The US Economy and Current Financial Crisis

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Another major American industry is asking for assistance as the global financial crisis continues: Hustler publisher Larry Flynt and Girls Gone Wild CEO Joe Francis said Wednesday they will request that Congress allocate $5 billion for a bailout of the adult entertainment industry.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...ederal-bailout/

 

I know you're probably thinking "yeah, right," but imagine how intense the lobbying for this could get.

I had a laugh when Glenn Beck made the case for supporting a bailout of the Porn industry over a bailout of the NY Times though he couldnt go far without making jokes or laughing at a joke he couldnt say on the radio... Some caller mentioned that porn is the reason we have so much technology today, which is pretty much the truth.

[BruiserKC 0]

When does TSM go for its bailout? I think we provide here equally as important a service as Hustler and Joe Francis.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Maybe we can get one from Canada or something.

 

 

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

There's a lot of talk amongst Internet No Lifers that all of this is part of the New World Order's master plan to create a single world currency. Hulk fucking Hogan.

[CanadianChris 0]

Maybe we can get one from Canada or something.

Back of the line.

[The Niggardly King 0]

There's a lot of talk amongst Internet No Lifers that all of this is part of the New World Order's master plan to create a single world currency. Hulk fucking Hogan.

 

Ron Paul could of been America's Sting, but instead we got Luger in the white house.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I like how now its going to cost only a measly $3.5 TRILLION to fix the banks now. Hopefully the banks can waste that too and the government can just declare fuck it and buy the banks and nationalize em already instead of playing this BS game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[EricMM 0]

I don't like it

[BruiserKC 0]

I like how now its going to cost only a measly $3.5 TRILLION to fix the banks now. Hopefully the banks can waste that too and the government can just declare fuck it and buy the banks and nationalize em already instead of playing this BS game.

 

For the banks that truly need the help, give them the help. For those that screwed up with the money from the taxpayers or who were headed by greedy SOB's, let them go under and be bought out. If someone ever in Congress brings up a bill for the buying of the banks, I will be personally starting a campaign for their impeachment/expulsion, whatever.

 

Meanwhile, Harley-Davidson lays off 1100 employees as their profits are down. Plus, the former CEO of Merrill Lynch gets run out at Bank of America and the board might be ready to clean house at the top. These days the market and business news is as exciting and interesting as sports.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Why does this new proposal have to include hundreds of millions for contraceptives? Fucking Nancy Pelosi.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Its pretty cool that only about $27 billion of the over $800 stimulus program is actually going to be used this year to stimulate anything. and to all those local governments salivating over the infrastructure money part, too bad, we ain't doin that now either.

 

But if we take the contraceptives from Pelosi and give them to the Welfare For Life by pumping out babies faster than a Cabbage Patch factory crowd, maybe it could save state governments some cash..

 

The government won't be able to spend at least one fourth of this stimulus package until after 2010. One quarter of the stimulus package won't even be allowed or available until 2011. This is not from that evil Rush Limbaugh. This is from the CBO, the congressional business office. The government is going to spend $26 billion of the $825 billion, they will spend only $26 billion of it this year, $110 billion of it the next year and $103 billion will be spent in 2011 and the remaining $53 billion -- I'm sorry, it's not even the remaining. $53 billion will be spent in 2012 and $63 billion between 2013 and 2019. This isn't a stimulus package by any stretch of the imagination. Less than $5 billion of the $30 billion set aside for highway spending will be spent in the next two years. Less than $5 billion of the $30 billion. Remember they are saying this is about infrastructure, this is construction, building bridges and roads. $30 billion? Here's an idea. Take the $20 billion that you're spending right now and add another $30 billion and put it in there right now for the bridges. What do you say we just call this a $50 billion stimulus package.

 

One in $7 of a huge $18.5 billion investment for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs would be spent within a year and a half, $1 in $7. Almost a billion dollars is being spent to expand broadband access to rural areas. This is not, this is not a stimulus package, and it's a lie to anybody who's telling you any differently.

[Turbo Lion 0]

There was a pretty convincing argument by some Harvard economist when this first started about letting the Banks solve their problems organically, with the strong buying out the weak. I'm no economist, but that's stuck with me throughout what's happened since.

[SuperJerk 0]

Its pretty cool that only about $27 billion of the over $800 stimulus program is actually going to be used this year to stimulate anything. and to all those local governments salivating over the infrastructure money part, too bad, we ain't doin that now either.

 

But if we take the contraceptives from Pelosi and give them to the Welfare For Life by pumping out babies faster than a Cabbage Patch factory crowd, maybe it could save state governments some cash..

