Carlton,
Thank you very much for your response. I put some thought into your comment and have some opinions of my own I would like to share. It’s not a personal attack at all, I’m a firm believer in learning from others. If I only surround myself with individuals who agree I’ll never learn a new way of seeing the world. I appreciate your reading the blog and responding, I think it is truly a great opportunity to open the dialogue. I think talking about what is wrong is the first step, working out how to fix it stems from there. Here are some of my thoughts:
Clinton balanced the budget, he did not have spare change from the dot com revolution. The money the Bush Administration has spent is money we don’t have now and did not have then. We’re about $455 billion in debt at this point, debt that countries like China are buying up. If I were making a list of countries I would like to be indebted to, China would not be in my top ten. Therefore I might consider as a country incurring this debt we should slow down and stop spending so recklessly.
I am a fan of bipartisanship. I believe the attempt being made by congressional leaders in support of the bailout was to get banks to cooperate with one another in order to help them help their customers. Is this a trickle down approach yes. However, I think when you suggest giving funding directly to citizens you enter into an entirely different debate on who gets what; how much to families in city A, what is considered a “family” unit or creating fair balances between income levels, fluctuating housing values, and what constitutes a fair amount because you can’t give the same amount of money to families across the board. Some have more children, some have smaller houses, and I think it’s appropriate to consider that the cost of housing is much different in Des Moins, Iowa than it is in Los Angeles. I would also like to point out that I don’t think it was the best idea regardless of its political support base.
I do know a thing or two about the economy. I realize presidents have little to no impact directly on the economy. In fact, free market economies don’t recognize the difference between presidents and citizens, they recognize buyers and sellers. Presidents and political parties have great impact on the budget. The budget determines what the U.S. will spend its money on and what it won’t. There is no more or less, there is only option a or option b. If the government spends 100 percent of its money on option a, there is nothing left over for option b. If the government spends 60 percent of its income on option a there is 40 percent remaining to spend on option b or option c, etc. Therefore, as the government continues to spend vast amounts of its income on this war that leaves very little income to distribute to other programs like health care, technology etc.
Yes, loans were given out to poor candidates during the 1990’s. This was done by companies like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, in order to encourage people to buy homes and invest. Loans were given with exceptionally low rates to individuals that these companies wittingly knew could not pay. To simplify, lenders sold and resold these properties that were worth $5 initially, and then enabled individuals to borrow against the initial value which led to the creation of $8 of debt for a property that was only worth $5. The $3 did not exist and therefore has created a problem for parties repaying and holding these loans as no one can come up the $3 non-existant dollars that were bought and resold so many times it becomes impossible to track. Though I will grant you that politicians have little control over the economy, they do control regulation. The ability of Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae to not only create this loophole, abuse it significantly and then receive a government bailout is rediculous. The responsibility of our public leaders is to assure that companies do not abuse their power, create monopolies and take advantage of U.S. citizens. The need for reform and for reformers who are willing to pay attention to what is needed by the people, not just corporations, is what I believe is necessary to improve our current state of affairs.
What Happens When… January 13, 2009
Tags: explosion, intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear warfare, Politics, survival
When starships collide,
In polite suicide,
And their parts do decide
To begin falling to sea
When oceans grow dim
In the moonlight we swim
When among all the din
The parts do arrive
As the explosions burst out
With their most violent clout
The ship now more stout
Floats under the sea
Then it floats to the bottom
The Coast Guard has got’em
Suddenly silence is then a hum
No passengers were left alive