Moral Imperatives And Economic Necessity
Blame Game and the Art of un-Stonewalling the Opposition.
In his first State of the Union Address, President Obama again reminded us “…we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program. On top of that, the effects of the recession had put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. All this was before I walked in the door.”
So I wasn’t surprised to read the following SOTU except:
“Our current problems are not the product of the recovery program that’s only just now getting under way, as some would have you believe; they are the inheritance of decades…. The only alternative being offered to this economic program is a return to the policies that gave us a trillion-dollar debt and runaway…unemployment.”
Except that in this case the speaker was Ronald Reagan, in his first State of the Union Address. Blaming one’s predecessors for the Economic Predicament while ignoring one’s own contributions is a time-honored American tradition, and one Mr. Obama is certainly justified in trotting out as the occasion(s) may warrant. But as he has also continued to note, this time our situation is so tenuous that we don’t have the luxury of stonewalling the issues and passing them off to the next administration to deal with. Something must be done—although many of us would prefer that this “something” involve allowing the markets to deflate back down to their intrinsic, rather than to their derivative worth, and putting a halt to this seemingly incessant papering-over of corporate and GSE losses at the expense of the taxpayers.
Assuming that stabilization of the economic crisis is the goal of this both administration and the majority of the electorate, (else the enraged and disaffected run wild in the streets demanding the head of every functionary remotely connected to this mess,) and mindful that a 95% unemployment rate is going to wreak chaos upon the tax base, these economic reform measures are going to have to come from both sides of the political aisle.
But our legislative body, like most marriages of convenience, tends to be at odds with itself more than in concert; and like most such unions, there usually comes a point when spouse A confronts spouse B about the profligate spending which has finally caught up with the family budget. Recriminations give way to pouting and counter-accusations, friends of the family take sides, and dire proposals about what might be done to rectify the situation inevitably result in one party sulking in the corner of the bedchamber and refusing to join in connubial congress. Eventually, with enough cajoling and compromise—if not threat of outright ruin—the solution presents itself. The committed will notch in their belts and do what has to be done. But in recent years our Congressional Bickersons, so full of self-righteousness and mutual loathing, have all seemed to end up buying a pack of attorneys and disbanding in bitter divorce. Meanwhile, the bills go unpaid.
For a while, it seemed as though the 111th Congress of the United States was headed down this path as well. But as I’ve noted here before, that dynamic appears, whether out of moral imperative, or sheer economic necessity, to be evolving into something a bit less dysfunctional. And that gives me hope.
Last summer the so-called Beer Summit became an impromptu “teaching moment” suggesting a new tone of compromise the administration would try to institute in Washington. This spirit of conciliation was in evidence last week as President Obama met with House Republicans in an unprecedented effort to break the procedural gridlock that has increasingly paralyzed our Legislative branch. In a free exchange reminiscent of the British House of Commons’ raucous verbal jousts with their Prime Minister during “Question Time,” the President and the Republican House traded barbs, entreaties, and at times even good-natured, laughter. “It is the kind of discussion that we frankly need to have more of,” said House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. “This is fun.” responded the President after one particularly bitter exchange.
Speaking without benefit of either his entourage or his fabled teleprompter, and to an at-times openly hostile audience, Obama’s visit was both courageous and canny—as was convincing the conference to allow the event to be televised for all to see. With a national audience looking on, the President addressed the “sour climate” in Washington and took the opportunity to refute many of the factually erroneous political talking points recently directed against him by grandstanding members of the Republican House.
A few Republicans even expressed their muted admiration of his willingness to finally hear them out. “I give the president an enormous amount of credit.” Said Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, chair of the GOP’s policy committee, in a more family-friendly iteration of an earlier comment. But whether or not that admiration is enough to induce Republican lawmakers to break ranks and actually start doing the hard work of fixing our economy, still remains to be seen.
For those who may have missed this genteel slug-fest and want to watch the Obama we elected at his eloquent best, here is a link to both the video and the text of the debate. For those who can’t bear another moment of the man and the elitist blathering that’s destroying Our County, here is a condensed subtext of the Q&A:
Speaker: Welcome Mr. (Kenyan) President, to the House Republican Conference.
Question from Congressperson: Our stimulus bill costs half as much as yours and creates twice the number of jobs. It offers across the board tax relief. Little David’s Daddy is out of work and Little David is very sad.
Obama: I will write Little David a letter the moment I get back into my limo. Now, please tell me why on earth I would reject a bill that actually creates twice the jobs and costs half as much? Problem is, I couldn’t find any credible economist to back up your figures. Can you? Oh, btw. It seems like quite a few of you found time to go to the ribbon cutting ceremonies for all those recovery projects you voted against….
Question: So. You’re gonna support our across the board tax cuts?
Obama: Warren Buffet’s not gonna get a tax cut.
Question: Why don’t you freeze spending now? And a line item veto. We want a line item veto.
Obama: Can’t freeze spending when there are automatic stabilizers that kick in from your past pork. Next year they’ll expire. Then you can wail at me for cutting your pet projects. Oh, and guys? Go ahead and hand me a line item veto. Please!
Question: What about the coal miners?
Obama: 1930 was eighty years ago, honey. Deke and Cletus are gonna have to transition to a new line of work in the Green Economy.
Question: I’m new here, and now I gotta clean up your mess. Why are you still allowing lobbyists in your administration? I’m so disappointed in you.
Obama: Some of the specialized experts—like the doctor who heads up the project to keep kids off cigarettes, (cough, cough,) are staying on. Others have carryovers into this administration from their appointed term in the old one. They’re being replaced as those expire. That okay with you? an we be friends again? Huh? Can we?
Question: Why weren’t the health reform hearings televised—like you said?
Obama: The majority were televised; carried on CSPAN, if you’d bother to get your face out of Fox News for five minutes. But as you know, countless committee hearings were held in chambers all over the capitol. Have you ever tried to get a film crew into the stall of a men’s room? Oh wait, that’s the Senate….
Question: Public option sucks. We don’t wanna pay for poor people’s health care. Or Baby Boomers’. Or illegal aliens. Especially those.
Obama: Tough. We’re gonna have to provide basic health care for everyone one way or another, so get over it. Tell your money boys that if they can show me guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions, no lifetime cap, no dismissals, and affordability for young people and small business, I’m game. Oh, and I’m not a Bolshevik you nitwits. You’re the ones screaming for Tsar Timothy and Gregori Bernanke’s heads. You’re the ones with the “Platform Purity test” from the Central Committee. So stop rousing the rabble because it tends to blow back big time…if you catch my drift.
Question: We do too have some good ideas! Stop telling our constituents we’ve offered nothing.
Obama: Please listen closely and I’ll speak veeer-rry sloooow-ly for you. Get me some independent verification and not just your unsubstantiated assertions and I’ll listen. You guys proposed a lot of this stuff when you were in charge, but now that a Dem’s in office you’re suddenly against it. Yeah, I’m talkin’ to you, Tan Man.
Question: Pelosi is a…(mean girl.) She won’t let us eat in Senior Park and the teachers all hate us.
Obama: I’m not in charge of the Student Council, kids; I work in the principal’s office. But gee, that’s why I’m here talking to you today. My office door is always open—just make an appointment with my secretary, Mrs. Pelosi….
Question: You’re raising an unconscionable national debt. Everybody hates you and all your toadies on Wall Street and the Fed.
Obama: Excuse me? MY toadies? I came into office with 8T in national debt staring me in the face. YOUR party passed the biggest unpaid entitlement in history and funded two wars through supplementals. Now we’re looking at 38T in unfunded Social Security and Medicare liability. So whaddya wanna do about it, huh? Leave Grandma out on the street? Death panels? Howz about we start bouncing YOUR federal paychecks, hmmmmmm? Yackity yackity yak, dude. Oh, and did I mention? Your figures are bs.
Speaker: Thank you for coming Mr. (Kenyan) President.
Obama: Well, that was certainly fun. Thank you, thank you, everyone. I’ll be back. (Ducks flying salad plate) What’s that? Of course I’ll sign an autograph for you….
by Allena Hansen
“Now we’re looking at 38T in unfunded Social Security and Medicare liability. So whaddya wanna do about it, huh? Leave Grandma out on the street?”
