Dw. Dunphy On… Get Me Some Money Too

In response to the nearly self-fulfilling prophecy of a recession, President Bush recently announced proposals to offer tax rebates in the ballpark of $150 billion. He also proposed a kick-in for industry to help support production, all in the name of boosting a rapidly sagging economy. There’s just one problem with his intentions — they won’t work.

The biggest variable is the price of oil. It depresses the value of the dollar worldwide, it crushes the budgets of millions of American households, and there isn’t a damn thing we can do about it. With the tables shifting in world economics and China booming with industry, if we had the ability right now to reject Middle Eastern oil outright, the effect on the price per barrel is presumed by most analysts to be negligible.

This, of course, is the pebble at the center of the massive snowball. Those American households I mentioned are dealing with a lot — subprime mortgages, credit crises, foreclosure, unemployment, and the winter cold that doesn’t care about the price of oil or the size of your home or how far you have to drive to an underpaying job.

Bush still has the notion that if you give taxpayers extra money they’ll spend it. In other crisis situations, that might hold true. Consumers, when gifted with a few dollars more, do go out and consume, but with the recent turn of events tied to something so essential to our lives, where we live, we can’t afford to spend tax rebates on anything that will dramatically alter the economy. It’ll go to bills, to debts outstanding, and to pay penalties incurred. If the money went toward paying off credit cards, perhaps future monies could then be spent in the marketplace, but that would depend on breathing room between payoff and reuse. If you pay down your debts but the job market sucks, you’ll only create new debts out of sheer survival.

As always, we can’t really look to other countries to blame. Is China driving the world economy? Certainly, but it’s this country’s fault for outsourcing jobs (slave labor is only slave labor if you see it). American industry’s aversion to paying its work force a fair wage is coming back to bite it in the ass. Sure, Chinese manufacturing helps produce products with cheaper prices, but a $100 television may as well be a $2,000 television for a consumer living off unemployment checks. If you had given that consumer a $1,900 tax rebate a couple years ago, maybe — maybe — he would’ve bought that new TV. But right now, when getting by is becoming harder and harder, that money could be used for food and utilities, portioned out very carefully, ensuring that this massive influx of moving cash never quite happens.

This all has seeds in the housing boom and the predatory loans that helped people buy way above their means, and an infrastructure that never considered the artificial bubble it was inflating. Recent reports show, again and again, that government intervention in these practices could have prevented the nationwide McMansion explosion. The unrealistic exaggeration of the “American dream” of home ownership could have been tempered if subprime lenders had truly educated their clientele on the dangers of the fickle interest rate; the importance of actually paying more than the interest payment every single month could have been contractually stated rather than sneakily implied. The reason the government didn’t intervene, as you can guess, is because they didn’t want to “spoil a good thing,” opting for sunny-side ignorance over sober-minded governance.

So where are people’s tax rebates going? Probably into liens levied onto their accounts to pay back lenders. Is that money helping the economy? Not really. It’s just balancing loss on ledgers. To put it another way, it’s filling holes in preexisting roads rather than building new roads.

That a massive portion of the American budget is still being torched in the flames of a fruitless war cannot be ignored. The only people who’ve benefited from the war as of late are President Bush and John McCain, both proponents of the troop surge in Iraq, because the tailwind doesn’t reek of failure as much as it once did. After the numbers are crunched, one suspects the stink will resurface, but by then both men may have gotten what they want: for Bush, a breather from criticism, and for McCain, an impressive collection of delegates.

All of this is to say that if I’m given a check from the U.S. government I’ll gladly accept it, but that money is already spent. A decade of excess has forced most of us into fiscal prudence, and all the extra bucks will do is take a little weight off my Visa and Discover bills. That’s it. No new car — I’ll still be patching up leaks in the old one and praying the radiator holds. No new TV — I still have a year left before the signal goes digital, and honestly, all I’ll miss is PBS. I’ll make do with my living arrangement because I have no other choice.

Is there a solution, other than lying in the bed we made with our inappropriate and sometimes ludicrous national choices? Would a nationwide minimum-wage increase force the middle class back above working-poverty levels? Perhaps, if it doesn’t drive employers farther out of the country. Would massive penalties against those companies, for abandonment to their own homeland’s needs, help fill coffers and give them pause to think that taking off may not be the moneymaker they envisioned? Possibly. Will the government, which has for the better part of a decade been utterly beholden to El Corporata, make that move? No. Never.

So here we are. The solutions: make companies pay fairly and make them pay dearly for going Absent Without Responsibility, make banks and big construction suffer for offering the drug and then ravaging the addict, bring the troops home and stop paying for blood and armor, and give the American debtor, who has more credit cards than hope, a light at the end of their rolling-balance tunnel. Do some or all of these things and then money can be spent on “stuff.”

