« Light pollution in theaters | Main | Marlborough Center »

March 07, 2009

We eventually must pay

Apparently President Obama thinks he has an open pipeline to the federal treasury. When is he going to discover that the “treasury” is empty? Really empty! Not to worry, fellow taxpayers — he has the ultimate solution to all the problems of this recession. It is simply this: Print more money.

Naturally it won’t be backed by anything and will represent one of the most brutal forms of taxation, but it may serve to ameliorate, at least temporarily, the misery of those who have lost their jobs and those who, almost daily, watch their retirement plans go down the drain.

Those who will pay for this are well known. That would include ourselves, our children, grandchildren and yes, all of those who have their hands outstretched for a piece of the government pie. Of course the latter group probably doesn’t even care.

Indeed something needs to be done — and soon. A good starting point would be to restore the words “accountability” and “oversight” to the federal lexicon.

Charles M. Henderson
Almena, Kan.

Comments

KC Educator

“I get sick of Obama trying to take credit for being innovative when he's not.” I get sick of people that don’t know the process assessing blame. Let’s not forget that while Obama campaigned for the presidency he promised that he would try to push through a stimulus package to jump start the economy, and part of the reason he so clearly won the election was because people wanted the change. In order to make money there has to be an investment. The government was the only entity available to make the investment that was necessary, and almost every economist, both conservative and liberal agreed with that strategy. His package contains almost everything that he asked for, but you have to remember that the democratically controlled congress crafted the legislation. The republican’s, in their self righteousness did nothing more than to offer more of the same policies that caused the problems, and complain about the pork that the democrats put in the bill. It is ironic that the republicans are loading up the new spending bill with as many pork projects that they cram in. Obama had little choice, under the existing rules, but to sign the stimulus bill, or veto it which would be akin to doing nothing. If you want to hold Obama accountable then push for a line item veto for the executive.

Engineer

Pub 17
The Bush tax cuts were for everybody. A large number were actually relieved of paying any FIT. I can see no way in which he "took money from the middle and lower class and gave it to the rich". Please explain how you contend this was done. There are those who state that the decrease in household income you cite is due to a decrease in the average size of households. As to the socialistic European countries, I would not wish to live in one, fond as I am of Italy.

Pub 17

Not "people," Engineer, "the rich." Bush's radical agenda took money from the middle and lower class and gave it to the rich: note that real income in the U.S. per household declined from 2000-2008 for the middle class and increased for the wealthy. As ever, note that those poor miserable socialist Europeans are not exactly pounding our doors down to emigrate to the U.S., and that their economies are in such dire straits that the Euro trumped the dollar throughout the Bush Administration. Reality bites, to use the vernacular.

Engineer

Pub 17
The most you can say is that Bush allowed people to keep what they had earned. That's just the government keeping its hands off, not the government redistributing. But no big worry. It appears that when Obama gets through none of us will have anything to redistribute. We will all be in the socialists' and Obama's perfect world, all broke and miserable together.

Pub 17

No, Engineer, BUSH redistributed wealth to the wealthy, in a radical move that defied years of U.S. policy. Obama is trying to return to the more traditional formulation that the U.S. had relied on for almost a century until Bush came stomping through the house in muddy boots.

Engineer

Obama may well have "taken over the largest federal deficit in history" but it only took him a month or so to make that deficit seem small. jack, how does spending you didn't like under Bush may out of control spending under Obama any better?
Where is the money Obama is spending going to come from? It appears that a lot of it may just be printed. This will cause inflation and the destruction of capital. In a way, this achieves redistribution of wealth which appears to be Obama's main goal.

Stifled Freedom

And lets not loose sight of facts. Obama took over the largest federal deficit in history thanks to Bush.

solomon

..."just because Obama is half black".-NMMNG

It's impossible to take your posts seriously when you start them so insanely.

NoMoreMrNiceGuy

I do not agre with the spending, invasion, or strategy involving Iraq, however, I do certainly do not endorse the equally lame spending just because Obama is half black.
This is money that does not exist and it will not work as the majority is going to government recurring expenditures.
You may think giving someone more foodstamos and an additional $1,000 when they do not even pay income taxes will somehow magically create a profitable business, but it won't. I get sick of Obama trying to take credit for being innovative when he's not. We have had heavy infrstaructure projects going on for longer than he's been out of puberty yet he shock and awes the sheep into thinking HE is the innovator. I find it hard to believe that people find the time and money to patron restuarants, casinos, concerts, sporting events, etc YET they claim they are so broke. Government is not the answer. Everything he does is justified and he can do no wrong, the guy is not held accountable. BUsh did have 6 years of positive growth altough I am not a big Bush endorser and think he was a retard, Obama is nothing but an ambulance chaser either.

solomon

Good morning,

NE,

The guy is spending a lot of money but at least he's spending it at home. these guys who don't bat an eye saddling our great grandchildren with the debt of the Iraq war bitch and moan about an expenditure that "might" help our nation overall. I don't know if it will work, but looking at it and doing nothing wasn't working either.

v-v,

Sundays obligatory letter....

BuddyT,

Absolutely nothing to do with national defense, the Iraq war is one of aggression, choice and imperialism. Support the war if you want, just be honest about what it is.

jack(louie),

Why does anyone swear allegiance to either party?

hope all is well with you.

NoMoreMrNiceGuy

Yep it took 8 years for Bush to evaporate less than what it has taken Obama and Princess less than 60 days to piss away.
What's really pathetic people are so ignorant as to believe everything that comes from his hole. It is impossible for anyone, even Albert Einstein if he were around, to figure out 1100 pages of pork.
Obama, the speed reading math genius lawyer.

viet-vet1970

Charles from Almena is another rant wing hypocrite newly converted to fiscal responsibility on Jan. 20, 2009.

BudRog

Yeah, see Chuck, Yomama can spend kazillions on social spending, like the war on poverty (Six trill and counting) but according to folks like jack (leg) you can't spend one damn dime on National Defense. Of course it is no big deal if we all end up speaking Farsi.....right jack (leg)?

jack

Gee, Chuck, where yah been the last 20 or 30 years? Especially, where were you the last eight years? How many hundreds of billions did the Bushies urinate away with no oversight or accountability? Or were you one of those claiming that wanting these two things while Bush was in office was proof of a lack of patriotism?

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright