Are these numbers correct?

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
Is this really were we are at? I have been following a lot of the bailout stuff but I have never seen it on paper all together

Bailout value

So if we use simple math, the fed government has allocated/or is going to spend

9.1t <---- yes that is trillion dollars not counting the current 800+ billion that nobama wants to spend.

So with the current $305,789,061 US population (according to census)

$9,100,000,000,000 / $305,789,061 =

$29,759.08 for everyone in the U.S or

$119,036.31 for a household of 4.

^---math correct?

What are we getting for this amount of money and how are we ever going to repay this amount of debt?

Just staggering to look at all lumped together.

-fish


 

RichardE

Banned
Dec 31, 2005
10,246
2
0
Do you want bread lines, strong terrorism and red china becoming more powerful than you?

No?

Well, we need this, and don't you forget it!
 

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
Not being an economist are there really any alternatives other than spending money like it is growing on trees.

My first assumption is that the fed gov doesn't just have this money sitting in some big fault so we are borrowing this money to inject? <--not sure of this?

If in fact we are borrowing this ? whom is it coming from and what is the cost?

T-bills?

 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
326
126
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Not being an economist are there really any alternatives other than spending money like it is growing on trees.

My first assumption is that the fed gov doesn't just have this money sitting in some big fault so we are borrowing this money to inject? <--not sure of this?

If in fact we are borrowing this ? whom is it coming from and what is the cost?

T-bills?

Borrowing presupposes someone with money will lend it to us. If no one has money to lend us, then we will probably just print money and deal with the resulting inflation.
 

xenolith

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2000
1,588
0
76
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Not being an economist are there really any alternatives other than spending money like it is growing on trees.

My first assumption is that the fed gov doesn't just have this money sitting in some big fault so we are borrowing this money to inject? <--not sure of this?

If in fact we are borrowing this ? whom is it coming from and what is the cost?

T-bills?

The printing press is the US government's best friend right now.

Fisher, you're just awakening to the biggest crisis that few want to face in this whole mess, that is, the paper notes that sits in your wallet right now may soon be almost competely worthless.

It's time everyone see the forest through the trees... and of course make sure you buy enough canned goods...
 

xenolith

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2000
1,588
0
76
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
No, it is not correct. They are lumping a lot of stuff in there that doesn't belong.

Right. Kind of like Obama's stimulus package.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
All this money to chase 4 million jobs. Though I hated the bank bailouts I understood the reasoning and supported it. The rest of this garbage is a waste of resources.
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
Originally posted by: RichardE
Do you want bread lines, strong terrorism and red china becoming more powerful than you?

No?

Well, we need this, and don't you forget it!

I hope you are being sarcastic. Because history will show that the bailouts are not working. The stimulous Bush passed with income taxes, bank bailouts, etc has done nothing, and we are even closer to what you said than we were a year ago, or 10 years ago. And in another year, I foresee us in worse shape.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
All this money to chase 4 million jobs. Though I hated the bank bailouts I understood the reasoning and supported it. The rest of this garbage is a waste of resources.

Wait! I thought it was 3 millions jobs. Sort of like Obama promising everyone making under $250K would get a tax cut; now, according to the stimulus bill it's $150K. I guess this is the change he was talking about.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: Genx87
All this money to chase 4 million jobs. Though I hated the bank bailouts I understood the reasoning and supported it. The rest of this garbage is a waste of resources.

Wait! I thought it was 3 millions jobs. Sort of like Obama promising everyone making under $250K would get a tax cut; now, according to the stimulus bill it's $150K. I guess this is the change he was talking about.

Yeah who knows. At this point they are tossing out bigger numbers to scare us into submission. It will work for a short while until it doesnt work. Then I pray we have a real alternative to this crap in the next couple of election cycles.
 

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
And know on the heals of the Senate passing the obama 800+billion stimulus plan we get another

link

few trillion here, a few trillion there.

How are we ever going to repay this money?

what good is saving an economy if all we are going to do is be in debt?

Isn't all of this spending just prolonging the future and taking the bubble that existed in all of the industry's and rolling into one big US of A IOU?


Can anyone please explain what a successful bailout is going to look like?

 

sciwizam

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,953
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: Genx87
All this money to chase 4 million jobs. Though I hated the bank bailouts I understood the reasoning and supported it. The rest of this garbage is a waste of resources.

Wait! I thought it was 3 millions jobs. Sort of like Obama promising everyone making under $250K would get a tax cut; now, according to the stimulus bill it's $150K. I guess this is the change he was talking about.

So I wasn't the only one to notice the numbers going up and up. First it was 2.5mil to 3 mil, then 3 mil, then 3-4mil, now it stands at 4 mil.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: brandonb
Originally posted by: RichardE
Do you want bread lines, strong terrorism and red china becoming more powerful than you?

No?

Well, we need this, and don't you forget it!

I hope you are being sarcastic. Because history will show that the bailouts are not working. The stimulous Bush passed with income taxes, bank bailouts, etc has done nothing, and we are even closer to what you said than we were a year ago, or 10 years ago. And in another year, I foresee us in worse shape.

Look for the invisible /sarcasm tags. ;)
 

KlokWyze

Diamond Member
Sep 7, 2006
4,451
9
81
www.dogsonacid.com
Originally posted by: fisheerman
And know on the heals of the Senate passing the obama 800+billion stimulus plan we get another

link

few trillion here, a few trillion there.

How are we ever going to repay this money?

what good is saving an economy if all we are going to do is be in debt?

Isn't all of this spending just prolonging the future and taking the bubble that existed in all of the industry's and rolling into one big US of A IOU?


Can anyone please explain what a successful bailout is going to look like?

You are asking strait-forward questions that won't get a unanimous answer. From people that believe China is going to rule the Earth to people with a real understanding of economics, the only real consensus is: Nobody knows.

IMO, the bailouts of failed business is as bad as it gets. Once one went through so did many others. Bad businesses should fail. If the government was so worried about the credit markets freezing up then they should have went in another direction to fix that problem.... or attempt to fix the problem.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Sure are a bunch of bitter sore losers around here.

Back at the ranch: 600k jobs were lost last month (3.2 million in 13 months). GDP retracted at an annual rate of 3.8% last quarter (including all of that 'federalization') and our (insolvent) banks are still sitting on $62 trillion of 'assets'.

What's the over/under on the percentage of those assets that may be characterized as 'toxic'? Inquiring minds want to know (none of which appear to belong to the bitter whiners in this thread) ...
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,459
7,515
136
Originally posted by: Genx87
All this money to chase 4 million jobs. Though I hated the bank bailouts I understood the reasoning and supported it. The rest of this garbage is a waste of resources.

It wasn't based on sound principles then and it isn't based on sound principals now. If you want to know what real conservatism stands for look no further than Mark Sanford?s recent comments.

As many state and local officials clamor for their share of the billions of dollars in federal aid in the stimulus bill under consideration in Washington, South Carolina?s Republican governor is sounding a note of dissent about federal efforts to help the economy.

?A problem that was created by building up of too much debt will not be solved with yet more debt,? Gov. Mark Sanford said Sunday, making a reference to the federal deficit spending that will likely finance the federal stimulus package.

?We?re moving precipitously close to what I would call a savior-based economy,? Sanford also said Sunday on CNN?s State of the Union.

The South Carolina Republican said such an economy is ?what you see in Russia or Venezuela or Zimbabwe or places like that where it matters not how good your product is to the consumer but what your political connection is to those in power.?

?That is quite different than a market-based economy where some rise and some fall but there?s a consequence to making a stupid decision,? Sanford said after pointing to the powers granted to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to help deal with the current economic crisis.

?A lot of people who?ve made some very stupid decisions are being bailed out by the population at large,? he added.

The reason you supported the bank bailouts is the same ideology that Obama made perfectly clear last night. The concept that he must act, that he must fix this by spending our money.

Obama:
So, you know, we -- we can differ on some of the particulars, but, again, the question I think the American people are asking is, do you just want government to do nothing, or do you want it to do something? If you want it to do something, then we can have a conversation. But doing nothing, that's not an option from my perspective.

This concept that government must prop up these failed institutions has created a market based on federal money and political decisions instead of the free market. What?ll drive a company?s profits and success now is whether it is federally funded (and thus owned). Soon their taxes will rise to pay for the federally owned companies. Investors have no choice but to follow the money.

There is nothing conservative about enabling this socialist takeover, and it began with Bush and the Banks. You are looking at a complete collapse now if Obama?s ideology and plans are not successful and sound in principle. No nation has survived printing this much money, and great nations fall from within.
 

RichardE

Banned
Dec 31, 2005
10,246
2
0
Originally posted by: brandonb
Originally posted by: RichardE
Do you want bread lines, strong terrorism and red china becoming more powerful than you?

No?

Well, we need this, and don't you forget it!

I hope you are being sarcastic. Because history will show that the bailouts are not working. The stimulous Bush passed with income taxes, bank bailouts, etc has done nothing, and we are even closer to what you said than we were a year ago, or 10 years ago. And in another year, I foresee us in worse shape.

I am :beer: You need new batteries? :p
 

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Genx87
All this money to chase 4 million jobs. Though I hated the bank bailouts I understood the reasoning and supported it. The rest of this garbage is a waste of resources.

