How would YOU stimulate the economy?

Discussion in 'The Loafing Shed' started by Tbitt, Feb 5, 2009.

  1. Tbitt

    Tbitt Most beloved member of MW

    So, ya.....this Stimulus (sp?) bill...........

    What do I think will work best for the economy? Something that will make the every day person (the ones who actually spend money, buying goods, eating out, contracting services...entertaining ourselves....) feel safe.

    My plan:

    This stimulus package should pay off our mortgages.
    Give us our houses free and clear. BUT with stipulations.

    By relieving our biggest burden, and removing the fear of loosing the most important thing to us, we will become freer to start contracting out those services again, buying new, needed, items. And maybe, just maybe going out to dinner again.

    The stipulations would be:
    a)This house could NEVER be mortgaged again for more than 30% of the total value of the house with at cap set at 50K.

    b)But these loans can NOT be taken out for more than 10K at a time!

    b.1) AND they can only be used for improvements/upkeep on the house (which will have strict rules to follow)
    b.2) OR for a lump sum (10K) to be sent to the educational institution that your child just graduated from.

    c)This house can NEVER be used as collateral!!!!!!!!

    Same thing for Business owners but only for buildings strictly used for that business. (No paying off of the nephew's garage (or your shed) as a home base for you "business")

    The same stipulations would be set, but the total would max out at 80K and the increments would be 20K

    The loans would be a bit more lenient business demands only (again the will NOT be allowed to borrow against a trucking business to purchase a Saturn, motorcycle or a new stove)

    When you sell this previously "Governmental paid off" house/business. The new money goes 100% into a new business or house.

    Your new stipulations will be set at your new houses/business' value.

    If you are not putting this money back into a new house or business you will pay a penalty. And it will not be a small one 80 % of the Original "paid off total"

    Do you think this will work? How do I get this to the new Prez?
  2. lori

    lori New Member

    Nooo!!! I love my big fat mortgage interest tax deduction!

  3. Tbitt

    Tbitt Most beloved member of MW

    Well then - no stimulus money for you...........................Sucka
  4. BUC

    BUC Administrator

    I think the whole stimulus plan should be axed. It makes no sense to me to give money out to ourselves that we have to pay for in the long run. I think this is a reality check that people have been living beyond their means and not taking responsibility for their own actions for to long.

    The economy has to level itself out, it always does. We've been here before but it will take a worse turn this time because of irresponsibility on our own part, no one else's.

    In light of what's already came out on the bail out money we've already handed out, I believe those institutions should have to relinquish the money and fail.

    Yeah I know under my plan things would really suck...but when does accountability start?

    The media should also be forced to do nothing but put out good news for 24 hours, skip the doom and gloom. That would stimulate the economy more than anything.
  5. lori

    lori New Member

    You little Keynesian economist you.

    It's my favorite theory too. But mostly because that's what says stimulus/tax rebate checks to individuals will stimulate the economy and that people spending on consumer goods is a good thing--it's justification for buying stuff!
  6. Tbitt

    Tbitt Most beloved member of MW

    BUC - I agree with you 100%.

    But if they insist on giving out this money - I want it to go to the people who it will help the most - I don't understand giving our millions to help a select few, when you could be giving out the same millions and helping our 10s of thousands of people...............

    I love this:

  7. JenR

    JenR Formerly Underworld Queen

    Our economy is actually in better shape than it was during the period from 1974 - 1982.
    However, the biggest problem we have now is a government that is hell bent on "fixing" the "collapse" (that the media trumpets about daily), and bingo, talk about a new Great Depression enough and you will see it into being. Of course, that's a great way for a government to seize more centralized power (we came very close to socialism/communism under FDR, that little tidbit is often left out of the history books. and should be something we all keep in the back of our minds imho).

    No mortgage stimulus and no more PC lending being forced onto banks -- that's one of the things that got us into this mess. Sometimes the truth is tough to take: some people are poor mortgage risks and some people live way too far over their heads, since when do we promise them "equal and fair" to be allowed to default or live beyond their means? If anything, cut some of the social programs (yes, bad, bad, the people are suffering -- I do feel for them, but this isn't about personal feelings here).
    Same goes for companies -- the UAW and the Big Three have been dead men walking for decades now -- either they cut the dross or they go under (and are perhaps replaced by companies that know how to be competitive, same with workforces). Tax cuts for new business and companies that have a proven record of being competitive. If the government must impose sanctions, then sanction against wasteful spending and pork.
    Allow for the exploration of energy supply and development in this country -- sorry environmentalists, but if it comes to people having jobs and being able to afford to live or a spotted owl, I have to pick the people as I am one. Besides, the whole eco-nazi Church of the AlGoracle doesn't seem to be the truth after all. By all means research better, more ecologically sound energy production methods -- but don't let gas go up to $4 again (which by the trends it very well will by the end of 09).
    Get rid of that idiot PETA ideologue in the DoI as well (but maybe that's a personal bias).
    For God's sake lose the "Buy American" protectionism -- that worked wonderfully in 1932 (see above comments). This is a global problem -- national protectionism and incumbent trade war won't help things. It also won't help in the long run -- what will help in the long run is a competitive product from a skilled, competive work force -- which means our schools have got to quit being multi-culti, pc, feel good daycares cranking out stupid kids, which means the stupid kids are just going to have to face the fact that they aren't going to all be doctors, lawyers, or sport stars and nobody ever promised them they could be.
    Realize that economic ebbs, tides, bubbles, valleys are the way it works -- we're coming off a growth period, things were going to slow down for a while; we're also going through a population dynamic shift -- the housing market was going to go down. What's needed is no panic and let things adjust -- but oh hell noes! We have opted (globally) for a nice bout of Chicken Little -- and we've got folks like Pelosi and Reid and Frank and Dodd calling the shots on this (might want to check those folks out vis a vis this mess and their agendas/characters). So now in trying to avoid, we call it on ourselves. Which leaves us with the other way to stimulate the economy:

    When in doubt, get into a big, nasty, frakking war (the one we're in right now isn't enough, it's pretty small) -- say with like, Russia and her allies (which might well be some interesting switch hitters who we thought we could rely on).
    We'll have to gear up our industrial and agricultural output or we lose ; We'll have to fix issues with our transportation infastructure, or we'll lose; we'll have to throw a lot of effort into new tech or we'll lose; we'll have to institue a draft because we'll be killing off a lot of people and if we don't throw it all up there we lose (fixes job competition!!!! housing will be more affordable too!!).

    Worked for FDR...
  8. syndiego

    syndiego New Member

    I wish Washington would do NOTHING, and just get the HELL out of the way. What is printing money and spending it (on wonderful things such as bike paths and the Smithsonian) going to do besides mortgage the future of the next generation? They say that FDR's New Deal, if anything, prolonged the Depression.

    And whatever happened to the Payroll Tax Holiday bill. I thought it had merit.

    There was actually a "well hidden" news story the other day that the housing market was showing signs of strengthening. Did anyone see it? I doubt it, I only heard it on conservative talk radio. God Forbid, the Dem's in Washington don't want us to hear good news, and the media is in bed with them. Today's Dow is up because of positive signs in the financial sector. What will that be, a 5 second story buried in the 6 o'clock news, if it even gets that much coverage?

    No, they must keep us scared to death, so that the public will beg them to spend the money. George Will had an analogy of the rich guy with a chicken bone caught in his throat. He went to a Dr to have it extracted. Once it was out, the man asked the Dr. what he owed. The Dr said, pay me 1/2 of whatever you would have spent while the bone was still in your throat. Of course, the man would have paid ANYTHING at that point!

    I'm done. In the immortal words of our leader, we are fucked
  9. pinp

    pinp New Member

    good old fashioned foreplay. ;D
  10. JenR

    JenR Formerly Underworld Queen

    Here's an interesting quote on just this very stimulus-y thingymabobby:

    CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul
    Stephen Dinan (Contact)
    Wednesday, February 4, 2009

    President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

    CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

    CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.

    The House last week passed a bill totaling about $820 billion while the Senate is working on a proposal reaching about $900 billion in spending increases and tax cuts.

    But Republicans and some moderate Democrats have balked at the size of the bill and at some of the spending items included in it, arguing they won't produce immediate jobs, which is the stated goal of the bill.

    The budget office had previously estimated service the debt due to the new spending could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost of the bill -- forcing the crowd-out.

    CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.

    CBO said there is no crowding out in the short term, so the plan would succeed in boosting growth in 2009 and 2010.

    The agency projected the Senate bill would produce between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent higher growth in 2009 than if there was no action. For 2010, the plan would boost growth by 1.2 percent to 3.6 percent.

    CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.

    From the Washington Times
  11. syndiego

    syndiego New Member

    Between this, and Dick Cheney's words yesterday about how reckless the new admin is being with our national security, I am about ready to slit my wrists. No kidding, someone say something to put a positive spin on something, anything! (and it BETTER not be YES WE CAN)

    I'm might just have to quit following the news for my own sanity. At least ignorance will be bliss until we get blown to bits.
  12. JenR

    JenR Formerly Underworld Queen

    You might want to stay away from sharp things while reading this then:

    Home / Animal Rights / Headlines

    January 15, 2009

    Exposed: The Secret Animal Rights Agenda Of America's Next Regulatory Czar

    Barack Obama's pick for "regulatory czar," Harvard Law School Professor Cass Sunstein, may be the incoming president's most popular appointment so far. Judging from his resume -- best-selling author, "pre-eminent legal scholar of our time," and an endorsement from The Wall Street Journal -- we can almost understand why. Almost. Because as we're telling the media today, there's one troubling portion of the new Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator's C.V. that has seems to have flown under everyone's radar: Cass Sunstein is a radical animal rights activist.

    Don't believe us? Sunstein has made no secret of his devotion to the cause of establishing legal "rights" for livestock, wildlife, and pets. "[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, scientific experiments, and agriculture," Sunstein wrote in a 2002 working paper while at the University of Chicago Law school.

    "Extensive regulation of the use of animals." That's PETA-speak for using government to get everything PETA and the Humane Society of the United States can't get through gentle pressure or not-so-gentle coercion. Not exactly the kind of thing American ranchers, restaurateurs, hunters, and biomedical researchers (to say nothing of ordinary consumers) would like to hear from their next "regulatory czar."

    A version of the same paper also appeared as the introduction to Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, a 2004 book that Sunstein co-edited with then-girlfriend Martha Nussbaum. In that book, Sunstein set out an ambitious plan to give animals the legal "right" to file lawsuits. We're not joking:

    "[A]nimals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law ... Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients' behalf."

    It doesn't end there. Sunstein delivered a keynote speech at Harvard University's 2007 "Facing Animals" conference. (Click here to watch the video; his speech starts around 39:00.) Keep in mind that as OIRA Administrator, Sunstein will have the political authority to implement a massive federal government overhaul. Consider this tidbit:

    "We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn't a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It's time now."

    Sunstein also argued in favor of "eliminating current practices such as greyhound racing, cosmetic testing, and meat eating, most controversially."

    He concluded his Harvard speech by expressing his "more ambitious animating concern" that the current treatment of livestock and other animals should be considered "a form of unconscionable barbarity not the same as, but in many ways morally akin to, slavery and mass extermination of human beings." Sound familiar?

    As the individual about to assume "the most important position that Americans know nothing about," Sunstein owes the public an honest appraisal of his animal rights goals before taking office. Will the next four years be a dream-come-true for anti-meat, anti-hunting, and anti-everything-else radicals? Time will tell. For now, meat lovers might want to stock their freezers.

    In fact, I think this might be something every animal owner should perhaps ponder -- it's going to be a loooonnnggg four years.

    It's not reading in its entirety -- and it should be read in its entirety. Here's the linky:
  13. JenR

    JenR Formerly Underworld Queen

  14. syndiego

    syndiego New Member

  15. Mass

    Mass Senior Member and Masscaster

    If they are going to give out 900 billion, it should go to the people. Maybe not to those who bit off more then they could chew, but there are a lot of people in my position, who FAR from live beyond their means, that could use the money and road construction jobs and all the pork in that "plan" isn't going to stimulate my economy at all.
  16. Shell

    Shell New Member

    How would I stimulate the economy?

    * I would bring back "our" jobs from over seas. Stopping so much foriegn trade going on. When something says it's made in America, it Means the entire product was made in America. No more buying from overseas and switching the labels. Or having a teennie weenie piece produced in America and lableing the whole product "made in a America", because it's being sold to the consumers in America.
    * Since we print our own money, more would be printed and distributed to those who deserve it. I know it's not as easy as that, I'm just putting it in a very short form and to the point.

    ??? * What happens to our money anyways? We pay into the system, someone screws up....where does it go from there? It's like it just disappears and then were told our country's in dept.

    * Maybe we need to get back to some basics and just using technology to keep us going.
    * Stop allowing companies to tax for every little thing. Stop the services charges, unless the consumer is at fault. I'm tired of companies digging in our pockets and taking our spare change so they can make more of a profit.
    * And not charge a service charge for paying a bill on time. It shouldn't matter if you pay online or send it through the mail.

    I've always been a consumer and this is how I think.
  17. JenR

    JenR Formerly Underworld Queen

    Well, printing more money will just drive inflation/devaluation -- so down the road we have a bigger crash than we have right now.
    And that's another reason why I don't want to see any money given out -- we don't have the money; in order to get the money we'd have to print more, and then see above.

    As for acting protectionist -- they're hinting at doing that too; plus sending shots at China for manipulating their currency. The EU, Japan, and China have all said they'll match tit for tat. A trade war is the last thing we need right now, and it isn't wise to piss off the country that owns all of your debt.

    The Russians are happy though. In the past two weeks they've been pushing through some very heavy agendas of their own -- I'm beginning to wonder if we're going to have an ally or at least favored trading partner left in two years.
    Oh, and as it looks right now -- Iraq is screwed, and so are our troops in Afghanistan.
    The Russians are really happy. Putin is smiling again. So I guess we've got that going for us.
  18. snaffle

    snaffle Guest

    I think we should all pay a 10% income tax all across the board.

    No exceptions... no deductions...

    10% for everyone
  19. cherokee

    cherokee New Member

    someone enlighten me please; How can our economy be in better shape now than
    back in the 74-82 ish period of time? I sure would like to know since now we have
    more people, prices on every day items have went up, the cost of vehicles, houses
    have went up and the unemployment rate has went up do to a number of things
    mainly shipping jobs over seas. So could someone please tell me how we can be in
    better shape now?
  20. syndiego

    syndiego New Member

    One of my huge peeves is when I hear the statement the "worst economic times since the Great Depression"

    Read this entire document on the Carter administration. It is not political commentary, it is factual statistics:

    Some highlights of the out-of-control inflation.

    Automobile prices up 72% between 1973-1979
    Gasoline up 60%
    Houses up 67%

    Overall inflation 1972 +6.8%, 1977 +7.6%, 1978 +11.5%, 1980 +12.4%

    That's only the economic troubles. Foreign affairs was another debacle. Definitely the worst President in my lifetime, possibly the worst ever. Although, project forward what Obama has been able to achieve in one month, and it promises to be a European socialist state. I don't think we'll recognize this country in 4 years.
    Hey, but the field mice in Nancy Pelosi's district got some fantastic news yesterday! One must focus on the silver lining.