U.S. Will Slip Into A Recesion Unles Presidnt & Congres Get On Th Job!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JimofPennsylvan, Aug 10, 2011.

  1. JimofPennsylvan
    Offline

    JimofPennsylvan VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +83
    The President & Congress need to get on the job if the economy is to avoid a recession and fully recover, America's in crisis here! The answer is not "deficit increasing" federal stimulus spending which is economically dangerous, morally wrong to future generations and will lead to a national sales tax. It is Washington using common sense to solve some of the economy's problems in a good manner which is needed; it's listening to some of the good ideas being voiced by the American people and following through on them! Included would be the following.


    First Area, what is the sector of the economy that historically is key to lifting America out of a recession which hasn't been there for the recovery of the 2007/2009 recession? Housing and it is in part because the housing price bubble burst with the recession, foreclosures are sky-high and it is tougher for home buyers to get loans. The 2010 Dodd-Frank legislation mandated that banks that make loans have to hold a portion of the loan (when they sell it so they can get money to make more loans) the idea is if the banks have to hold a portion of the loan they will be diligent in making sure the borrower is a good risk, banks can get around this hold requirement if the loan of very high quality like the borrower puts down twenty or more percent of the sale price, has a certain credit score, etc.. The bottom line is that this provision has had a stifling effect on the ability of home buyers to get loans. Further, this provision was put into Dodd-Frank because prior to the 2007/2009 recession mortgage lenders and banks did a terrible job in checking borrowers income representations and doing calculations on whether borrowers could afford to pay their mortgage payments when the loan interest rates reset; today, things have changed U.S. regulators are no longer asleep at the wheel they are insuring the industry does this due diligence, moreover, banks have been sued big-time over this by the buyers of the shotty loans made incurring many billions of dollars of liability, today no bank executive that is sane would allow such a problem to develop in his or her bank. The point here is that this provision of Dodd-Frank hurting buyers’ ability to get loans should be repealed; it is a solution looking for a problem which is harming the housing industry!

    Another housing topic which the President and the Congress should jump on is that it has been reported in the media that federal and state regulators are close to a grand deal with the banks over the legal ramifications of their shotty paper work in foreclosure actions (e.g. robosigning) and in transferring loans from the original lender, apparently, the deal could result in many many homeowners in trouble with their home loans getting their home loan modified so they can afford to stay in their home thus reducing the foreclosure problem. Allegedly the sticking point is that the banks want protections from future liability over this issue; if adequate protections can't quickly be secured from Attorney Generals across the nation the President and Congress should just pass legislation giving the banks the needed liability protection - Isn't Federal law supreme to state law can't the Federal government fix this problem?

    On the housing topic of foreclosures, the public frequently hears real estate agents say that foreclosure sales are driving down home sales and home sale prices and home builders say foreclosure sales are competing with new home sales and drying up the market for new homes (buyers don't want new homes when they can get such great deals on foreclosed homes). The country has eleven million unemployed and the economy is growing at an anemic rate meaning America will see continued high home loan default and foreclosure rates. The President and Congress need to become fully engaged on this foreclosure issue which means using common sense, twenty-five percent of outstanding home loans are underwater meaning loan principle owed exceeds market value of the home. This fact indicates that a very high percentage of home loans going into foreclosure are underwater, considering that lenders/loan owners on average only end up walking away with only about sixty percent of the market value of a foreclosed home when the property is sold considering their costs and that it is a distressed sale, "common sense" calls for the Congress/President to allow Bankruptcy Judges to cram down the principal on these underwater loans to be foreclosed on to the market value of the property it would result in borrowers being able to afford to stay in their homes, lenders making out better economically in the long run and society-at-large having less foreclosure sales and suffering less harm these sales bring. The President and Congress should pass some well-crafted bankruptcy legislation that allows cram downs on home loans that doesn't unduly encourage these bankruptcies but turns down the spigot on foreclosed properties coming into the home sales market. Put a five year expiration on the legislation, to qualify a debtor has to have home taxes and mortgage payments that exceed fifty-five percent of the debtor’s income, limit the value of loans to loans under $700,000.00, etc.. The Bank Lobby was responsible for derailing this legislation when it was tried in 2009, members of Congress and the President need to make it clear to this lobby and financial institution executives that their first duty is to the American people and the country has endured this foreclosure problem long enough and the harm it causes on the housing industry will be mitigated as much as it can by Washington going forward and this bankruptcy law change is one tool that will be used.


