest in Our lending Institutions, So the Banks will be able to remain In business. but why Would they? interest on the there investment would Be low. maybe they can get a return on there Investment, by useing these Companys as a way to Invest in Cadidates for Congress or the presidentcy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Brown imigrants Posted by: aka_bozo
the rebate check
Posted by: Trazom on Jan 24, 2008 1:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
will nicely cover my increase in health insurance ($820). So no, I won't benefit. I'll just manage to hang on, as I've been doing for 7 years now. But my hands are getting sore, and not in a good way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Helps the Chinese
Posted by: Sparks56 on Jan 24, 2008 2:37 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, we're going to borrow yet more money from the Chinese so we can go to Walmart and buy more products made in China. I have an image of Mao Tse Tung laughing his head off, with Cho En Lai, with his inscrutable grin, thinking, "Maybe this capitalist stuff isn't so bad."
The only purpose, and the only result, of this rebate scam is to provide political cover for spineless Democrats who he been asleep at the switch and greedy Republicans who have been looting the US Treasury and the pockets of every working American with both hands for years.
What about this stupid, endless, hopeless goddamned war that is bleeding money from us and real blood from the Iraqi people?!!!!!
How about injecting some money into the economy by repairing and rebuilding bridges, tunnels, water mains, sewer plants, and the electric grid?!!!!
How about investing in mass transit and real R&D in alternative energy infrastructure?!!!
But, not to worry. The stock market is rebounding, and that's all that matters, isn't it. Go back to sleep, America. zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Helps the Chinese Posted by: JSquercia
Herbert Hoover Strikes Again
Posted by: dayahka on Jan 24, 2008 3:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was pretty disgusting seeing Comrade Pelosi and George Bush smiling and cheering each other on with this wild and stupid--and effectively useless--rebate scheme. How on earth can borrowing more money to give people who are in over their heads on borrowed money will rebates help the US economy? How on earth will buying a plasma TV from Japan, a laptop made in China, some wine from Spain, or (if rationality exists) paying off some debt going to help the US economy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HERE IS THE ONLY STIMULUS THAT CAN SAVE AMERICA!
Posted by: luckypuck on Jan 24, 2008 3:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IMPEACH BUSH NOW!

Anything less than this will allow Bush to shitcan this country in the year before he leaves office. A year! Think how much mischief he can do, how much damage he can do to this country a year. HE HAS NOTHING TO LOSE! No matter any down side there is to impeachment, it's peanuts in comparison to NOT impeaching him. So,

IMPEACH BUSH NOW! THIS MINUTE!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Quiet Desperation
Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com on Jan 24, 2008 3:20 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Night is cruel for some: When a worker comes home and checks the mail, the bills come in and/or the collection calls flood in shortly thereafter.
And viewing this article, our president thinks his stimulus can help (some of) us alleviate debt and prevent us from losing our homes.
As the article mentions, his "plan" will not help those who need it most. For those in the know, our economy has layers to it: Those at the top aren't fretting the night hours how to avoid eviction, to pay off the high-interest credit card fees, to pay for education, among other things.
Is the president's plan desperate? Is he serious about the economy? He's been in office for about eight years and if we recall what he did during his first year he gave us money in the form of rebates to stimulate the economy.
Eight years later, accoridng to economists, we're worse off than ever.
I'll give him credit for attempting to lead us out of this malaise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You are too generous Posted by: TheLimit
Why not just burn the $140 BILLION...This plan is ridiculous...
Posted by: micheleallisonrealty on Jan 24, 2008 3:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There isn't a molecule of intelligence behind this plan.
$140 Billion rolls off the tongue as if it is $100 bucks.
You can not offer our tax money or borrow money from China [as we are doing to fund the war]to falsely stimulate a sinking economy. The situation that we are in is due, in part, to the wasteful spending and greed of this government.
This is "welfare" on a larger scale. Giving away money is not going to do a thing for the Country and shore up the markets.
Take the $140 Billion, crazy amount, and invest it where it will get a return so that we stop printing money. Apparently, the White House does care that the value of the dollar is at an all time low and this package is not going to help.
The Country and our heirs will be paying for this disgraceful government for many years to come.
We need this government run like a business with checks and balances.
Thanks for viewing....take care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A System Set-up Solely for the Top 1% in America That Owns 1/3rd of Her Wealth
Posted by: sofla100 on Jan 24, 2008 4:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America's super-rich own 1/3 of her wealth while the bottom 50% own another third, is this justice? These rebates will just go to put food on the table and get medical care for tens of millions of Americans. They are a scam by politicians trying to look sympathetic. As for Wall Street and Americ'a top 1%, they will be busy, via their psychopaths like Rush Limbaugh, lecturing the working poor on being "responsible" with the money. As though tens of millions of Americans with barely enough to eat will be buying HDTV's and video recorders. The rebates are pathetic. The real solution is for an immediate break-up of all of America's large corporations, and instituting a social democratic system like Sweden and Western Europe have. Anything else is just fodder for the proletariat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A two dollar tax rebate
Posted by: PaulK on Jan 24, 2008 6:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I live pretty poor. I once got a two dollar tax rebate, based on my income tax. I guess that the rebate stimulated me a reasonable amount because I never cashed the two dollar check. However, it never stimulated my personal economy. That's what happens when you're poor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CommonDreamer
Posted by: CommonDreamer on Jan 24, 2008 7:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is just more crackpot economics from the regime that brought you trickle down koolaid and every manner of economic abuse of the working class it could engineer. The biggest practitioners of economic sophistry are in the White House and they continue on with this, its latest bandaid for a hemorrage.

