Showing posts with label bailout. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bailout. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Dear Congressman Baird: tell me again why *I* should bail out other homeowners?

.
I checked my "in box" and found the following sitting in my bin, so to speak:

Help For Homeowners


Click here to sign up to receive my email updates

March 24, 2009

Dear Friends,

We're facing some of the most trying times since the Great Depression. Many families in Southwest Washington find themselves one mortgage payment away from disaster; you might be one of them. However, help is on the way.

President Obama has introduced his plan to assist homeowners with their mortgages during this economic downturn. The Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan will offer assistance to homeowners in Southwest Washington and across the country who are making a good faith effort to keep current with their mortgage payments.

You can learn more about President Obama's plan and find out if you qualify at the Department of Housing and Urban Development's page. You can also see a list of foreclosure avoidance counselors in Washington State by clicking here.

It's truly an honor to represent and serve you. If you ever need anything, or just want to let me know about an issue that concerns you, please feel free to contact my office.


Sincerely,
Rep. Brian Baird's signature

Congressman Brian Baird
Representing Washington's 3rd District


Forward this email to a friend

*
CONTACT MY OFFICES

*

Vancouver Office
O.O. Howard House
750 Anderson Street, Suite B
Vancouver, WA 98661
Phone: (360) 695-6292
Fax: (360) 695-6197

Olympia Office
120 Union Avenue, Suite 105
Olympia, WA 98501
Phone: (360) 352-9768
Fax: (360) 352-9241

Washington, D.C. Office
2350 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3536
Fax: (202) 225-3478



Nice piece of work. Now, Mr. Baird is my Congressman. He's had the job since 1998. I've had some concerns with how he uses his power, detailed here, here and here, among others.

Mr. Baird has voted for all of these programs and expenditures. No stranger to earmarks, Mr. Baird has taken particular pride in "bringing home the bacon" for the Downtown Vancouver Mafia.

That said, Mr. Baird, I've got to tell you: why is it again that *I* should use MY money to bail someone else out for YOUR political expedience?

I bought my home 3.5 years or so ago. We settled on a home at least one-half to 40% the cost we were pre-qualified for.

As a result, we aren't having any problem paying our still-substantial, but quite reasonable house-payment.

In arriving at this position, when we pre-qualified, we didn't lie about our income. We have pretty good credit. We didn't try to buy a mansion based on our income. We make our payments on time EVERY month.

Now, Mr. Baird... tell me again how it is that I bear ANY responsibility of ANY kind for those who lied about their income? Or got too greedy when it came to not having the income to support their house payment... or who received a mortgage not on their ability to pay... but instead, on their ability to breathe.

Why am I responsible for that?

And, as I gaze into the future that you and Our President have provided, where massive, bottomless deficits are the order of the day... how is it that *I* need to pay for the decisions and actions of OTHERS?
.

Monday, January 26, 2009

So... you feelin' bailed out, yet? CITI buying a $50 Million plane.

.
So, once more with the idiotic and massive waste of huge amounts of OUR money.

There's an excellent chance there would be no CITIgroup if the idiots on both sides of the aisle hadn't ratcheted up steam-shovels full of cash with few, if any strings attached.

Interfering with economic law when it gets a little uncomfortable has led us to this. With the spigot turned on and billions already wasted, the recipients of government largess already know that there's nothing at this point that government can do to reign these people in.

We are being abused. And so far, there is no particular reason for that abuse to stop.

The ball is in the democrats court generally, and Mr. Obama's court specifically.

But I doubt they'll do what has to be done, which is to stop this printing-press madness.



JUST PLANE DESPICABLE
'RESCUED' CITI BUYING $50M JET

By JENNIFER GOULD KEIL and CHUCK BENNETT

Last updated: 10:06 am
January 26, 2009
Posted: 1:02 am
January 26, 2009

Beleaguered Citigroup is upgrading its mile-high club with a brand-new $50 million corporate jet - only this time, it's the taxpayers who are getting screwed.

Even though the bank's stock is as cheap as a gallon of gas and it's burning through a $45 billion taxpayer-funded rescue, the airhead execs pushed through the purchase of a new Dassault Falcon 7X, according to a source familiar with the deal.

