Monday, May 11, 2009

Money Money Money


The economy has been showing signs of turning around and yet only a small percentage of the funds from the Reinvestment and Recovery Act have actually been spent. The economy has been turning around on its own as the banks and mortgage industry are slowly trying to get their act together. So why did we appropriate billions of dollars and tack on 780 billion extra dollars to our national debt if it wasn't going to matter anyway? A better question is why are we still going to allow all of that money to be spent if the economy is already getting better on its own? Most of this money won't even be spent until 2010, and most economists are saying our GDP might be back into the black as soon as the third or fourth quarter of this year.

Additionally, with the current proposed budget, our government will have to borrow 50% of every dollar they spend. Meaning they are spending twice what they take in. Pretend you make $50,000 a year at your job, but spend $100,000 a year to live. You're living well beyond your means just like our government. We absolutely have to address failing banks, a broken health care system, global warming, etc..., but we cannot afford to tackle all of these problems at once nor can we afford the cost. We have to strategically go after each of these problems and create solutions that are smart and affordable. The only solutions currently proposed are all the same, throw money at the problem. True reform does not necessarily have to cost more money, it could just be changing the way our system works. Reforming how we regulate lobbyists, banks, and pharmaceutical companies. Not every solution has to come with a fancy program name and be allotted an annual budget of billions of dollars. Why can't we just fix the system we have instead of continually making new departments and making the government even bigger than it already is?

GM is on the verge of bankruptcy. I'll say this one more time, let them go under. If a company cannot turn a profit then they need to close their doors. Whether it's because of labor costs or a broken business model, it doesn't matter. A company cannot perpetually operate in the red. It's just unfortunate that we had to waste tons of money trying to keep them afloat until finally they came to the same conclusion that people with any common sense have, which is that they need to declare Chapter 11 and either reorganize into a profitable company or close its doors forever. I would love to see America back on top of the car industry, but that is not going to happen by our government propping up crappy companies nor taking them over. If there is a demand in this country for cars to be produced and sold locally then someone with a vision will start a new kind of car company and fill that niche. The dinosaur car companies like GM and Chrysler lost their edge and failed to stay current with the market trends so now they have to pay the price. I hope that some day, people with a great new idea wanting to make some money will start a car company. And if it is a good product I will buy it. But you can't expect people in this country to continue buying crappy products soley in the name of patriotism.
Call your Congressman, tell them to 1. Stop the spending and 2. Balance the budget.

12 comments:

  1. Sounds to me like someone should introduce the US government to Efusjon to get us out of this mess. At the very least they're only out like a couple hundred bucks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. See, now that's the kind of "outside of the box" thinking we need for our current mess. Why do we need to spend billions upon billions of dollars when we could invest only $100-200 a month and potentially make $600,000 a month. And just think, if every single one of our politicans participated and started their own downlines then the profit would really start to add up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JB - Let me know once you get more people and I'll add them to the JB downline counter on the left

    ReplyDelete
  4. What if we coupled Justin's kill of the bottom 10% of the population idea (or whatever is was) with the Efusjon plan to get us out of debt. The government would pick their best salesman to convince all of the bottom 10% of America to get on board with Efusjon. In time the government would scam them out of all their money and leave them to rot in the streets drinking nothing but Efusjon until they have heart attacks and die. Justin, you can't tell me this isn't a good idea. I dare you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. First, we have to spend the money...the government does not do "Go Backs". So I support putting the United States Government under JB for Efusjon. Now because so many people are going to be hyped up on energy the economy will boom due to productivity. Also, do to use bring the United States to JB, I think she should get a piece of the pyramid pie.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jake, If I am reading your post correctly you are against government spending and corporate bailouts? I'm surprised you were able to keep that under wraps for so long.

    I don't think it's fair to say that the recovery act hasn't made an impact on the turnaround in our economy, if you can even call it that. The two biggest factors to the turnaround thus far have been the stabilization of the bank and mortgage industry and consumer confidence, and one could argue both have been affected by Obama's recovery plan. Even money that hasn't been spent yet could have already made an impact as expectations are a big player in the market and the economy. This is just one of those issues that depending on your position, you can see the same thing differently.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Brett- I know, my stance is shocking huh? I agree and think that is a good point. Much of the recovery is based on consumer confidence and speculation. Once people think things are getting better, they start spending again and booya, self-fulling prophecy.

    But now that things are appearing to turn around, wouldn't the Administration calling back some of the TARP money be appropriate? If they called back some of the money, it would continue to support the idea that our economy is getting stronger and the extra money isn't needed. That in turn would provide even more consumer confidence. But more importantly, that money could be used to pay down some of our nation's debt and help get this year's budget closer to balanced.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yeah, I agree with that...but good luck convincing them. The thing is a lot of that money is going to things that are not even related to stimulating the economy. A lot of that money is budgeted for education, health care, and energy reform.

    This is a tough one for me because I do think that our country has serious issues with all three of these things, but I'm not convinced they can be solved with Obama's plans, maybe with the exception of energy. I like his energy plan.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Or perhaps they could take the money back and replace all of the money that has been stolen from our Social Security fund.

    The money is budgeted for those things you listed, but it's money we don't have. I'm all for spending money on things like that (instead of interest on borrowing more money or on more wars), but it has to be in moderation and fit within our budget.

    I'm not sure how I feel about a carbon tax or cap and trade system. I like the intention and goal of those things, but usually when the government imposes more taxes, they end up getting passed along to the consumer.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Efusjon! Plants crave it!!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. At work. I Don't have time to really comment, but I do have time to make you laugh.

    http://www.theonion.com/content/news/chicken_shit_asteroid_veers_away?utm_source=a-section

    ReplyDelete