 

The government won't be able to spend at least one fourth of this stimulus package until after 2010. One quarter of the stimulus package won't even be allowed or available until 2011. This is not from that evil Rush Limbaugh. This is from the CBO, the congressional business office. The government is going to spend $26 billion of the $825 billion, they will spend only $26 billion of it this year, $110 billion of it the next year and $103 billion will be spent in 2011 and the remaining $53 billion -- I'm sorry, it's not even the remaining. $53 billion will be spent in 2012 and $63 billion between 2013 and 2019. This isn't a stimulus package by any stretch of the imagination. Less than $5 billion of the $30 billion set aside for highway spending will be spent in the next two years. Less than $5 billion of the $30 billion. Remember they are saying this is about infrastructure, this is construction, building bridges and roads. $30 billion? Here's an idea. Take the $20 billion that you're spending right now and add another $30 billion and put it in there right now for the bridges. What do you say we just call this a $50 billion stimulus package.

 

One in $7 of a huge $18.5 billion investment for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs would be spent within a year and a half, $1 in $7. Almost a billion dollars is being spent to expand broadband access to rural areas. This is not, this is not a stimulus package, and it's a lie to anybody who's telling you any differently.

 

Four things:

1) It's called the Congressional Budget Office, not the "congressional business office."

2) OMG SOURCE PLZ!

3) Conservatives want to argue that the stimulus isn't going to work because it isn't big enough? Can you guys please find an economic philosophy and stick with it?

4) In no way did the line about contraceptives and cabbage patch dolls make any sense.

 

 

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

1 - whoever transcripts Glenn's show is a moron

2 - Glenn Beck (duh)

3 - My understanding of what he was saying was that they should just call it a 26 billion stimulus package and worry about the other 799 billion later instead of lumping it all together for the next 10 years and calling it a 825 billion stimulus package when the bulk of the stimulus isn't happening for at least a couple years. After all the talk of this being what was needed to fix things and it comes out as only being 26 billion for this year, it seems very much like the Obama administration isn't showing much confidence in the ability of the 26 billion to do anything if they need to spend over twice as much in 10 years for economic stimulation as they are this year. If they were really trying to accomplish something that would have a positive impact on the economy in a timely matter you would think there would be more money going to stimulate the economy now, not 10 years from now.

4 - I think it makes perfect sense.

[The Niggardly King 0]

I have a feeling if Gleen Beck took a dump and somehow tied into the current economical shitfest, you'd somehow post about it Marv

[EricMM 0]

Troll.

[2GOLD 0]

Are condoms so rare and expensive that people suddenly can't find and afford them? Why does the government need to pick up that bill? Comes off like one of those things that just aren't needed for the government to waste the time and effort on. The pill and all of that, just make it less expensive instead of making taxpayers pick up the tab. They can be sold for 10 bucks a month and if a family cannot afford the pill, then condoms still exist and they don't break like rubber bands that often.

 

If you want to put the money towards actual sexual education other than abstinence (which I'm fine with teaching that as well) then cool. Course abstinence doesn't need money since it's really just telling kids "Don't have sex until your married" and there is zero to spend money teaching there. We've still got kids who firmly believe the pull out method is 100% full proof and that the pill is 100% effective with no chance of getting preggers. That alone tells me the schools are doing a really REALLY shitty job with sex ed now.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

3 - My understanding of what he was saying was that they should just call it a 26 billion stimulus package and worry about the other 799 billion later instead of lumping it all together for the next 10 years and calling it a 825 billion stimulus package when the bulk of the stimulus isn't happening for at least a couple years. After all the talk of this being what was needed to fix things and it comes out as only being 26 billion for this year, it seems very much like the Obama administration isn't showing much confidence in the ability of the 26 billion to do anything if they need to spend over twice as much in 10 years for economic stimulation as they are this year. If they were really trying to accomplish something that would have a positive impact on the economy in a timely matter you would think there would be more money going to stimulate the economy now, not 10 years from now.

You misunderstand, as do most of the people reciting that talking point, Glenn Beck included. That's why it's called a talking point and not a "research/reading the news" point. The Congressional Budget Office figure you're citing only accounted for something like $300 billion of the stimulus funds, first off. Secondly, the real impact of something like this isn't based on the actual cash spent, but on the contracts awarded for it. The contracts provide long-term assurances to banks/contractors/whomever the stimulus is meant to support, based on government contractual authority, which allows for improved financing and (I believe) significantly less agony over credit. The value of the contracts as budgeted will likely account for most of the stimulus, although the actual cash distribution will be done over time. Peter Orszag, the director of the Budget and Management offices, thinks 75% of the funds will be spent within the first 18 months.

 

This is my very novice understanding of it, but it seems pretty sound; if you amortize funds, even over a relatively brief term like 3 years, then you somewhat artificially ensure that the industries being supported will have that support through the life of their contracts with gradual adjustments. Throw it out there in one big pile, and who knows how (and how effectively) it'll be used.

[SuperJerk 0]

Why does the government need to pick up that bill?

 

Becuase it will save the government money in the long run in health care costs and AFDC payments.

 

If you want to put the money towards actual sexual education other than abstinence (which I'm fine with teaching that as well) then cool. Course abstinence doesn't need money since it's really just telling kids "Don't have sex until your married" and there is zero to spend money teaching there. We've still got kids who firmly believe the pull out method is 100% full proof and that the pill is 100% effective with no chance of getting preggers. That alone tells me the schools are doing a really REALLY shitty job with sex ed now.

How do you know the people who think that passed or even took sex ed?

[Dandy 0]

Caterpillar moved to lay off around 22,000 employees yesterday, and intends on restricting overtime and making other budget cuts. I work for WalkerCAT, a dealership for Caterpillar, and we are actually hiring people right now as we just closed out a record year. The owners informed us managers to tighten the budget where we can and try to cut out overtime if possible, but they are optimistic that we will still have a good year. One of the things that we were told today was Caterpillar is still behind on production, and that we cannot get machinery from them fast enough to supply the demand. Yet another instance of West Virginia not feeling the pinch that other states are feeling. It's definitely coming, though.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

It's not a magical nonexistent CBO report like the Marvster's, but it's the best I could do...

 

Congressional Budget Office compares downturn to Great Depression

 

By David Lightman | McClatchy Newspapers

 

The nation's current recession is likely to be the longest since World War II, and by some measures could be the worst since the Great Depression, a new Congressional Budget Office forecast said Tuesday.

 

Without a major economic stimulus plan, "the shortfall in the nation's output relative to its potential would be the largest – in terms of both length and depth – since the Depression of the 1930s," said new CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf in testimony prepared for the House Budget Committee...

 

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/60822.html

[At Home 0]

Marivn, do you have any political insight that didn't come specifically from the mouth of Glenn Beck? Any at all?

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

It's not a magical nonexistent CBO report like the Marvster's, but it's the best I could do...

 

Congressional Budget Office compares downturn to Great Depression

 

By David Lightman | McClatchy Newspapers

 

The nation's current recession is likely to be the longest since World War II, and by some measures could be the worst since the Great Depression, a new Congressional Budget Office forecast said Tuesday.

 

Without a major economic stimulus plan, "the shortfall in the nation's output relative to its potential would be the largest – in terms of both length and depth – since the Depression of the 1930s," said new CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf in testimony prepared for the House Budget Committee...

 

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/60822.html

 

After the AP first wrote up the "report," the rest of the media piled on the story. In a new analysis, ThinkProgress has found that since the AP's report last Tuesday, the CBO report has been cited at least 81 times on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, the Sunday shows and the network newscasts in order raise questions about Obama's recovery plan.

 

I dont feel so bad about this now, given that even MSNBC mentioned the non-existant report. But there still is the part that says that over half of the infrastructure portion of the program wont be spent by 2010 even though 75% of the total money will be. Obama's magical cure all of Investing in infrastructure had state and local governments stampeding to the trough to get their share of it and now its noted (for real this time) that the infrastucture portion barely accounts for 1/4 of the total program. Hopefully this is because of the rediculous things that the local governments wanted to do with the money, but its interesting that Obama backed off a lot on his original plan.

[SuperJerk 0]

I'm sure everyone in the "liberal media" was quick to retract their earlier stories on the report.

[NoCalMike 0]

Why does the government need to pick up that bill?

 

Becuase it will save the government money in the long run in health care costs and AFDC payments.

 

If you want to put the money towards actual sexual education other than abstinence (which I'm fine with teaching that as well) then cool. Course abstinence doesn't need money since it's really just telling kids "Don't have sex until your married" and there is zero to spend money teaching there. We've still got kids who firmly believe the pull out method is 100% full proof and that the pill is 100% effective with no chance of getting preggers. That alone tells me the schools are doing a really REALLY shitty job with sex ed now.

How do you know the people who think that passed or even took sex ed?

 

Yeah aren't the highest teen pregnancy rates mostly in states along the bible belt........and not in the "heathen" states like CA & NY where sex ed is probably a lot more accepted and prominent.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Not really, Mike.

 

States ranked by rates of pregnancy among women age 15-19 (pregnancies per thousand):

 

1. Nevada (113)

2. Arizona (104)

3. Mississippi (103)

4. New Mexico (103)

5. Texas (101)

6. Florida (97)

7. California (96)

8. Georgia (95)

9. North Carolina (95)

10. Arkansas (93)

 

It's pretty much anywhere where hispanic populations are more concentrated, if you've noticed. It's definitely a cultural thing, as women being pregnant at a younger age is not as big of a deal in latino culture as it is in other ones. But yes, there's definitely a correlation there between the bible belt, especially if you look at the top ten states by live birth, although that shouldn't be as big of a surprise because abortion is severely frowned upon in some of those states.

[BruiserKC 0]

Caterpillar moved to lay off around 22,000 employees yesterday, and intends on restricting overtime and making other budget cuts. I work for WalkerCAT, a dealership for Caterpillar, and we are actually hiring people right now as we just closed out a record year. The owners informed us managers to tighten the budget where we can and try to cut out overtime if possible, but they are optimistic that we will still have a good year. One of the things that we were told today was Caterpillar is still behind on production, and that we cannot get machinery from them fast enough to supply the demand. Yet another instance of West Virginia not feeling the pinch that other states are feeling. It's definitely coming, though.

 

Didn't they already lay off 15,000 at the end of last year, and just adding another 5-7,000 now to that total?

 

Pfizer lays off 8000, although the official line is that it was a result of Pfizer's being bought out, not the recession. Home Depot has laid off 7000 of their own also.

 

As for money being included for rubbers in the stimulus plan, that gives the term "government pork" a whole new meaning.

[SuperJerk 0]

Not really, Mike.

 

States ranked by rates of pregnancy among women age 15-19 (pregnancies per thousand):

 

1. Nevada (113)

2. Arizona (104)

3. Mississippi (103)

4. New Mexico (103)

5. Texas (101)

6. Florida (97)

7. California (96)

8. Georgia (95)

9. North Carolina (95)

10. Arkansas (93)

 

It's pretty much anywhere where hispanic populations are more concentrated, if you've noticed. It's definitely a cultural thing, as women being pregnant at a younger age is not as big of a deal in latino culture as it is in other ones. But yes, there's definitely a correlation there between the bible belt, especially if you look at the top ten states by live birth, although that shouldn't be as big of a surprise because abortion is severely frowned upon in some of those states.

 

Although I cannot dispute the reasoning behind the high rankings in your list, the CDC has different results, in which southern states continue to be over-represented in the top 10:

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/2...state-rank.html

 

Rank State Birth rate per 1,000 women ages 15-19

1 Mississippi 68.4

2 New Mexico 64.1

3 Texas 63.1

4 Arkansas 62.3

5 Arizona 62.0

6 Oklahoma 59.6

7 Nevada 55.8

8 Tennessee 54.7

9 Kentucky 54.6

10 Georgia 54.2

11 Louisiana 53.9

12 Alabama 53.5

13 South Carolina 53.0

14 North Carolina 49.7

15 Wyoming 47.3

16 Missouri 45.7

17 Florida 45.2

18 West Virginia 44.9

19 Alaska 44.3

20 Colorado 43.8

21 Indiana 43.5

22 Kansas 42.0

23 Delaware 41.9

24 Hawaii 40.5

25 South Dakota 40.2

26 Ohio 40.0

27 California 39.9

28 Montana 39.6

29 Illinois 39.5

30 Idaho 39.2

31 Oregon 35.7

32 Virginia 35.2

33 Utah 34.0

34 Michigan 33.8

35 Maryland 33.6

36 Nebraska 33.4

37 Washington 33.4

38 Iowa 32.9

39 Pennsylvania 31.0

40 Wisconsin 30.9

41 Minnesota 27.9

42 Rhode Island 27.8

43 North Dakota 26.5

44 Maine 25.8

45 New York 25.7

46 New Jersey 24.9

47 Connecticut 23.5

48 Massachusetts 21.3

49 Vermont 20.8

50 New Hampshire 18.7

 

 

 

 

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I thought Wisconsin would be a lot higher, honestly.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Not really, Mike.

 

States ranked by rates of pregnancy among women age 15-19 (pregnancies per thousand):

 

1. Nevada (113)

2. Arizona (104)

3. Mississippi (103)

4. New Mexico (103)

5. Texas (101)

6. Florida (97)

7. California (96)

8. Georgia (95)

9. North Carolina (95)

10. Arkansas (93)

 

It's pretty much anywhere where hispanic populations are more concentrated, if you've noticed. It's definitely a cultural thing, as women being pregnant at a younger age is not as big of a deal in latino culture as it is in other ones. But yes, there's definitely a correlation there between the bible belt, especially if you look at the top ten states by live birth, although that shouldn't be as big of a surprise because abortion is severely frowned upon in some of those states.

 

Although I cannot dispute the reasoning behind the high rankings in your list, the CDC has different results, in which southern states continue to be over-represented in the top 10:

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/2...state-rank.html

Reading is a skill. There's also a link up there which shows the same top ten of the 50 you posted. I was going by pregnancy, not live birth.