This is what happens when you bankrupt half the country (read: median and under-income persons) by levying higher taxes on them than on investors - by making it possible for companies to write off health insurance for CEOs who are paid $30 million (how is it possible these CEOs can look themselves in the mirror and not pay for their own health insurance?).....by driving up the cost of housing and then calling that a "boom", and so on. Well the boom has fallen and the truth is out: Crackpot economics doesn't work.

And neither does encouraging people to borrow against their rising home values. Why would a responsible nation encourage its people to borrow so much? Why would people buy this pablum? Especially people who make median income and so on and struggle with health care costs, etc. The truth is, these people have no extra money at all to do anything. Like it or not, $40K will buy you a basic life - and that's it - nothing more...and people need to understand this and live with it. It's great if you have moxie and ambition to try to make more - but in the meantime people have to accept where they are in purchasing power.

And people have to understand that they've been doubly crippled by this administration that favors the wealthy in nearly every instance - so that the wealthy pay less taxes, get bigger write offs, are able to drive up the price of everything, and then are able to yank pensions, jobs and depress wages for the rest of America. It's a double whammy and now we have a one time visit to the economic emergency room for a quick fix.

What happens later? When our wages continue to be depressed? When the layoffs continue? When people get continue to be foreclosed upon? When investment bankers walk away from the mess they caused....with $30 million in their pocket and layoffs in their wake?

The mercenary government sophistry continues unabated. This is no fix - only a truly progressive tax fix will halt the abuses that lead to this problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“Free markets do not work when demand outstrips supply.”
Posted by: Missing Piece on Jan 24, 2008 7:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This story and all alternet stories are a waste of time. Why doesn't alternet ever talk about the false flag committed on 9/11 and peak oil?

People, the time to wake up was in the 70's and if you want to survive in the future you need to mentally prepare. Google 9/11 truth, peak oil, and remember the two are directly related, something neither side will admit too.

I suggest you read the latest from simmons and plan accordingly.


http://www.texasmonthly.com/2008-02-01/feature2.php

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally!
Posted by: cherylholmes on Jan 25, 2008 12:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally, someone is saying the same things I have been saying for 20 years. Bravo!

Let's not leave out the media who is as guilty as all those crooks are who rob us. They could have told people the truth. But they chose not too. They are co-conspirators in every mess we find ourselves in. They are as guilty as the criminals perpetrating the crimes we have been enduring and continue to endure under this form of government. We let them all rob us out of homes, healthcare, education, housing, fuel, food and everything we need just to survive. There's no turning back now. We let all of them get away with it for so long, they have an expectancy of being able to continue to screw us because we've let them for way too long. They have stolen our lives, our freedoms, our dignity and every dime we ever had. We let them, and now it's too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Won't Get Bupkis - I'm on Disability Benefits
Posted by: colleenwhalen on Jan 25, 2008 2:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For seniors collecting Social Security and disabled, or familes recieving TANF - they won't get ANYTHING. Unless you have a job and paid taxes last year, you don't qualify for the dinky $800 tax rebate. For unemployed people whose EDD benefits ran out and they didn't work last year - they get nothing.

Bush's plan to give $800 to all of us doesn't do anything to help the poorest people.

Didn't he try this same stunt the very first year he was in office? I remember folks got something like a couple of hundred bucks tax rebate - "to stimulate the economy" - didn't work then - won't work now.

Why hasn't this moron been impeached? Because Nancy Pelosi said "Impeachment is off the table" and the Democrats are too cowardly to kick his sorry hide out of the White House.

