$825 Billion Stimulus Plan

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
We still have Trillions in CDS. Credit Default Swaps. Like 45 Trillion.

All unregulated. We need to keep this never ending debt cycle going

or you can kiss the Dollar goodbye and with it the entire US economy

when we default on our outstanding national debts. The Federal Reserve Banks just

love this situation. They are making huge sums with the ever increasing debt.

They are financially enslaving at least the next 2 generations with their ability

to increase the national debt. The failing banks are just symptoms of

a far bigger disease. And this stimulus plan is just a band aid on a severed artery.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1232689379]

T!m, the problem has already become catastrophic.



As for when we need to do "something", I think that events will determine that on their own.</blockquote>


I disagree that is is already catastrophic. If you think it is, then I think you are lacking imagination. :) I can imagine it getting much worse.



As for the point of when to do something -- it is subjective. To you it may not be time. Others think it is time.
 
I understand where you are coming from T!m and valid points. However, we are handing out parachutes to dead people. Why not hand them out to those that are alive? Giving a parachute to BofA or AIG doesn't solve the issue. Maybe our govt will make it their priority so they don't fail, but pumping billions maybe even trillions into this will have severe consequences that you and your children will have to pay for.



But you're right, many opinions can be drawn from this issue. Most will also be biased to what is best for them and their timeline.

Nobody really is right or wrong.
 
[quote author="blackvault_cm" date=1232691754]I understand where you are coming from T!m and valid points. However, we are handing out parachutes to dead people. Why not hand them out to those that are alive? </blockquote>


I like that. I guess the problem is figuring out who is dead and who is only mostly dead. :-)



<blockquote> Giving a parachute to BofA or AIG doesn't solve the issue. Maybe our govt will make it their priority so they don't fail, but pumping billions maybe even trillions into this will have severe consequences that you and your children will have to pay for.

</blockquote>


I get the feeling that no matter what we do, our children will be paying for it. (Well, YOUR children will. I have none. In theory I should then be happy to pass the problem on to future generations, yet I am not happy to do so.) It feels like the past twenty-five years has been varying degrees of pushing problems to the future.
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1232675506]The problem with any bail out or stimulus is once it is enacted we will never know "what would have happened" without it.



I would venture a guess and say that TARP has helped artificially prop up housing prices in some markets, by how much is anybodies guess. I would think that any Bank receiving TARP money today would be liquidating foreclosures if not for the TARP money. The human cost is a person buying a home in one of those markets will have to put more of their income toward debt retirment for 30 years.



</blockquote>


Some evidence in support of your guess ttrent... I spoke with a former colleague of mine this week. He used to be a VP of sales at a software company I was at. He got hooked up with some guys that bought bad loans from banks in beginning back in 2006. He said pretty much exactly the same thing you ventured, i.e. that because of TARP, lenders haven't been nearly as willing to sell loans for the couple of quarters.



In 2007 and early 2008 they were picking up loans at 20-30 cents on the dollar and either refinancing them or foreclosing and selling the property. They acquired a good-sized pool from Countrywide, $30M in loans (book value of over $100M to Countrywide), and made around $10M in profit on the pool. Due to the sizeable discounting by the lenders on the loans, they were paying their investors a guaranteed and liquid 10%. According the him, they haven't been able to acquire any new pools of loans with a fraction of the profit potential of the Countrywide score for quite some time.
 
[quote author="T!m" date=1232692835][quote author="blackvault_cm" date=1232691754]I understand where you are coming from T!m and valid points. However, we are handing out parachutes to dead people. Why not hand them out to those that are alive? </blockquote>


I like that. I guess the problem is figuring out who is dead and who is only mostly dead. :-)



<blockquote> Giving a parachute to BofA or AIG doesn't solve the issue. Maybe our govt will make it their priority so they don't fail, but pumping billions maybe even trillions into this will have severe consequences that you and your children will have to pay for.

</blockquote>


I get the feeling that no matter what we do, our children will be paying for it. (Well, YOUR children will. I have none. In theory I should then be happy to pass the problem on to future generations, yet I am not happy to do so.) It feels like the past twenty-five years has been varying degrees of pushing problems to the future.</blockquote>
Exactly... I don't want to push this any further into the future. I want to deal with the consequences now, not shove it off onto someone else's kids.



Yes, it could get worse. But I think you are looking at it from the standpoint of the effect of events to date, while I am looking at the effect of events to come; in my view, we have already passed the point where we can forstall a collapse. It is coming. Taking an example from recent events, the choice isn't between continuing on to our destination or go back, the choice is between trying to make it to that little landing strip or put it down in the river. I don't think we have enough lift to make it to the landing strip, not without invoking the kind of default bltserv mentioned.
 
<em>"If you are among the newly unemployed and you want to see just how soon Obama's bailout and recovery program is going to succeed, take a pail down to the ocean and start bailing. When you have stopped the tide, that's when the government will have fixed the problem."</em>



Bob Moriarty
 
[quote author="bltserv" date=1232690680]We still have Trillions in CDS. Credit Default Swaps. Like 45 Trillion.

All unregulated. We need to keep this never ending debt cycle going

or you can kiss the Dollar goodbye and with it the entire US economy

when we default on our outstanding national debts. The Federal Reserve Banks just

love this situation. They are making huge sums with the ever increasing debt.

They are financially enslaving at least the next 2 generations with their ability

to increase the national debt. The failing banks are just symptoms of

a far bigger disease. And this stimulus plan is just a band aid on a severed artery.</blockquote>


This is the rub in this whole TARP/bailout plan that nobody wants to talk about.

I think eventually this will come to roost and everything will collapse.

If we throw $1 trillion at a $45 trillion problem? Like a bandaid on a bleeding artery.
 
<a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flashpbc.htm">Pelosi defends adding funds for birth control to stimulous bill</a>



PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Sun Jan 25 2009 22:13:43 ET



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic "stimulus" package, claiming "contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."



Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, "Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a mom," seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.



The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC's THIS WEEK.



STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?



PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.



STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?



PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.



Developing...
 
Hey Winex.



You got any kids ? I am going to guess the answer is NO.



You want to talk about something this trivial while the economy is

sinking like the Titanic. Keep moving around those deck chairs

and singing with the band while the water swirls around your eyes.



Birth Control. How weak.

Lets make the poor have more children. Good Plan.
 
It's fun to watch trrenter and winex be all butt hurt because thier guys don't get to drive anymore, and the new guys are driving away from where the old guys wanted to go ASAP.



Fun but not satisfying.



<img src="http://www.jazzage1920s.com/paulspecht/images/sm-satisfied-1929.jpg" alt="" />
 
[quote author="WINEX" date=1233001925]<a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flashpbc.htm">Pelosi defends adding funds for birth control to stimulous bill</a>



PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Sun Jan 25 2009 22:13:43 ET



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic "stimulus" package, claiming "contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."



Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, "Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a mom," seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.



The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC's THIS WEEK.



STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?



PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.



STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?



PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.



Developing...</blockquote>


You need to listen to <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99871329">this</a> to understand how this stimulus plan will work.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1233022324]It's fun to watch trrenter and winex be all butt hurt because thier guys don't get to drive anymore, and the new guys are driving away from where the old guys wanted to go ASAP.



Fun but not satisfying.



<img src="http://www.jazzage1920s.com/paulspecht/images/sm-satisfied-1929.jpg" alt="" /></blockquote>


Now I am hurt I thought I was on your ignore list. I thought that would be a good place since you <strong>ignore</strong> most of my points.



You must have missed this <strong>I was opposed to Bush?s stimulus and now I am certainly opposed to this. I was also opposed to Bush?s tax cuts while we were at war with Iraq. (don?t want to debate the war just pointing out I was critical of those decesions as well). I was also opposed to Tarp.



So my oposition is to the Stimulus not Obama.</strong>



My stance has remained the same across the board. Again another one of your pithy condescending comments that don't answer any point really.



