Hey all the prposal budget is ony 3.6...

[jedi]

TRILLION!

Obama pushes Congress to pass $3.6 trillion budget.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is again asking Congress to pass his $3.6 trillion budget, saying it will "spark the transformation" the country needs to remain economically competitive.
Appearing Tuesday with the chairmen of the congressional budget committees, Obama said he doesn't "just view this document as numbers on a page." He called it an "economic blueprint for the future."
Obama said the country "can't go back to a bubble economy, an economy based on reckless spending and spending beyond our means." He acknowledged though, that new deficit figures likely to be revealed in coming weeks will make the job tougher.
But he also said, "We don't need more point-scoring. We need more problem-solving."



SOURCE: Obama pushes Congress to pass $3.6 trillion budget

---
You have to love the item in red. BO says we can not go back to an economy of "spending beyond our means". Oh wait "our" meaning yours and mine but he must no be including himself in that "our". I get it know! No wonder his budget will work. Besides its only 3.6 trillion. That is less than a quadrillion which I'm sure we will see soon.

What is quadrillion?
WikiAnswers - What are the numbers comes after a trillion as in million billion trillion......

 

[jennybird]

Let's see...

$3,600,000,000,000 divied up amongst the approximately 150,000,000 taxpayers... that comes out to $24,000 per taxpayer. Hmmmm, imagine what THAT could do for the economy! (My economy is stimulated just thinking about it)

Can someone explain to me why it's such taboo to consider giving the money to the people who put it there in the first place instead of giant corporations who blow it on trivial nonsense like bonuses and trips to Hawaii?

I really am having a difficult time understanding this.

 

[CulpeperMM]

Let's see...

$3,600,000,000,000 divied up amongst the approximately 150,000,000 taxpayers... that comes out to $24,000 per taxpayer. Hmmmm, imagine what THAT could do for the economy! (My economy is stimulated just thinking about it)

Can someone explain to me why it's such taboo to consider giving the money to the people who put it there in the first place instead of giant corporations who blow it on trivial nonsense like bonuses and trips to Hawaii?

I really am having a difficult time understanding this.

because the money is not there. there is NO money. it is borrowing. the treasury borrows from the federal reserve, the chinese and others. that borrowing is secured by your (and my) ass. not to mention the labor and savings of our children and our children's children. we can not magically "stimulate" anything. we either borrow or print. so far they are borrowing. if they begin to print then we will have hyper-inflation. you cannot print. not even a little bit, with out the value of the currency falling by the amount printed. then you get $100 loaves of bread. there is nothing to give. this is enslavement of America.

And, is you ask me, this enslavement of America is intentional.

 

[CulpeperMM]

repped the OP, thanks for this

 

[jedi]

Let's see...


Can someone explain to me why it's such taboo to consider giving the money to the people who put it there in the first place instead of giant corporations who blow it on trivial nonsense like bonuses and trips to Hawaii?

It is because those AIG executes need the bonus as a moral booster and to retain them in leadership roles. (This according to a nws report on Yahoo News about 2 hours ago).

The OpEd said we were better off not giving them those bonuses and letting them (AIG executives) walking away as we would be better off without them.

Oh BTW uncle sam now owes 80% of AIG. Might as well just bite the bullet pay the other 20% and convert all those exectives to government employees that way we save money since they will get GOV pay which will be much, muc lower.

 

[jennybird]

because the money is not there. there is NO money. it is borrowing. the treasury borrows from the federal reserve, the chinese and others. that borrowing is secured by your (and my) ass. not to mention the labor and savings of our children and our children's children. we can not magically "stimulate" anything. we either borrow or print. so far they are borrowing. if they begin to print then we will have hyper-inflation. you cannot print. not even a little bit, with out the value of the currency falling by the amount printed. then you get $100 loaves of bread. there is nothing to give. this is enslavement of America.

And, is you ask me, this enslavement of America is intentional.

Sorry Culpeper if I wasn't clear. I've posted before my thoughts on stimulus packages... I think they're crap. I don't believe anyone should be receiving any kind of stimulus. Not you, not me, and certainly not big execs. The economy will reset itself naturally with time, as it should be.

My question is more of a hypathetical one really. If they're so willing to throw money at corporations and what-not, why not just hand it directly to the people instead? Again, I'm not saying I think they should by any means. Just trying to understand their thinking is all.

 

[Keith_Indy]

Why not give that much money directly to people, because then the politicians wouldn't be able to control how it was spent, and we might make "bad" decisions.

 

[jedi]

Yup.. Like buy more guns & ammo!
Oh wait you can't find the 2nd one amymore.
=)