Bailout America, Please

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 to post by Quasar




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

Trillions? I suggest you check your math.

Aargh! What is it with people confusing billions and trillions?

This is the third thread I've seen doing "back of the envelope" math and coming up with a number that's three orders of magnitude off.

I'm starting to think it's a conspiracy...



Edit: Quasar:
179,419,771 times $50,233 = $9,012,793,356,643
That's $9 trillion. Of course, that's about what the 'bailout' is costing now, isn't it?


[edit on 9-12-2008 by Ian McLean]

Originally posted by Quasar
Trillions? I suggest you check your math.

you are suggesting bailout of 179 million people ,each getting 50,000$

yes , it would be in trillions in magnitude ....

a 10,000 $ bailout for each would cost 1.79 trillion ,
so a 50000$ bailout .... yes trillions

I guess it's a matter of whether or not the massive bailouts for the financial and auto sectors is really treating the symptoms or just trying to cover a wound with a band aid.

Governments elsewhere are doing stimulus package thing, perhaps not $50,000 per person (eek!), but stimulus money is flowing relatively freely.

But can you imagine $50,000 turning up in certain people's bank accounts? Booze, drugs, and plenty of other needless stuff, like big screen TVs.

In that case, why don't governments just wire that money directly to China, where all of these consumer electronics being bought by these stimulus packages are made?

Australia has recently had a stimulus - families with a litter of kids will actually be getting about AU$20,000, and it's sort of an irksome having that amount of money turning up for households that might not spend it particularly wisely.

Over Christmas, a lot of it is just going to end up "against the wall".

Governments don't want people to pay off their debts - they want it spent in the real economy.

Many countries are going to enter deficits with their federal budgets to fund these stimulus packages - when this global recession period is over, that means taxes will inevitably rise to pay it all back.

Don't be fooled, the governments are definitely not going to give away money for nothing.

and even if your math was right ... that money would be gone in a year or two and there'd be nothing to show for it.

hey ... much like your bailout money!

holy crap my bad.... yes trillions... I'm just so frustrated because this whole situation is effecting my family so bad, it doesn't look good.

[edit on 12/9/2008 by Quasar]

You seriously need to study economics. As a matter of fact start listening to Ron Paul because He educated a lot of people on this issue. You fail to realize if they gave out money like that soon the dollar would be worthless. Lets say give everyone a million dollars right. As soon as that money hits the market the prices on everything would sky rocket. The price of a big mac would go up to 10,000 dollars and I am not kidding. When the money ran out people would starve to death because prices would have risen so much people could not afford to eat....


The best thing to do is to either let it fall or roll back the debt. Our money is printed out of thin air and the only way it gets into the economy is through loans. Now You could roll back the clock 5 years and require all the banks to knock off the balances of all loans by 20% and to redo the loans which would allow more americans to borrow. The other alternative is to get rid of social security, welfare, 50% of the gov, our over seas commitments, commodity based currency, & repeal the income tax....

If You really look into this stuff You will come to realize the whole reason we are in this problem is because of government and guess what bigger government is not going to fix the problem but make it worse.

No no give it to the banks who started this mess so they can lend it back to us with interest.

that way our banks can also lend some money to everybody around the world.

Take US tax payers dollars and give it away and charge us the interest.

Originally posted by Quasar
holy crap my bad.... yes trillions... either way, shouldn't we be the ones to be helped??

maybe ,but isn't the socialism .... after all USA is land of oppertunity for capitalism and land of free(even to exploit others)

so you are capitalist , or do you want communism ???

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

but isn't USA capitalist?? survival of fittest ?? so shouldn't those who cannot earn much be allowed to starve

Originally posted by jkm1864
You seriously need to study economics. As a matter of fact start listening to Ron Paul because He educated a lot of people on this issue. You fail to realize if they gave out money like that soon the dollar would be worthless.

I have a "Write In Ron Paul - There's Still Hope For America" bumper sticker on my car, actually. And your right. I needed to rant somewhere, and this is my favorite place. I try not to watch the news, but I'm addicted to it, and am so sick and tired to what I'm hearing, apparently I drank too much tonight, and posted what I felt without proofreading it.

Sadchild01, sorry, you were right...

It's just getting to me.

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?

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]

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.

Oh the collapsed system gotcha
That does not exist anymore

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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!