I will make it clear to you. I think the <strong>entire government</strong> was drunk at the wheel. I am not dolling out blame for this to one party because both parties are to blame. Unfortunately it looks like the <strong>entire government</strong> may still be drunk at the wheel.



You continue to make your little comments as if I am a Right Wing Conservative Aplogist when in all actuallity I am critical of our entire government at this point. Republicans and Democrats alike.



I am not bitter or sad that Obama won. When McCain announced he wanted to reduce the balances of mortgages he lost my support. Oh and if he was elected and tried to push that dumb a@@ plan I would be right here posting on how stupid that was.



So you may continue down your same line that everything I say is "sour grapes" but if we can bash The Bush stimulus check and Tarp I think we should be able to bash this stimulus plan.



This plan which admittedly does not do much stimulating in the short term.



Instead of going full steam ahead in another direction lets find out if it is the right direction!!!



NoVas I will wave to you next time I drive by the Church of Obama you must attend.
 
<em>"because everything the government is doing now is going to make the situation much, much worse. They're trying to reflate this bubble. All along I knew that what would potentially be fatal wasn't the recession itself but the government's response. But what they've already done exceeds even my worst-case imagination." </em>

Peter Schiff
 
<em>"Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take on more and more expensive debt, until their debt becomes unbearable.



The unpaid debt will lead to the bankruptcy of all banks, which will have to be nationalised, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism.?</em>



- Karl Marx
 
[quote author="green_cactus" date=1233024257][quote author="WINEX" date=1233001925]<a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flashpbc.htm">Pelosi defends adding funds for birth control to stimulous bill</a>



PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Sun Jan 25 2009 22:13:43 ET



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic "stimulus" package, claiming "contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."



Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, "Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a mom," seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.



The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC's THIS WEEK.



STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?



PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.



STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?



PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.



Developing...</blockquote>


You need to listen to <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99871329">this</a> to understand how this stimulus plan will work.</blockquote>


I need to forget anything I ever learned about economics to understand the logic of the Democrats stimulus plan.
 
Winex

That should not take too long for you. LOL



The Stimulus Plan will not fix the Economy. Agreed.

We need to go through the necessary pain of bottoming out.

Now what thats going to do to the Banks, Auto Makers, Equity Markets

is going to be very ugly indeed. Never mind the Real Estate markets.

We are going to go through a "Depression" in the classic sense it appears.



The never ending spiral of borrowing and deficits at some point in time

cannot be sustained. But for know we will throw more debt/money at the problem

and see what happens ? Its a forgone conclusion the stimulus will be passed.

You forget the GOP basically is a shell of its former self in the Congress

and has been eliminated from the Executive Branch. Game Over.



Personally I think the situation here in California is a version

of the same philosopy in a smaller case.

California is now unable to borrow anymore and looks to be in the more advanced

stages of the process. Can you imagine if the Feds decided to keep your Tax Refund

or send you an IOU? How about holding pay on the Military ? California is going to

go bust. Lets hope the Federal Government does not do the same.
 
This is pretty interesting. You can see the distribution of the stimilus package by state and by program such as infastructure, education etc. California is pretty red throughout except infastructure.



<a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-STIMULUS0109.html">Stimulus Distribution by State and Program</a>
 
WSJ has an article showing some of the details of what is included in the $825 billion. The article is titled: "A 40-Year Wish List - You won't believe what's in that stimulus bill."



"We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons"



"by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus."



"Congress wants to spend $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles. Congress also wants to spend $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities. The Smithsonian is targeted to receive $150 million; we love the Smithsonian, too, but this is a job creator?"



"Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators."



Here is the link if you have access to WSJ:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html
 
[quote author="irvine123" date=1233210489]WSJ has an article showing some of the details of what is included in the $825 billion. The article is titled: "A 40-Year Wish List - You won't believe what's in that stimulus bill."



"We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons"



"by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus."



Here is the link if you have access to WSJ:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html</blockquote>


<img src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51osJfNd5-L._SL500_AA240_.jpg" alt="" />



Here is a book for Congress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top