|
Post by darthdodo on Sept 26, 2008 14:06:37 GMT -8
I heard something a while back that really shocked me... it sounds too good to be true. Sounds great even... With all these banks closing down the government wants to give up 700 Billion dollars to bail them out. If the government would cut that money in half to 350 Billion dollars, then distribute that amount (500 thousand dollars) to everybody 18 years and older (at least just the families) with a 30 percent tax rate, then the government would get some back... then most people would be able to get out of debt, go buy things they need and even things they want, which would help the banks get back on their feet. The banks will be doing good, the government would be doing good, and the people would be doing good. That would save our economy. But our government is too focused on giving to the banks that they won't dare think about the people. I say we all pitch in and flood the senators with emails! Just think about it. 500 thousand to each person above the age of 18!
|
|
|
Post by TFE on Sept 27, 2008 20:44:25 GMT -8
You're not one to fakepost, but I don't see how this can not be one.
$500,000 (for people > 18 yrs.) = $75,000,000,000,000 at its most ideal form (1/2 of people less than 18 yrs.)
So, basically, increase the national debt 8 fold. Infact, the national yearly budget is only 1/25 of what you're proposing. We'd need 25 years spending NO money (no military funds, no interest paid off on the national debt, etc.) to accomplish what you're suggesting.
Now, I'm all for them giving me $500,000. Go ahead and write your Senator about that. ;D
|
|
|
Post by funkjamshizam on Sept 28, 2008 13:15:50 GMT -8
Even if this brilliant plan worked, it would do absolutely nothing to alleviate the economic crisis. It has very little to do with the amount of money we have, and a lot to do with how we spend it. Giving people more money to spend poorly wouldn't fix things at all.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight Taeris on Sept 28, 2008 19:50:14 GMT -8
Om . . .if we dont bail out certain important banks our Economic situation will be AT LEAST twice as bad as the 'Great Depression' O.o Sadly there is no good solution to this Economic Situation, weve ignored it for too long and plan to fix it too fast
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Sept 29, 2008 17:55:47 GMT -8
First of all, it's more of the principle, than the details. The details are bendable (these facts came from someone else, I have not done the research myself). But at least 100,000 would help the average citizen! And really it doesn't have to be for any of the singles. Really the age can be lifted to say 25 (being as most people below that age are irresponsible). Or even 30! And, to Tacgnol, if we give people above the age of 18 (or 25, or 30) 500,000 (or 100,000 at least) they will be able to get out of debt... Who do you think people are in debt to? You take the amount people today are in debt, every person in America. Take an average debt amount, multiply it by the amount of citizens, and that's that much given to the banks. It'll definatly help the banks. And then people with the left over money will be able to replace old furniture, plumbing, roofs, etc... they'll be able to do all these projects that need doing, giving everybody work (which, I don't know about some people, but carpenters and plumbers don't get too much work these days). To, funkjamshizam, yes, you are absolutely right, people have no self control, they'll jump back into debt. A good example is someone who wins the lottery and runs back into poverty because they drown themselves in things they don't need and they go overboard. That's why the age limit is put to say 25 or 30. It's definatly fact that there are more 18 to 25 year olds who are irresponsible than 25 to 30 year olds (there's still some of them, too). To MissionComplete, you talk about this Nation's debt, their talking about giving these banks 700 billion bucks, mostly borrowed from other nations. If they were to do this (which it doesn't look that way now), then they'd at least need to take the approach that's less debt for them and greatest help for everyone, which would be the plan I've just mentioned. This plan is not a out of the blue, do it if you feel like, plan. This is more of a "if your gonna spend money, do it wisely" plan. But since as of yesterday this bill was put on hold, this plan has really become irrelevant. And I do agree with you, Tacgnol, we've waited too long. I think it's about time this country gets use to wearing a couple sets of clothes over and over again and taking only 2 showers a week, and stop buying so much junk, grow a garden, type of mentality. Becoming part of an industrialized mindset is dangerous, because when the "chips are down" you have nothing to run the industry, then you have to rely on agricultural means which most people know nothing of. My family's made the mistake of relying too much on Wal-Mart and all these stores. Worst thing is, we cannot grow anything in our yard... it use to be a junkpile, then someone threw some cheap topsoil over it. We'll starve, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight Taeris on Sept 29, 2008 19:11:05 GMT -8
Most people who have gotten into debt have done so consciously. Whether for better or worse, they doid it. Why should they be released from their own responsibilities? My mother is in a huge amount of debt becuase of her months in the hospitals and the month in ICU. We cant pay it all at once, but we will pay it. As for the mortagesd and homes and what not, again, people's own responsibility comes into play. They jammed themselves into high amounts of debt and couldnt pay it, So now we are going to give them money to pay ff their debts and then spend MORE money to get themselves BACK into debt. So itd be much simpler to just bail out the companies than the people.
|
|
|
Post by funkjamshizam on Sept 29, 2008 19:26:05 GMT -8
taking only 2 showers a week Ew.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Kerse on Sept 29, 2008 19:54:09 GMT -8
......if the government gave out money then all the stores would up their prices on everything so you'de spend a couple hundred on a roll of paper towls......Germany tried that after WW2....people were pushing wheel-barrows of money to the store for milk and bread....not a good solution my friend.
|
|
|
Post by Jango Reiss on Sept 29, 2008 19:56:08 GMT -8
First of all, it's more of the principle, than the details. The details are bendable (these facts came from someone else, I have not done the research myself). But at least 100,000 would help the average citizen! And really it doesn't have to be for any of the singles. Really the age can be lifted to say 25 (being as most people below that age are irresponsible). Or even 30! And, to Tacgnol, if we give people above the age of 18 (or 25, or 30) 500,000 (or 100,000 at least) they will be able to get out of debt... Who do you think people are in debt to? You take the amount people today are in debt, every person in America. Take an average debt amount, multiply it by the amount of citizens, and that's that much given to the banks. It'll definatly help the banks. And then people with the left over money will be able to replace old furniture, plumbing, roofs, etc... they'll be able to do all these projects that need doing, giving everybody work (which, I don't know about some people, but carpenters and plumbers don't get too much work these days). To, funkjamshizam, yes, you are absolutely right, people have no self control, they'll jump back into debt. A good example is someone who wins the lottery and runs back into poverty because they drown themselves in things they don't need and they go overboard. That's why the age limit is put to say 25 or 30. It's definatly fact that there are more 18 to 25 year olds who are irresponsible than 25 to 30 year olds (there's still some of them, too). To MissionComplete, you talk about this Nation's debt, their talking about giving these banks 700 billion bucks, mostly borrowed from other nations. If they were to do this (which it doesn't look that way now), then they'd at least need to take the approach that's less debt for them and greatest help for everyone, which would be the plan I've just mentioned. This plan is not a out of the blue, do it if you feel like, plan. This is more of a "if your gonna spend money, do it wisely" plan. But since as of yesterday this bill was put on hold, this plan has really become irrelevant. And I do agree with you, Tacgnol, we've waited too long. I think it's about time this country gets use to wearing a couple sets of clothes over and over again and taking only 2 showers a week, and stop buying so much junk, grow a garden, type of mentality. Becoming part of an industrialized mindset is dangerous, because when the "chips are down" you have nothing to run the industry, then you have to rely on agricultural means which most people know nothing of. My family's made the mistake of relying too much on Wal-Mart and all these stores. Worst thing is, we cannot grow anything in our yard... it use to be a junkpile, then someone threw some cheap topsoil over it. We'll starve, I guess. For those who don't want to read all of this, here are the finer points: Give everyone way too much money in a social experiment that would probably fail. Become hippies.
|
|
|
Post by TFE on Sept 29, 2008 19:58:55 GMT -8
Most people who have gotten into debt have done so consciously. Whether for better or worse, they did it. Why should they be released from their own responsibilities? Agreed. Haha. To MissionComplete, you talk about this Nation's debt, their talking about giving these banks 700 billion bucks, mostly borrowed from other nations. If they were to do this (which it doesn't look that way now), then they'd at least need to take the approach that's less debt for them and greatest help for everyone, which would be the plan I've just mentioned. This plan is not a out of the blue, do it if you feel like, plan. Yes, yes it is. The only problem with this your plan is that you argue about having to borrow money for 700 billion dollars. How is the US government going to get 75 Trillion (not billion) dollars aside from borrowing money (from about every country everywhere)? Even $100,000 is comes out to $15 Trillion, a ridiculous amount. If they could get that much money together, pay off the national debt, then we can talk about giving everyone socialist handouts.
|
|
|
Post by Jango Reiss on Sept 30, 2008 18:40:41 GMT -8
Ok, I just found another flaw in your plan. I'm assuming that since the government would be sending all these people money, that they'd send out checks? Well, if they sent out everyone checks for $100,000, the people still have to go to the banks and cash the checks. That would completely drain the bank's supply of money, further worsening the economy.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight Taeris on Oct 1, 2008 19:11:38 GMT -8
Well they passed the bill, so it doesnt matter now lol
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Oct 1, 2008 19:50:19 GMT -8
While there may be a lot of flaws with THIS (not MY) plan, it'd do the same thing giving money directly to the government would do. Instead you add a middle man who gets benefits as well. Now, I'm typically anti-socialist. Giving money away on a whim isn't the way to get things done. My point was... IF they're going to give money away on a whim, then they mays well do it to help the most amount of people possible. But as Tacgnol has just said... it's too late. So... how to save our economy? 1: ignore it 2: wait until Venezuela attacks us, then go in and pillage the country and get what we can (not likely ) or 3: move to another country. Really, I'm not a politician, this is the first Presidential race I've payed much attention to, and I'm a rookie in this matter. I heard a plan to save the economy and I posted it on here to see what ya'll thought about it. But, putting all our heads together we managed to bring out some major flaws... but these flaws still don't outway the flaws in what they have done... their still in debt to countries which want to eliminate us and the tax payers are still not happy. I guess you can't please everyone.
|
|