Bob Foster brought this documentary, "I.O.U.S.A," to my attention. It will probably be the most sobering clip that you will ever see about the state of the United States economy. I was aghast at the findings. I think it should run three times a week on all TV outlets for a solid month during Prime Time. I just wished that I had watched it a bit earlier. It's nearly 1:40 AM and I'm afraid I will get no sleep tonight.
A few of the most awakening facts are even if we ended the war in Iraq, rolled back the Bush tax cuts, and eliminated earmarks and pork barrel spending, our problems will not be solved. Another very very sobering fact is the trade deficit. This is simply outrageous! We have become dead last among the nations of the world that are buying more than their selling. Not to mention what we are receiving are cheap goods. With a country as big and rich in intellect and resources, it is shameful that we have become indebted to paper shufflers and not innovated by product producers.
It is incredibly hypocritical that those who are screaming about the current deficit spending and continued tax cuts have presided over the largest deficit spending in our Country's history. Both the Reagan and Bush W administrations were the worst. Yet, we still hear the Republican leaders in Congress today railing for more of the same. This is insane. The deficit increased tremendously throughout the Reagan administration and we were not even in a war and I guess those tax cuts did not work as planned either.
There are so many outrageous things in this video that its simply mind boggling that we could have allowed ourselves to get here. Who could have ever thought that we could have two wars, tax cuts, and personal debt spending, and there not be a perfect storm? It was no secret why Secretary of State Clinton tread softly in China on human rights issues. China currently holds the largest denomination of our Treasury Securities.
We most certainly have had a leadership problem. To think that Paul O'Neill, the former Treasury Secretary, was asked to lie about his release because he told the Bush administration in 2002 the truth about our dire situation is a stunning omission, though perhaps for many not surprising in the least. President Bush and Vice-President Cheney be ashamed of their actions. Maybe that Truth and Reconciliation Commission is indeed necessary. I wonder who else was told to lie in many matters. Mr. O'Neill appeared too honorable for the former administration. I guess Secretary Paulson was more to their liking for whatever reason.
At the end of the documentary my question was not when we were going to get out of this crisis, but how. It is going to require the effort of everyone to emerge from this very serious deficit crisis. As friend of mine often says, "debt is like cancer; it kills." But we really must know how bad it really is. I knew we were in a major crisis, but not to this extent. This is apparently what the President was aware of and chided for. Others thought that his Inaugural Address and tone thereafter were too somber. Because President Obama is so hopeful, many could not help but to think that he was bracing us for something huge.
THIS IS HUGE!
Showing posts with label Stimulus Package. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stimulus Package. Show all posts
Friday, February 27, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Being a Grumpy Old Man II
In a post back in October I wrote of John McCain Being a Grumpy Old Man. It looks like the good Sentor may be even becoming grumpier. In an interview on Friday Bob Shrum said of McCain, "He is bitter and really angry. He is angry at the press, which he thinks is unfair. He is angry at Obama and angry at the voters. He has gone from being an angry old candidate to being an angry old defeated candidate."
I wonder when President Obama appears in his state of Arizona this week to talk about his plan for the nation's foreclosures, which are higher than most in Arizona, what his reaction will be. I wonder about this as Senator McCain had no plan to rectify the foreclosure situation in his state; instead, he bad mouthed the stimulus package which seeks to help homeowners facing such a crisis. From what I gather, Senator McCain will be in Arizona when the President is there this week but will not, as Republican Governor Crist of Florida, be with him onstage.