It wasn't based on sound principles then and it isn't based on sound principals now. If you want to know what real conservatism stands for look no further than Mark Sanford?s recent comments.

As many state and local officials clamor for their share of the billions of dollars in federal aid in the stimulus bill under consideration in Washington, South Carolina?s Republican governor is sounding a note of dissent about federal efforts to help the economy.

?A problem that was created by building up of too much debt will not be solved with yet more debt,? Gov. Mark Sanford said Sunday, making a reference to the federal deficit spending that will likely finance the federal stimulus package.

?We?re moving precipitously close to what I would call a savior-based economy,? Sanford also said Sunday on CNN?s State of the Union.

The South Carolina Republican said such an economy is ?what you see in Russia or Venezuela or Zimbabwe or places like that where it matters not how good your product is to the consumer but what your political connection is to those in power.?

?That is quite different than a market-based economy where some rise and some fall but there?s a consequence to making a stupid decision,? Sanford said after pointing to the powers granted to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to help deal with the current economic crisis.

?A lot of people who?ve made some very stupid decisions are being bailed out by the population at large,? he added.

The reason you supported the bank bailouts is the same ideology that Obama made perfectly clear last night. The concept that he must act, that he must fix this by spending our money.

Obama:
So, you know, we -- we can differ on some of the particulars, but, again, the question I think the American people are asking is, do you just want government to do nothing, or do you want it to do something? If you want it to do something, then we can have a conversation. But doing nothing, that's not an option from my perspective.

This concept that government must prop up these failed institutions has created a market based on federal money and political decisions instead of the free market. What?ll drive a company?s profits and success now is whether it is federally funded (and thus owned). Soon their taxes will rise to pay for the federally owned companies. Investors have no choice but to follow the money.

There is nothing conservative about enabling this socialist takeover, and it began with Bush and the Banks. You are looking at a complete collapse now if Obama?s ideology and plans are not successful and sound in principle. No nation has survived printing this much money, and great nations fall from within.

^---this

Thanks for providing what I have been trying to say.

Can we really bail out credit problems/debt (people/govt/states) with more debt?

Wouldn't only time and contraction allow this?

It just feels like if we are able to save the economy we will end up with something other than capatilism and I am not sure everyone understands that. I don't think I understand it fully all I know is that we will look nothing like what we did going into this mess as we did coming in. I guess that is what is bothering me the most.

-fish
 

TheDoc9

Senior member
May 26, 2006
264
0
0
Originally posted by: fisheerman
And know on the heals of the Senate passing the obama 800+billion stimulus plan we get another

link

few trillion here, a few trillion there.

How are we ever going to repay this money?

what good is saving an economy if all we are going to do is be in debt?

Isn't all of this spending just prolonging the future and taking the bubble that existed in all of the industry's and rolling into one big US of A IOU?


Can anyone please explain what a successful bailout is going to look like?
Yes! Bank Bailout #2 FTW!
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
Originally posted by: KlokWyze


You are asking strait-forward questions that won't get a unanimous answer. From people that believe China is going to rule the Earth to people with a real understanding of economics, the only real consensus is: Nobody knows.

IMO, the bailouts of failed business is as bad as it gets. Once one went through so did many others. Bad businesses should fail. If the government was so worried about the credit markets freezing up then they should have went in another direction to fix that problem.... or attempt to fix the problem.


I'll give you answers.

How are we ever going to repay this money?
We won't, if we are lucky our great grandkids might, or maybe their great grandkids.
Probably it will eventually be paid off by hyper-inflation. $10 trillion in debt will not be so bad when a loaf of bread costs $1 million. We can only hope it does not happen in our lifetime.

what good is saving an economy if all we are going to do is be in debt?
Does it matter if you can buy 52 inch plasma TV's with it? At least that is the prevailing thought. And really, I don?t know if it does matter. As long as the world continues to act like we have all the wealth, we actually do.

Isn't all of this spending just prolonging the future and taking the bubble that existed in all of the industry's and rolling into one big US of A IOU?
Yes. Read my first point about our great grandkids paying this off or having to deal with hyper-inflation. All these bailout bills actually do is put a band-aid on the system so the current administration does not have to do the hard work of rebuilding a working economy.

Can anyone please explain what a successful bailout is going to look like?
Not exactly. There are many ways to do a successful bailout bill that does not kill the cow to get the milk. But all of them will have some things in common. They will let companies that make bad decisions fail while helping out good business that have made good decisions. The current bailout bills all do the opposite. The government spending will build infrastructure that helps business with out stepping on their toes. The current bill looks to have this right, but we better watch how it is executed. It will help individuals that need help and not large groups and want to be paid for charity, the bills fail at this, instead giving money to large corporations with a stern warning to use it to help people out.