No, get everyone who was part of the politically active generations into the system before the dollar and debt crisis hits. And then close the programs to future recipients due to “circumstances beyond our control.” Then claim its for their own good, to rebuild the extended family.
At this point, there are few other options aside from asking those in or near retirement to sacrifice something as well. And that won’t happen.
those in or near retirement to sacrifice something as well. And that won’t happen ??
I respectfully disagree WT…There is no question “In My Mind” that “means testing” is coming on a multitude of fronts most prominently of which will be Social Security and Medicaid…I am planning on it…
You don’t think they’ll means test the existing recipients, do you?
When I laid out the possiblities for Social Security a few years ago, I came up with four alternatives.
The Democratic alternative was means testing.
The Republican alternative was eliminating payments for the second spouse (she should have been in the home).
My alternative was eliminating the fixed retirement age, setting the ratio of those paying in to those taking out to three to one, and letting people retire as workers were around to support them.
The do-nothing alternative was keep borrowing until a currency collapse, and then impose draconian taxes and benefit cuts on those who are not vested. Several years later, the top three are going by the boards.
“The Democratic alternative was means testing.”
I wonder what the parameters were, what kind of assets counted as “means”? or did it even get that far.
It almost doesn’t matter. Clever lawyers who specialize in assisting the elderly already have loads of ways to avoid the Medicaid clawbacks if granny needs a nursing home and still wants to leave the family homestead to your dad. With strongly written trusts establishing life estates and a thrid party making your “pull the plug” decisions, you don’t even need to like or trust your kids to do it.
That’s the problem with means testing. Why save? And if we as a country were willing to accept less and pay more, which is what savings were, we’d be doing it collectively, and Social Security and Medicare wouldn’t collapse.
Of course there could be means testing based on lifetime earnings. But that would mean real suffering by EXISTING beneficiaries who blew their wad on high living. That could be considered justice, but justice doesn’t fly when the majority are irresponsible.
but justice doesn’t fly when the majority are irresponsible.
Ouch! That’s a painful truth. Maybe, that’s when the bond vigilantes mete out the justice.
I like your alternative. As we live longer, we should work longer. Retiring at 65 when you expect to live to 85 or more is crazy. Retirement should be for those who are too infirm to work.
This is a bit of a Catch-22 for the younger generations, however. If folks don’t retire at 65, there is less opportunity for younger folks to move up.
I keep pointing it out, as nobody seems to acknowledge. Means-testing for Medicare already started under GWB admin. Those earning under $85K at age 65 pay premiums (for Medicare Part B) equal to I think 1/4 of the average benefit.
Other cut-offs at $125K and $160K.
If earning over $200K at 65 you pay 60% of average benefit.
No hue and cry was raised. I assume they can just go on adjusting those cutoffs and percentages.
What’s this? An Obama-infomercial?
Who are you and what have you done to the Housing-Bubble-Blog!
‘what have you done to the Housing-Bubble-Blog’
I suggest you go back and look at the HBB posts from early 2005. I was carefully connecting the GSE’s, congress and the rating agencies. Like it or not, the government was the financing mechanism for the housing bubble. And now, any hopes for reform are in the political realm.
Every day I listen to the media refer to the ‘global economic crisis,’ with out a mention of the mania that was behind it. And I’ve pointed out before that the HB has steam-rolled everything that tried to stand in its way. Now our entire economy is shaken, and what our government does from here on is a part of this story.
BTW, any of you that want to take a few unpaid hours out of your week and provide a guest post are welcome to give it a shot. Just be ready for people to attack your motivations, logic and just about anything else.
BTW, any of you that want to take a few unpaid hours out of your week and provide a guest post are welcome to give it a shot. Just be ready for people to attack your motivations, logic and just about anything else.
Right on, Ben!
hey, critical analysis can be productive & is a welcome balance to azz kissing yes-men, but I especially appreciate the same critics offering solutions, instead of just endless vinegar.
easy to tear it down, much harder to build it up.
Ben, thanks for your time and efforts. Your blog kept me from jumping in at the worst time.
Even *I* gotta admit that today’s column sound little left. Perhaps one of the right-leaners could post a rebuttal or have a regular column? Not sure if I’d reply there, but at least it would be there.
Amen!
I thought your description of the event was a rather nice piece of prose Ben, just as entertaining as John Stewart’s re-enactment of the meeting. I live in Katy Texas where the economy and the housing market are quite good…for now.
Aaron Layman (Aaron Layman’s Katy Texas Real Estate Forum)
Thanks, Aaron. I do it for you.
Ben Jones,
Point taken, and yes, I well recall those early discussions. I also recall many posters here nagging you ( myself included ) about “whatever shall we discuss once The Bubble has indeed popped!?”
So I think we always knew this thing would morph and move on as the battle lines moved. I don’t have any issues w/ that as it’s clear, the lid has been blown clean off.
Since my main concern continues to be “the mania behind it” it’s been my position that unless and until we get meaningful reform in the MBS/REIC/WS channel, a lot of the talk about HC reform etc. is premature. I think The President gets that now and his focus on putting small business back on track exhibits exactly that. IMHO.
my main concern continues to be “the mania behind it” it’s been my position that unless and until we get meaningful reform in the MBS/REIC/WS channel…
I thought your main concern was demanding that every thread be about, and only about, FBs and how stupid they are. Any talk of ‘meaningful reform in the MBS/REIC/WS channel’ is *squelched* by you as being ‘not what we used to talk about on the hbb back in the day, come on, guys’. (The fact that you are a self-admitted FB makes it even more peculiar.)
He first increased the ‘budgets’ of all his departments by 20% then says I’ll freeze them for three years. Whoopie whoopie doo.
Thanks for the offer Ben but just because I have an official HBB T-shirt doesn’t really mean that I am qualified to FLY this thing !
Sheesh..dispite the Housing Bust, this is one trusting guy.
“BTW, any of you that want to take a few unpaid hours out of your week and provide a guest post are welcome to give it a shot. Just be ready for people to attack your motivations, logic and just about anything else.”
She deserves to have her motivations attacked. She, like “The One”, would like to use this economic event as a springboard to institute the most radical left wing schemes this country has ever seen. How can she be surprised many in the country do not want our system to be “Fundamentally Changed”?
I will call the post what it is…Propaganda and cookie cutter insults directed at those “ignorant”, “unenlightened”, “racists” who make up the opposition.
‘institute the most radical left wing schemes’
Again, it’s easy to attack something, but no so easy to put something together. I’m curious what your 10 or so paragraphs would amount to and what fault others could find with it? (BTW, I’ve come to believe people who buy into “left and right” are tools of the establishment).
‘I will call the post what it is…Propaganda and cookie cutter insults’
I can just see you wowing them over. So how about it? Put up a guest post for all to pick over, and we’ll see how smart you are and how thick your skin is.
Ok…I will change it to Progressive schemes. Call it what you want, we can not pay for any of these (fill in the blank) schemes and they continue to chip away at our liberty. The opposition, both republican and democrat, are the only thing standing in the way of these atrocities.
My skin is plenty thick. If I find myself among the previously employed, I would be glad to write a guest post. As for now, I only have time to be a drive-by poster/reader/criticizer.
Call it what you want, we can not pay for any of these (fill in the blank) schemes and they continue to chip away at our liberty.
But sometimes things are not what they seem.
For example:
A single-payer health-care system could address the two very important issues in your sentence above, liberty and cost.
A single-payer health system in other countries has been proven to be cheaper and deliver good results. It’s cheaper. and people could be able to buy additional private insurance if they wanted to. What’s not to like?
A single-payer health insurance system would also enhance American’s liberty and freedom. How?
Right now we are hostage to our jobs and to our health plans that discourage job changing, moving, risk-taking, and starting a new business. How can we support a system that INHIBITS RISK TAKING if we call ourselves capitalists?
Does our current health-care system foster liberty, freedom, small business formation, capitalism and economic advancement?
I say it does not. I say it does the opposite and I say people are too simplistic conceptually when they look at such issues and I say it is because of disingenuous political propaganda spewing forth from entities protecting their interests that are incongruous with the interests of Americans and the American way of life.
Right now we are hostage to our jobs and to our health plans that discourage job changing, moving, risk-taking, and starting a new business. How can we support a system that INHIBITS RISK TAKING if we call ourselves capitalists?
My prediction: Once the health insurance/job hostage-taking ends, our National Anthem will become “Take This Job and Shove It.” And I already asked Johnny Paycheck if we could borrow his song for a while.
You tel ‘em Rio….single payer….not some massive insurance payments to “cover” everybody uner the current scheme….USA-payroll doctors….they get $x dollars, maybe a bonus if their patients stay well…
socialized medecine to the “N”th degree, the sooner the better!….
take away my liberty…what nonsense!
Screw it! Don’t change a thing! we’ll have this conversation again in 5 years when half the “The Gubbmint’s Takin’ muh Liberty” crowd has gone through a medical bankruptcy.
MAybe the problem is they can’t imagine things being any different.
What is “their” solution? tort reform, interstate competition…yeah….right
Exactly, Rio. What would be more pro-small business than a single-payer healthcare system? As it is, the big cos have a major advantage over smaller cos because they can offer the ‘gold-plated’ health coverage that the little guys can’t. People fear to leave jobs with health coverage to start new businesses or work at start-ups.
Our existing system discourages entrepreneurship.
As long as 50% of the population pays NO taxes we are toast.
As long as 50% of the population makes their money by trading and deal making (instead of productive work), we are toast.
She, like “The One”,
Hey that’s original. Did you make it up?
Did you call our previous president “The number 2″?
I didn’t.
With all due respect, cashed, I’ve lived the most John Galtian life of anyone on this blog; but I’m also a concerned member of a highly complicated– and very troubled– political system that defies simplistic ideology. Your ascertains suggest not only an profound ignorance of philosophical nuance but a lack reading comprehension as well. And a huge dose of presumption.
We’ve seen you write some really thoughtful analysis here on the blog. Why the continued umbrage?
Interesting spell-edit there. “assertions.”
She deserves to have her motivations attacked
Gotta call B.S. to that!!!
I don’t want nationalized medecine because I’m some sort of marxist bent on government takeover……
I WANT TO FIX A BROKEN SYSTEM……
It just so happens broken systems only get fixed when things are bad enough that people are willing to do something about it. You do realize that this is the only country in the world that has “fundraisers” for choldren with cancer. I can’t even explain to my french in-laws what Granny -dumping is - another uniquely american phenomenon.
Maybe it’s not broken enough for you so we’ll have to wait until the last hospital within a 100 miles of your house shuts down due to non-payment by so many, or better yet you or your kid gets infected with typhoid or the next super bug from the person that went untreated….
i’m not part of a conspiracy just looking for solutions to make a better world... do me a favor don’t insult me or my motives (and I’ll accord you the same respect)
“looking for solutions to make a better world”
What does the mean exactly? It’s akin to the beauty pageant contestant saying “I am for world peace”, it means nothing. Who is supposed to pay for your better world…the taxpayers? Do all taxpayers have a say or are some of them too ill informed to know what is best for them?
Click on my name, it links to the national debt clock. We don’t have the money.
Cashedin:
better world= not getting typhoid from untreated uninsured, not having local hospital close, ending childhood fundraisers
what’s your solution? or is there no problem?
p.s. i realize the budget problem is intractable
Honestly, I do not have a solution to the worlds problems. Perhaps private parties and charitable organizations can combine forces to assist those in need (Look how much money MDA takes in). Some of the reforms required for health care affordability can be achieved at the state level…In other words, closer to the people. We still need the free market and capitalism involved in health care, profit is the incentive that produces much of the new drugs and treatment innovations.
Also, it may be time for the rest of the world to step up and pay their own share. If they have corrupt systems/governments, is that the fault of the US taxpayer? Mexico has tremendous poverty and corruption, does that mean the US taxpayer has to pay the medical bills and education expenses of all who cross the border? Where does it stop? What happens when we stop the printing presses?
Then there is the problem of our privacy and our liberty. When government becomes the payer, we have lost both. You can’t have that nightcap, that cigarette, that wendy’s value meal, that harley ride, that hike in the mountains, etc. They will not factor in your overall health, that you may be physically fit participate in vigorous exercise often enough to make that burger, drink or occasional smoke not so detrimental. And…god help us if they start making decisions based on your political beliefs.
Look how much money MDA takes in
NO NO big charity is almost as bad as big business. look how much they spend on themselves
may be time for the rest of the world to step up and pay their own share.
last time I checked , France, Canada, Britain, paid for their own health care system (and do it a hell of a lot better than we do) and military , sufficient to deal with any real threats
Then there is the problem of our privacy and our liberty. When government becomes the payer, we have lost both.
newsflash: you already have lost your privacy. 49 states have mandatory seat-belts, fluoride (shudder the thought) in the drinking water, tobacco and booze is getting taxed out of sight already. More public service announcements to go for a walk would be a dagger in the heart of liberty.
And…god help us if they start making decisions based on your political beliefs.
i guess that’s a joke. i think neo-nazi’s in France get treated like the “socialists” who run the place.
Charity is not a solution.
Then there is the problem of our privacy and our liberty. When government becomes the payer, we have lost both. You can’t have that nightcap, that cigarette, that Wendy’s value meal, that harley ride, that hike in the mountains, etc.
I don’t have the total solutions either however we have already totally lost privacy and liberty in our private health-care system. I just looked at a 9 page application from Blue Cross. Talk about invasion of my privacy and giving them wiggle room to not cover me or to back out of coverage once I am sick.
The thing is, if everyone is covered no matter what, we have a greater liberty to drink, have a cig or a Big Mac if that’s what one wants because everyone is covered. Booze and cigs are not outlawed in Europe or Canada however they DO have MORE incentive to provide booze and drug rehab and education and to educate people about good health habits.
I do understand there are trade-offs in every system but to think we have any liberty or privacy or assurances of coverage in our existing system is fallacy.
I am starting to hope all of these programs pass with flying colors. When they do, I will be one of the most passionate gamers of the system. I will give up full time employment and live off of the poor saps that continue to work. There are several dreams that I would like to pursue including but not limited to:
Law Degree
Acting
Professional Poker/Gambler
Camera Man in Porn movies
RV’ing across America
Full Time Volunteering
Now I will have the opportunity to do so. I see this as a more productive glass is half full attitude. Call me a convert.
+100 A. Hansen. Excellent post.
c’mon dinor(Dan In Northern Oregon?), lighten up!
agreeable or not, at least the commentary is a coherent post that doesn’t ramble on about Oil City, PA.
aquis,
LOL! My response was posted right after Ben’s but when they get hung up a bit in Mod., they can come across as mean spirited and overkill, even if they’re really not.
For guys like me, bringing up HC at a time like this is when your kids keep pestering and pecking away at you, trying to break you down enough to get a “Yes already damn it!” ( even if it’s gotten out of you by nothing more than duress! )
Conclusions and solutions arrived at thru those tactics are seldom lasting. IMHO.
These guest posts do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management. I write them to stimulate thought and lively conversation, and to give Ben a break in the time-consuming responsibilities of running his blog.
with Love,
allena
Incredibly well-written and certainly provocative. Much appreciated by a former English Teacher and Director of a language school.
ahansen,
Your posts are always much appreciated!
Thanks for taking the time and energy to write for us.
Have you ever noticed that school districts are always asking for MOOOOORRREE money? For the last twenty years we have piled it on thick and deep. Has our education improved? Our son’s old middle school used to have a principal and a vice principal with 1100 students. Today it has a principal and THREE vice principals along with a host of other administrative positions. Same 1100 students.
The same problem with medical. People with insurance feel like they need to get their moneys worth and go to the doctor a lot. They want a lot of tests and they don’t care how much it costs. Get rid of insurance and we go a long way to cutting costs.
Obama’s answers continue to be more money for schools, more insurance etc. and more taxes. Problem? IT DOES NOT WORK!
My brother is an education professor (very junior) and he tells me that the money drain is definitely in administration. Some of it necessary to deal with evolving documentation requirements and some of it more like credential inflation in overall hiring. If you used to be able to get a job with a BA, now it takes a masters degree. Similarly, if you want to be a considered a principal of an excellent suburban school you have to have more people directly working for you - a management team, rather than an assistant to take the student discipline problems off your desk.
I’m sure there are other issues, like over paying people who go out and get particularly useless advanced degrees, and retirement costs and 100% coverage of gold plated health insurance premiums contribute as well, but administration inflation plays a large role. Please note that a lot of these folks are people who didn’t like teaching actual children, so a role is found for them within the system, but without actual classroom time.
“…that the money drain is definitely in administration.”
“administration”:
Prison System = CULT
Fire System = CULT
Police System = CULT
Public Works = Cult
Education System = CULT
Hospital System = CULT
Medical Specialist System = Cult
Financial System = CULT
Does anyone see a “pattern” developing here?
For example: Is the following happening in YOUR neighborhood?
Is Metropolitan Water District trying to avoid public scrutiny?:
February 2nd, 2010, by Teri Sforza, OC Register staff writer
“Essentially, negotiations between the union and the management of MWD took place in a cone of silence. Once everyone was reasonably happy, the tentative contracts went to employees for approval first, and then on to MWD’s giant board of directors for the final sign-off.
Well, after the employees approved said tentative contracts, but before the board voted, there was time for muckrackers to do a bit of poking around. The public - stumbling out of a recessional stupor - was outraged that public employees could see their pay rise as much as 23 percent over five years, and incensed at the proposed 25 percent hike in retirement formulas, at a time when pension investments were bleeding.
That the sweetened retirement formula would have been a windfall for many of MWD’s long-time managers (who were negotiating and recommending approval) may have been the nail in the agreement’s coffin.”
Looks like most of the cults are union jobs
Titled: “administration”:
I think most “administrative” position’s are non-union
That said:
Union’s = Cult
Unions = middle class.
…then they go to work for the State Board of Ed, or run for the legislature. We have more “educators” in the legislature here than lawyers. They get a sweet deal with leaves of absence while serving at the capital. I even heard the school boards make up the difference in pay. The average worker would lose his job.
In all fairness, too, apparently the Title I requirements (whatever those are) are quite a drain on school finances.
Title I: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg1.html
Enjoy!
way to go polly,
still wading through it to see where the specific mandates are….already see a few “shall”…
We have more “educators” in the legislature here than lawyers. They get a sweet deal with leaves of absence while serving at the capital.
Interesting — but is your state legislature full- or part-time? In some states it’s a part-time gig, and some professions naturally allow for more flexibility in that realm …
How is the high proportion of educators influencing state law? Is it apparent?
this is a big subject in Connecticut (i don’t know how many legislators are former educators). We have binding arbitration here, which means the teacher’s union makes a proposal and the Town or Regional school makes a proposal. If they don’t agree , then a 3 person arbitration panel picks one or the other. ( I believe this was devised to avoid the unsavory and lengthy teacher strikes of the 70’s)
Arbitrators work at the pleasure of the Department of Labor.
The upshot is salaries and benefits are going through the roof. trying to dig in your heels with smaller raises only makes it worse when the arbitrators take the teacher’s offer. Those contracts are then used as reference points for deciding what’s fair for the teachers’ contracts next door. Something’s gotta give since the schools gobble up over 70% of a town’s budget and the state is not in a position to help.
It’s going to be good-bye extra-curriculars (sports , music , art) , hello study halls (the teachers on duty get paid princely so it will be sayonarra to the others). The colleges have an organization that always comes around threatening to yank some sort of certification they give which high schools that don’t have what they consider “necessities”.
Budget’s have to be approved by referendum. it’s really interesting because parents are usually active voters when the budget axe is about to swing. in the 06488 the P.T.A. (as in Harper Valley) has the moms wearing sandwich boards urging people to vote yes. We’re luckier than hell to have Heritage Village (dating to the late 1960’s, it’s one of the first over 55 condo complexes - minor children prohibited- in the North-East). They have about 4,000 residents, all paying taxes with exactly zero children in school- out of the towns total population of 20,000. Anyway its a pitched battle every year–old timers versus the parents. (actually some villagers support the schools) The “villagers” put up a good fight, but they’re screwed by the procedure. I,f the budget is defeated it comes back with no change or a 1% decrease. The old people don’t have the stamina of the parents so after a few tries at most eventually the budget gets passed. (It can take some of those people 15 minutes to walk to the door from the parking lot) My hunch is that the Superintendent of the school system builds a little fat into the budget so the “cuts” don’t hurt. I have two middle-schoolers and I prefer our school system to any of the private schools in the area- best of everything!
Local realt-whores often point out how important a good school system is to maintaining home values so many non-parents get on board with giving the schools whatever they want. Check our home prices—not getting clocked like so many places. aslo, with all those villagers absorbing so much of the taxes we have much lower tax rates than neighboring school systems who are trying to decide if they should layoff 12 or 15 teachers next year.
I’m part of a citizen’s taxpayer group in town and am up to speed on all this stuff. Most people are completely clueless—they just bitch when their taxes go up.
also- special Education is really expensive.
My brother is an education professor (very junior) and he tells me that the money drain is definitely in administration.
My mother was a public school teacher for 22 years. She’s been retired since 1993, but word of warning, do not get her started on administrative bloat. Just don’t.
But to be fair about it, any discussion of “administrative bloat” in any business needs to include a discussion on how Federal mandates require additional staff to track/enforce/demonstrate compliance.
Because the “there ought to be a law” crowd has run amok, businesses and organizations of all types have had to hire people just for this. And it’s all “overhead” (or an “unfunded mandate”).
At the same time, genuine lawbreakers get a pass because the government never seems to have enough people on staff, or with the proper expertise, to enforce the law effectively.
A lot of the laws exist because there are so many people who are willing to screw around other people to make a buck.
But to be fair about it, any discussion of “administrative bloat” in any business needs to include a discussion on how Federal mandates require additional staff to track/enforce/demonstrate compliance.
X-GSfixr, you just hit the motherlode (’scuse the pun) of her discontent!
The worst example of this (to me) is the California Air Resources Board. Cali is having a major fiscal crisis, businesses shutting down and moving out, etc. and these guys are still pushing laws to force tailpipe emissions in Cali to be Angel-Fart clean.
Never mind the fact that there are about 98% there already. Gotta make everyone spend that extra $2000 bucks or so it will take to get Angel-Farts.
Out here in the Great American Desert, we get the “cram down” on this stuff; because the California market is so big, we end up having to pay for California/Northeast mandates, because it makes no sense for anyone to design cars for two different markets. Never mind the fact that we didn’t get a chance to vote for these a-holes, and never mind the fact that pay scales out here won’t support purchasing a $40K mid-size family car.
Ever live in the San Gabriel Valley during a smog alert?
Automakers et al have known this was coming since the 1950’s–because they were complaining about California’s emission restrictions even back then, and did nothing to address the issue except lobby against them and make a few ineffectual modifications.
This is a perfect example of having to pay the piper now for what this country has put off dealing with for decades. And this is only a teensy microcosm of the larger problem. Gonna be a lotta squealin’ goin’ on for the foreseeable future….
“pay the piper now”
Geez, not ‘everything’ is the proverbial canary! Not everything is “years in the making”. You could have off’d yer’ self in a matter minutes using the exhaust of a 70’s muscle car.
Thank you, we’ve heard all this before time and again. X-GS was just bringing something fresh to the table by explaining the issue from the mfrs…. perspective. Frankly one I’d never stopped to weigh before.
Petroleum-based fuels are on the way out, as are privately administered health “insurers,” retail megabanks that suck tax dollars to survive, and McMansion housing tracts. But that doesn’t mean they’re going to go quietly.
Alternatives to all these institutions have existed for decades, but been supressed by bigger competitors and a public too dull to imagine any other choices. Now these failing entities are dealing with the markets they themselves created and perpetrated. It’s not going to be pretty, and they’re going to scream bloody murder about the changes, but they WILL change. And folks like our fixr are the ones caught in the fallout.
Petroleum-based fuels are on the way out
Pray tell what is going to replace them?
The ethenol is better hoax is an igore (algore) thing. Ethenol based gas creates more smog plus it gives 15% less milage. It’s a creation of the midwest pols (mostly dems).
No; I’ve only spent 8-9 days in California in my entire life. But that is beside the point.
Just because pollution is “bad” in one specific location in California, doesn’t mean that the draconian fixes mandated by the CARB should be applied to the other 50 states.
As far as petroleum-based fuels are concerned, electrics/hybrids just aren’t going to cut it for large swaths of the country.
Then there’s the problem/issue of NHTSA/IIHS and their demands for more/more expensive/more complicated/heavier safety equipment. We’ve all seen people on this blog complain about their 1992 Honda Civic being 1000 pounds lighter than 2010 Civic. Almost all of the weight gain is due to mandated safety equipment and structure improvement/crush zones.
The fact is that all the currently available motor fuels on have half the energy/gallon as gasoline, and costs less, even with gasoline priced at $4/gallon. (unless you figure in the government subsidized price). Never mind the fact that none has enough of a price advantage to justify a “build it from scratch” distribution infrastructure.
Low energy nuclear reaction, high storage battery technologies, photosynthetic conversion, heck, teletransportation–we’re already virtual. Redesign of populations centers, delivery systems, storage and distribution patterns. For starters.
I’ll say this for the air quality in California — L.A., specifically.
Back when my DH and I were kids growing up in the San Fernando Valley, you couldn’t see the mountains on the other side of the valley except for a few weeks in the winter, usually after the rains. When cresting the Sepulveda Pass (405 fwy) as you came into the valley, you almost never saw any mountains.
Then, we got all the smog laws in the 80s (IIRC), which I certainly complained about as a young driver with old, delapidated cars (because that’s all I could afford at the time).
Thing is, every time we go to L.A. (now live in the San Diego area), we can see the mountains, clear as a bell. And the odd thing is, the population has only grown larger over the years.
So, more people and less pollution…I think it was worth it.
The issue is that we need cheep energy. Energy is required for any sort of growth/industry. Out of all the clean energy options nuclear is the best solution. The problem is the not in my back yard syndrome and all the red tape that is required. Without cheep energy the development of hybrids or plug in vehicles is dead in the water.
It’s kinda funny that Obama is giving up on his own party coming together as one, and is reaching out to get some crossovers.
It’s definitely a good (unprecedented perhaps?) thing, but also funny.
I prefer to see it as an attempt to circumvent the ideological gridlock with a more non-partisan approach–which is, after the platform he ran on. The Blue Dog wing, the Ron Paulisans, the bi-partisan Tea party, are all examples of this new approach to cracking the ossified Party system in our country and getting something more democratic into the proceedings. When you’re trying to break an impasse, Communication is Good.
getting something more democratic into the proceedings.
But we are not a democracy. And I really wish people would stop calling us that. Democracies breed dictators as the poeple are always looking to one leader. This country, whether you like it or not, WAS NOT DESIGNED AS A DEMOCRACY. We are free, SEPARATE and equal states. Most progressives dont see it that way. Why do we care? Most of the things the messiah is trying to do could be done by the states and should be done by the states. I have always felt it should be the states taxing us and the fed govt taxing the states. But then again, it would take away the big pot of money our politicians, (both Democrat and Republican) are using to fleece us and get rich. We need to get back to how our country was founded and I dont think enough politicians are reading the constitution anymore….
We are free, SEPARATE and equal states. Most progressives dont see it that way.
Most conservatives don’t see it that way, either, unless there’s a clear benefit to their state.
See the rhetoric from defiantly “independent” Alaska, then check the bottom line — they get back more than $1.80 for every dollar they send to the federal government. Wealthy (blue) states subsidize that “independence” …
A large part of the dollars going to red states are for military bases and federal land - Alaska being the prime example of the latter. Subtract out those amounts, and the red states subsidize the blue states.
geeber,
Sure you didn’t mean to say that vice-versa? Either way, it’s not that clear cut any more. After the ‘08 Election, it was noted that all but a handful of counties in TX voted more Dem. than in any previous cycle.
That’s not to say the Rep’s didn’t carry them, but when they did, it was by a lesser margin. What has happened is that, tech co’s from the BA ( and other Blue strongholds ) come to TX for the “business friendly” env. ( but uh… bring their liberal politics w/ them! )
How that isn’t two-faced I don’t know?
Nope - the red state federal “subsidies” (which they can’t use to balance their budgets anyway, so it’s a complete red herring) are for military bases and federal land within their borders. Subtract out those amounts, and the blue states receive more federal dollars than they pay.
RE: 2008 elections–REQUIRED READING-
Here’s the link to the map showing counties that voted More For Kerry in 2004 than for obama in 2008.
I think it shows where the Uber-racists are (i.e. Appalachia, Louisiana, parts of teaxas, arkansas)
What is that expression, Diogenes? “paddle faster”
to whom does federal land in a given state belong? Red states are definitely takers but what the blue states are “making” is illusory
geeber,
You mean like CA & NY? Last I checked, Cali is like the 8th Largest Economy in the World and as Blue as it gets. If anything, states like OR are the ones coat tailing.
Try that link again
Bluer: more Democratic in 2008 than 2004
Redder: more Republican in 2008 than 2004
Seems to me to, generally, track the most racist counties in the country
Nope - the red state federal “subsidies” (which they can’t use to balance their budgets anyway, so it’s a complete red herring) …
So if a state can’t balance their budgets with it, the money doesn’t count? WTF?
That’s not even the calculation I’m talking about, which is federal tax dollars/revenue sent to Washington v. the amount of federal money that returns to the state.
A large part of the dollars going to red states are for military bases and federal land - Alaska being the prime example of the latter. Subtract out those amounts, and the red states subsidize the blue states.
Do you have a source for that assertion?
And how would that work for California, which gets back about 78 cents for every dollar sent to DC (source: taxfoundation.org), yet houses many of the country’s largest military bases (Pendleton, Irwin, Edwards AFB), as well as large swaths of government-owned land?
Or Texas, or Nevada, two red states that meet your conditions, but get back less from the federal government than they send to DC?
“…This country, whether you like it or not, WAS NOT DESIGNED AS A DEMOCRACY.”
Right. That’s why we have “one man, one vote.” And national elections. And a public school system with a standardized national curriculum. And that silly CONTINENTAL Congress.
This is the 21st century, Step. We have this thing called the “internet” now and a global economy that sort of renders artificial constraints and boundaries, well, quaint. Commerce crosses state lines now! Databases have gone national! North high and South high have merged into Metro high!
Imagine the possibilities.
This meme is as poorly contrived as it is trite. Seriously.
Free, SEPARATE and equal states?
U.S.A…what does the U stand for, again?
Yeah, all that “State”s Rights” stuff was working so well prior to 1861.
i thought we were a republic.
Most of the things the messiah is trying to do
Aww man…. If you guys gotta be disrespectful to major tenet of the Christian religion at least use a capital “M” in Messiah please.
Didn’t anyone teach you all how to dis another person’s religion in a politically correct manner?
Dang.
Step- You are aware you’re making the exact same argument the Confederacy made to justify slavery and secession and the southern states made to justify jim crow laws, right? State’s rights and all that?
My deep thoughts on the Civil War and “State’s rights”:
I believe the slave “States” had the “right” to get their butts whipped badly.
Step- You are aware you’re making the exact same argument the Confederacy made to justify slavery and secession and the southern states made to justify jim crow laws, right? State’s rights and all that?
Yes, I do..
But I am making arguments for our time, not then.
U.S.A…what does the U stand for, again?
United in the common good. And no, not in the “good” of giving an entitlement, the good of opportunity.
This meme is as poorly contrived as it is trite. Seriously.
I understand. Our country was designed to be different from Europe from the very beginning. Seems to me the more we are trying to be like Europe, the worse off things are becoming….
Step- I think you’d discover that ‘our time’ will still not let you eat in some restaurants, stay in some hotels, or marry someone of another race in parts of many states if we go back to state’s rights. It wasn’t so very long ago that this was the case, and it only ended when the federal government forced it to end. What do you think has changed?
On top of that, the effects of the recession had put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. All this was before I walked in the door.”
Senator 0bama was one of the most liberals senators in the history of the senate and voted for every government spending bill that came along his desk (for the short time he was there).
And now he wants to blame everyone else.
The FACT is that he TRIPLED the deficit in 1 year from the outrageous Bush deficits.
He has NO ONE to blame but himself. Presidents used to have a sign on their desk that used to say “the buck stops here.” For 0bama it is “Who can I blame?”
Agreed.
This thread post is absurd and reads as nothing but another example of praising “the One” as if he is somehow blameless for ever action, including his own. When he’s bothered to vote at all (other than “present”) he’s done nothing but vote to increase spending. He has also made his goals for a weaker, diminished America clear, where we’ll be fretting about keeping under our carbon rations vs. actually building a future.
The Prophet of Change is just as bad as the rest of them, and the sooner people stop worshiping him or cutting him slack because “Bush was bad, too” or “he isn’t the only crooked politician,” the better off we’ll all be.
5th grade rebuttal from the Peanut’s gallery:
Cheney-Shrub Shadow Legacy Effect #8: “We delivered the worst US Economy in 80 years, see ya”
Cheney-Shrub: “We want him to succeed as president, we really do.”
Lucy: “Hwy, you’re such a BLOCKHEAD!”
The only people called Obama “The One” and claiming he’s worshiped are sour grapes republicans.
No one else thinks he’s perfect. If the republicans had run someone else besides Senile Old Coot McCain and Caribou Barbie, they would have won.
JoJo,
Sour grapes Rep’s ( or gloating Dem’s ) ?
I… think it’s been amply displayed they could have ran JC himself and it would have been over before the poles closed in the Mountain Time Zone but..?
“Caribou Barbie”
Now that’s funny, I don’t care who you are…….
I loved that dancing moose passin’ through on that on SNL skit but then…I’m EZ to amoose.
Without putting myself in the “Deficits don’t matter” camp, I’m still not sure he, McCain or anyone else would have been able to handle things differently thus far?
Where I take exception is that, with all that printing goin’ on, how was HC even on the table? Does it suck? You bet. Is it a priority? No doubt, but can we please… put it on the back burner until we get the big fires put out?
And yes.., we’re aware those very words came from Ronnie. Thanks so much for pointing them out to us for the 14th time.
Somehow I do not see McCain:
1. Nationalizing health care
2. Cap and trade
3. Handing over car companies to unions
4. Apologizing to every muslims
5. Worried how to give US Constitutional rights to terrorists
6. Tripling the deficit in one year
etc.
1…2…3…and 6 i would definately agree with…hell…he wanted taxpayers to pay people’s mortgages. if you want to tax me and steal the wealth of future citizens withouth fair representation….i would much rather the money be spent on healthcare rather than mortgages.
What everyone is missing, is that the money spent to bail out (and to continue to bail out) all the entities responsible for the housing bubble makes the “normal” deficit numbers a rounding error/meaningless.
The guys making the macroeconomic decisions in this country have screwed the pooch, and are frantically trying to keep things from imploding, while they try to figure out “Plan B”……hopefully before J6P finally gets a clue, and gets out the whetstone.
the money spent to bail out (and to continue to bail out) all the entities responsible for the housing bubble makes the “normal” deficit numbers a rounding error/meaningless.
Aww come on….How am I gonna pick a side when you throw heavy facts like that around?
2banana must be filling in for Eddie today with the straw-man conservative rejoinders.
“…Thanks so much for pointing them out to us for the 14th time.”
First time I’ve mentioned them, D. Wasn’t aware of them m’self until I started researching this piece.
Agree that it doesn’t matter who’s “in charge.” It a matter of style over ideology. But the Medicare/SS issue is THE looming $38T gorilla that must be confronted. Now. Baby Boomers ARE retiring. Ultimately, houses aren’t going anywhere. Cold, angry Grandma brigade, on the other hand, can make your life a living hell for the next forty years.
ahansen,
Rest assured, if Fox is even having to own up to those quotes ( you’d best believe they’re not lost on Olberman, Maddow etc. )
Frankly..? I’m not sure I can take it any more? LOL!
That’s why I watch PBS.
As long as the lib/marxists run PBS you won’t see me listning or watching. By the way, I thought we were going to see the making of the health care bill ,8 more lies by Obama, on PBS ??
I couldn’t help but notice the covers of both Time and Newsweek in the store the other day; both had Obama on the cover and basically communicated a somber, the party’s over, what do we do now message. Could it be that the MSM is starting to wake up and realize the Kool-Aid they’ve been drinking ain’t gonna solve anything?
“…And now he wants to blame everyone else.”
President Barack Obama declared Thursday “the buck stops with me” for the nation’s security, taking responsibility for failures that led to the near-disastrous Christmas attack on a Detroit-bound airliner and vowing the problems would be corrected.
Or
President Barack Obama said he will take the blame for bonuses being paid at American International Group Inc. if it will settle an intense finger pointing under way over how such payments were possible at a company that has received tremendous taxpayer aid.
Or
In two televised interviews today, President Obama made clear that the buck stops on his desk. He accepted full blame for the bungled nominations.
or…
He always says “the buck stops with me” and in a next sentence he blames everybody else.
+1000
Your point about Obama is a fair one. I think he is advancing tough and responsible choices as President, but he didn’t get elected by doing so as a candidate, and he didn’t do so as a Senator. So the Congress is ignoring him.
We have the same issue in New York State. Our “accidental Governor” Paterson is trying to get the legislature to stop being completely irresponsible, but there was little in his prior decades as a legislator to make people take him seriously.
Of course there are worse alternatives. Bush was far more irresponsible as President that he had been as a Governor or candidate.
“The FACT is that he TRIPLED the deficit in 1 year from the outrageous Bush deficits.”
A large part of the ‘tripling’ was that Obama, unlike Bush, actually counted the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan in the budget.
What did Obama have to do with this mess? He didn’t direct Fannie and Freddie to make 10% of it’s mortgages to sub prime borrowers, that happened during the Bush administration and during the republican control of the house and senate. Also it’s Bush that enacted the Zero Down Payment act and the American Dream low down payment act, NOT Obama.
I find it amazing how anyone can blame Obama for this. Don’t any of you read? Obama took office on Jan 20 2009, the Bubble burst and the sub Prime mess started in late 2007 and it hit the fan in Sept/Oct of 2008. BUSH enacted TARP, NOT Obama. Bush inherited 4% unemployment and a $200 billion budget surplus. He left with 7.6 % unemployment, which was expected to hit over 10%, some said 20%, with in a year and a $1.3 TRILLION deficit. If you think I’m lying just look it up.
Now I know that many people just don’t like Obama, but really, unless you intend to always live your life in a crisis you have to learn to actually look at the facts and reality of the situation before you make up your mind. The simple fact is that Bush inherited a country at peace, a budget surplus and low unemployment and left office with 2 wars, a $1.3 trillion deficit and an economy on the brink of a great depression. Please tell me how Obama did that?
Realtors Are Liars,
( Always loved… your screen name btw! )
Right, and for as much needling/potshots as I take from the more Liberal posters, you won’t often catch me high fiv’n the conserv’s when it comes to random character assassination attempts.
I think Ben put things straight when he said, The HB has steam-rolled through everything in it’s path! To me, that means regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office?
I think you forgot the twin towers.
Good point. He failed at protecting the nation too.
+1
Bush -did- enact TARP. And Bush did leave office with a 1.3 T deficit.
If Obama had changed course on either of those things, I’d be singing his praises.
How much course changing do you think we’ll get with the likes of Geithner, Bernanke and Summers hanging around the White House?
Geithner may be on his way out.
Unless I am mistaken, the majority of folks on the HBB, including those like me who are fiscal conservatives yet social liberals, view Little Timmie with some suspicion that he is truly a lightweight. Am I wrong???
That could be interesting, AZ Slim.
The most self contradictory moment of the entire SOTU speech, IMHO, was a tiny little throw away line right after he talked about taking the private banks out of the guaranteed student loan program.
