Monday, February 09, 2009

U.S. Taxpayers Risk $9.7 Trillion on Bailout Programs

Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- The stimulus package the U.S. Congress is completing would raise the government’s commitment to solving the financial crisis to $9.7 trillion, enough to pay off more than 90 percent of the nation’s home mortgages.

NINE POINT SEVEN TRILLION.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

I have a great fucking idea then. Pay off all the existing mortgages instead of the bullshit in that piece of garbage spending bill.

Anonymous said...

DITTO!

Anonymous said...

Isn't Nancy just great? And her new best BFF Barack.

UFB

Rose said...

All you can figure is money doesn't mean anything anymore. It's all just an illusion. All the time you've been being responsible, why?

Or you could think about the people you've been electing. In theory they should be the best and the brightest. You trust them to manage budgets, manage the money you give them, and to be good stewards.

Right now you see them spending money like drunken monkeys, incapable of examining and analyzing the programs they are funding because it is all being done at breakneck speed.

They don't want you to know what they are doing. They don't want to take the time because they know you will say NO! STOP! THINK!

Therefore the great urgency.

And you let them piss away your children's future.

Mike Thompson. Barbara Boxer. Diane Feinstein.

May their names live in infamy.

Anonymous said...

Sen. John McCain is firing back at President Barack Obama after Republicans were mocked by the president last week for their resistance to the huge spending in the stimulus package.

“What do you think a stimulus is? That’s the whole point,’’ Obama said in a fiery speech to House Democrats Thursday night. “No, seriously, that’s the point.”

Now McCain is explaining what the “whole point” is.

“The whole point, Mr. President, is to enact tax cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy,” McCain said during a Senate speech Friday. “There are billions and tens of billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within three, four, five or more years, or ever. Or ever.”

Anonymous said...

One bad thing about paying off all the mortgages, think about it - you might get somewhere between $30,000 and $400,000 if you owe on homes around here.

But imagine what John Kerry and Al Gore will get. I'm sure they'll take it too. I can't imagine they would, for once, put their money where their mouths are, and refuse it - and say they can make it on their own, donate that money back into the treasury.

For that matter - has ONE SENATOR OR CONGRESSMAN cut back on any of their perks? Given up their salary? Decided they could cover their own transportation? (Drive themselves to work like Tom Daschle pretended he does)? Offered to pay their own health care?

They don't give a flying fig about cutting back, saving money or living within the government's means.

Anonymous said...

The fiscal stimulus bill being debated in Congress not only won't help the economy, it will make the recession much worse, says Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital.
Schiff scoffs at the notion the economic decline is starting to level off and concedes no government action means a "terrible" recession. But the path of increased government intervention will lead to "unmitigated disaster," says Schiff, who gained notoriety in 2007-08 for his prescient calls on the housing bubble and U.S. stocks.

mresquan said...

And to think that Obama had such a huge surplus upon his inauguration.So may people were right in saying that the Bush administration was a prime example of what cautionary spending is.George needs to be appointed sainthood tomorrow.A huge surplus upon his departure,now only weeks later,we're in massive debt.

"Bob" said...

"There are others who recognize that we've got to do a significant recovery package, but they're concerned about the mix of what's in there. And if they're sincere about it, then I'm happy to have conversations about this tax cut versus that -- that tax cut or this infrastructure project versus that infrastructure project.

But what I've been concerned about is some of the language that's been used suggesting that this is full of pork and this is wasteful government spending, so on and so forth.

First of all, when I hear that from folks who presided over a doubling of the national debt, then, you know, I just want them to not engage in some revisionist history. I inherited the deficit that we have right now and the economic crisis that we have right now."

Anonymous said...

I didn't vote for him, or Nancy, or Barbara.

I read the first 80 pages or so. There is soooooo much BS. The only reason they're pushing this so hard is they don't want non politicians to read it and see that's it's just all the dream crap Nancy and her ilk have been trying to shove up our collective asses for the past 15 to 20 years.

I won't vote for any politician that votes yes on this one. Or speaks in favor of it.

Rose said...

So, Bob, here's a comment from another blog that sort of addresses your point...

"Obama’s attacks on the Bush administration were equally silly:

(Obama says) First of all, when I hear that from folks who presided over a doubling of the national debt, then, you know, I just want them to not engage in some revisionist history. I inherited the deficit that we have right now and the economic crisis that we have right now.

Right. And that’s why his first act as President is to double or triple the deficit? Why, then, doesn’t he say that the Bush administration was following the right policies, only needed to go farther? Likewise with his claim that the “failed” policy of the past was to rely only on tax cuts. Actually, the Bush administration also increased spending greatly, just as Obama now proposes. And since, as Obama told us a couple of days ago, all spending equals stimulus, isn’t he once again emulating the policies of his predecessor, only carrying them to a new level?"


He says it better than I can.

There's no PLAN here. A PLAN requires some thought, some analysis, it requires identifying the problem, the root of the problem, this is a RUSH to the end.

Rose said...

Here's another one, Bob:. something on which I think we can all agree - "At the end of the day, it all comes down to what you believe. And here are five few simple things I expect no matter who’s in charge:

I expect my elected officials to read the bills before they sign them.

I don’t want to hear anyone say “it’s not perfect” and “I know it’s flawed” when you’re asking for $1 TRILLION from me and my fellow taxpayers…and $1 TRILLION we need to borrow from someone else in the first place.

I have a right to know how my tax money is being spent, and am entitled to expect each of my 537 elected officials to justify it.

I don’t want it done fast, I want it done right. For $1 TRILLION, you can take an extra week instead of sticking to arbitrary deadlines.

I’m not impressed by scare tactics, using children as human shields, or dismissing my difference of opinion as me being too stupid to know any better.

So yeah, when we’re on the brink of a bill that is going to cost over $1 TRILLION to allegedly save or create jobs - when it doesn’t seem to do anything to save my job, help my employer help me save my job, help my friends and family save their jobs, or help their employers save their jobs (none of us are union and/or in construction) - and I don’t feel my President and the people voting to pass this bill have done enough to answer these five simple concerns, I get to disagree regardless of what others in my party have said in the past."

mresquan said...

"A PLAN requires some thought, some analysis, it requires identifying the problem, the root of the problem, this is a RUSH to the end."

The root of the problem is excessive military spending,continued funding of the paramilitary C.I.A.,membership in the U.N.,subservience to Halliburton and KBR,and most importantly,subservience to the Fed Reserve,The Bank of London,and the Vatican.
Until we break these ties,we're all indebted.

Rose said...

wrong.

Anonymous said...

Mark Konkler should really quit drinking the KoolAid and the pot-butter pancakes over at the DUHC house and grow up.

US dues to the UN are tiddly-winks compared to the massive expenditures on the Medicare system and the prescription drug giveaway (agreed to by BOTH Bush and the Congressional Dems, no angels here), as well as service on the debt.

Last I heard, we don't give foreign aid to London or the Vatican.

Dude, get a grip.

lunatic fringe said...

Mresquan, oh how I wish that was the root of the problem, I'd feel a lot better.

mresquan said...

"Last I heard, we don't give foreign aid to London or the Vatican."

We give them soldiers.

"compared to the massive expenditures on the Medicare system and the prescription drug giveaway (agreed to by BOTH Bush and the Congressional Dems, no angels here), as well as service on the debt."

Certainly it is a problem,but not the root of them,it's sort of a side effect.Wait until we further "westernize" and implement the Hillary/Obama version of universal health care.

Rose said...

Order now.

.amazon.com/No-Such-Thing-As-Doomsday

And HOPE and pray Soros and Buffet have a plan to pull the rabbit out of the hat.