And chances are that imposing a VAT will stunt the already overly optimistic economic growth that Obama was planning on.
Since he hasn't proposed a VAT, I don't see that that is hugely relevant. Invading Mars would also cost a lot. barfo
This is the best thing that could have happened to this country as a whole. How long have we been paying for stuff other than firemen, police, roads and other necessities? HMM....for as long as anyone alive can remember. We are going to go bankrupt, the only thing I feel terrible about is that Obama isn't going to do what he should. That is increase our military spending to make sure we are the most powerful country in the world. When the shit hits the fan and China wants to come take our country as payment how will we stop them?
So not having a powerful military is going to make the same situation better for us how? edit, I shouldn't say the same situation because I don't believe the Soviet Union was selling off its industry and landmarks before it went tits up...not a history major so enlighten me
Money not spent on the military can be spent on other things is all I meant. Of course if we believe that an invasion is coming, then we should spend on military anyway. However as far as I know the Canadians are not restless. barfo
You have repeatedly defended the spending that is going to quadruple our deficit. Health care reform was part of that proposed spending and budget. So yes, you have.
Not so fast there. Health care reform was definitely not part of the stimulus package (which I have defended). In fact health care reform has not been part of any spending bill as of yet. So, no, I haven't. Which is not to say I won't in the future. I think health care does need reform. But I'd like to hear what the plan is before I decide whether to sign on. barfo
Can I ask a quick non partisan question? If not the massive spending (bail outs), what else could have been done? I'm asking this with the utmost purest intentions. I want to know what the "Republicans" would have done. I put quotes around Republicans because those of you that are more fiscally conservative may or may not be actual Republicans. Anyway. I'm not trying to bait anyone in to an argument. I'm inexperienced in all of this, but extremely interested. I know what Obama did - what would you do had you been faced with the same economic "crisis?" EDIT: Perhaps this isn't a "quick" question. After re-reading my post I laughed out loud. Nothing "quick" about it. Haha...
I have less of an issue with the bailouts than I do with the projected longer term deficits. The longer term deficits are what are really going to cripple this country. The $700billion numbers for bailouts and so-called "stimulus" packages are going to look small compared to the almost $1.5 TRILLION deficits projected on a YEARLY basis.
I'm not a Republican, but I am on the right side of the political spectrum. Here is a thumbnail sketch of what I would have done: 1. I would have funded TARP because a meltdown of the financial system would have been disasterous. I would have supplied them, however with loans to be repaid instead of the equity mess we entered into. 2. I would have taken over Fannie and Freddie completely, wiping out the shareholders' equity. I would then have spun off the ancillary businesses (for example, FHLMC has a profitable multi-family loan business), and merged the remaining entity into a smaller, more focused entity that is simply in the business of creating a secondary mortgage market. 3. I would have made dramatic spending cuts, starting with Federal employee salaries. Concomitantly, I would have cut taxes, lowering the marginal rate and creating a capital gains tax holiday. 4. I would have allowed GM to go bankrupt and Chrysler to liquidate. In short, I would have put the economy in the hands of the people instead of the government.
Instead of giving bailout money directly to the banks, which then turned around and bought other banks (like BofA buying Merrill Lynch), I'd have used the money to buy down peoples' mortgages. My reasoning is that people bought homes at $200K setting a market value of $200K for homes in the neighborhood. When some got foreclosed, the banks liquidated them for $100K, setting a market value of $100K for everyone else and making it near impossible to sell, leading to more foreclosures. Why more foreclosures? People see a $150K (that's being generous on the down payment) loan on a house worth $100K so they walk, making the problem worse. If the bailout money had bought down those mortgages by $50K, it'd have made the homeowners whole, the banks don't lose the $50K reselling the homes, and the banks actually get the $50K anyway (buying down the loans). I fully agree with loaning corporations money. It means short term debt that gets repaid fully, though there's risk that the companies go under anyway. That is an investment of the public money, since you expect those companies to continue to keep people on the payrolls and you expect the economic downturn to reverse at some point. I fully agree that the long term structural deficits are a grave threat.
