Thoughts On A Sunday

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
There was a bit of concern if the WP family this weekend. The WP Father-in-Law was taken ill on Friday which required a trip to the local hospital. From there it was to an O.R. to have his spleen removed.

He spent the balance of Friday, Saturday, and most of Sunday in ICU. Now he's in a regular hospital room. He must be feeling better because he's already complaining about hospital food and the lousy selection of TV channels in his room.

We figure he'll be home sometime this week.

*********

With BeezleBub off from school this week, it was decided he'd stay down at the WP In-Laws to help out his grandmother while his grandfather was in the hospital. I have no doubt they're having a ball.

*********

It is no surprise that California is suffering more from the recession than most other states, particularly if one takes into account the state's self-deluding narcissism.

As has been the case with other trends, many start is California. Could the state government's fiscal chaos be merely the first in a series of state or federal fiscal meltdowns? It seems California is trying to do far too much with too little money to pay for it. Raising taxes won't work because California's sales and income taxes have already reached confiscatory levels. Sound familiar?

*********

It seems liberals are not only ignoring history, they're trying very hard to disprove Santayana's axiom "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."

They're trying to move us into fiscal and social slavery, all for "the good of society."

Gee, where have I heard that before?

*********

It doesn't matter how many times I watch this, I can't get enough of Rick Santelli's rant on CNBC about the stimulus package and how it does nothing but "subsidize losers".



Many are calling this the "Rant Of The Year". I agree.

Here's more about Santelli and his rant from the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade.

*********

And speaking of rants, here's another excellent rant from Pat Condell about Europe's capitulation to Islam and the loss of freedom of speech such surrender entails. Basically he's telling those willingly allowing this to go to hell.



Amen.

(Via Maggie's Farm)

*********

Obama wants to slash the budget deficit in the upcoming budget. That's all well and good, but he plans to do that by raising taxes "on the wealthy." I think too many will find out that "the wealthy" will be redefined to mean "anyone with a job." He will also allow the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2011, meaning everyone's taxes will go up.

As the article link states, "Even some nonpartisan observers question the wisdom of announcing a plan to raise taxes in the midst of a recession."

While the White House claims the amount of tax revenues will rise, I believe just to opposite will occur. History certainly shows the effects of raising taxes to a level known to reduce revenues collected. And that's what will happen when the Bush tax cuts expire and the new taxes are imposed. When Bush cut taxes, the revenues rose because the extra money in people's pockets spurred more spending and growth of jobs. Taking that money away is a sure fire way to slow the economy.

Again, it will be sold by saying "it's good for society."

*********

This doesn't bode well:

Bailout lament: What about me?

"What about people like me who are playing by the rules, who got a mortgage we could afford?" said Carpenter, 52, who programs building management systems for MIT Lincoln Laboratory. "Maybe I'm too old school, but you sign on the bottom line, and you're responsible for it."

Carpenter is among the vast majority of Americans who work, pay mortgages, borrow responsibly, and now find themselves facing the bill to bail out those who didn't. Over the years they lived within their means. Now they're asking: What for?

The anger underscores the dangers government faces in private sector rescues. While such interventions aim to benefit everyone by preventing severe damage to the economy, they also risk encouraging irresponsible behavior in the future. Economists call this "moral hazard."

In other words, if homeowners believe the government will lower their payments if they fall behind, they won't have as much incentive to keep paying mortgage bills on time.

Far too often those offering such bailouts forget human nature, assuming that everyone will behave the way they should, rather than the way they really will. Call it an extension of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Assuming everyone is altruistic is a failing of many in government, particularly those of a leftist bent. It was a failing of the old Soviet government, forgetting that people will act in their own self interest, looking out for themselves and their families first. They appealed to the people's altruism when they felt none. It's no different with the leftists in government today, particularly those in Congress. With a housing bailout they're assuming those of us that followed the rules of finance and made the necessary choices in order to be able to afford our homes will lightly go along with subsidizing those who didn't.

Absolutely wrong.

And don't assume we want a piece of the bailout. We don't. All we want is for those who made the bad decisions to pay the price for them. If they don't pay the consequences they will merely do it again and expect the government to bail them out again. And when the government doesn't they'll make noises in front of the TV cameras and claim the government is heartless, not responsive to their needs.

It's not up to those of us that took responsibility for our financial obligations to bail out those not willing to spend within their means.

Commentary from David Henderson about the message Obama is sending to those waiting in the sidelines to buy a house: "I don't care."

*********

Along the lines of taking responsibility, Skip of GraniteGrok graces us with a link to and quotes from Victor Davis Hanson's letter from Mr. & Mrs' Battered American to President Obama, and adds some commentary of his own to Dr. Hanson's letter.

Writes Skip:

Obama and his crew, I believe with this Stimulus bill and the utterances of him and those around him, have stirred the pot and it is now coming to a boil. For years we've taken the guff, we've been hammered for the lack of sensitivity to accusations of political incorrectness. And now, that patience may well be wearing thin as we see our kids, our grandkids, and great grandkids futures clouded by the cost now being incurred (as well as the "social justice") to bail out those that haven't "played the game" straight as we have - politicians on the other side of the country, local governments everywhere but here (OK, my state of NH has not behaved well at all!), and citizens who make bad decisions that now have now claim on my money just because Obama says so.

I spoke with Skip on the phone earlier today and he reminded me of the movie Network, where Howard Beale, played by the late Peter Finch, rants about how we've allowed the media to control what we think.



While dated, the rant includes a huge kernel of truth.

*********

Now that their mentor sits in the White House, ACORN has decided breaking into foreclosed houses to 'reclaim' them for the foreclosed owner is okay.

Never mind that the former owner was an ACORN leader in Baltimore. I guess we can also ignore that "[s]he bought it in 2001 in cash for $87k and did several re-mortgages until the final one in 2005 for $250K. According to court records, the first foreclosure started the year after, in mid 2006 but that stopped for un-noted reasons. Foreclosure started up again in Feb 2008 and was finalized with eviction in Sept 2008." Her last refinance brought her payments to $1600 per month. The only problem was that she only made $2200 per month. So we have to ask this question: How did she get a mortgage for that amount even though her income was inadequate to pay for it? Even though she worked two other jobs for an additional $1275 of income it would have left her stretched to the limit financially.

Another question: What the heck did she do with all that money she got from refinancing? She pissed away $250,000 in seven years and had nothing to show for it. Is it any wonder the bank foreclosed?

This almost smells like a set up, used to push forth ACORN's agenda.

*********

Yet another attempt to whitewash history in the name of political correctness.

(H/T Raven)

*********

And that's the news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where it's snowing once again, the kids are on vacation, and the ski resorts are full.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Thoughts On A Sunday.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://weekendpundit.org/blog-mt/mt-tb.cgi/268

Leave a comment

New Additions

Expatriate New Englanders

Other Blogs We Like That Don't Fit Into Any One Category

Sitemeter

    -->
Powered by Movable Type 4.1