    Another Area is Road & Bridge Infrastructure Spending, this spending (good for employment) is down since before the recession and the economy can't afford this employment loss. Democrats have been floating this idea of creating a National Infrastructure Bank and using as seed money tax income that comes from a one year tax holiday on repatriated income from U.S. corporations from these corporations’ foreign operations, the tax rate on such income is currently essentially 35% and the idea is to cut it to 5.25% for one year. The Republicans absolutely rightly say this is a bad idea because this Infrastructure Bank will end up borrowing tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars to loan to the states for building infrastructure projects and the states will eventually be in a real bind paying off these loans and they will eventually be proclaiming to Washington for relief saying this debt is obstructing them from do necessary road and bridge repairs that impacts safety release us from this debt and members of Congress will for political reasons and the Federal Government will be left paying off this infrastructure debt. However, there is a great idea here, have this one year tax holiday and then do what many people are calling for and permanently lower the tax rate on repatriated funds to let's say 10%. Ten percent not 5.25% because the latter is too low and the current 35% is too high; although many countries don't tax repatriated income the no tax option is not fair it is not fair to all the other businesses in a country paying taxes paying their fair share, the foreign income stems from a U.S. corporation that is created by U.S. law has all the benefits of U.S. law often has the products, services and or business plan that makes up the foreign business designed or created in the U.S. probably ideally from a fairness standpoint the tax on repatriated income should be 15% to 20%, but in light of the fact most other countries don't have such a tax and we as a country want this problem of U.S. corporations not repatriating foreign profits to permanently go away permanently at 10% makes sense, 10% is not so high it should deter repatriation for business executives of multinational corporations frequently deal with a lot of business variables that can fluctuate income up to 10%, e.g. currency issues, raw material costs, etc.. Moreover, besides the yearly economic stimulus of this continual increase in repatriated monies into the economy by this permanent tax change this change will provide the added economic benefit of incentivizing small and medium size U.S. businesses to open up foreign markets for they get to keep ninety percent of the profits from such markets. To get back to the transportation infrastructure issue, Congress should just distribute this additional repatriated tax income like it does federal gas tax income this extra distribution will make a difference; this one year tax holiday should generate at least twenty-five billion dollars a year one would have to think a permanent ten percent repatriated rate would have to bring in ten to twenty billion dollars a year - these billions would fund a lot of road and bridge projects. Reports in the media are that the new transportation bill set to replace the one expiring next month is at a log jam. Apparently, the Democrats want the yearly funding to remain at current levels around $52 billion per year and the bill to be a two year bill and the Republicans want the bill to match the income that comes from the federal petroleum tax which is $34 billion dollars a year and be a six year bill which will allow state and local officials to plan big and medium size projects because they can know how much federal dollars they will be getting. This log jam is ripe for an “everybody give a little” compromise. In light of the desperate need for stimulus in the economy and that it is not right to state officials to rapidly cut federal funding here and the fact that transportation bills should as a rule be done in six year increments so state officials can plan and if the Democrats win the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2012 they can always come back in 2013 and do a supplemental transportation bill, the Congress should do the following in the 2011 six year transportation bill keep the current level of funding for the first year, fund the second year at the mid-point between the current level and $34 billion and for the three to six years make the funding $34 billion. If Congress were to reduce the tax rate on repatriated corporate income as suggested, yearly federal funding in the transportation bill could be increased accordingly with the additional federal income.
     
