Homestead mailing list

[bob ford <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>]

I disagree with 'nothing' you just wrote.  And, if "taxes" weren't 
automatically deducted from checks , and regular working people had to sit 
down 4 times, or better yet, one time a year, and write a check for the 
entire amount to the fed gov't, they would realize how much of "their" money 
the gov't is already taking (at least the payroll portion).

 and; then, if maybe just 25%, or just a third, decieded "we are not going to 
write a check this year, you wasted the d*mn money we sent you last year"; 
something "would" change.  

Telling them not to spend anymore, while agreeing to keep giving them money, 
is like asking a drunk  to stop drinking while giving him a bath-tub full of 
whiskey ...bobf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


--- On Tue, 10/28/08, Don Bowen <don.bowen AT earthlink.net> wrote:

> From: Don Bowen <don.bowen AT earthlink.net>
> Subject: RE: [Homestead] Upcoming - under Dem/Obama reign  - wsj
> To: bobford79 AT yahoo.com, homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2008, 10:16 AM
> > They can't "spend" money they don't
> have.  Well, yes they do, but that
> > could only last for so long if there were no promises
> of future taxes from
> > working people to pay back the money.
> 
> "They" are spending future monies without any
> promise of a return other than
> vague and unfounded promises that "As taxes go down,
> revenues go up."  Power
> is gained with the power to spend.  Cutting spending is
> cutting power and no
> politician or bureaucrat is willing to do either.
> 
> I have read several things from both liberal and
> conservative economists
> that deficient spending is ok and they temper the approvals
> with references
> to percentage of GNP or GDP or assets and so forth.  I have
> read just as
> much about how bad deficient spending is and the numbers
> are about equal on
> both sides.
> 
> It cannot continue.  Next year promises to be close to $1T.
>  We are spending
> almost $1T to bail out the financial system, again with
> vague promises about
> how we will make money in the end and that is not all of
> it.  The Auto
> companies are looking for $25B.  Bernanke has already
> committed close to $1T
> for some very shaky assets.  Where does this money come
> from?  China has
> been a willing lender as have the oil rich countries but
> all they are doing
> is lending the money back to us that we gave them for oil
> and cheap DVDs.
> 
> When will a country that cannot declare bankruptcy realize
> that it is
> bankrupt?  Don't think for a moment that the $10T is
> all.  If the government
> were forced to use the same accounting rules it forces on
> businesses the
> real total is well over $30T.
> 
> Don Bowen  KI6DIU
> http://www.braingarage.com/Dons/Travels/journal/Journal.html