The French-made luxury jet seats up to 12 in a plush interior with leather seats, sofas and a customizable entertainment center, according to Dassault's sales literature. It can cruise 5,950 miles before refueling and has a top speed of 559 mph.

There are just nine of these top-of-the-line models in the United States, with Dassault's European factory churning out three to four 7Xs a month.

Citigroup decided to get its new wings two years ago, when the financial-services giant was flush with cash, but it still intends to take possession of the jet this year despite its current woes, the source said.

"Why should I help you when what you write will be used to the detriment of our company?" replied Bill McNamee, head of CitiFlight Inc., the subsidiary that manages Citigroup's corporate fleet, when asked to comment about the new 7X.

"What relevance does it have but to hurt my company?"

More:
.

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Leave it to the Icelanders: A simple plan to get us to agree to the Obama fiscal vision (Or as most realists put it, "Nightmare.")

.
I'm a cynic. Of course, anyone reading this blog for more than 30 seconds has already divined that factoid, but I admit it. Cynicism in this day and age of our MSM acting as if they all answer to the President's Press Secretary should, to a greater or lesser degree, become a component in us all.

I do not agree with Mr. Obama's bailout plan. I've been staunchly opposed to the scam known as TARP. The handling of the latter, wherein billions of our dollars were redistributed to banks; many of which have not, well, exactly chosen to use them as they were intended, has negatively impacted the former... and WHAT a surprise THAT has been, eh?

Meanwhile, President Obama is out there like a duck, outwardly placid but shilling his butt off to get congressional support for his latest fiscal fantasy, yet another trillion dollars to bury us with out here in the Hinterland.

Well, thanks to the fine folks in Iceland that have resigned, causing their government to fall (meaning new elections will be held to determine replacements... you've got to love a parliamentary, proportional representative system) I've come up with a way to get us to ALL agree to the Obama Plan.

The beauty of it is simple.

Our democrat-controlled government wants us generally, and Congress specifically, to support this massive, horrific waste of money. OK, fine: here's how it can be done.

1. Obama and the democrat leadership come out and explain, IN DETAIL, what the plan is... AND WHAT IT WILL ACCOMPLISH. By that end, I mean, where we'll be be in 6 months, 12 months, 18 months and so forth. That way, we will ALL get the chance to see if the plan is worthwhile, plus we'll have the advantage of being able to see in the future for purposes of financial stability.

"Where we'll be" to my mind means where interest rates will be, oil, home starts, employment, the stock market, 401k's, all retirement plans and the like, GDP and GDP growth and so forth will be if we do this plan, and what will happen if we don't using the same criteria. Obama's all ABOUT "transparency," right? (well, maybe he isn't, but STILL)

After all, our government HAS to know what the impacts will be... right? Otherwise, they're doing this just to do it, and THAT can't be true... can it?

2. When this passes... and if Obama and the democrat leadership (Obama, Biden, Clinton, Reid, Murtha, Pelosi, Emanuel, et al) are wrong, then they all resign from office.

That is, if they make these promises, and if, at 6 months, 12 months, 18 months and so forth, they have failed to deliver... then they resign. Immediately.

What's not to love? Right now, these clowns have zero buy-in. They want all of US to assume ALL of the risk, while they share all of the glory if it works.

You want me to sign off on this?

Then put your asses on the line for it, just like you're putting OUR asses on the line for it.

Otherwise, they risk NOTHING, and WE risk EVERYTHING. As it is, they're risking our country. The least THEY can do is risk their jobs, like they're risking ours.

Simple enough plan, don't you think? Win - win and all that?
.

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Another flashback: "Do you FEEL 'bailed out?'"

.
The bailout isn't working for most people. Oh, it's working for the few with friends on Capital Hill.... those people get all the money.... political paybacks abound.

But the PRACTICAL effect is that we're vaporizing money as fast as we can print it. And there's never been any good outcome from that.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Oct 9: Stock Market down ANOTHER 678: how's that "bail out" working for you?
Gee, today's bailout news?