For those that are unfamiliar (and experts, please correct me if I am wrong), at this time the federal government sets rates on student loans, provides the capital that is lended (yes, I think it is this absurd, though it might be that they just pay the banks to use their own capital/money borrowed from the Fed), and guarantees the loans so the bank has no risk of loss. The banks are taking in huge amounts of money for no risk of any kind. It is like being given a huge upside-only equity play in a trade for processing the paperwork. This is such a great deal, they pay financial aid officers all over the country huge “consulting” fees to direct their students to the bank’s program. Obama proposed (and he isn’t the first) to stop letting the banks take huge profits for no risk, but run the loans directly by the government, pay the banks a reasonable rate to just process the paper and use the savings to reduce costs to students and expand the Pell Grant program.
Sounds great, yes?
But then he proposed that repayments on the loans be limited to 10% of a graduates salary. OK. Might take a while, but it makes some sense to pay more back once you are acutally well established and making more money. Then he said that the number of years you spend paying it back be limited to 20 years, or 10 years for someone who goes into a public service profession. So if you make 30K to 40K in a public sector job in those first 10 years, you will never pay more than 3K to 4K a year to completely eliminate your debt. $35K to pay off the whole thing. The problem is this, what if you borrowed $60K to go to school? Or $80K? Or more? And you are accruing interest once you graduate, so the disparity could be a lot bigger.
Are you upset yet? Wait. I haven’t gotten to the actual contradiction yet. The the president tossed in a line - it almost could have been an ad lib. He said that the colleges were going to have to keep their costs down too.
So, we are going to set up a program where the students have absolutely NO incentive to look for cheaper alternatives to college because their repayments are capped at an amount so low that going to a combo of Austere Community College and Local State U will leave theme with exactly the same loan payment schedule as attending Luxury Private U. Then he expects the colleges to reduce their costs?
Now, this whole thing could work out if the program was completely recast so that only people who are actually poor (as in completely broke w/respect to assets and very limited family income) qualified for loans. When the middle class can borrow without limit, then the colleges just raise charges to absorb all that can financed - kind of like houses. If anyone with a pulse can borrow $500K why would a builder sell a house for $400K? They are leaving money on the table. Same thing for colleges. If the middle class kids can borrow $100K to go to school for 4 years, why would they charge any less? Plus whatever they can wring out of the parents and grandparents.
How much do you want to wager on that sort of reform going through? Well, one of my law school profs told us that law degrees changed from batchelor’s degrees to doctorates because the senators and representatives wanted their law school bound progeny to be able to pay for it with government guaranteed student loans. I will bet nothing on real reform in the program.
I guess the young people should be grateful. Even if they never see a penny of SS and Medicare, at least they will be able to get something on the front end. Assuming it passes. Which it might not.
And that was the most contradictory moment in the SOTU. IMHO.
Maybe this is the prelude to a shake out of all the “colleges” that are basically loan processing entities?
Not sure. I think there is a program to kick out schools that whose students have the worst loan default rates. But I think it has to be really, really, really outrageous. And I don’t know if going into an essentially permanent state of hardship deferral because your program doesn’t prepare you for a job is included in that program - probably not.
Within a mile of the Arizona Slim Ranch, there’s a vacant commercial property. (It’s at the southeast corner of Stone Avenue and Grant Road, in case you’re in town for the Gem Show and need a place to show your collection.)
Any-hoo, it used to be home to a school of bricklaying. Being the curious neighbor that I am, I sauntered in there back in 2005.
Had a few questions about learning this trade, and, quite frankly, I wasn’t terribly impressed by the demeanor of the guy answering them. He didn’t seem to care about my questions, or in enrolling me in the courses.
Maybe it was because I pointed out that I couldn’t just drop everything and go to bricklaying school for a few months. After all, I had to make a living. I asked about the possibility of classes for part-timers like me, and was essentially told that such a thing was not going to happen.
BTW, I wasn’t the only neighbor interested in going on a part-time basis. There were others around here who were willing to sign up for such a curriculum.
Well, that was in 2005, which was also when I started taking classes at the community college. I finished with them in summer 2006, and, interestingly enough, I noticed that the bricklaying school had shut its doors.
I suspected that the community college’s construction curriculum, which is built around the idea that people have to make a living, was too much competition. I asked one of the community college’s lead construction instructors about this, and he said that the school closed because it was a front for getting student financial aid money from the government. The instructor also told me that the bricklaying school’s owner had been jailed.
A former professor of mine told me that school loans of students in the fine arts had lower default rates than doctors and lawyers…
VERY interesting….luv to see it corroborated….not that i don’t believe it…but it would be neat to see the stats. on all the grads/professions
Arg.
Lended? Lended? I don’t even deserve to be allowed to correct it. But I do apologize.
Yes Polly,
i think we all hope that talk about student loan repayment end up like Bush’s manned-Mars mission….forgotten
Quite frankly, I’d like to see an end to the whole student loan scam.
The way I interpreted Obama’s speech on students loans was that banks shouldn’t get rich when they’re taking no risks (agreed, and think this should apply across the board — including mortgages). As for schools reducing costs; back when I was in college, they wanted to build a big football stadium so they could join the A-level teams (??? sorry, not into sports, so don’t know the terminology). The students voted it down, time and again, but eventually they went ahead with it anyway. Millions of dollars spent on a stupid stadium when most of the students there just wanted to get an education and had to work their way through school.
I’d love to see an end to student loans, and MUCH lower costs by eliminating the sports component and eliminating a lot of the administrative positions.
It’s the President’s fault. It’s the Republican’s fault. It’s the Democrats fault. Well, there seems to be enought blame to go around. I distinctly remember that most Deomcrats voted for various wars back when it was fashionable to be “patriotic”. Now that it is fashionable to be frugal nobody wants to be associated with those festering money pits. The bad news is you can’t just turn off a war like a light switch. But of course that would have required foresight and long term planing, both in short supply in DC.
Watch out when gubermint is trying to make anything affordable, like housing or education or health care. Take a close look what this has done to tution rates over the last 20 years. Take a close look what it has done to housing. Once government throws billions at the situation prices will go through the roof. I started college in 1988 at $484 per semester. I worked odd jobs and paid for college myself, no help from nobody. While pay for the odd jobs I worked remained roughly the same as 22 years ago, tution is $2,763.50 (Spring 2010 @ NC State). That’s an average anual increase of 7.9%, too bad pay for waiters, pizza delivery or (un)loading trucks didn’t keep up. A college education is more and more becoming a service for the finacially well off instead of those that are most capable.
The countless bailouts, guarantees and backstops for housing, Wall Street, FANNIE, FREDDIE, FHA, FDIC, etc. total in the trillions and some of them will have to be honored sooner than Barney Frank thinks. Throw retiring boomers into this witch’s brew and there’s is no escape from the looming debt crisis. Since other countries from Japan to UK, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy and even Germany and France face similar dire situations I am convinced that the world will be facing a currency crisis within the next 20 years. A crisis whose size will overshadow anything in recorded history. To finance their largesse they will come after YOU! They will tax, confiscate and inflate away everything you own. Don’t get caught with your pants down. The more you officially own the bigger target you represent.
You raise the dilemma I am facing
I have one daughter in her first year of college; working toward a B.S. in Biology. Her first year (and the associated expenses) seem to be reviewing/re-doing everything she did in high school (she took A.P courses, but the school won’t accept the credits…….the state school 60 miles down the road will, but she would have to live there (and pay the associated expenses) to go there.
The “old way” of doing things says that any kind of Bachelors/Science degree is something worth having. But I worry things have changed, and not for the better.
The other daughter is in High School, and has bought into the “what’s the point of a college degree?” school. She is a lot “street smarter”, knows B.S. when she sees it, and doesn’t take “no” for an answer. She’d be a great Used Car salesman.
So, going forward, which one of these two has the answer for the way things will be going forward from here? Used to be if you career/financial decision was bad/wrong for whatever reason, it used to be a lot easier to change direction and start over.
Now, not so much.
X-GS,
We touched on this a bit yesterday, and I’m no ‘wiser’ today?
I was strongly advised to either stay on active-duty ( or find a ‘home’ in the civil svc. system ) and rejected -both-. But you’re absolutely right, it was far, far easier to simply change direction back then.
