Monday, September 29, 2008


This is the important question that is the elephant in the room. Our Senators and Representatives studiously avoid. "They" talk about limits on executive compensation, the need to strengthen regulations (but not in this bill where it belongs unless it's just spin to placate the people) and they even talk about protecting the taxpayer. If "they" were serious about "protecting" the American taxpayer they would not bailout out the rich white people who never want to grow up and face the consequences of their actions....our leaders would listen to us and not put the burdens of the rich upon the middle class and poor in this country.

This is the ultimate lipstick on a pig.

They refuse to work with the INDEPENDENT Senator from Vermont--Bernie Sanders---which proposes placing the burden on the people who have profitted from the Bush economic plan. Sanders proposed taxing the wealthy elite for a limited five year time period....If you are single and make over 500k a year then you will pay a 10% surcharge for five years, and couples making over 1 million a year would also pay a 10% surcharge for five years. It's about time the wealthy elite took some responsibility. This plan would bring 300 billion dollars to the table and reduce the cost to the taxpayer by 50%.

Why does Wall Street business get to do business with no sales tax? Wall street wants a handout so they should help pay for it with a sales tax. This is the only fair thing to do; this is the perfect time to put a sales tax on Wall Street.

Why is Wall Street setting the terms for it's own bailout? Wall Street thinks it should set the terms and conditions for the government bail out? This takes arrogance to new heights. It looks like Wall Street OWNS our Congress.

If "our" government is going to act on this matter then the costs of this should be placed on the people who have benefited from the crisis they created; the wealthy are also actually able to foot this bill handily. The rich have become very rich (at the taxpayers expense) under the Bush administration. Funny, I don't hear any Democrats or Republicans bringing up how the middle and lower class have lost ground under the Bush administration.

IF Congress were doing it's job and representing the American people instead of the corporations. They would insist that the wealthy taxpayers and Wall Street pay for this bailout by having the necessary taxes be a part of the bail out bill. They would insist that the government not get stuck with worthless junk. The people deserve real assets and a fair ownership interest. Our nation has many problems that need to be addressed. The nation should make money off of any Wall Street deal so this can be used to fix our infrastructure, solve our energy problem, and create new jobs so that working people will have the boots and bootstraps that we know how to put to good use.

So why is the Democratic party going along with the Bush plan and making their constituents pay for this mess against our will? The people are speaking out loudly and clearly. It looks like Congress has sold us out to the elite corporate interests.

I don't care what party the Senator or Representative belongs to if you vote for a Wall Street Bailout that rewards the culprits and lays the brunt of the burden on the "taxpayer" you should be thrown out.

The American people are speaking out loud and clear. It's time to throw out the members of Congress who refuse to listen.

1 comment:

No Fax Payday Loans- David said...

On Tuesday, October 7th, In Nashville, Tennessee, the second presidential debate was held. At this Town Hall debate, economy was the most discussed topic. "The last president to raise taxes during tough times was Herbert Hoover," said John McCain, linking Barack Obama to the Depression-era president. Indeed, Mr. Obama said, "we are in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression," but he blamed the "failed economic policies of the last eight years" that President Bush authored and Mr. McCain supported. Economy is definitely what us Americans want addressed, considering stock markets are staggering, this credit crisis has spread globally and of course, retirees have lost $2 trillion.

Voters at Tuesday’s debate at Belmont University were asking question after question about the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. People were very upset and even scared it would not work, they sought reassurance and a solution. McCain announced that as president he would immediately order the treasury secretary to start buying mortgages from owners of homes that are now worth less than they owe, avoiding foreclosures at all costs to stabilize neighborhoods. The plan would cost $300 billion – out of the $700 billion approved last week by Congress – and could add to the national debt, his aides said.

"It's my proposal, it's not Senator Obama's proposal, it's not President Bush's proposal," Mr. McCain said. Obama made no effort to rebut his statement. But after the debate, his aides pointed out that Congress already gave the Treasury the authority Mr. McCain says he would invoke, and they noted that Mr. Obama voiced support two weeks ago for direct mortgage purchases. So if it is McCain’s new proposal, why have steps been taken to buy back mortgages before he even proposed it at the debate claiming he is the only one with this idea?

Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406