Impeach Bush Cheney and Jail to the Chief! Send Bush & Cheney to life in prison in Abuy Ghirab or Guantanamo!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Fed can create money, not wealth
Posted by: AlienSlave on Jan 25, 2008 5:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Fed can create money, not wealth
Money is not wealth. It is only a measurement of wealth. A given amount of money, qualified by the value of money as expressed in its purchasing power, represents an account of wealth at a given point in time in an operating market. Given a fixed amount of wealth, the value of money is inversely proportional to the amount of money the asset commands: the higher the asset price in money terms, the less valuable the money. When debt pushes asset prices up, it in effect pushes the value of money down in terms of purchasing power. In an inflationary environment, when prices are kept high by excess liquidity, monetized wealth stored in the underlying asset actually shrinks. This is the reason why hyperinflation destroys monetized wealth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Havn't we been here before
Posted by: Andrew_S on Jan 25, 2008 10:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Trickle down fiscal policies have been tried and tested and did it work? Just because you call it something else makes no difference. Unless of course you are an apple pie eater. Get this folks, no more SS just bandaids, no more social infrastructure, it will take an estimated 1.38 trillion just to fix the existing one. The administration costs of managing a country have skyrocketed, and guess who will always have first pick of the cherry. For those who call themselves individually responsible, well bully for you, but you are still one of us,no matter how much you think you are one of them. There in a nutshell is the problem, too many people forget who they are. If I am not my brothers keeper who am I, I say lets just keep voting in the establishment and sell all our souls, red or blue its the same coin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The $800 Rebate Won't Go to Disabled, Seniors, Unemployed
Posted by: colleenwhalen on Jan 26, 2008 11:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm on disability benefits from Social Security. My annual income is about $12,500. Because I am disabled, unable to work and therefore didn't file taxes last year, I am not eligible for the $800 rebate Bush is offering. Seniors on Social Security, poor families recieving TANF, unemployed people who did not work last year - none of us are eligible for Bush's $800 rebate.

The most marginalized, poorest people in America will get nothing.

BTW - didn't Bush do this exact same stunt in 2001? I remember one of the reasons he blew through the huge billions in surplus Bush inheirited from the Clinton Administration was because he gave a one time flat rate tax rebate check to Americans. It didn't do ANYTHING to help our sagging economy and it won't help now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is Bush's plan going to work for the economy
Posted by: niliadis on Jan 27, 2008 5:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
$600.00 is not going to change anyone's life
$6,000.00 yes!~ $600 for me is only going to pay one bill (gas, phone & w&P for one month) and it will appear again next month!
Not that I am not grateful, I truly am but if this plan is to change peoples lifes in improvin the economy sorry, not enough!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need the economy we had before Bush
Posted by: niliadis on Jan 27, 2008 5:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That was the best economy in History!
Thank You President Clinton! Historical fact!!
Hope our next president can accomplish what President was able to do!
Whomever he/she may be!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

promote spending
Posted by: oxheadone on Jan 28, 2008 2:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The simplest way to stimulate the US economy is to suspend collection of the employee portion of the social security tax for a few weeks. It would benefit the working poor . We can pay for it by eliminating the tax cuts for the rich (that will expire in a couple of years). Tax cuts for the rich and for corporations do not stimulate the economy because they do not increase (especially domestic) spending. Increased spending means more income for business and higher profits which they should be happy to share to help reduce the deficit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

promote spending
Posted by: oxheadone on Jan 28, 2008 2:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The simplest way to stimulate the US economy is to suspend collection of the employee portion of the social security tax for a few weeks. It would benefit the working poor . We can pay for it by eliminating the tax cuts for the rich (that will expire in a couple of years). Tax cuts for the rich and for corporations do not stimulate the economy because they do not increase (especially domestic) spending. Increased spending means more income for business and higher profits which they should be happy to share to help reduce the deficit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No more crackernomics!! Listen Up!!
Posted by: yellow on Jan 28, 2008 1:04 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back in the early 1980s, with the advent of Reaganomics, the big superpartriotic fiscally responsible Republicans decided to stimulate the US economy and squeeze inflation by making the US entirely dependant on foreign capital inflows. One of the reasons that Volcker sustained interest rates well above the rate of inflation before gradually allowing them to cascade downward in 1986, is because he wanted to draw portfolio investment from abroad. Average national income was steeply declining with the economy concentrating through a flurry of mergers and acquisistions. US multinationals set up shop overseas in low wage zones. The economy eventually financialized and the gradual merging of commercial and investment banking produced a wide array of new financial products. This financed more imports and a gapping balance of trade deficit. The $30 billion average annual trade deficits of the early 1980s turned to $160 billion by 1987. Yet the overriding concern was to keep up the flow of foreign capital regardless of the effect high interest rates had on the domestic economy. In 1986 alone, $143 billion in new foreign investment flowed into the US exceeding the total net fixed domestic business investment for that year!! After 1985, with the decline of the US dollar, Foreign Direct Investment began to flow in creating jobs and buying up existing productive assets. As jobs were shed through lean production techniques and demand constricted, cheap imports became the order of the day further depressing domestic output and US wage levels. Volker's strategy of capital restructuring revalued the international exchange value of the US dollar upward by 60% making increasing imports and the penetration of the US domestic market by foreign firms. Corporate America gained from this new strategy. They relocated abroad to cheap labor zones making their "exports" more competitive as well!!