I wonder when President Obama appears in his state of Arizona this week to talk about his plan for the nation's foreclosures, which are higher than most in Arizona, what his reaction will be. I wonder about this as Senator McCain had no plan to rectify the foreclosure situation in his state; instead, he bad mouthed the stimulus package which seeks to help homeowners facing such a crisis. From what I gather, Senator McCain will be in Arizona when the President is there this week but will not, as Republican Governor Crist of Florida, be with him onstage.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Being in the Old Guard IV
"This bill is a honeypot," said Senator Pat Roberts on the Senate floor today. I must admit to laughing out loud when I heard this. "Honeypot?" Now, I must admit that I might be missing some historical context here, but it sounded like a breakfast cereal or some illicit name of street drug to me. Hmmm? Maybe the latter is the desired affect.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Being Arianna Huffington III
In a post today, Arianna Huffington wrote that President Obama has to chose between "bipartisanship fetishism vs. what's best for America." I could not agree more. I have written a lot here about the necessity of bipartisanship; but after last week I began to wonder if the effort itself was being turned into a political platform to negate the President's plan and to jockey already for 2012.
After adapting a Washington bipartisanship style of "going to the other party, splitting any differences you have, patting each other on the back about how nice and civil you are being, and moving on," it's now time to get down to business. President Obama must lead with the support of the people who have resoundingly voted for change in all branches of the federal government.
Watching the partisanship practiced in Washington last week, I began to feel sickened by the lack of respect for this particular time and the real difficulty that so many Americans now face. It seemed like the hooks were in and a wave was building that had little to do with the matter at hand and more to do with regaining power at the expense of President Obama's desire for bipartisanship. The President wised up quickly. I believe that he will chose what's best for America.
After adapting a Washington bipartisanship style of "going to the other party, splitting any differences you have, patting each other on the back about how nice and civil you are being, and moving on," it's now time to get down to business. President Obama must lead with the support of the people who have resoundingly voted for change in all branches of the federal government.
Watching the partisanship practiced in Washington last week, I began to feel sickened by the lack of respect for this particular time and the real difficulty that so many Americans now face. It seemed like the hooks were in and a wave was building that had little to do with the matter at hand and more to do with regaining power at the expense of President Obama's desire for bipartisanship. The President wised up quickly. I believe that he will chose what's best for America.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Being John McCain II
I must admit to laughing the entire time the honorable Senator McCain spoke on the Senate floor regarding his rejection of the stimulus package. Just remembering his antics during the campaign, especially voting for the TARP and suspending his campaign to return to Washington to fix the housing crisis, was very much on display here. I laughed. It seemed as if he was having flash backs. He rambled a bit and appeared somewhat unfocused. The list of "pork barrel" spending seemed to excite him as the billion dollar numbers eluded him. There was some confusion there. I have written here of his awesome comedic ability and I must say that I was reminded of it today.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Being for the Stimulus Package III
Some who are against the stimulus package are so because of an ill-conceived ideology that the poor will be living large on their hard earned dollar. There are a few business blogs that I follow and contribute to; Tom Peters' blog is on of these. Recently there in a discussion regarding President Obama's support of the $500,000 cap on CEOs whose companies receive a bailout, I told a commentator that the joke was on him for not supporting this initiative. He responded, "Judith you are correct to say that the joke's on me. Taking my money, at the point of a gun, and then turning around and handing it to people that haven't earned it is sad. Oh wait, they call that welfare and we have been that for a very long time. So instead of sending a millions dollars to 10,000 lazy people, we send it to one."
The commentator appears to be one of those dittoheads living in a fantasy land of the far Right who is tettering on a kind of poor folks and racist ideology that blankets welfare recipients as lazy when, in fact, many who receive some form of welfare are the working poor who pay taxes; the biggest flaw in your argument is your blinders which produce a kind of insipid ideology which does nothing to correct the problem but inflame it indeed. His comment is lame for its one-sidedness and handicap for its inability to embrace the whole. It's a shameful stupid comment.
Although living in England, he seems to have been listening to Limbaugh and other extreme right comedic pseudo politicians who inflame instead of inviting, who blame instead of understanding, who are full of themselves who actually berate average guys, doping them into believing that he is speaking for them as they find relief in fantasy while being barely able to pay their gas bills. As they struggle to pay their bills, Limbaugh laughs all the way to the bank. (It's sort of like the new leader of the Republican Party, Joe the Plumber, speaking out against policies that he himself would benefit from. But in his mind he and Limbaugh are on the same level. Right! He too is a joke.) We do not need more of that inane ideology.