If this is too much to ask, then we must accept our fate. Few nations haphazardly fall into a hole. Instead they prefer denying the shovel in their own hands.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Great post Dw! I think you really capture the sense of frustration and the large amount of heavy lifting we are going to have to do in the future to get out the messes we're currently in.
  • Danke schoen, Ted!
  • Almost in full agreement with you. I think you underestimate the impact of illegal aliens on low-paying jobs. That's the other side of foreign competition -- foreign competition right here on American soil. Here in meat packing country, imported labor works in the packing plants, construction, lawn care, etc. There is no question wages would be higher but for all the unfair competition. Americans will do these jobs if paid a decent wage.

    But don't worry about your TV going dark. The government has borrowed a couple of billion bucks from the Chinese to help you buy a digital TV converter box. Ain't that nice of 'em? Sign up for your $40 coupons here:

    https://www.dtv2009.gov/ApplyCoupon.aspx

    Like the guv'ment man said, I only want to help you.
  • Well, you do make a compelling case, but it comes back to US governance failing in policy: NAFTA has allowed companies to go to Mexico and work the populace like virtual slaves. Many of those illegals are running away from jobs that ought to be in America, were corporate interests concerned with paying fair wages.
  • Keith
    First of all, your DEFINITION of "won't work" is just that. YOUR definition. It may serve to lessen the deepness of a later recession. It may not. We'll never know. But you sure as heck would be whining if nothing was done.

    BTW, I'm for raising interest rates with hands off the economy and putting us through a deep recession. I'm against this tax rebates plan too. We need a cleansing and a lot of dead wood needs to be cleared out. Sorry Dems, but sometimes pain is necessary.

    And frankly, the war has very little to do with this. It's maybe a trillion. We're TEN trillion in debts because of nutty entitlements promised by the welfare state over the years. Please complain about the 31 Trillion drag on the economy Medicare is (in years out) versus the 1 Trillion problem Iraq is (and that INCLUDES Afghanistan). Like Ben stein recently stated, you could get rid of the pentagon/DoD budget and interest on the debt completely and numbers in out years do not change much. That's how much SOCIALISTIC ENTITLEMENTS are a problem.
  • Who gives a shit what Ben Stein recently stated?
  • So, reducing poverty levels with social security and providing health benefits via Medicare is socialist, but if you're in the military getting similar benefits, it's not an entitlement?
  • I'm a total New Deal kind of guy. I believe that a government, big, small and all sizes in-between, has a duty to protect the constituents. I have family members that, without Social Security and Medicare, would die. We can call that entitlement, but when they were paying into the system way back when, I doubt they saw it that way. They were paying their dues, working in factories all along Mercer County and out in the heart of Trenton.

    Trenton's motto, by the way, is "What Trenton makes, the world takes". Trenton doesn't make much anymore.

    Can't stress this enough: Social Security is the system that supports those who have worked to build the vitality of this country. If we had the jobs, we still would and it wouldn't be entitlement because we'd earn it honestly.
  • Keith
    The comptroller of the U.S., David Walker has said the same on 60 minutes. I must of angered a true socialist donkey judging by the profanity.
  • Boy, you're right, you really must have to be a straight-ticket Democratic voter to question the wisdom of Ben Stein on matters of U.S. fiscal policy. By the same token, I suppose you'd have to be a knee-jerk Republican not to take Al Franken at his word regarding the finer points of flying a fighter jet.
  • I'm flat out stating it won't work because the governing body is not demanding that the cornerstone of an improved economy, home based industry that feeds supply-side economics, be essential to the works. It is not enough that American CEOs will reap the benefits of their satellites in China and Mexico. That trickle-down is not enough.

    We are in this mess primarily because we've allowed corporate greed and interests to subvert governance. Until the country is run above the hanky panky, and not in bed with the hanky panky, a one-shot infusion of cash is a con-job.

    As far as the war goes, it may be a trillion. It may be ten trillion. That's mine and my future generation's trillion/ten trillion that's being blown to smithereens. If, in fact, that pittance of a trillion is nothing to you, shoot me an e-mail where I can contact you. Perhaps you'll consider cutting me a check?
  • Keith
    "we are in this mess primarily because we've allowed corporate greed and interests to subvert governance. "

    Corporate greed is a part of it, but a larger part of it is people living beyond their means and demanding things from gubment that gubment should not provide.

    "As far as the war goes, it may be a trillion. It may be ten trillion. That's mine and my future generation's trillion/ten trillion that's being blown to smithereens. "

    Then I suggest you worry about Mediscare/Medicaid/Social Insecurity and gubment pensions which are a larger dent by orders of magnitude against the future generation. But don't worry, $5000 handouts to every newborn, Hillary care and guaranteed gubment Pre-K will definitely dig us out of the hole we're already in.
  • The Dems are as guilty of slobbing the corporate knob as the GOP. I've harbored no illusions on that. My point remains. If we had the jobs back, we'd have the employment, the insurance, the health care, the disposable income and your qualms about government entitlements would be eased because the burden would be eased. But it absolutely means that the governance must divest themselves from their corporate masters.

