HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So here's my thought, Pre...

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 04:45 PM

So here's my thought, Pres Obama: The poor and the middle class have already taken their cuts.

Period.

The middle class saw so much of their worth, on paper, go down the toilet, the second that the housing bubble broke. I think some experts said it was a nine trillion dollar loss to people who held homes or other forms of real estate.

Other experts put the figure much higher.

Secondly, once the housing market collapsed, so did the economy. This was a loss of jobs, and then the local income tanked, and that affected almost everyone, except the financial class. (More on them later.)

Meanwhile, the slam in real estate prices, combined with the cuts in the amount of money circulating through the local economy meant that the states saw their tax revenue slashed. With states having less revenue, so did the counties, as the state normally distributes help to the counties based on how much money the state is taking in.

If you apply for welfare, medical insurance and food stamps inside the state of California, it can take over 75 days to get your claim approved. And the person making the application has very little recourse - the state and its administrative judges understand that the number of social workers is far lower than it was back when fewer people were applying for any help. So they excuse the delay. I assume the same is true of any of the other 34 states that have under-water budgets.

Mr Obama, when governors of the states that have a budget deficit went to your "good buddy," one Tim Geithner, for help, they were adamantly told that any help from the Federal government would hurt the nation's monetary situation. He made that statement quite confidently to Governor Ahnold Schwartzennegger, back in the summer of 2010. Then over the next 13 months, the US Federal Government was able to come up with 255 billions of dollars for modernizing the military, and offering up weaponry systems to Israel and the UAE.

Apparently we always have money to modernize our military, but ou Treasury officials want to have nothing to do one of the more sensible activities out there - help the individual states keep their programs in place. (For every state program that remains up and running,t here is money saved, in terms of things the Federal government needs to do.)

Mr. Obama, when you say for every one dollar in tax revenue raises upon the rich, you will cut two dollars from the Federal government's budget, I hope you think of reducing the military spending before you reduce the social safety net programs. (As explained above - those budgets are already "Cut back" due to severe personnel shortages at Social Service offices across the nation.) Our nation has a military whose strength in weaponry, cutting edge defense techniques and all other important gauges of military strength, surpasses the military strength of the next dozen nations put together.


Additionally, when Bernie Sanders' insisted-upon audit of the Federal Reserve went public, many of us discovered that there has been some fifteen to sixteen trillions of dollars of money loaned, through the mechanism of "digitized account creation" employed by your re-appointed public servant, one Ben Bernanke. Experts tell us that that least 4,7 trillions of these dollars of "loan monies" will never be repaid. (For those readers who don't understand what a trillion dollars does - these 4.7 trillions of dollars could run the state of California for some 66 years - and this is s a state with 37 million people!)

What gives with that? As a nation, the public has watched time and time again how our agencies take over - directly - the financial accounts of Bin Laden, and other rogue nations and rogue terrorist players. Well, how about it? Why doesn't our Federal government use its muscle to see to it that immediate re-payment through seizure of assets begins - unless these Big Banks and Financial firms agree to make the payments. (And please, no funny business. The public is not amused to find out that when the Big Banker TARP recipients re-paid their loans, they were given tax credits to off set the repayments, dollar for dollar.)

Finally, in conclusion, I want to say how impressed I was with Pete DeFazio, ("D",) coming forward over the last few days, to announce that none of this "Fiscal Cliff" nonsense really should be dealt with now. After all, the only reason the Big Political Players are so concerned is because their rich friends are leaning on them to make waves and create austerity programs right now. Apparently, if nothing is done, then the Re-extended Bush/Obama tax cuts for the rich will end, with some stating this happens on Dec 31st. See, there's the rub - the rich very badly want the tax cut extensions and will be most happy to do anything to keep those tax cut entitlements in place, even if it means they have to personally stab each Social Security and MediCare recipient in the heart.

Well, Sir, let them friggin' end! At least until there is the ability of every state in the Union to staff the social services agencies, keep the school teachers and fire fighters, social workers and project managers employed, let the damn tax cuts for the rich friggin' end. My household had to pay one percent more to enable the richest of the rich to gain by the entitlement of tax cut extensions! Stop it!

And do as the Honorable Pete DeFazio suggests-- wait until the newly elected Congress is in place, and let them make the decisions, which at least will be decisions created by the elected officials rather than the selected few.