  2. JimofPennsylvan
    Offline

    JimofPennsylvan VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +83
    Third Area involves agricultural commodities, America as well as the world has an utmost serious problem here the current supply of wheat, corn, soybeans, etc. isn’t enough and it hasn’t been for at least a year now it is huge driver of inflation it really hurts businesses and it causes terrible hardship on individuals. It is a shame that should be remembered for generations that in our times political, civic and religious leaders aren’t complaining like crazy about this problem and calling for the following solution. That being the conversion of more public lands to farm lands. America has huge amounts of federal and state public lands that could be converted granted in many cases trees would have to be cut down, rocks removed and land graded to be able to be worked by tractors. The President and the Congress need to enact legislation post haste that converts more public lands to working farm land. The economic stimulus effect would be huge not only do you have the job creation in converting this land to farm land and farming it and the income to businesses that produce and sell crops and lower cost for food processors but if it is done on a large enough scale it should reverse some of the extreme food inflation Americans have seen recently thus increasing U.S. consumer power. Why doesn’t the federal government initiate a program identifying federal and state land that is suitable for farming; make them empowerment zones that is free from federal and state and local taxes for ten years; make low interest loans available to farmers to prepare the land for farming and get the needed seed, equipment and buildings needed to farm it, on federal land make the lease cost low for the initial years and if the economies call for it no cost; and as long as the individual farmers financial investment is considered make arrangements where after ten years for both federal and state lands the federal government can retire these leases if there be a need related to an over supply of crops (the need for this option seems highly unlikely considering the population growth in the Middle East and for that matter world-wide and how industrialization has from what it appears for now permanently hurt the world climate causing increases in droughts and flooding, etc. which will result in low crop yields in affected areas).


    Fourth Area Oil, people should take note that over the last three years whenever the U.S. economy begins to pick-up a good pace the price of oil significantly increases and takes the legs right out from under the economy. Back in early 2008 Washington passed a stimulus package giving American families anywhere from $300 to $1800 and what did the price of oil do it jumped to $147/barrel (July 2008) and killed the stimulus effect, in early 2011 Washington provided a stimulus in the form of a social security tax holiday giving the average tax payer an extra $1000 dollars of income and what did the price of oil do it rose to $115/barrel (May 2011) and killed the stimulus effect; oil commodity traders even admit this connection they say that when the economy shows signs of improving there will be more demand for oil so the price will go up. It is "absolute insanity" and egregiously irresponsible for elected officials to let this situation continue, what is the point in Washington further trying to improve the economy when oil prices will just knock it down again. Of course the ultimate solution is to dramatically increase oil supplies and/or dramatically cut oil demand but that is impossible to do in the near future. The only possible relief option here is for Washington to "fix" the price of domestically produced oil and require end users to pass on the savings to U.S. consumers, the oil comes from sovereign U.S. territory the sovereign U.S. government has every right to control the price that oil sells for if the American people's interest compellingly calls for it which it does. The U.S. government should pass a law fixing the price of oil for seven years (by that time America will have significantly transitioned to electric/natural gas for their motor vehicle fleets and thus be less vulnerable to harm from high oil prices). Mandate the price for the first year be $85/barrel and increase it at $1.00/barrel for the next four years and $2.50/barrel for the last two years thus ending at $95/barrel. This price is fair to producers it will give them at least a good profit thereby incentivizing production and it will be something American consumers can bare. The Congress would need to mandate that the domestically produced oil must be sold domestically it doesn't help U.S. consumers if the lower priced oil is sold to a foreign end user this shouldn't really matter to foreign countries because America imports over fifty percent of the oil it uses and has for many years so practically foreign countries will never see U.S. produced oil no matter what U.S. law is on this subject. The way Congress could have it work is that the government entity that buys oil for the SPR (Strategic Petroleum Reserve) would if need be be a big buyer of oil contracts and stockpile them for sale to U.S. end users and if need be be the buyer of last resort for oil contracts in the oil markets, realistically though end users will buy up all these domestic oil contracts because as stated America imports over fifty percent of the oil it uses and domestic oil will likely be lower priced than foreign oil. If the U.S. government does this it is a wonder why world leaders don't go to Saudi Arabia which is essentially the world's oil producer because of its King-size production output and ask them to fix their price for seven years and they would guarantee it would get passed through to their consumers explaining this would provide vital help to heal the world economy; this price would probably need to be ten dollars higher per barrel than the above outlined scheme calls for because London oil trades around that much higher than U.S. oil; Saudi Arabia very well may go for it because their target price range on oil is historically pretty reasonable and Saudi Arabia has smart leaders they know the world has serious problems on their hands that are not easily solvable like the oil price problem, namely in part, feeding the world's populations, they may be moved by the positive effects this could bring. One final thought on this issue, America has seen how on the "Grover Norquist No To Raising Taxes" pledge Grover has snookered a huge number of elected officials into signing it and it has had a profound practical effect in Washington what the American people should do is call for scrapping this stupid pledge (how can a person running for office make such a pledge that person doesn't know what circumstances they'll face in office) and start a movement calling for candidates running for national office to pledge to vote for good oil price fixing legislation for the next seven years if America gets enough of these pledge they could pass such legislation and repair the devastation on America market priced oil causes on America. Further on this oil topic, Obama and the Democrats got to open up ANWR in Alaska to oil development the U.S. and the world needs this new oil supply, America needs these jobs; moreover, the Alaska oil pipeline that carries oil down to the lower states needs this new supply to continue to operate in upcoming years the fields that currently supply it are producing less as fields naturally do and it has been reported that if something isn't done in the near future the pipeline will have to be shut down and pursuant to law have to be disassembled and America will have lost a great infrastructure asset. In this same vein, Obama should order the State Department or whatever government agency is responsible to give the needed authorizations to build the Keystone pipeline that will allow oil to be moved from the Canadian Tar Sand Oil Producing region to the petroleum refineries in the gulf region, America needs the jobs involved here this project should be green lighted with all urgency.