So much so, I had/have friends that conducted their lives like -every- day was “career day”. Gee.., I’ve always wanted to..? Personally, I found that mindset to be entirely too stressful. Just the thought of being the ‘new guy’ was more than I could bear?
But I ‘did’ make a career change at 30. Here’s where I’ve never lost a minute’s sleep, had I stayed on active duty, my kids would have changed schools at least every 3 years and I’d have gotten a ‘whopping’ $897 a mo. in “retirement”. By even getting out of the Reserves, and coming back years… later, it will easily be over $1,500 a month, medical, L.I, and MAC flights etc. You can’t tell ‘what’ is going to work out for you in 2010 in 1977?
The other daughter is in High School, and has bought into the “what’s the point of a college degree?” school. She is a lot “street smarter”, knows B.S. when she sees it, and doesn’t take “no” for an answer. She’d be a great Used Car salesman.
Unfortunately, the “what’s the point of a college degree” also brought us mortgage brokers, real estate salesmen, house flippers, and a host of other parasites whose main purpose in life is to skim money from other people without producing anything of their own. Not to mention construction workers and car assemblers who spent years building inferior junk that now sits unwanted.
GS– your daughter might be able to do as I did at UCLA and convince the professors of the superfluous courses to let her take their final exam pass/fail for credit to prove that she has mastered the course material. (It’s worth a try–many profs are sympathetic.) Managed to take 36 units a quarter that way for undergrad requirements and only had to pay for the quarter’s tuition.
This is excellent advice.
Unfortunately, I found out about this method long after I had finished taking all my classes.
Hope you see ahansen’s comment, GS.
I’m always confused by the “this mess you left me with” talk. The mess came from congress, the same place we fetched our new Pres from, no? It will take a miracle.
The mess came from Generation Greed. And they still control Congress, the statehouses, and the media.
WT, you describe the human condition. you are an exception?
It seems to have gotten worse. I live like I did as a child, with a few add ons like the internet, and am happy with it.
It seems that anyone who isn’t selling out their own future, and voting for those who are selling out our collective future, is an exception. It has been a cultural tsunami. You begin to wonder if there was any way for any “leader” to buck it.
Bush inherited 4% unemployment and a $200 billion budget surplus.
…
The mess came from congress
If these are both true and history repeats, look for the last six years of Obama’s administration to fix a lot of problems with the help of a Republican majority in congress.
Just in time for a Republican president to “inherit” it all.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Works for me.
lavi, I don’t believe that any more than you do.
Here’s a twist. Let’s say that the banks are the alpha citizens of the USA. Are they Republican or Democrat?
Here’s a twist. Let’s say that the banks are the alpha citizens of the USA. Are they Republican or Democrat?
Ehh, what do I know. All I’m saying is that a democratic pres and republican congress did alright last time.
MikeinMiami below says that they rode the tech wave, but maybe this time around it will be the cheap, clean energy wave.
Well that would work for me too!
Back then there were different dynamics at work. The cold war had ended, computers and the internet were new and not every manufacturing job had been outsourced to China. Times were good, but it was also at that time that the groundwork for our current predicament was laid, government interference with housing, deregulation of banking and NAFTA.
When Bush took office he added 2 wars, tax cuts and other unecessary spending.
Now Obama inherited all of the above and added various bailouts and guarantees for banks and housing that will add several more trillion dollars to the mess.
The way things are going there will be no “last six years of Obama’a administration”.
Mike,
True, and to further balance, Bush also ‘inherited’ the Tech Wreck ( which seems to pale in comparison! ) and 9/11 etc. etc.
As bad as things are today, I’m always amazed people gloss over the NASDAQ going from 5K to triple digits like we walked away from that like it was nothing more than totaling out Dad’s car on prom night?
At ‘the time’, it really -did- seem like te end of the world. ( How little did we know… )
The “Tech Wreck” didn’t have much visible effect in Flyover Country. Unlike (mainly California, and a few cities like Austin), the “Tech Industry” didn’t have much of a footprint anywhere else. Especially the crazy stuff going on with IPOs, etc in Silicon Valley.
I remember the CFO (who we got from Wall Street/Investment Banking) of the company I worked for at the time talking with us out at the hangar one day…….said that they must have some good stuff they were smoking in California, because the math on most of those companies out there just didn’t work.
Three months later……….
X-GS,
Right, and unless… you worked for one of those companies..? Who cared! Still, it should well have been an ample warning sign of where excess leads, and it didn’t.
That’s what makes it frustrating for me, a second time. It did have quite an impact on OR and we really didn’t have the stamina to re-join the HB until at least 2004. Which of course just made it all the more painful. We invented the “Jobless Recovery”.
Whoaaaaaa..there Dino….9/11 was on his watch…remember that, apparently too vague August 6th memo titled “OBL determined to strike in the US”…maybe everybody would have been more alert to Al-qaida if there hadn’t been a certain fixation with where clinton’s penis was…..
“inherited 9/11″….sounds like something you would hear on FOX
the fact that most people find it impossible to see that there is no distinction between the bush (republicans) and obama (democrats) administrations’ macro economic policies is flabbergasting to me…simply…flabbergasting.
One was a big spender, the other is a bigger spender.
- TARP.
- ZIRP.
- government spending.
One party is tax and spend, the other is borrow and spend. So there….there IS a difference!!!!
One party is tax and spend, the other is borrow and spend. So there….there IS a difference!!!!
Repeat that one again in case we forget!!!!!
Why would the republicans support a policy of supply side/borrow and spend? Interest payments just makes everything more expensive. They have no respect for us taxpayers.
It’s difficult because Obama has carried forward all of Bush’s ideas and unfunded mandates and added his own on top.
re: Republicrats on macro-economic policy
That’s why some of us would like to see populist fever take hold.
rep. Grayson and ron paul are our standard bearers!
Allena, you’re awesome, and I love your writing, but this is wayyyyy over my head. I’ll confess to not being politically savvy enough to understand this post.
Blue, did you buy?
Thanks for your post Allena. Always something to think about.
So unfortunate when the blog devolves to donkey/elephant sparring, like jackals barking. Kind of excludes a lot of considerate conversation. We share the common future. It will be more important to help one’s neighbors in the near future than it will be to judge what club they were in.
Agree, too bad some people around here cannot seem to hold our current president to the same standards that they held our former president. But that’s just politics, I assume.
A houseful of toddlers will do that to you, Mugs
Translation of translation:
America’s two political parties can’t seem to work together to solve any of the economic or social problems besetting us. President Obama says he is trying to get Congress to at least start talking to each other again. He went to the House Republicans’ annual caucus last week and spoke with them in a televised open debate. It got rowdy. The Republican Congresspersons threw questions at him. He threw back answers. Who knows if it helped?
Next week he is going to speak to the Senate Democrats. The economy is still in deep trouble.
The funny part is that this article was removed by Reuters shortly after it was posted ..as seen here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100202/…_backdoortaxes
Fortunately, someone had already copied and pasted it to one of the forums I frequent.
Default Obama hits middle class with backdoor taxes after saying he wouldn’t…..another lie!
Really….who didn’t see this coming? Yet anothe rlie told by this piece of CRAP.
By Terri Cullen Terri Cullen Mon Feb 1, 4:09 pm ET
NEW YORK ( Reuters.com) –The Obama administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.
In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.
While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.
The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration’s Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.
If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.
Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.
Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a “patch” that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.
Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year’s levels, the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.
Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:
* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;
* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;
* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;
* Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;
* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free.
Obviously it was removed…the White House had it removed.
It was removed because the White House objected to the facts the AP had stated. The AP has also said they gave out the wrong facts and would provide corrections to the story they printed.
I’m so glad everyone gets the privilege of paying their part for living in the greatest country in the world.
If you disagree, try to leave. You will find out it’s not easy to become a permanent voting citizen in another country.
Has anyone seen a poll or statistic showing any type of exodus from the US the last few years? The ex-pat population to the south has been growing but like I said above, very few are voting citizens. One other thought, maybe you missed it but a few years ago the government put a limit on the amount of cash you could transfer out of the US. It was part of the anti-terror international banking laws setup in the last few years.
You will find out it’s not easy to become a permanent voting citizen in another country.
That’s the truth.