20 replies, 1515 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply So here's my thought, Pres Obama: The poor and the middle class have already taken their cuts. (Original post)
truedelphi Dec 2012 OP
truedelphi Dec 2012 #1
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #2
pansypoo53219 Dec 2012 #3
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #4
dkf Dec 2012 #5
truedelphi Dec 2012 #6
dkf Dec 2012 #9
truedelphi Dec 2012 #10
butterfly77 Dec 2012 #7
ananda Dec 2012 #8
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #11
truedelphi Dec 2012 #12
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #14
truedelphi Dec 2012 #13
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #15
truedelphi Dec 2012 #17
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #19
truedelphi Dec 2012 #20
DaniDubois Dec 2012 #16
truedelphi Dec 2012 #18

Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 05:25 PM

1. Oh and one more thing - I really hope that after the dust settles, companies like

Verizon, which rake in tens of billions of dollars of profit, are required to be paying their share of taxes.

Currently Verizon is paying nothing. Not a single penny.

And yes, yes, I know, then the customers will have to pay more. But does anyone really need a cell phone, with "plans" that let them talk 24/7? The people who almost drive me off the road a half dozen times a week, they would be better off if they had less ability to continually talk, (and check their email), and more time and brain cells to use in actually driving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 05:29 PM

2. K&R nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 07:13 PM

3. PARTISAN sacrifice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:20 PM

4. Have you sent this as a letter to the president?

If not, you should. He has a whole staff and volunteers who read the letters, and every day they pick ten for him to read personally. If you have a personal story about how these cuts have impacted you, I would include that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:36 PM

5. Real estate is a lot riskier than stocks because it is LEVERAGED.

 

Yes that same thing we condemn banks and hedge funds for...

If you only put down 20% you have leveraged yourself 5 times your investment.

If you only put 5% down then you have leveraged yourself 20x your investment.

That oh so spooky idea of using margin to buy stocks only lets you margin 2x.

I find it enormously ironic that people are petrified of stocks yet have no clue how risky buying a house is.

The only way that type of risk makes sense is if you are pretty damned sure you can make those payments every single month for 30 years. So you better make sure you have resources to tap and that you keep that payment managable.

Stretching yourself on real estate only makes sense if you are prepared to walk away.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:30 PM

6. UH, NO ONE SAID THAT REAL ESTATE IS NOT LEVERAGED.

Last edited Tue Dec 4, 2012, 04:45 PM - Edit history (1)

i grewup inside a middle inocme family, with my dad being the main bread winner, and he tauight both of us kids that:

One) If you buy a house, you will be required to put at least 20 to 30% down.
Two) You shouldn't buy a house if the house payments are more than 25% of your income.
Three) You should never buy a house if you can't abide by One, and Two above. (Special circumstances exempt, of course - you've won the lottery and it will be two months before the state sends you the Super Lotto check)

But I actually walked away from a real estate deal in early 2000 - simply because the way the realtors discussed the "liars' loan" part of it, made it seem like the world of real estate was rather fishy.

But the people who have been losing their shirts are not necessarily people who went out and bought homes in 2000 to 20-05. They are people who expanded their delicatessens, their dry cleaners, their accounting service, their car lot, their beauty parlor etc.

BTW, if you examine the way that the Paulson/Geithenr/Bernanke hand out of "settlements" and bailouts for the Big Financial firms has actually worked - those who set up the leveraging and then went and made bets against the very products they had been helping to sell (i.e. mortgages,) those people were rewarded by our system of Bailouts. If you believe in what the auditors of the Federal Reserve reported - the reward was a nice big fat one, too. Some fifteen to sixteen trillions of dollars.

Meanwhile in Iceland the people who had corrupted the system are now sitting in jails. Iceland is now in recovery mode, with its people free of worries about their economy.

And in Ireland, when the government Bailed Out the Too Big To Fail crowd, the Too Big To Fail types were told that the Bailouts offered security for any outstanding mortgages that existed. So the people that actually get the bill for the Bailouts, i.e.,the citizens, had received benefits also. In the USA, not at all. Same old scam of telling us average blokes that we just better pay the way of the privileged.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:35 AM

9. It is EASY to lose money when you use leverage.

 

And the reason we bailed out the banks is because they are part of the monetary system and not to preserve shareholders. If the system could have handled their collapse the Feds wouldn't have stepped in. They only got involved because it was seen as a risk to systemic failure.