Stock Market: down ANOTHER 678!

Do YOU feel "bailed out" yet?

Remember, it was YOUR government and BOTH of our presidential candidates that helped do this to you.

Well, here's a partial list of payoffs and sellouts within the bill that some here, initials "Eric," were so proud of (Are so proud of?)

From Evergreen Freedom Foundation:

Today the bailout bill was signed into law by President Bush. EFF agrees that action was needed to be taken to reassure the markets. However, we proposed free market solutions like exempting capital gains tax for anyone who purchased these troubled assets.

We do not believe this will solve the financial problems facing the country because this bill essentially nationalizes the mortgage market and gives the Secretary of Treasury virtually dictatorial power over much of our economy. It does not address the pubic policy problems which led this crisis... things like government forcing financial institutions to give home loans to people who could not afford the payments.

We are deeply troubled by the intent section of the bailout bill.

The U. S. Constitution clearly says "to protect the general welfare" not to ensure the general welfare. But the purposes of this bailout bill include giving the Secretary of Treasury the authority and such facilities to use in a manner that:

-"protects home values, college funds, retirement accounts, and life savings;.
-"preserve homeownership and promotes jobs and economic growth;
-"maximizes overall returns to the taxpayers of the United States; and
-"protects public accountability for the exercise of such authority."

The bill reads more like the Communist Manifesto than a free market bill, and I read every word of its 451 pages.

Here is a summary of the bill.

1. It started out as 3 pages and is now 451.

But only 112 1/2 pages are bailout. the rest is:

* energy improvement pages 112-244
* Broker requirements pages 244-261
* Tax breaks 261-310
-alternative minimum tax relief (sections 101-103 , pages 264-267)
-extend deductibility of state and local sales taxes (section 201, page 267)
-extend deduction of qualified tuition and related expenses (section 202, page 268)
-extend deduction for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers (section 203, page 268)
-extend tax free distributions from IRA plans for charitable purposes to December 31, 2009. (section 205, page 269)
-$18 million in clean energy breaks (includes wave- and-tide electricity generators, fringe benefits for bicycle commuters, etc
-$192 million to cover a rum excise tax with money diverted to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.(section 308, page 279)
- $33 million in economic development funds for small business in American Samoa. (section 309, page 279)
-$4 million in tax credits for mine rescue team training. (section 310, page 280)
-$? million in expensing advanced mine safety equipment (section 311, page 280)
-$? million in Domestic production activities in Puerto Rico (section 312, page 280)
-$119-205 million in tax credits for business that employ American Indians who live on reservations and accelerated depreciation for property used on reservations (sections 314 and 315, page 288)
-$? million railroad track maintenance. (section 316, page 289)
-$331 million seven-year-cost-recovery period for land improvement at motorsport racetracks. (section 317, page 290)
-$? million in tax incentives to invest in the District of Columbia (section, 322, page 291)
-$? million in enhanced charitable deductions for contributions of food inventory (section 323, page 293)
-$148 million reduction of wool fabric import tariffs to the Wool Trust Fund to promote American wool competitiveness (section 325, page 295)
-$397 million deduction for domestic projects for film and television productions (section 502, page 298)
-$6 million for exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children (section 503, page 300)
-$223 million in payouts to fishermen who received payments for the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident (Section 504, pages 301-307)
-Mental health parity which will cost $3.8 billion over the next five years and will result in more uninsured people because mental health coverage will now be included in all health care plans - pages 310-344
-Rural schools - pages 344-394
-Disaster relief-pages 394-451
-"Spending reductions [I can't find them!] and appropriate revenue raisers for new tax relief policy"
-correct title of bill page 451

2. Notice this is a "mental health" and "substance-related disorder" bill that had the bailout added to it.

3. President Bush, on October 1, told us not to worry because it is not really $700 billion. It is only $250 billion to start and then the Treasury can ask him for another $100 billion and, if needed, go back to the Congress for the remaining $350 billion.

SO WHY IS THE DEBT LIMIT RAISED BY another $700 billion, which is in addition to the $800 billion increase in July. (SECTION 122, PAGE 68 ) .

4. The underlying assets involved do not even have to be in the United States! Here is the definition of a "troubled asset," right from the bill:(Section 3(9). This permits the Secretary of Treasury to bail out foreign investors.

"(9) TROUBLED ASSETS. The term "troubled assets" means (A) residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008, the purchase of which the Secretary determines promotes financial market stability;

and (B) any other financial instrument that the Secretary, after consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, determines the purchase of which is necessary to promote financial market stability, but only upon transmittal of such determination, in writing, to the appropriate committees of Congress."

Note: conspicuously missing from the definition is the requirement that the asset's underlying thing (that is, the property that was mortgaged, etc) lies within the United States. Also note that Treasury must tell Congress if they add "new types" of debt, but that Congress has no right of review or censure.

5. The bill authorizes the government to renegotiate loans for people who can't afford them! The government can reduce the interest rates; reduce the loan principal; and do other similar modifications. (Section 110, pages 27-29). Think of the difficulty of implementing this without fraud taking place.

What a socialist grab. Whoever is elected /re-elected next month will have the most sweeping authority and virtually unlimited resources to spend to have their way with the economic course in American History. Private enterprise as we call it will be less free than ever, and ownership as we know it will erode as the possibility for politically manipulated transfer of wealth is embraced as the "finest hour" when the US Senate and US House came together to fix this problem.

Bob Williams
_________________________________________

And now today's (1 Oct?) impact...

So this piece of crap was passed and signed into law.

The result? Gold took another hit... and so did oil.

Just as a brief aside, I have to give credit where it's due.

Back in the halcyon days of $140+ oil, when it seemed the sky was the limit, George Soros of all people came out and said that oil wouldn't go beyond $150 and that it would, in fact, fall.

While Mr. Soros appears to have the political acumen of a box of hammers, one finds it difficult to fault is financial forecasts.

How did the stock market greet this great news from the White House?

The Dow nosedived 157... dropping to 10325... lower then when it dropped 777 earlier this week. Wall Street rumblings yesterday? $805 billion: not enough.

Tell us again: how is putting us on the hook for a "so-far" $2400 or so for each man, woman and child in this country benefited us?

Oct 2.

Let's see... today's bailout impact?

Gold nosedived. Not good for THOSE investors. Oil weakened, which ultimately, may trickle down to the pump... And the senate, in their infinite wisdom, blew the 3-page-from-the-Treasury, 110-pages-from-the-House-bill up to 450 pages.

No money was freed up; after all, the entire bill doesn't REQUIRE lending. The stock market was so impressed by this sell-out that it responded... by DROPPING 348 points... putting the market back to about where it was after the 777 point drop.

So... when are all these wonderful effects SUPPOSED to impact?

Most Americans STILL don't have a clue what's actually IN the bill... you can bet that next to no one voting on the bill, yeah or nay, had a clue, either.

Well, intrepid souls, here's a link.

It is loaded with garbage. Some of those items NEED to be accomplished. But not as part of THIS bill. Many more of those things in the bill do NOT need to be accomplished.

How it is, for example, that "mental health parity" needed to be in this bill?

Now, the worthiness of mental health parity can be argued by many, both one way or the other.

But what the hell is it doing in a bill that we so "desperately" need to "save" our country?

It ISN'T needed, of course. And it's the kind of political; forgive me, bullshit that any one of us KNEW was going to be ladled into this bill.

You know, like the House bill, section 103, where all the unions were bought off and paid for by all of us.

No conservative could possibly support this kind of crap. That is, presumably, why Eric supports it.

That explains why Gordon Smith, so-called Republican, complete turncoat and non-conservative voted for it. That also explains why Patty Murray voted for it.

But in supporting the idea of, once again, removing the element of responsibility for the actions both of business and individuals who supported and took loans they could not afford, we also get this:

First, forget about the "snatched out of thin air," absolutely unsupported and arbitrary $700 billion figure. The true figure is now $805 billion.

Who was it that once said, "a billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon, you're talking real money?" (Attributed to Sen. Everett Dirksen... but in some doubt as to authenticity.) Whether he actually said it or not, the sentiment is accurate.

Therefore, here we have received the largess from a 450-page bill that had no hearings, no critical examination and is loaded with crap.

Bully for us.

Let me be clear: there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN THIS BILL TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS THAT CAUSED IT.

So, conservatives... you like the idea of spraying money around like paint so that we can hope it will stick somewhere... while doing NOTHING to address the issues and people that put us here in the first place?

What tax loopholes were fixed? What criteria were changed? What's to keep PRECISELY THE SAME THING FROM HAPPENING OVER AGAIN?

We have a bill packed with garbage... that will dramatically increase our debt... that's an additional $805 BILLION that will vaporize.

To paraphrase the Braveheart movie, "If Republicans support this, then I'm ashamed to call myself one."

Which is, come to think of it, part and parcel as to why I no longer do.

Friday, December 12, 2008

UPDATE: The President blows it: He's caving to the UAW and subverting both Republicans and the Senate.

.
Breaking: Insanity reigns in Capital City as the President caves to the UAW by writing them a check from TARP funds, over Senate objections, to START their bail out.

I really don't get it. It's like our democrat-controlled legislature spending taxpayer dollars to bail out the Building Industry Association.

So, the UAW has been and is doing everything it can to destroy the GOP; they refuse any wage or benefit concessions, and the President is going to bail them out?

He really does have a loose screw.

UPDATE:

Folks, GM sold 9.3 million cars last year, and lost $37 billion.

Toyota sold 9.3 million cars, and showed a profit of $17 billion.

Nothing has changed at GM. Why the hell would we want to bail them out?


White House considers help for car makers
Send

By KEN THOMAS and JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writers Ken Thomas And Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 36 mins ago

Play Video FOXBusiness – Sen. Corker TARP Money for Autos
Play Video Video: $14B auto bailout dies in Senate AP
Play Video Video: U.S. Senate blocks auto rescue Reuters

Related Quotes

Symbol...........Price..... Change
GM ..............4.07.......-0.05
^GSPC .......865.55.......-8.04
^IXIC .......1,512.07......+4.19

WASHINGTON – Worried about the weakening economy, the Bush administration said it was ready to step in and prevent the U.S. auto industry from collapsing after the Senate refused to pass a rescue bill endorsed by President George W. Bush and congressional Democrats. The most obvious source of help was the Wall Street bailout fund.

"The current weakened state of the economy is such that it could not withstand a body blow like a disorderly bankruptcy in the auto industry," White House press secretary Dana Perino said.

Treasury spokeswoman Brookly McLaughlin said, "Because Congress failed to act, we will stand ready to prevent an imminent failure until Congress reconvenes and acts to address the long-term viability of the industry."

The Wall Street bailout fund was one of the few remaining options for General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, which have said they could run out of cash within weeks. Bush had originally refused to use the bailout fund to help the automakers, insisting that help come from Congress. But the White House said it must reconsider after the Senate failed to agree on a $14 billion rescue plan.

"Congress spoke last night. They don't have the votes to do anything," Perino told reporters on Air Force One as Bush traveled to a commencement speech in Texas. "They didn't get it over the goal line and so we have to consider what other options we would take." She declined to say when a decision would be made.

About $15 billion from the first half of the $700 billion financial bailout remains uncommitted. Treasury in the past two months has pumped out about $335 billion to banks and insurance companies. To begin tapping the second half of the bailout, the administration would first have to notify Congress, which could block it or put new conditions on how the money is used.

In Detroit, United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger welcomed the Treasury's statement Friday.

"I think it's great news — the response that we've been getting out of both the White House and the Treasury," he said. "I'm not sure what this means, how much they're talking about, any terms or conditions that are associated with it. ... But I do know this, we cannot afford for there to be a run on the banks, if you will, at those companies."

More:
.

Friday, December 05, 2008

Enough is enough: just say "No!" to the auto or any other bailout.

.
Folks, do you FEEL "bailed out?"

I don't.

The auto industry is no more deserving then any other industry of government bailout funds.

NO business should have the ability to tap into the treasury so they can continue the bizarre, out of touch policies that got them and us into this situation in the first place.

Like our government, the same group of morons that got us into this are somehow expecting us to believe they'll get us out of it.

We've already set aside to waste $850 billion in taxpayer monies with hundreds of billions more to come... again, if administered by ANYONE, they'll be administered by the same tone-deaf idiots that got us into this trouble to begin with.

The first bail out was a terrible idea. McCain was a bufoon for supporting that effort, and our government will reach new heights of moronic achievement if they go along with this effort.

After all, was it just me, or did those dolts fly into DC a few days back in Learjets? And then, just a few days ago, they were begging for $25 billion. Now, a few days later, they demand $34 billion?

When would it end? What do they do when this money runs out, as it inevitably would? Does anyone believe they won't be back, over and over and over again? When would it end?

Never. The fact is that like buying a new car itself with no downpaynment, you're buried in it the moment you drive it off the lot.

And with every billion we waste on an auto company bail out, our ability to let these clowns fail becomes less and less. In short, the more cash we flush down the bail out dumper, the more cash we'll HAVE to flush down the dumper, to avoid the allegation that we wasted billions to begin with.

Will it hurt to let these businesses flounder? Of course it will. But it will hurt much less than the alternative, which is the wasting of hundreds of billions of dollars with a result of having absolutely nothing to show for it, which is what we have now.

That the primary basis for doing this is to pay back the auto worker's unions cannot be denied. Unfortunately, politics excuses nothing.

And wasting our money at such a violent rate; causing massive increases in our budget deficit that was OH such a BIG deal during the campaign but which now goes essentially unmentioned as our government determines how many thousands of dollars of indebtedness each of our children will have to bear for the entirety of their lifetimes, since this garbage is so expensive that our children and THEIR children will bear this burden for the duration of their lives.

And folks... there's something wrong with that.

Enough is enough. No more bailouts. Period. For anyone.
.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

So, when is enough, enough?

.
I’m watching the auto makers attempting to join with the Wall Street crowd to scam the taxpayers out of billions.

When is enough, enough? What do we tell them when they come back in a few months? What do we say when they come back again and again and again?

I could join the choir and say something cryptic like, “when do I get MY bailout” but I am extremely fortunate not to need one. But there are many hundreds of thousands of small and medium businesses around this country that due… businesses that I would venture to say employ tens of thousands more people than the Big 3.

I support American manufacture (except all of the Big 3 have been manufacturing American market cars outside our borders for some time, now… so really, what, exactly IS an “American Car,” anyway?) of motor vehicles. But at least part of this concerns innovation, design and quality control.

Mini Cooper sales, for example, are up 30% year to year over last year.

So… how come Mini sales have skyrocketed while the Big 3’s have tanked? The Big 3 build small cars. Why aren’t they selling?

In the end, $25 billion won’t bail these people out. $250 billion won’t bail these people out.

What’s their business plan? Exactly how much money do these people have? Do they even HAVE a business plan? Is this like that idiotic $700 Billion bailout where promises were made, but then immediately violated?

In the end, what concessions are the unions willing to offer? I haven’t heard anything about that.

Would those people rather be laid off… or would they be willing to absorb a substantial pay/benefit cut?

Terrible cars. Bad marketing. Service that sucks. (Recently, for example, I went to Vancouver Ford for yet another recall on a sedan I own. They told me that it would take 45 minutes (it took two hours) and that they didn’t have one of the recall parts I needed (They’d have to order it and I would have to come back 2 weeks or so later) and even THEN they failed to fix one of the recall problems that caused me to bring it in the first place… and THEN they fudged the amount of time I was there on the work order, so that while I was there for 2 hours, the work order said I was there for something like 50 minutes… proving once again that figures don’t lie, but liars figure.)

Add that to design for parts and maintenance that would make a grown man weep… and have to be preformed on an increasing basis by factory technicians because no home wrench could hope to have the diagnostic equipment needed to tell the end user what the problem is.

They have to fail. Then we’ll see what we can get to rise from the ashes.
.