And where are your facts? I see the opinion. Mine is simply a surmise over the economic similarities between Geithner and Speer.
By the way (and this doesn't deserve it's own thread), a friend of mine sent me this economic plan conceived by an ordinary American. It's a far simpler plan than Timmy's Rube Goldberg fix: This plan seems a whole lot better than what the Congress/White House has come up with! This was an article from the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on "How Would You Fix the Economy?" I think this guy nailed it! Dear Mr. President, Patriotic retirement... There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force - Pay them $1 million apiece severance with the following stipulations: 1) They leave their jobs. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed. 2) They buy NEW American cars. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed. 3) They either buy a house/pay off their mortgage - Housing Crisis fixed. It can't get any easier than that! . P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress and the Administration pay their taxes… (So true, so true). -- thumbs
What's $40 trillion among friends? We'll owe that by 2020 anyway. But, if it helps your soul, make his or her concept everyone over 55 or 60 -- some age that makes the amount the same as Obama's profligate spending. It's the concept that is appealing.
Well, for starters, Speer didn't get put in jail for his economic policies. When Geithner tries to start killing Jews, then your point might have some kind of relevance.
Let's estimate the Obama deficit as $2 trillion this year. So that's 2 million people that you'll give $1 million each too. They'll pay taxes, putting them at about $650,000. And then they'll buy a car and pay off their house, probably putting them around $450,000. And they are retired and unemployed. $450k is not going to get a 50 yr or whatever through retirement. And opening up 2 new million jobs just gets us back to where we were in December given that we're losing about 650,000 per month, so that doesn't solve any of the major unemployment or economic slowdown worries. Not only that, assuming this replaces the Obama budget (to be deficit neutral), now you haven't done anything to address the 40 million uninsured Americans or the energy grid or any of the other hundreds of things that the Obama budget is supposed address with that money.
Weak. Weak. Weak. Major, I was expecting a more collegiate refutation of my observation. For example, Speer was an architect whereas Timmy is actually grounded in finance. Speer was a political fascist and Timmy is a ...., well, forget that comparison. But, you get the point. BTW, aren't a lot of the executives Timmy is persecuting, uh, threatening to replace or penalize .... Jewish? Hmmm.
The post I quoted was your reply to BigBenito. I did the math on your reduced version of your plan that was designed to match the Obama deficit.
So uh, I'm just wondering, if you fire all the CEO's, who do you replace them with, the Tooth Fairy? No ideological crap, just a straight forward question. Now that you got rid of say, Rick Wagoner who is grossly incompetent, who among those qualified would touch GM with a 10 foot pole, especially since he ain't being paid for it. Isn't that why they tapped Fritz Henderson, or for that matter, Vikram Pandit?
Correction -- not my plan. I wish I had the intellect to suggest something that ingeniously rational due to its simplicity. I would have made the money tax free, but even a flat tax will require a few tweaks to make it workable. The task at hand is to make the financial pain/gain as fair and comprehensive as possible. BTW, I agree with Obama's goal of a national health plan. I jjust don't want a plan where a big brother government decides who deserves it and who doesn't.
After it's paid out, congress will pass a 90% tax bill for income over $250k for any person that has received federal money. Everybody will move to a more free country like Russia, because America has become more socialist than Russia has ever been.
$1,000,000 isn't enough to support someone for 30 years, particularly when their medical expenses are going to explode mid-way through. This was stupid and annoying when I received it at work, too.
I wish you did too. I'd even settle for you finding something ingeniously rational and simple. Right now, all you've done is find something that doesn't make any financial sense and doesn't solve any of the problems in front of us. Certainly true - it's fairly difficult, if not impossible, to provide a detailed, rational rebuttal to nonsense that has no merit or logic to it.
Let's assume this will work (which is a huge assumption given the numbers involved). What happens when a few years later due to either reckless spending or poor investment decisions, we end up with a ton of people in their late 50s and early 60s that are completely broke? So now we have a huge poverty problem amongst people who were forced to retire by the gov and are still paying off the money used to retire them. What could possibly go wrong?
I don't know why I am pursuing this if an intellectual like Major doesn't want to pursue this as a hypothetical but somewhat interesting scenario. First, a tax-free $850K would yield at least $25 - 30K at 4% annually. Couple that with $12K to $36K Social Security -- minus $130K for a modest retirement house and $20 for an economy car -- and medical (Obama style), there's no sweat for a fairly comfortable retirement. That was a courtesy, pouhe, because you seem to a nice person (generally). I don't wish to pursue it.