    And people living above their means is why the subprime debacle occurred, as I previously stated. The government was responsible for making sure mortgage companies weren't, as I said, offering the drug and then ravaging the addict. The government turned a blind eye and let the bubble happen, fearing the killing of the golden goose, yet screwing the future to humor the present.

    Government is responsible for those they govern, like it or not. We elect them to be proper stewards (you can tell I'm all about the New Deal, right?). The current administration is then accused of being improper in that task and the next administration, if they're at all interested in pulling this bird back up, had better address those mistakes.
  • Keith
    I guess I see it differently than you. Having signed a mortgage several years ago, I can remember all the federal and state gubment mandated forms, statements and disclosures by the lender I had to sign. The mortgage companies were by no means hiding anything, because government wouldn't let them.

    I hark back to those days when all the good little leftists were crying about how only evil rich white men could partake of home ownership and how lending standards should be relaxed so all could enjoy the benefits of home ownership whether they could afford it or not. I'm sure Jesse Jackson and the Al Sharpton would be whining had those new loan packages not been offered.

    BTW, are you aware of the recent study by the Mortgage Asset Research Institute in Reston, Va which found that 60 percent of people who signed up for no-documentation loans overstated their income by 50 percent or more? But hey, I guess Uncle Sam made them lie, huh?

    Exposing the truth about LIAR LOANS

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesst...

    BTW, if we had the jobs back as you say, how would our manufacturing compete with someone in a global economy making $5/day?
  • I'd wager our manufacturing would do fairly well. With the jobs and the oversight to make sure those jobs paid fair wages, there would be more Americans with money, possibly even disposable income, to spend. We could meet the demand and supply it.

    Sure, we need to compete with the flat world. I read Friedman's book too. :) But to get all Biblical here, we need to remove our plank in order to address the world's mote. We have to fix our markets, our economy, our workforce, and then we'll be able to take our place with strength in the world market again.

    And what the hell, maybe the dollar could rival the euro once more! Sure would make those import Radiohead CDs a hell of a lot cheaper!
  • BBF
    Totally agree with your statement:

    So here we are. The solutions: make companies pay fairly and make them pay dearly for going Absent Without Responsibility, make banks and big construction suffer for offering the drug and then ravaging the addict, bring the troops home and stop paying for blood and armor, and give the American debtor, who has more credit cards than hope, a light at the end of their rolling-balance tunnel. Do some or all of these things and then money can be spent on “stuff.”

    Too bad the Republicans seem to be backing a candidate who claims Americans are OK with US troops in Iraq for the next 100 years. The few anti-war candidates were summarily dismissed by the MSM even before they gave up the fight. Both Obama and Clinton voted again and again to fund the war and seem to have no real plans for bring the US soldiers out of the Middle East. No one bothers to remind us that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are costing between 12 and 15 billion dollars a month. Perhaps we need to just declare "We Won", and bring the troops home.
  • The most galling thing to me is that there are very visible, hemorrhaging wounds. We know what they are. We can address those wounds and make positive changes. One-shots of cash is like a single morphine hit. Only this time, we'll never feel even that because of outstanding debts, liens and such.

    The current batch of candidates aren't too keen on taking up the cause because they will lose supporter funds. Those big money supporters are banks, developers, industry-types... essentially more of the same, which we can expect of our economy.

    As for the war, why expend precious lives and blow material and cash we can use here? I'm not saying become America First isolationists, just that we must remove the plank from our own eye before identifying the mote in the eye of the world.

    And what of Al Qaeda? Should we worry? Of course, but does anyone really believe our efforts in Iraq quell Islamic fundamentalism while our 'allies' in Pakhistan are harboring key fundamentalist figures?
  • Travis
    I see some points from both sides of the coin here. but there is one thing you are missing. Sure we can fight to bring jabs back here and try to stimulate the economy with better wages and more benefits. But where is the money coming from to pay for all this??? From the products producded by the companies coming back to America. Well if we are producing them here and paying a higher minimum wage, which most people make more than, then that means the cost of products goes up. So maybe now the wealthy and possibly the people with the new jobs can afford them....but what about all those people who already work here in America and already can't afford the products made oversees. It is not as easy a fix as people think. the only thing that will help is time for one, and the other is finding ways to either cap prices or corp profit which would be hard to convince anyone is a good thing. We are to greedy of a country and have to much corporate "stuff" going on for this to be a near future reality. Really we could go on and on but we don't have time. I know for someone like me with a family the money will help me pay bills, but I will also spend on things like improving my home and repairing my car. So for me and my direct economy it will be a stimulus. Just a few thoughts. Thanks
blog comments powered by Disqus