Bailout America, Please, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 9-12-2008 @ 01:32 AM by Quasar
An American "bailout" seems to make more sense then any other "bailout". Is it because of who owns stock in these companies?

179,419,771 Americans filed their taxes last year, according to PDF page 23 of
this IRS document.

If the government gave each and every one of those people a "stimulus check" of $50,233.00, which is the average median income of every one of those taxpayers, according to this census sheet, then:

$9,012,793,357(9bil) is what the government would give to "bailout" its country....

So why is this?

$700,000,000,000(700bil) to the banks?

$15,000,000,000(15bil) to automobile manufacturers?

Wouldn't it be cheaper, and more effective, to give its own citizens money to spend? That would mean we would be buying things, fixing our credit, and giving these corporations money, right?

Most people can barely afford a roof over their head, and we bail out huge corporations?!

Somebody please explain this, this makes no sense.

[edit on 12/9/2008 by Quasar]


reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 01:44 AM by sadchild01
reply to post by Quasar





a bailout to american people will cost trillions ,thus leading to hyperinflation


reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 02:25 AM by sadchild01
Originally posted by SLAYER69
Originally posted by sadchild01


yes, communists helped their people a lot , free homes(one home for each family) ,food , quality cars which are simple and cheap etc ...





What planet are you from?

Give me an example of free homes for families?
This cant be the former soviet union?
or China?
Cuba?



yes, it was soviet union that gave free homes , ye

One important element of collapse-preparedness is making sure that you don't need a functioning economy to keep a roof over your head. In the Soviet Union, all housing belonged to the government, which made it available directly to the people. Since all housing was also built by the government, it was only built in places that the government could service using public transportation. After the collapse, almost everyone managed to keep their place.
In the United States, very few people own their place of residence free and clear, and even they need an income to pay real estate taxes. People without an income face homelessness. When the economy collapses, very few people will continue to have an income, so homelessness will become rampant. Add to that the car-dependent nature of most suburbs, and what you will get is mass migrations of homeless people toward city centers.
www.energybulletin.net...


yes housing was free and no rent was charged , and yes, people managed to retain their houses after collapse of SU , while in USA , people have to pay property taxes , in USSR , people did not ,



[edit on 9-12-2008 by sadchild01]


reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 03:54 AM by liquidsmoke206
I don't like the idea of bailing out anyone.
But I think think gov't should nationalize the car industry, but only for a short term, say 15 years or so, after that it would become a publicly traded company. They'd have time to fund it, keep it on it's feet, and restructure it so that it works.

Never gonna happen.

As far financial industies.....
People........

It goes without saying that there are exceptions. I don't feel I should ever have to buffer a statement with that, but if you don't people fly off the handle.

You know.....are people really as broke as they are sayin? They eff around in the spare bedroom of their condo that they bought with virtually no money down, on their high speed internet. Then when they get bored they go and check out the, multi million dollar an episode TV show on their 1080p flat panel, but when they get depressed from all the bad news about the economy they pop in a vid and blow people away who live in another time zone, a great way to kill time between making dumb decisions.

Stop bailing anyone out. Doesn't anyone think that people should have to pay for wreckless irresponsible lifestyles?

Handing a bunch of people money, so they can what? Show some initiative, put their heads together, get organized, and come up with a great idea to spend it on.

Or maybe this sounds more fmailiar....
We can all just buy new iPODS, and outfits. Go to the latest generic flick. Put a down payment on a car that will really impress the chicks, or keep paying off our little homes(hell, I know it it ain't much, but at least it's mine).





no plan that ever gets formulated by this government, or any in the foreseeable future will ever work for the simple reason that the vast majority of people have effed priorities. everyone knows it.


reply posted on 9-12-2008 @ 03:22 PM by marg6043
reply to post by Quasar




That is not all take hold of this one,

AIG Continues to Waste Your Money

The American people rightfully own an 80 percent share of American International Group. Yet the United States government continues to sit on its hands as the insolvent company doles out tens of millions of dollars in bonuses to the very executives whose actions drove the firm into the ground.

The conflict of interests represented by stupendous executive pay-scales is part of the reason for our current financial crisis. Executives feel no need to guarantee sound performances if they are able to come away with millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains regardless of their company’s outlook.


Were is my cut of the AIG profits and out rageous bonuses pay by my tax money

www.economyincrisis.org...


Among 38 executives with annual salaries between $160,000 and $1,000,000, AIG has handed out “retention payments” ranging from $92,500 to $4,000,000. These payments are not coming from AIG’s own reserves or profits – which are non-existent – they are coming directly from the billions given to the firm by both the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department. Even in a place as high-priced as New York City, the idea that someone who already makes over $150,000 per year will need another $100,000 just to stay with the company is preposterous.

The average income for one person in New York City is roughly $50,000 and literally millions of New Yorkers live on an income in that range. If a highly trained corporate executive is barely getting by on an income three times greater than an average person, his ability to reasonably manage money is clearly insufficient; his qualifications to hold that position in the financial industry should be called into question.


www.bloomberg.com...

This how we have been scammed and our own government doesn't give two rats about how we the rest of the hard working Americans are doing.

Also the BOA took 25 billions on bail out but instead of helping the consumers they took 7 billions and invested in a Chinese bank.

I also want a piece of the profits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Its our tax payer money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Do I have freedom FROM religion?
  Posted 1 days ago with 18 member flags
Is this the only politician in europe that is not blind?
  Posted 2 days ago with 8 member flags
Former NAVY SEAL Rebukes Obama
  Posted 17 days ago with 7 member flags
What The Founding Fathers Thought About Corporations
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Newsweek Cover: \'The First Gay President\'
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags
Westboro Baptist Church
  Posted 11 days ago with 4 member flags
Congress Revolts On Obama Plan That Would Ban ‘Buy American’
  Posted 18 days ago with 3 member flags
Police Pursue 4-Year-Old for Overdue Library Book
  Posted 12 days ago with 3 member flags