In other essays, I discussed the problems of a recession, Look up the Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! item We also discussed innovative solutions from cutting red tape to solutions for offshoring and illegal immigration and others.
This essay is the bottom line on how to get the inertia rolling the other way. This is the road to recovery from this unprecedented never ending Obama / Cartwright / Casey recession.
We are clearly suffering under a mountain of debt and there are deficits scheduled from here to eternity. A Congress controlled by my party has permitted the deficit to skyrocket to over a trillion dollars. The National debt is up six-fold to over $20 trillion. With these big numbers it is easy to get zero fatigue. Take a look at the debt clock in the figure above from usdebtclock.org/ to get a picture at how the me generation has robbed the future. The number of zeroes are staggering.
There are only two groups in America it seems who do not know the basic way to get the United States out of a recession. The two groups are the Legislative Branch (Congress) and the Executive Branch (the President and the Czars and the Bureaucrats).
We have been in recessions before and they were almost all solved by doing two simple things. The government must stop spending and it must cut taxes. It is the only way. Then, and only then will the people be able to have money to spend on real stuff. Though the budget is a trillion out of whack, it must be balanced or be on its way to being balanced to escape a further deepening recession, and the ultimate demise of our nation.
Instead budget deals between corrupt Democrats and Republicans that will increase spending forever, radio talk show-host Sean Hannity has solved the problem. Number one, eliminate this madness called baseline budgeting, which projects increases in government spending in every program, six, seven, eight, nine, ten percent a year. That is insane. Instead, Hannity's "penny plan" proposes that Congress insists that government cut just one penny out of every dollar that government spends every year for five years. At the end of five years, things will be in balance. Our Congress however, both Republicans and Democrats like to spend money we do not have.
One of the dumbest things the two know-nothings (Legislative and Executive branches) bring up when the people are sleeping is something called a value-added-tax or VAT. We must fight this with all our muscle as the fiscal end is near if a VAT is passed. Why? It is an unseen tax and dishonest Congresses love bringing pork home unnoticed.
The VAT will not reduce the deficit anyway. In fact, it would cause the debt to continue to rise because the President and the Congress have insatiable spending appetites . They will take any money we give them to make the economy better and they will throw it away on expanding the welfare state. They will make government bigger and less responsive to the people. This will be another tool with which the government can redistribute wealth and spend much more on stupid and frivolous projects. Maybe if they spent some money on NASA, along the way it would not be so bad but NASA is not part of this government's spending plans. Team Obama with Matt Cartwright and Bob Casey Jr. right along side him, has given up on the US being a leader in Space technology. NASA's prime function today is counting up the contributions of Muslims.
Rasmussen, the polling people, has found the public to be well aware of how to solve the problem. Voters agree that tax cuts would help the economy lots more than increased government spending. We have seen the spending side and it does not work. The economy remains un-stimulated despite the stimulus bills and seven years, almost eight years of Obama policies.Job losses continue at a record pace.
Why do they not say enough already. Instead the Congress voted in Obamacare, which at a minimum raised expenditures by $1 trillion and many are suggesting that it will eventually be more like $3 trillion. Meanwhile, Americans are paying more and more because of Obamacare, for basic healthcare.
Though interest rates are being kept artificially low, inflation is already taking hold. Please do not use the consumer price index as a guide to knowing the inflation rate as it is a formal instrument for government lying. Bureaucrats use it to dupe the public to suit their purposes. One place it is used all the time is to set the social security take home amounts. Despite major inflation and food costs spiraling, Seniors again got no raises. Politicians in Congress and the President lie like rugs. Go buy a rug and see if it is less expensive when the CPI is low. Better yet, go try to buy a grocery cart full of food. How is everything more expensive and yet the government tells Seniors there is no inflation. Again, get its straight, they lie to suit their purposes.