This is, in part, the fantasy about which I speak. Yes, we can spend billions upon billions on Wall Street banks and no money for the little guy, even that ideological one who is just at the poverty line, listening and laughing to the likes of Limbaugh. Well, I guess, at least, they can laugh. But many of them need to be crying. Escapism is a serious drug. Yes, we should strip away wasteful spending but tax cuts alone have not helped the working poor and neither have the trickled down laissez-faire economics without corporate responsibility.
These are extremely difficult times. I hope that he will not find himself on the dole after a while. During the Depression a great many very wealthy prosperous people found themselves without and needing the support of the government. (Nassim Nicholas Taleb says that the very wealthy have been hurt the most by this crisis.) Many stood in soup lines; many jumped out of buildings to their deaths. One bad investment could ruin a great many people in these difficult times. It is no time for stupid insipid ideological comments. This stuff is for real. Yes, we need to get things right, but let's not overlook the real problem that America and the whole world faces right now. Let's focus long-term and short-term stimuli, such as infrastructure, green technologies, education, and welfare reform. But we need a shot of some form of stimulus right now.
By the way, the commentator has done right to call what we are doing welfare; I have written of this repeatedly on this blog and on the Huffington Post. It is not called welfare when big corporations are in need of assistance. But when the single mother needs assistance to care for her children, even when she is working, it is despairingly labeled as welfare. No amount of welfare already received by the thousand and thousands of mothers across this great country will add up to the many billions that we have already spent on bailouts for private industries. I'm not complaining. But tax cuts alone will not do it. We've been there and done that. Look at where we now are after 25 years.
If he said anything of value it is his proper labeling of what we are actually doing here. These companies are receiving welfare. I know that some might say that the difference is that we will be paid back with interest. This is our hope. We also hope that the single mother would be able to make things right and be able to one day pay taxes. We also hope that her children will also rise up and call her blessed and seek ways out of the hills of Tennessee or the ghetto of urban America and be contributing citizens to this great country that we all love. Now, if someone can only open his head and pour therein a touch of sensitivity and reality that would be good. Good luck to the one who seeks to do this.
As Warren Buffett, Donald Trump, Paul Krugman and many other economists on the Right and Left, I am in support of the stimulus package.
The commentator appears to be one of those dittoheads living in a fantasy land of the far Right who is tettering on a kind of poor folks and racist ideology that blankets welfare recipients as lazy when, in fact, many who receive some form of welfare are the working poor who pay taxes; the biggest flaw in your argument is your blinders which produce a kind of insipid ideology which does nothing to correct the problem but inflame it indeed. His comment is lame for its one-sidedness and handicap for its inability to embrace the whole. It's a shameful stupid comment.
Although living in England, he seems to have been listening to Limbaugh and other extreme right comedic pseudo politicians who inflame instead of inviting, who blame instead of understanding, who are full of themselves who actually berate average guys, doping them into believing that he is speaking for them as they find relief in fantasy while being barely able to pay their gas bills. As they struggle to pay their bills, Limbaugh laughs all the way to the bank. (It's sort of like the new leader of the Republican Party, Joe the Plumber, speaking out against policies that he himself would benefit from. But in his mind he and Limbaugh are on the same level. Right! He too is a joke.) We do not need more of that inane ideology.
This is, in part, the fantasy about which I speak. Yes, we can spend billions upon billions on Wall Street banks and no money for the little guy, even that ideological one who is just at the poverty line, listening and laughing to the likes of Limbaugh. Well, I guess, at least, they can laugh. But many of them need to be crying. Escapism is a serious drug. Yes, we should strip away wasteful spending but tax cuts alone have not helped the working poor and neither have the trickled down laissez-faire economics without corporate responsibility.
These are extremely difficult times. I hope that he will not find himself on the dole after a while. During the Depression a great many very wealthy prosperous people found themselves without and needing the support of the government. (Nassim Nicholas Taleb says that the very wealthy have been hurt the most by this crisis.) Many stood in soup lines; many jumped out of buildings to their deaths. One bad investment could ruin a great many people in these difficult times. It is no time for stupid insipid ideological comments. This stuff is for real. Yes, we need to get things right, but let's not overlook the real problem that America and the whole world faces right now. Let's focus long-term and short-term stimuli, such as infrastructure, green technologies, education, and welfare reform. But we need a shot of some form of stimulus right now.
By the way, the commentator has done right to call what we are doing welfare; I have written of this repeatedly on this blog and on the Huffington Post. It is not called welfare when big corporations are in need of assistance. But when the single mother needs assistance to care for her children, even when she is working, it is despairingly labeled as welfare. No amount of welfare already received by the thousand and thousands of mothers across this great country will add up to the many billions that we have already spent on bailouts for private industries. I'm not complaining. But tax cuts alone will not do it. We've been there and done that. Look at where we now are after 25 years.
If he said anything of value it is his proper labeling of what we are actually doing here. These companies are receiving welfare. I know that some might say that the difference is that we will be paid back with interest. This is our hope. We also hope that the single mother would be able to make things right and be able to one day pay taxes. We also hope that her children will also rise up and call her blessed and seek ways out of the hills of Tennessee or the ghetto of urban America and be contributing citizens to this great country that we all love. Now, if someone can only open his head and pour therein a touch of sensitivity and reality that would be good. Good luck to the one who seeks to do this.
As Warren Buffett, Donald Trump, Paul Krugman and many other economists on the Right and Left, I am in support of the stimulus package.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Being for the Stimulus Package II
It is not enough any longer, considering the incredible time our country now faces, for a political party to simply define itself by long held ideology without actually bringing something to the table. House Minority Leader John Boehner described the stimulus packaged as "big government boondoggle." Well, that's not going to cut it.
We need less rhetoric and more action. Any ideas? The whole idea of Democrats being for big government and Republicans being for business is archaic and farcical. If we have not had big government in the past 8 years, I do not know what we have had. President Obama has inherited $482 billion in the 2009 budget year. The reality is that there should be vigorous debate. But let's also create solutions, not simply offer ideology and criticism.
We need less rhetoric and more action. Any ideas? The whole idea of Democrats being for big government and Republicans being for business is archaic and farcical. If we have not had big government in the past 8 years, I do not know what we have had. President Obama has inherited $482 billion in the 2009 budget year. The reality is that there should be vigorous debate. But let's also create solutions, not simply offer ideology and criticism.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Being for the Stimulus Package
Susie Gharib interviewed Warren Buffett for an airing on Nightly Business Report and among other things, I found this quote particuarly interesting with regards to economists and the need to act now.
"Economists like to talk about it, but in the end they’ve been very, very wrong and most of them in recent years on this. We don’t know the perfect answers on it. What we do know is to stand by and do nothing is a terrible mistake or to follow Hoover-like policies would be a mistake and we don’t know how effective in the short run we don’t know how effective this will be and how quickly things will right themselves."
--Warren Buffett
President Obama's 100 hours have been a major push to get the economy moving with a multi-billion dollar stimulus package and tax cuts.
What are your thoughts?
"Economists like to talk about it, but in the end they’ve been very, very wrong and most of them in recent years on this. We don’t know the perfect answers on it. What we do know is to stand by and do nothing is a terrible mistake or to follow Hoover-like policies would be a mistake and we don’t know how effective in the short run we don’t know how effective this will be and how quickly things will right themselves."
--Warren Buffett
President Obama's 100 hours have been a major push to get the economy moving with a multi-billion dollar stimulus package and tax cuts.
What are your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)