The people of Iceland basically screwed people in other countries. They lived high off the hog when the times were good for their banking system then abandoned their obligations when the times were tough. They walked away which people with mortgages could also do if they so desire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:58 PM

10. It is not at all the reason we bailed out the banks.

What should have happened, if our officials wanted to keep the nation a democracy, was to handle the economic crisis of 2008 was the same way we handled the S & L failures and collapse back in the 1980's.

Both Kucinich and Issa, who were the Chairmen of the House Oversight Committee on Financial Matters, suggested that that should be the way the crisis was handled.

In the late 1980's as a very necessary response to the S & L crisis, the Federal Government helped the states see to it that there were regionally chartered state banks in each area of the nation. And those chartered banks received monies from the Federal reserve and the government. Those monies were required to be loaned out to the people in those regions of the nation.

And those laws are still on the books. Much to the dismay of one Tim Geithner, who tried repeatedly to tell members of Congress that those laws didn't exist. (This is known as perjury, by the way, and it ought to have been enough to get Mr Geithner impeached. Lying to Congress is an impeachable crime!)

But this is anathema to the new style of Dems and Republicans who are now in office. Why set up a system that allows for a society in which only 8 cents out lof every dollar of profit created in the nation is captured by the Biggest Banks and the Biggest Financial Firms? That is such an old fashioned notion... Quaint, almost. Why not set the system up and skew it for the one Percent. After all, isn't it the One Percent that slave and toil so many long hard hours? Don't they deserve 49 cents out of every dollar of profit created in the country?

So dkf, continue to spread the information you spread. Depending on whether a person understands how a society ought to work, and how this oligarchy does work, the people here will either believe you or else believe Dennis Kucinich, and Pete DeFazio. I choose to stand with Dennis and Pete.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:07 AM

7. Kick..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:08 AM

8. Congressional and rich and corporate sacrifice!

And imprisonment for crimes and treason against the people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:01 PM

11. The president has asked us to contact Congress. He cannot do anything to the Budget.

This is a budget proposal that only Congress can pass.

Instead of just targeting the president, send your letter to your member. Bombard him/her with calls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:18 PM

12. Unfortunately my Congress Person is a guy

Who "proudly" states that he is a Blue Dog. He is to the far right of someone like Dwight Eisenhower, and even Richard Nixon.

Back in 2011, he ran around his district, where I live, with this silly "pie chart" that shows the federal government is making huge payments to Social Security recipients.

A friend of a friend of mine, attempted to let him know that this pie chart was erroneous - that Social Security is its own damn fund, and that the monies paid to SS recipients are not adding to the budget - Social Security has a 2.1 trillion dollar surplus.

He was always very careful not to call on her, and made sure to not let her present him and the audience with the facts.

Sen Feinstein could care less, unless it is a matter that her husband Richard Blum, can make millions off of. And Senator Barbara Boxer's staff has been infiltrated with people who don't let her know what the public is calling her about.

I will call Maxine Waters, and give her my support, and Pete DeFazio, and Garmendi. As they are not bought and paid for or pushed out of the loop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:36 PM

14. WOW! Your Rep is a jerk! The Blue Dogs will destroy this entire process. I wish we didn't have to

deal with them. And you're right: DiFi is no better.

Nancy will have to whip up the support in the House to get that middle class tax cut bill to the floor and passed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:19 PM

13. Oh and one more thought -

Actually the President does have power over this.

I t is called the Presidential Veto Power.

One stroke of his pen and he can make sure the middle class and the poor are not hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:37 PM

15. That is true, but that gets us nowhere, now does it? We STILL need legislation that protects

middle class tax cuts, as well as, protects the Big Three without cuts to programs that hurt the poor. It's a tall order, and he still can't do much if Congress doesn't cooperate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:53 PM

17. Sorry to reveal my age, but in my day,

The Big Three were Ford, GM and Chrysler... What Big Three are you referring to? (Don't mean it in a snarky way, just really don't know.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:47 PM

19. Sorry. Big Three: SS, Medicare, Medicaid :)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:19 PM

20. Thanks! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:50 PM

16. Excellent read! I hope people take the time to pass this around. I know I will.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DaniDubois (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:55 PM

18. Thank you DaniDubois.

Although I must confess, ninety percent of what I know about the economy is because of two DU'ers - autorank, and Octafish.

The other ten percent comes from watching C SPan videos of things that went on in the House and the Senate back in fall of 2008, and all through 2009.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread