Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • 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.

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

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.


Digg!

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).



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 i