- party42 wrote:
- No offense to anyone else on this board but I have a question for Scorpion and only scorpion. I hold his opinion in high regard here and would like his input before anyone else responds. Thanks.
Please explain to all of us why the government is bailing out the banks and wallstreet but not giving the money to the taxpayers. Please explain to us why giving the money to the taxpayers wouldn't be the best thing to get this economy started again.
Well, I'll give it a shot. I'm going to make an exception and dispense with the usual links for this one, because it would simply take too long to answer. The other posters should feel free to fact check me on this.
I'm going to split this up into 2 parts, because the TARP program (for banks) is totally separate from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
- party42 wrote:
- Please explain to us why giving the money to the taxpayers wouldn't be the best thing to get this economy started again.
This idea would
never fly. You've seen the outrage at simply providing a tax break to low income wage earners. Can you imagine the reaction to giving tens of thousands of dollars to these people? This would be seen as a massive "redistribution of wealth," and rightfully so. I can hear the cries of "Communism!" at the very idea of such a tranfer.
The best way to explain why we need a massive investment in our country's infrastucture is to take a little stroll down memory lane. When Clinton left office, he turned what was then a massive deficit into a surplus which were projected to grow each year for at least 10 years.
That was the perfect time for investing in our country's infrastructure. Even back then, we had decaying highways and a soon to be obsolete electric grid. We've all seen the result of failing to fix the levies in Louisiana and failing to maintain our nation's bridges.
So how did we get to this point? You can trace it back to the across the board Bush tax cuts. The surplus disappeared immediately. There was no investment in anything, just tax cuts which benefited mainly the wealthy. There was a small recession at the time, and the tax cuts to the middle class probably helped out a bit, but there was certainly no need to provide tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. There was even a full scale attempt to make the tax cuts permanent, regardless of the state of our economy.
To make a long story short, that wiped out the "surplus," and killed any hope of making investments in our future. Shortly afterward, the Administration decided to start a costly war in Iraq, without any kind of tax to fund it. That was just irresponsible.
We never made the investments needed to begin to shift away from fossil fuels, neglected our educational system, and allowed the Health Insurance situation to become a crisis. These problems are even more critical than they were a decade ago.
The Reinvestment and Recovery Act is at least a step in the right direction.
Now about TARP....I'm not an economist, but I don't think that there is any question that we need the banks to resume lending... Without that, our economy will eventually come to a complete standstill. I feel that the Bush Administration bears respomnsiblity for the crisis, if only because they let things get so out of control.
It also looks like they didn't spend the first $350 billion in a responsible way, and that's unforgivable. There is absoultely no excuse for not knowing exactly how that money was spent. At least we will know how the second $350 billion is spent. That's something, I guess.
I hope I answered your questions. If not, then let me know. If anyone else has any comments, feel free to post them.