Another hidden tax that seems destined to be here sooner than later is the raising of the minimum wage to $15.00. In PA right now, it is $7.25. So, the wage of unskilled workers will more than double. How is this a tax? Well, if low wage earner gets a double increase, prices will go up almost immediately. Let's say for this plus 100% wage increase that prices go up 50% just as an example. Will Social Security wages increase so that seniors can afford paying 50% more for the same stuff? Will Medicare costs go up to pay for the increased labor expense of services? Who gets stiffed? Does anybody really gain. Will those who have worked their way up to $14.00 per hour not want a differential of at least $7.00 over those at the bottom pay scale? When would it end?
Taxation through currency devaluation is how this all happens and it is very easy to do. Moreover it is the politically expedient course; but it is also more damaging as your dollars become the size of the one dollar bill in Gordon Liddy's famous Rosland Capital commercial as shown below:
Government cannot continue secretly taxing through borrowing (a.k.a. deficit spending) yet they persist. Is the Fed secretly printing money? Inflation is socially and economically destructive in that it wipes out fortunes for those who are not invested in hard assets. if you want to know the pace at which the dollar is devaluing, look at the price of gold. Since 2008, the stock market has risen strangely enough but that too is because there is nothing worse to own right now than cash.
Inflation is taxation but silent. Though taxation is not the answer, if citizens were forced to pay through direct taxation up front, the voters would be shocked. They would immediately see that there really is no free lunch as promised. Though more and more people understand that nothing is free, still others think government creates money from thin air.
They secretly believe that in Fort Knox and its surrounds, the US plants the whole world's supply of money trees. The dollar is the world's currency right now because these trees grow various denominations of dollars. The trees cannot grow Euros, for example. Congress would not be able to go out in public if some of the public really knew that the trees do not exist. Politicians spend the people's money. Those who think the government creates money just cannot see the problem.
Before we continue let's review the notion of a tax. A tax simply is money collected by government directly or indirectly from the people to cover the expenditures of government.
How does the government get the people's money. Though tax systems are supposed to be voluntary, the Government gets its money by force. We know that intrinsically. The IRS may very well be toting heat in the future when the citizens stop coughing up the cash willingly. There was a time when FBI Agents did not carry weapons so don't be surprised if your friendly IRS begins to get a bit more forceful if you hold out on them. What force is typically applied today?
Government decrees that you and I and businesses will pay a percentage of our income to the Tax man (the IRS). If you or I or any business refuses, we are faced with fines, imprisonment or both. Since a business per se cannot go to jail, its officers may be held liable and they would be sent to the Big House by the IRS as necessary for it to collect what it believes is due.
If somebody else took your money by threat or force, it would be stealing. Government confiscates funds and does with them as it wishes. Your dollars often wind up in the pockets of your neighbors. And, yes, it is stealing.
Let's explore this question briefly: "If government can borrow instead of tax, isn't that good for the people? It's not like the people are borrowing, right?" Let's review how the government gets its money one more time. They take as much as is politically possible by force through the tax system. However, if Congress raises taxes too high, they don't get to come back to serve their next term in Washington. So, since politicians believe that they serve because they deliver the pork to the home folks, they have figured a way to bring pork home without raising taxes. As we noted above, they know they can borrow and who cares if it is Russia or the Chinese from whom we are borrowing. One would expect Iran not to be on the list of lenders.
This idea called government borrowing is a misnomer. Why the Chinese think they are going to get paid back is a mystery unto itself. There is no chance at all that the government will ever repay any of its debt. Who are they kidding? You may know that there was hardly any debt at the turn of the 20th century. It went from $2 billion to over $20 trillion in this past century, and there are at least $60 trillion in SS pension and Medicare promises via worthless IOUs that will never be paid back. The US Congress as custodians of the treasury have served no better than a pack of charlatans. They assure their reelections by robbing the treasury to provide pork to their people. When the people take the pork, the people get the government they deserve.