The current malaise has its roots in the early Reagan era. The FED is not the source of the restructuring but merely its handmaiden. The real source of the changes is the contradictory nature of late capitalism which skews the distribution of wealth and globalizes capital in order to reverse the trend of the falling average rate of profit experienced in the late 1960s and early 1970s. A crisis of overproduction of consumer durables in the advanced capitalist world was the origin of the most recent structural crisis of late capitalism. Creating the conditions for financialization was the chief role of the FED in the early 1980s. As finance capital globalized, the FED lost more and more control of monetary policy. The liberalization of global capital flows made it impossible for the FED to conduct monetary policy without reducing the competitiveness of US Banks or inducing constant recessions with ongoing monetary belt tightening to constrict the money supply to raise interest rates and defend the dollar's international value. The growth of a Eurodollar market abroad also presented challenges to FED control. The ultimate collapse of the Bretton-Woods Regime was due not to FED policy but to rapid changes in the nature of global financial markets that made fixed exchange rates impractical.

Today, financialization is at the core of attempts to stimulate an essentially stagnating world economy whose output capacity grows without comensurate growth of employment despite the global cheapening of labor. Constricted demand leads to more financialization. The real value of the global GDP is measured in the low tens of trillions while the total value of global financial markets of all kinds is measured in the hundreds of trillions!! Stagnation amidst wild financial growth is the bane of the world economy's stability. A severe crisis is already looming on the horizen. The contradictory nature of this system has vast implications for its very stability and sustainability.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

True, but who's gonna fix it? (Hint, We the People)
Posted by: audiodef on Jan 29, 2008 9:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The Christmas season has come and gone."

What a flippin' idiot! Help! The country is being run by morons! AAAAHHHHH! *runs away into the night*

"But, that's been far from the case if we consider the people's economy (the people - as in all the American citizens who don't fall into that upper percent of the nation's wealth bracket). And very little in the President's, or in most of the presidential candidates' plans, will change this."

Yup. That's why I'm voting for Gravel and that's why I'm upset Kucinich withdrew. These are the only two candidates, as far as I can see, that will do anything that's Gol' durn REAL for the people. Everyone else is just a matter of more or less of the same evils. Bah. Humbug.

"Seriously, wouldn't it kill you if your health insurance premium rose just as you were about to cash that government rebate?"

That's what's gonna happen, boys and girls, in case you haven't been paying attention.

"people will buy less, which will hurt corporations, who will then fire more people."

La, la, la de da, la, la la *hums*... Just another day with more idiots running the show. You'd think that if corporations want more money, they would HIRE more people, which means more people will have more money to buy things. *to the tune of TUMS* DUMB, DA DUMB, DUMB, DUUUUUUUUMB. But this is good, as I do not like capitalism. Maybe this will help it all come down and people will find a better way of life.

"We can debate forever whether the average $300 tax rebate in 2001 that the administration claims stimulated the economy did or not."

Yeah. About the same way a shot of (your drug here) simulates you. Gives you a rush, then BOOM, down you come again.

"(We can debate whether a similar rebate will or will not this time around.)"

Take some more drugs, whee! Round and round we go!

"Over the past two decades, wealth in the top 2 percent of the country has doubled; in the bottom quarter, it has declined."

Gee, mom, didn't that happen right before all those messy revolutions in all those sci-fi books I read as a kid?

"It did not replenish the Social Security system. None of the candidates has addressed pensions or social security in any meaningful way - saying 'we'll fix it' is not meaningful."

Nope. They're trying to replenish it by demanding that people who once got benefits pay it back. The SSA wants $125,000 from me - an unemployed deaf man. Way to go! I have help from a Congressman's office, though, so all is not lost, and there IS hope for all.

"Place the focus back on the majority of the population: increase collective wealth and not the wealth gap, and GDP will follow - on a more stable, long term platform."

Yes, it will. I just do not believe the "major" candidates for 2008 will do this. Gravel probably will, and Kucinich probably would have. The rest can go talk themselves into a coma for all I care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

c4xfire
Posted by: clefty on Jan 29, 2008 10:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I need the money desperatly but rest assured some of it will be going to the Democratic Party coffers. These fascists can never satisfy my all encompassing need for justice. Their attack on america must never be forgotten . I demand payback!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement