I'm not Rich!!!

I am getting a few hundred bucks after all from the stimulus package! Since I already have a maid service I can finally get a gardener! Woohoo!

SFCraig wrote:I am getting a few hundred bucks after all from the stimulus package! Since I already have a maid service I can finally get a gardener! Woohoo!

This stimulus package is admission by adpotion of policy that tax payer money is better for the economy and the country if it is placed in the hands of taxpayers instead of the government and proves lowering taxes is the correct thing for our government to do.

Hi Aaron,

That's a great point. Although I am very skeptical about the stimulus package, I like the idea of the government giving us back the money it took. I also think that this may help some people catch up on their mortgages.

You're not getting YOUR money back, you're getting a loan from China. I'd say it's more of a validation that American Capitalism is a house-of-cards, built almost entirely on citizens spending more than they earn.

No, I'm getting MY money back; it's the government and it's policies that made us a slave to China, not my income or my work.

Hmmm...where did the gov discover this money? Under its mattress?

Our government would be shackled to the Chinese with or without this stimulus package. If we taxed more for "living within our means," we'd find that spending would increase just that much.

If I could trust the government with my money I'd be happy to let them have more of it. As it is, our policy is so disastrous that the more of my own labor I can enjoy right now, the better.

If we are really going to deal with the Chinese, we are going to have to rethink our trade policies, as Stephanie as already said, and back up our dollars with something, as she has said as well. Until "useful" reforms are made, I might as well get my check as our system will not be feasible with it or without it.

We are actually in agreement, but if you're 9 or 10 Trillion in debt that's not your money. That's like claiming I have 50K in the bank because I have 50k available on my credit cards. All the worse, if I know that my children will have to pay off my balance.

The only moral arguments to be made re: stimulus checks is that it "may" help the economy, and that is has been limited to those who need and will spend it.

SFCraig wrote:The only moral arguments to be made re: stimulus checks is that it "may" help the economy, and that is has been limited to those who need and will spend it.

If I'm not mistaken, I think the high end of the income qualification is 75K. How badly do those making that much 'need' the stimulus check?

I'm sure some of them may "need" that money to help cover their skyrocketing interest payments.

Plus, I think you're missing the point of the so-called "stimulus plan". They don't want to give money to people who are simply going to pay their electric bill with it or pay down debt or plunk it in their child's college fund. They hope we'll all run out and by gizmos, gadgets, clothing, dvd's etc to give retailers a boost. If you're one of the countless working poor you're not very likely to run out and spend that extra $$$ on a new I phone or pod etc.

If someone's mortgage payment is skyrocketing because they purchased a home on an ARM then that's their own fault and we as Americans shouldn't be bailing them out any more then we should have bailed out Bear Sterns for making stupid loans.

I read is a very wise book once that you reap what you sow. Problem is our idiotic leaders in government, for whatever reason, has decieded that they cannot allow poor Americans to suffer so they are doing everything in their power to stop the much deserved reaping. All they are doing with their continued interference is prolonging the problems and making the suffering worse.

Aaron wrote:If someone's mortgage payment is skyrocketing because they purchased a home on an ARM then that's their own fault and we as Americans shouldn't be bailing them out any more then we should have bailed out Bear Sterns for making stupid loans.

I read is a very wise book once that you reap what you sow. Problem is our idiotic leaders in government, for whatever reason, has decieded that they cannot allow poor Americans to suffer so they are doing everything in their power to stop the much deserved reaping. All they are doing with their continued interference is prolonging the problems and making the suffering worse.

It isn't just adjustable rate mortgages squeezing the middle class. People have their interest rates increased on all of their credit cards for a late payment on one, or even for closing a credit account. It isn't just one facet of the credit industry that is squeezing consumers.

The plain and simple fact of the matter is this President and this Congress is unwilling to take the steps necessary to remedy the problems this nation and our people are facing. Cutting spending by reducing the size of government and ending the insane practice of interferring with the internal operations of other governments, not to mention ending the senseless, needless, extremely costly occupation of Iraq would be good places to start.

Stephanie wrote:
It isn't just adjustable rate mortgages squeezing the middle class. People have their interest rates increased on all of their credit cards for a late payment on one, or even for closing a credit account. It isn't just one facet of the credit industry that is squeezing consumers.

The ARM is a trigger though. It's all a domino effect and something had to be the first to fall. In this case, it is ARM's, no interest loans, 107 percent loans and other mortgages made to people they never should have been made to. The governemnt getting involved only made matters worse and their continued interference is only extending the problem.

Stephanie wrote:The plain and simple fact of the matter is this President and this Congress is unwilling to take the steps necessary to remedy the problems this nation and our people are facing. Cutting spending by reducing the size of government and ending the insane practice of interferring with the internal operations of other governments, not to mention ending the senseless, needless, extremely costly occupation of Iraq would be good places to start.

Bretton Woods was eliminated in 1971. It is not just THIS President or THIS Congress or THIS country. The Gold standard is not currently being used by any other country or bank.

As for Iraq, you've continually failed to address legitimate questions and concerns. Just "marching out" is simply foolish and would do more damage to the US economy then the continued occupation would.

Bretton Woods was eliminated in 1971. It is not just THIS President or THIS Congress or THIS country. The Gold standard is not currently being used by any other country or bank.

When Johnson made the decision that silver certificates were no longer redeemable for silver, that was the beginning of the end.

THIS President and THIS Congress are the ones who are currently driving us into ever deeper debt to other nations. Fiat money works quite well for them because they can just keep printing more and more and more of it. The problem is they're unable or unwilling to recognize the problems this is causing......like inflation. For years with a lot of juggling and manuevering they were able to keep inflation largely under control.

This isn't the case any more and our government over-extending us in the process of over-stepping their Constitutional authority and function, has tipped that balance. Now people are losing faith in the fiat currency. Mr. History man, you should know what will happen when all faith is lost in the fiat money. It has happened before and you do have that PhD in history, right?

Stephanie wrote:

Bretton Woods was eliminated in 1971. It is not just THIS President or THIS Congress or THIS country. The Gold standard is not currently being used by any other country or bank.

When Johnson made the decision that silver certificates were no longer redeemable for silver, that was the beginning of the end.

THIS President and THIS Congress are the ones who are currently driving us into ever deeper debt to other nations. Fiat money works quite well for them because they can just keep printing more and more and more of it. The problem is they're unable or unwilling to recognize the problems this is causing......like inflation. For years with a lot of juggling and manuevering they were able to keep inflation largely under control.

This isn't the case any more and our government over-extending us in the process of over-stepping their Constitutional authority and function, has tipped that balance. Now people are losing faith in the fiat currency. Mr. History man, you should know what will happen when all faith is lost in the fiat money. It has happened before and you do have that PhD in history, right?

Nope, I don't have a PhD and I've never claimed to. I do have common sense and the ability to use logic and reason that I've used to study and read about history for a good portion of my 42 years.

It really is too bad for you that a person cannot learn common sense and reading comprehension from a book. Both would do you a world of good.

I understand the pitfalls of a fiat currency. But to simpley 'switch' to the gold standard would be very difficult. Especially given that current dollars in circulation exceeds ALL the gold in the WORLD by ~3Trillion dollars and the population is every increasing (as Sam has pointed out) but you say we should just change.

If only it were so easy.

Well I keep getting indications from political talk shows that Jesse Ventura might compete for the Libertarian nomination.

Actually he seems more in tune with their philosophy overall.

He is against the Iraqi occupation, for individual liberties, against the "patriot" act, and for a balanced budget.

His biggest drawback from my pt. of view is income re-distribution.

Other than that I like what he is saying.

It looks like the two big Corporate parties are going to be tweedle dee and tweedle dum again.

The Iraq occupation will continue, the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer.

I like Nader, but don't think he has a chance to carry any states.

Also Ventura would re-open the 9-11 inquiry and let the chips fall where they may.

http://www.nolanchart.com/article3191.html

Also he is a lot more in tune with Libertarian policy than Ron Paul.

But maybe Paul could be Sec. of State.

He keeps mentioning Robert Kennedy Jr. for his VP.

You keep insisting I want to suddenly link our currency to gold, and gold alone. I have never said that. Perhaps you're the one with the comprehension problem.

I want a standards based currency, a currency tied directly to something(s) of value. Gold, silver, copper, platinum, nickel, titanium, rhodium and more....precious stones....it can be a combination of valuable commodities, backing our currency would work. The current scheme is a disaster waiting to happen..... a currency backed only by faith being printed out of thin air whenever a private bank thinks its a good idea.

Sherm,

Have you seen Jesse Ventura lately? He looks like a deranged Hell's Angel. I would think if he were considering tossing his hat in the ring he'd do something about his appearance.

Ron Paul isn't a Libertarian. He isn't seeking that party's nomination. You seem to be under the misguided notion he is. He's a Republican. He would make a fine Cabinet member, but we need his leadership in areas other than foreign policy.

Stephanie wrote:I'm sure some of them may "need" that money to help cover their skyrocketing interest payments.

Plus, I think you're missing the point of the so-called "stimulus plan". They don't want to give money to people who are simply going to pay their electric bill with it or pay down debt or plunk it in their child's college fund. They hope we'll all run out and by gizmos, gadgets, clothing, dvd's etc to give retailers a boost. If you're one of the countless working poor you're not very likely to run out and spend that extra $$$ on a new I phone or pod etc.

Oh no, Stephanie, I understand the point of the stimulus plan, I'm just saying that it has no hope of doing what it's intended to. This is not going to stimulate the economy any more than government spending does. My point was that it may have some good consequences, like people being able to play "catch up." My wife and I just moved a few months back, and while I see no large-scale help whatsoever, it will, God willing, pay off the credit card we've used a little too liberally.

So, while it will not ever help our gov't pay off it's own bills (they've been using their credit card too liberally for the past 35 years!) it will at least make my own life easier for the next 6 months.

Hey Michael,

I'm quite sure you understand the theory behind the plan. I agree with you it isn't likely to do a whole lot of good. I think I've made myself quite clear what I believe needs to be done.

I was responding to Aaron's question about why a person making $75K is getting any rebate. I took leave of my senses and started responding to him again. lol

Well Steph I am not the first to speculate that Paul might be interested in being the Libertarian alternative to tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.

And, at the risk of your ire I feel compelled to point out that he did in fact do that before.

IMO both him and Bob Barr are more republican than Libertarian.

But I suspect they both have stronger attachment to their own egos than any political Party.

Stephanie wrote:You keep insisting I want to suddenly link our currency to gold, and gold alone. I have never said that. Perhaps you're the one with the comprehension problem.

I want a standards based currency, a currency tied directly to something(s) of value. Gold, silver, copper, platinum, nickel, titanium, rhodium and more....precious stones....it can be a combination of valuable commodities, backing our currency would work. The current scheme is a disaster waiting to happen..... a currency backed only by faith being printed out of thin air whenever a private bank thinks its a good idea.

I've ask you at least 10 times how to address the monetary problem. I can't comprehend what you don't write as this is your first response.

And I agree that the fiat system is ripe for failure. But if you think you can suddenly switch to a commodities backed system, what do you thinks going to happen when citizens suddenly want to exchange dollars for those commodities.

Hint...it's in the history books. Study grasshopper!!!

Aaron wrote:

Stephanie wrote:You keep insisting I want to suddenly link our currency to gold, and gold alone. I have never said that. Perhaps you're the one with the comprehension problem.

I want a standards based currency, a currency tied directly to something(s) of value. Gold, silver, copper, platinum, nickel, titanium, rhodium and more....precious stones....it can be a combination of valuable commodities, backing our currency would work. The current scheme is a disaster waiting to happen..... a currency backed only by faith being printed out of thin air whenever a private bank thinks its a good idea.

I've ask you at least 10 times how to address the monetary problem. I can't comprehend what you don't write as this is your first response.

And I agree that the fiat system is ripe for failure. But if you think you can suddenly switch to a commodities backed system, what do you thinks going to happen when citizens suddenly want to exchange dollars for those commodities.

Hint...it's in the history books. Study grasshopper!!!

I did answer that before. Perhaps you only read and comprehend the things you want to read and comprehend.

You never gave any indication you know what has occurred historically as a result of people losing faith in fiat currency, as is beginning to occur now.

Stephanie wrote:

Aaron wrote:

Stephanie wrote:You keep insisting I want to suddenly link our currency to gold, and gold alone. I have never said that. Perhaps you're the one with the comprehension problem.

I want a standards based currency, a currency tied directly to something(s) of value. Gold, silver, copper, platinum, nickel, titanium, rhodium and more....precious stones....it can be a combination of valuable commodities, backing our currency would work. The current scheme is a disaster waiting to happen..... a currency backed only by faith being printed out of thin air whenever a private bank thinks its a good idea.

I've ask you at least 10 times how to address the monetary problem. I can't comprehend what you don't write as this is your first response.

And I agree that the fiat system is ripe for failure. But if you think you can suddenly switch to a commodities backed system, what do you thinks going to happen when citizens suddenly want to exchange dollars for those commodities.

Hint...it's in the history books. Study grasshopper!!!

I did answer that before. Perhaps you only read and comprehend the things you want to read and comprehend.

You never gave any indication you know what has occurred historically as a result of people losing faith in fiat currency, as is beginning to occur now.

Read about what happens when the system is suddenly switched to a commidity backed system and away from a central bank. I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm saying it won't be as easy as you make it out to be.