Apparently, the Virginia governor is just as clueless about how to cure the economy as Congress, the president and the Treasury secretary. The one honorable thing about Timmy K, though, is that he apparently admits it.
Stimulus.virginia.gov is a government website that allows you to enter your favorite pork project for consideration. It has nothing to do with the highest and best use of your money in getting us out of this economic mess. It's just more spending -- plain and simple.
My suggestion: give it all to me and let me decide. My second choice: apple fritters once a week for every person in the Commonwealth.
Those suggestions are about as good as any they'll get.
Showing posts with label Bail Out. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bail Out. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Make More Bad Loans?
Stressing that we “must get credit flowing again to businesses and families,” Treasury Secretary Geithner will now require recipients of TARP money to increase their lending activity and report to Treasury monthly on how their acceptance of TARP money “generate new lending” His remarks, released yesterday, are here
Do more lending? Are you kidding me? Banks are in the business of lending money, and will do so when it makes sense to do so (that is, they’ll lend when they have a good chance of getting it back). That’s the profit motive at work. Unfortunately, this whole mess is because banks got it wrong and lent money to people they shouldn’t have. We don’t need the Treasury now forcing banks to make new loans the banks wouldn’t otherwise make. I mean really. The problem isn’t people not being able to borrow money. The problem is getting people to spend money.
Do more lending? Are you kidding me? Banks are in the business of lending money, and will do so when it makes sense to do so (that is, they’ll lend when they have a good chance of getting it back). That’s the profit motive at work. Unfortunately, this whole mess is because banks got it wrong and lent money to people they shouldn’t have. We don’t need the Treasury now forcing banks to make new loans the banks wouldn’t otherwise make. I mean really. The problem isn’t people not being able to borrow money. The problem is getting people to spend money.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Bail Out, Part 2
I strongly supported the first bailout bill. Without some way of shoring up the banks, the economic system was certain to fail.
The problem was that we the taxpayers cut a blank check for $750 billion - and we got just what we deserved for such idiocy. Treasury does an about-face on whether the funds would be used for purchasing troubled mortgage assets, but, what's worse, the banks were, quite literally, told by Assistant Secretary Kashkari that it was their "patriotic duty" to take TARP funds. Some banks stepped up and took the money. Now, they're finding out that they really stepped in it with the new strings like limits on executive pay
TARP II is even worse. Rather than directing the funds to avoiding an outright economic collapse, the program is just throwing money at anything that will take it. It's a congressional free-for-all with pet projects galore. Congressional leaders on both sides are right in more closely taking a look at this version. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you . . . "
The problem was that we the taxpayers cut a blank check for $750 billion - and we got just what we deserved for such idiocy. Treasury does an about-face on whether the funds would be used for purchasing troubled mortgage assets, but, what's worse, the banks were, quite literally, told by Assistant Secretary Kashkari that it was their "patriotic duty" to take TARP funds. Some banks stepped up and took the money. Now, they're finding out that they really stepped in it with the new strings like limits on executive pay
TARP II is even worse. Rather than directing the funds to avoiding an outright economic collapse, the program is just throwing money at anything that will take it. It's a congressional free-for-all with pet projects galore. Congressional leaders on both sides are right in more closely taking a look at this version. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you . . . "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)