    Fifth Area is Government Regulation, the President should fire or transfer out of the EPA its head, Lisa Jackson and replace her with a person that is sensitive and fair to industry. This lady is a plague on the economy; under her watch the EPA is putting out regulations or trying to put out regulations on various types of pollution which demonstrate an obliviousness on the EPA's part to the economic harm these rules will cause on businesses. There is one set of regulations that the EPA has had several announcements on because they have to continually redo the regulations because of the harm they will cause industry. There is one set of regulations that require plants to get anti-pollution equipment in like a two year time frame, no appropriate consideration on affordability. Look at Ms. Jackson's history at the EPA she revoked permits for an oil drilling site in Alaska from Shell that had sunk like $3 billion into the project (it's a go now but there has been a year of development lost), she revoked a permit of a coal company for mountain top mining for a site in West Virginia - this violates regulatory norms businesses need to be able to rely on permits once they get them; this alone should cause her to be removed. Ms. Jackson sees her job as creating jobs by the promulgation of onerous regulations on business. Ms. Jackson's whole mind-set her whole approach to her job is not what the American people want, she should be dumped. On another topic, this writer is a pro-union American but the White House through Presidential directive or whatever has to put the kibosh on some of the unjust pro union rules being or trying to be promulgated in Washington. This rule that companies have to hold union certification votes for their workforce "ten" days after they have been notified that enough of their workers have signed the required cards; this is unjust to management they need time to hire a professional organization that can advocate their position to their workforce and time enough to do the actual workforce appeal - the rule should be management has forty days to do these tasks and has to hold the vote over the next thirty days. There is another rule that needs changing in certain industries only a majority of the workers actually voting need to vote for union certification for the certification to prevail; this is unjust unionization is a big change on a business for both the management and workers and not always a positive change for both - the rule should be majority of workforce needed for certification but the union can reduce this number for workers who can't make the vote for health reasons if they notify the NLRB with the name of the excluded worker and their medical excuse before the date of the election.

    President Obama and the Democrat Party better wake the hell up on the economy. Unless you guys dramatically change course President Obama will lose the White House in the 2012 elections. President Obama and the Democrat party can have the whole country believing that the poor growth in the economy with the high unemployment rate and the huge national debt and deficit is all President Bush's and the Republican Party's fault they were responsible for the Wall Street regulators that were MIA they created the Medicare Prescription drug program and started two wars and didn't pay for them etc.. But it all doesn't matter the American people don't care how we got where we are we want someone to lead us out and the American electorate is smart what is important is not that a person talk the talk but whether that person walks the walk meaning can Barack Obama lead the nation as President to prosperity, so far it is clear he can't - personally I think he has the skill set to but he has to start solving problems that will meaningfully move the economy forward. For starters, the President has to stop this stupid call for extending the Social Security tax holiday for a year this will add $110 billion to the deficit and could and probably more likely than not would have a minimal effect on economic growth - Americans very well may use this money to pay down debt, save it especially in light of the economic storm clouds that appear as far as the eye can see and increased petroleum prices could rear its head again and sap this added consumer spending power in the economy. President Obama is an admirer of President Abraham Lincoln well he should emulate one of President Lincoln's successful qualities which was that if something didn't work try something else until you find something that works he demonstrated this quality in replacing Union Generals until he found General Grant who lead the nation to victory, President Obama how about finding some General Grants for the economy!
     
  3. Steelplate
    Offline

    Steelplate Bluesman

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks Received:
    931
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ratings:
    +932
    Forget it... you said a bad word around here... spend.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,548
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,163
    Slip into a recession? Where have you been the past 3 years?
     
  5. rdean
    Offline

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,111
    Thanks Received:
    6,895
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,968
    Republicans have worked hard to get this country on a race to the bottom.
     
  6. Maple
    Offline

    Maple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Thanks Received:
    568
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +568
    There is no getting out of this recession until we get a new President, a Republican senate and keep a Republican congress. The Democrats will never cut spending, they want to raise taxes, they have over regulated our banks with their stupid Dodd- Frank bill ( the same people responsible for the last housing crisis) they threaten business with Obama care and none of that is going away until we get the bozoz's out of there.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. Maple
    Offline

    Maple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Thanks Received:
    568
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +568
    AGREED.:clap2::clap2:
     
  8. waltky
    Online

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,850
    Thanks Received:
    1,791
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,881
    Even the bugs get a bail-out while the working stiff gets stiffed...
    :eusa_eh:
    Jobs? Obama 'Should Be Working Overtime' to Get Pipeline Approved
    October 7, 2011 - Without spending a dime of taxpayer money, President Obama could put tens of thousands of Americans to work over the next four years and pump billions of dollars into the economy, if only his administration would get moving on a Canada-to-Texas crude oil pipeline.
    See also:

    Job-Creating Keystone Pipeline Affects Endangered Beetle, Says State Dep't
    September 1, 2011 : In its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the Keystone XL pipeline, which would create thousands of jobs and transport 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to Oklahoma and Texas, a State Department official said its investigation found “no significant impact to most resources” along the path of the 1,700-mile project. But the State Department also said the pipeline could adversely affect the American Burying Beetle, an endangered species.
     
  9. Matthew
    Offline

    Matthew Blue dog all the way!

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    49,711
    Thanks Received:
    4,604
    Trophy Points:
    1,885
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Ratings:
    +15,178
    Obama can stick this bill where the sun don't shine...It seems to me each and every time he tries to do something about the economy, he fucks it up. Cut the red tape Obama and get government out of the job of creating jobs. It is not the business of the government...Watch employment start to improve once you do that...Until then STFU about working to fix the economy.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2011
  10. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    The president has been "doing something" for the last three years. And we see the results. He needs to declare a permanent vacation for the next 12 months for himself and Congress. That would do more than any program to restore confidence.
     

Share This Page