Do the people get hurt when government borrows? The word again is price inflation. When government borrows, and when the Fed is operating normally instead of under Obama constraints, interest rates rise and the Fed lowers those rates by monetizing the Federal IOUs. When there is more money in circulation, your money loses its purchasing power. So, yes, the people do get hurt even when the government borrows instead of raising taxes. It is the most unfair form of taxation. It is called inflation.
If the dollar were forced to be reduced in size to match its value, Gordon Liddy would in fact have the first printed bill at the correct size for 2016. Whenever the Liddy Ad would come on TV, I stopped and would call my wife's attention to it. It is the face of the future. If the government had to continually reduce the size of the dollar to match inflation, eventually people would need tweezers to hold on to the dollar bills used to purchase their wares. The smaller the bill, the less it would buy.
As people traded in their huge dollars for smaller and smaller sized currency, Congress's game would be up. If they taxed us, we would know it and if they had to re-size the currency such as the Liddy Dollar Sizing System, to match its new spending power, we would also know it. And in all cases, G. Gordon Liddy would forever have the first reduced sized dollar. Just as the one we show above.
Inflation without dollar re-sizing makes it very difficult and probably more like impossible for both consumers and businesses to plan ahead. When businesses cannot plan ahead they like to have as few employees around to pay if they are not sure that they will need their labor. So, Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! does not occur in times of economic uncertainty. Since this is a time of uncertainty, one would rightfully ask, "Why is the government intentionally devaluing our currency?" Only the President and Congress can answer that one. It makes no sense.
When businesses cannot plan, their growth is impeded and when business growth is impeded you can forget about having progress in every aspect of society. Society is dependent on many things. For example, at its simplest, society is dependent on things being good.
If the people were taxed outright and honestly, we would revolt. Well, at least we would fire our politicians. Right? However, the slow sting of inflation is just what the doctor ordered for a Congress more interested in snookering constituents than representing them. What is unseen is never blamed. There are no champions in the 114th Congress, therefore none of us should lament when all of them are fired by the people.
You Won't Believe This!
You know that technology is such today that it would be easy for the government to set up an electronic wallet for everybody so nobody would be forced to carry dirty, slimy, cash. Though I do not know the man, something tells me that Bill Ayers would not want the government knowing how much walking around money he was carrying. And, let's face it, the government is the least secure entity on the planet. So if somebody wanted to know your wallet contents at a given moment, they too could hack the government system. Why bother taking on the cash-rich before you know they have gotten to their ATMs?
How innovative and how beneficent that would be of the government to take on the responsibility for managing all of the wallets in the country. It is such a powerfully fulfilling thought that it almost wants you to stand up and declare that banks are no longer needed. The imperial government can handle the cash and one would suspect it can also give a better interest rate. But, would it?
Unless, of course, like Bill Ayers, on some matters, we too are realists.
The government would own you even if they did not charge a dime for the service. When the "Big Government" chose to levy a new fee or a "simple" adjustment of a prior adjustment of an adjustment, once the paper trail looked more like oblivion than the Olive Garden, they could just take the funds immediately from your electronic wallet. Under this system, Government would not need to process those long and nasty lies (tax returns) sent in every year by taxpayers.
Rooting for the Government to Win the End Game?
Real radicals would ask, "Why should the government have to wait until April 15th to get their money." Hey, for historical purposes, if the tax code ever changed for the good, that could be the day of reckoning or the day of accountability or the close day or whatever you would like to call it. I predict April 15 will always have historical significance.
It would be more difficult for the government to fleece you if paper cash were used. But some might say it would be a grand day if the government were able to remotely lift your wallet from your pants--even as you were watching. Then, it could riffle through the bills and the change, perhaps even read the credit card stripes and even check all your accounts. You would never have to fear being audited again. Auditing would become a daily idea.
The hard left might propose an even slicker idea. Why should you have to go to the Post Office on April 15, to fulfill a duty. The government could electronically spare you the trouble. In a perfect world, the physical dollars could be activated to flow from your wallet to the closest mailbox and they could be electronically identified as coming from you -- perhaps via a dollar / retina-like scan.
Then the postman, in addition to doing regular mail, could pick up the cash from your mail box and turn over to the US treasury. It may not really be able to be done now (2016) with real dollar bills but if Obama has his way, this can all be done electronically. You would then have to spend only what the government has not taken. Can you imagine how easy it would be to contribute your "fair share." Nobody would be left out of the reach of the automatic electronic hand of the IRS.
Why did nobody think of this before Obama? Why should government be the last served? In the new system, when government needs anything, the electronic dollars, though in worth they may be the size of the Liddy Dollar Bill, would be electronically lifted from your electronic wallet. You "vill" be happy. These dollars will then head down an electronic speedway to the electronic national treasury where you can visit them once a month but -- no touching.
The bottom line is that if every dollar spent by government came immediately out of taxpayers’ wallets (your wallet), Congress might just find it impossible to fund their vast pork-barrel spending programs. You would not stand for it.
Life would become better as we would definitely throw the bums (Congress) out when the first pilferage occurred. Then, we’d all be able to plan for our future, knowing that our savings would be there and the bills would be able to be paid.
Congress gets away with this only because we the people accept it. Only conservatives line up against this and liberals, though not stupid by any means, hear our arguments but do not buy them. The far left cannot accept that these exploding deficits mean that they are laying the burden of this huge debt pile on their children and grandchildren.
Maybe they are right! Do you think that the real hard left liberals think the next generation (grandchildren) will solve this financial dilemma Let me ask a different way. If they felt that their grandchildren were going to be asked to pay up for grandpa's excesses, would they not stop the excesses? Unless they think their offspring will be so smart they can figure a way out of it, or they think that money grows on trees, they can't want to dump this on the grand-kids.
Since they really do not want to dump all this debt (our debt) on the next generation my logic tells me they should be complaining about how Congress and the President no longer respect their contributions. Even liberals are conservative when it comes to keeping their own money. The government is all consuming and all-eradicating. Don't look for anything to be left when the administration finally gives up on socialism.
All of us have been duped into thinking it will take a long time --- why else would their be references to children and grand-kids.? All US citizens will be paying what can only be called a fraud tax in the months ahead as price inflation soars. It is not waiting for the grand-kids to be born It is right around the corner. When it breaks loose, who are you going to blame?
Most will not blame the government. Yet, the big culprit is the government. If the people rose up and blamed the government, we could actually solve the problem. The government is the problem. Yes, we have met the enemy and it is the government of the US. The government is the culprit, and the good news is that we have the ability and the authority to change the government. The tool we use has a simple name. it is called a "vote."
Of all the big economic issues the most serious problem is the amount the US government owes to US citizens, corporations, foreign instruments, and of course the Government Sponsored Enterprise's -- GSE (Social Security, Medicare, etc.).
This cannot be fixed with monetary policy as it will lead to hyperinflation. The losers will be those with cash or treasury bonds. The holders of such bonds would never receive fair value market value for their investment. The dollars they would receive would be Liddy-sized and if China were shipped a pile of Liddy dollars in a small bag for their trillions in holdings, they might create a different kind of economic crisis.
I am a man looking for a solution that might even be quicker then the offshoring solutions explored in other essays. This solution would be very painful for a lot of people so even if they get a vote, the good from it will never happen. Some of this stuff has already been explored in other essays but let's look at it all together one more time:
Among the suggestions is to replace the income tax with the FAIR Tax. I like that an awful lot. Get rid of the Income Tax completely as we have been suggested in prior essays. Replace it with the FAIR tax. Instead of businesses protecting their earnings by eliminating jobs, they could pay as they go and be able to plan. A consumption tax such as the FAIR tax removes the disincentive for business to invest and it creates Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! Additionally, it has the effect of making products and services seemingly more expensive, and this encourages saving.
Some might call this a "virtuous cycle" as it adds to the pool of invest-able business credit; it lowers real interest rates; and it creates further business investment and jobs.
The financial experts have analyzed government spending patterns, especially as they relate to defense. Many, many good Americans worry that the President is too naive about the dangers in the world. Many think that he believes that the US should unilaterally disarm. They view him, the President, in his usual and customary role of the Pied Piper enabling all other nations who are apt to follow the Piper, to disarm. Some even believe he hates America and Americans.
If we can get past that without totally ignoring Obama's propensity to do good even if it is bad for America, the analysts have calculated that major savings could be garnered by getting it all done quickly in Iraq and Afghanistan, and wherever we may be wasting defense dollars, countless billions and billions could be saved. There are also solutions for Medicare and Social Security that will not bankrupt anybody and not stiff any current beneficiaries. The more important future scenario is that America still exists and America is still a capitalist country!
So, then what is the simple secret?
Herbert Hoover's Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon cut taxes in the mid 1920's and the economy healed. For Roosevelt, all of the wonderfully progressive notions he enacted helped a lot of people but did nothing to bring the economy back to the good days after the Mellon tax cuts. After World War II, the economy finally began to revive but Truman was President by then.
In the 1960's John Kennedy cut taxes and the economy healed. Ronald Reagan in the 1980's cut taxes and the economy healed and boomed. George Bush, after 9/11 (September 11, 2001) was faced with a stagnant economy and he cut taxes three times over the years, and the economy came back but died down near the end of his last term when Democrats took over both houses of Congress. The Bush solution should have been even more tax cuts and less spending but he did not do it, and President Obama continued relive the big Bush mistake. Additionally Obama did away with all cuts he could and added more taxes, which had a negative impact on jobs and the economy.
The 2008 collapse should have been predicted by banking regulators. A number of poorly conceived economic policies were forced upon the financial sector and they had been softening the strengths in the financial industry for a twenty year period before the 2008 collapse. Force, remember that word from earlier in this essay was the perpetrator. The strong arm of the government caused the problem.
The government forced the banks to do things that could not work in the long haul. The banks never would have gone this far if left to their profit motives. The bureaucratic regulators, charged by a dysfunctional and too altruistic Congress forced the banks to break sanity rules. The message from Congress to the banks was, "Loan to anybody who wants a home, or else!" When the banks began to fail, Congress blamed the banks even though it was the same Congress who forced them to endure the losses they experienced from making so many bad loans.
A few administration soldiers, strac, and brave did appear from the Congress. These "brave" men, a full trio of "Mighty Mice," included Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, and NEPA's own Paul Kanjorski back then. Thank God these three are long gone. They decided to help the banks while the proletariat (We the People) were screaming, "No Bailouts!" These three believed they knew better than the people and they acted accordingly.
Their work helped cause the crisis and has led to a lengthened recession. Their CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) and poor banking regulations along with poor oversight caused the problem. Spending money on a failed GM, failed banks, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, exacerbated the problem. It helped keep the economy at a standstill long after it hit bottom. The people wanted no part of it. If all these deals were so good, you and I know that the three politicians in charge would have figured out some way to put some of their own money into the investment pot to assure their getting some of the returns.
The verdict on a lot of this has been in for some time. We know the bailouts and the stimulus packages all were ill conceived and doomed to failure. Only a fool would have invested in a deal that would cost more than it was worth. Barney, Chris, and Paul stuck the American people with the bill for their ill-advised largesse.
No matter what we do, GM will have cost the taxpayers $billions that will never be returned. GM would be out of business if the government were not continually buying GM products. They will go out of business without more government help. No sane person would have gone for the Frank / Dodd/ Kanjorski deal. These three stooges stuck John Q. Public with the tab for their unsupportable and unprecedented schemes. For everybody in government and politics, the bailout decisions were good. The people have been remembering the members of Congress in the past three elections, but somehow forgot Obama's role.
Ironically as if nobody would remember the truth, all three Congressmen lined up to take credit in their campaigns for their sheer brilliance in avoiding a catastrophe. When I looked around I saw something far different. We are still living through a catastrophe. Freddie and Fannie are still bottomless pits fully subsidized by the people. Who are they kidding? The problem is not gone. None of the three charlatan congressmen were reelected thankfully.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac still have a big role in what some would call the welfare state mentality in Congress but it goes even further. What do these financial cousins, Fannie and Freddie actually do? Their mission is to buy mortgages from savings and loans, banks and other lenders. The bank makes its profit on writing the mortgage up front and Freddie and Fannie assume the mortgage. This gives more cash for banks and other lenders so they can make many more home loans.
Unfortunately for Americans, Fannie and Freddie together, right now either hold or guarantee $5.5 trillion of mortgages. This is about half of the US's outstanding home loans. Think of how big this trough can become. Thank you again Barney, Chris, and Paul. By the way, Hillary has ties to Freddie so expect little reform is she makes it to the White House.
Many know that President Obama has an easy time of taking issues which he either created or has permitted to fester and to comment on them as if he is an innocent bystander. Recently, he commented on Freddie and Fannie.
Yes, President Obama actually said that these two government sponsored companies had to be abolished, because it was, heads they win, tails, taxpayers lose. What the President meant by that was that, in good times, executives and shareholders of these companies would make money, but, in bad times, taxpayers would be left holding the bag. And that is sort of how it panned out. And, so Obama, who can get rid of them with a stroke of his pen pretends that he has no role in their survival. Perhaps, if we checked their executive's donations we might find a good reason for the President's lack of potency regarding these two shill organizations.
So what gets these institutions in trouble with taxpayers? Well, as home prices fell, foreclosures go up, and lenders run into trouble. So also with Fannie and Freddie. The loans they back go bad; capital becomes harder to come by and it is thus more difficult for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to find buyers for their their loan packages. So, what did they do? The politically correct answer is that they compromise and compromise and this leads to lower and lower standards. Eventually, they are "forced" to back even riskier mortgages. As we learned in 2008, and as continues today, all this comes back to bite them. Barney, Chris, and Paul were there from the beginning, but none took credit for helping to cause the collapse of the market.
The politically incorrect answer for the 2008 debacle is that Congress repealed depression era legislation designed to prevent catastrophes such as this. Additionally, Congress passed multiple versions of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) -- the last update was in the Clinton years. This was so that even people without a dime could qualify to get a mortgage for a home. The main criteria was reduced to whether the potential mortgagee was breathing or not.
The CRA more or less forced banks to loan at 105% or 110% of home value to people who could not even afford a rented apartment. The joke in states like Florida was that not only did they get a house that they could not afford but there was a Lexus in the garage when they moved in -- all financed by their no down-payment mortgage. While property values were rising, this was not a bad deal as everybody was a winner. As home prices fell, it all blew up in everybody's faces. Barney, Chris, and Paul Kanjorski, all Democrats, were supposed to have been watching.
Barney, Chris, and Paul had the banks as well as Freddie and Fannie over a barrel so they squeezed them to take on bad loans. The system had to break. These Congressional caretakers actually broke it.
These are the kind of loans in which the mortgagee brings nothing to the closing and if need be his lawyer, at the closing, types up a fake W-2 and other needed documentation to assure the loan. Everybody at the closing and the approving bank officers all knew this was a sham. But, by getting the documentation correct, at least the bank would have a record of why they approved the loan to the applicant. It was forced institutional fraud. Everybody knew it was a joke, but they had to commit fraud in order to be in compliance with the banking laws. In the last twenty years or so, being a liar was essential to being trustworthy in the financial industry.
There is no secret anymore. The government knows what happened. Yet, Barney, Chris and Paul in their last terms were still trying to pass legislation that makes permanent the notion of too big to fail, subtitled, the government will bail you out if you fail.
In the last third of April 2010 as I was finishing up my first version of a new book at the time, Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!, the Republicans were trying to figure out how to tell the American people that the big three -- Barney, Chris, and Paul, but mostly Chris, were really not trying to regulate the industry. They were actually trying to set up the country to have to pay for the next bailout. With President Obama out on another campaign tour to sell " banking regulations" to the people, the Republican dilemma is that the people want good banking regulations. Nothing that helps Americqns will ever come from this administration.
Unfortunately, many people still trust Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. They still can't or won't believe that Congress can intentionally perpetrate a fraud on the American people. The fact is that Republicans and Democrats had a deal going to make sure the legislation stopped Wall Street in its tracks when the Democrats, my political party, with Chris Dodd, a big part of the original financial crisis in charge of negotiations, pulled out and softened the legislation.
Among other things, they created a $50 billion slush fund to bail-out any banks that failed. When that $50 billion was gone, the legislation authorized Congress to grab another $50 billion for the next of the "too big to fails," would not fail. The people want them to fail when they squander the people's assets. Bad banks need to be purged from the US banking system rather than rewarding their crony investors. The legislation did not do that. Yet, It must for the stability of the future. Despite the facts, with Obama on another whirlwind campaign tour, Republicans had a tough problem convincing the loyalists in the Democratic party that Congress has set the people up again for a round of perpetual bailouts. Some things never change.
To make matters worse, one of the sticking points that caused Dodd to get up from the negotiating table with Republicans and strike out on his own was the treatment of Fannie and Freddie. Dodd completely let them out of his bill. Fannie and Freddie and government control of the mortgage industry had a lot to do with all of the financial failings. The Republicans were right. Leaving them out of the legislation to wreak more havoc was dumb-headed, but it helped a lot of cronies. .
The Not So Secret Solution to Ending Recession
Do you think banks who do not make it should fail? What if their failure is because they trusted that the government would protect them when they acted irresponsibly? I say yes they should fail. Should Fannie and Freddie Fail? I say yes again. Maybe housing will get so affordable that regular people can afford to buy homes again without the Fed devaluing the dollar every week. We need to get all this bad debt off the books and let the people who gained pay the price -- not the taxpayers.
Besides dealing with "too big to fail" in a responsible way, the secret to solving the recession is to simply cut spending and lower taxes. I would recommend corporate reforms for offshoring and we also need to correct the problem of illegal immigrants taking and keeping American jobs. Both of these are well covered and explained in other essays in my book, Saving America!. If we do all that, we can get this ship floating again without using Gordon Liddy dollars.
How do we know this will work? it has worked every time it has been tried from Andrew Mellon to JFK to Ronald Reagan to George Bush. Obama could have made history if he did what he should have done. Veronique de Rugy of the Cato Institute, a Conservative Think Tank sees it this way:
"Changes in marginal income tax rates cause individuals and businesses to change their behavior. As tax rates rise, taxpayers reduce taxable income by working less, retiring earlier, scaling back plans to start or expand businesses, moving activities to the underground economy, restructuring companies, and spending more time and money on accountants to minimize taxes. Tax rate cuts reduce such distortions and cause the tax base to expand as tax avoidance falls and the economy grows. A review of tax data for high-income earners in the 1920's shows that as top tax rates were cut, tax revenues and the share of taxes paid by high-income taxpayers soared."
Don't expect fundamental change until this fundamental law is followed (enforced) by the current administration or we are able to change the Congress and the President again. Additionally, we cannot permit Hillary or Bernie to ever take the office of the Presidency... ever... ever... ever...
To repeat, the bottom line on ending the recession is to cut spending and reduce taxes. Neither of these will occur, I am afraid, if it is left to this administration or one modeled after it. Keep the penny plan in the back of your mind. It can be done.