The "Can You Hear Me Now" Line item

[NeMont]

How about a $2.825 BILLION to further deploy cellphone and broadband services?

TITLE III--COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND SCIENCE

wireless and broadband deployment grant programs

For necessary expenses related to the Wireless and Broadband Deployment Grant Programs established by section 6002 of division B of this Act, $2,825,000,000, of which $1,000,000,000 shall be for Wireless Deployment Grants and $1,825,000,000 shall be for Broadband Deployment Grants.

$2.825 could pay 62,777 people $45,000 a year for one year or 6,277 people $45,000 a year for ten years, just putting it into perspective.

$850 Billion if just giving out to people could pay 18,888,888 people $45,000 per year. Just think what direct payments of the nearly $2 TRILLION that the Fed won't tell us where it went could pay for.

I feel bad for our once great country. I know Obama is doing what the majority are demanding but I am afraid the majority is stupid.

Nemont

 

[D13er]

"" .........but I am afraid the majority is stupid. ""

no truer words were ever spoken !!!



great post/pic, thanks for sharing

JB

 

[Forthewall]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-09 AT 02:39AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-09 AT 02:06?AM (MST)

Unfortunately we all cannot be John and Kitty McCain. I wrote a letter to Verizon and ATT to give me my own cell tower for free like the McCain's but they have not responded yet.

I find it odd that candidate McCain promoted expansion of wireless and broadband as a part of his stimulus package.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/25/mccain-broadband/

But now McCain, former candidate and current loser for the office of the presidency along with his rudderless partisan peers are against it.

is stupid or are stupid?

As for numbers, we could take every man, woman, and child to Subway for a $5.00 Foot-long sandwich, chips, and a large soda and call it National Lunch Day.

We could give every man, woman, and child in the U.S. 900 1 cent gumballs. Say has that 8-10 Billion in cash that went missing in Iraq ever turn up? What or who did that stimulate?
Of course Senate Republicans don't like to talk about that since that happened under their watch.

So given that example it only makes sense that Senate Republicans would consider 2.8 billion to ensure modernized communication and commerce nationally as wasteful spending.

Perhaps Obama should do the Republican thing and just lose the 2.8 billion, then never talk about it. Afterall 2.8 billion can buy just as much nothing as 8-10 billion.

 

[NeMont]

FTW,
I don't think this is a Republican bill as not a single Republican voted for nor was there any Republican input allowed in crafting the bill.

If your agruement is that the Republican congress wasted money so now it is the Democrats turn that is kind of fuzzy logic.

If just spending to spend will stimulate the economy then how come the $5 trillion pumped into the economy so far hasn't stimulated it? But this new Trillion will?



Nemont

 

[huntindude]

The republicans are in a great position, the democrats just like Bush was are in a position they must try to fix the economy, the republicans are powerless to fix it or to stop the dems fron trying.

So the republicans have no answers but they'll whine and snivel and oppose Obama, odds are in their favor the stimulus will fail but what if the economy improves and the stimulus gets the credit even if it had nothing to do with it? it's a gamble when you take a stand like this when voters are scared to death, if the economy improves Obama will be a rock star and a republican politian will be harder to find than a do do bird.

So when you look at it that way most of you hope you lose your house and are living under a bridge in the next 4 years aren't you? what's bad for you is bad for Obama and that's good. I think the stimulus is a joke, but I don't have a better answer and nobody else does either, the republicans plan to give tax cuts to people without an income shows they're as dumb or dumber than Obama.

 

[manny15]

but I am afraid the majority is stupid........LMHO

 

[Forthewall]

Nemont I am totally against any notion of government bailouts. I sent multiple e-mails to Idaho (D) Sen. Minnick to vote against it, which he did.

But it's here and the fact is that McCain was for national expansion of cellphone and broadband coverage as part of his stimulus package too. So he was for it, until the Dems were and now in typical Republican style he is against it.

The past 5 trillion was not spent to stimulate the economy, it was spent to keep the economy from allegedly imploding. I thought the post was about the 2.8 billion, not the inept economic monetary policies of the prior administration.

If somebody told you that you could spend 5 trillion patching the boat or 1 trillion in an attempt to fix it which would you chose? I am in wait and see mode, I don't like any of it but I will be patient, hope that a new found transparency weeds out the pork, and that the economy will stabilize.

I was the one to post the unprecented 2 trillion the treasury printed up in 2006, noting it stank of Veimar Depression. Now the government has equity in private markets, long-term loans to failed markets, and the dollar has dropped in value...sound hauntingly familiar to Germany 1939.

From what I have read it may take 3-4 trillion more with absolutely zero guarantees of success or failure. But some action has to be taken since letting the boat sink is not a viable option.

 

[NeMont]

HD,

The part you are missing is that the Tax cuts in this bill make up 33% of the stimulus. Can you tell which Republicans were allowed input in writing this bill? Either tax cuts work or they don't. The democrats don't need republican support for any of this because all they have do is convince two GOP senators to go along with them. The democrats own the House, the White House and have a big majority in the Senate.

So are you saying the Republicans forcee the Democrats to include $250 Billion of tax cuts in the stimulus? Explain how that happened.

The Republicans are in no position to do anything except whine because the voters kicked them out of office.

There are lots of steps that could be taken from a purely economic standpoint, the problem is that there isn't a single politician who has the gonads to tell the American people the truth. Doesn't matter if there is a D or R after their names.

I give Obama credit for being a very smart politician and I also am very encouraged by his foreign policies moves so far. I believe he is a very capable politician. He appears to be badly informed on the true problems and has let the inmates run the asylum with the appointment of Geithner.

I know that there is no way politically to get the thing done that the economy needs and unfortunately all the Obama team is going to do is waste another Trillion dollars on top of all the the Bush administration waste.

I really don't understand the guys who complained bitterly about the Bush debt but are cheerleading even bigger debt that is going to be run up by Obama.

Please consider getting out of the U.S. dollar as soon as possible. Preserve you wealth in some form before it is too late.

Nemont

 

[NeMont]

FTW,

If my only choices are to spend $5 Trillion or $1 Trillion I would of course spend the $1 Trillion. The problem is that the boat has way more holes then just one and a Trillion won't patch them all. I would rather have bought a new boat with the $5 trillion and not have to worry about a Trillion bucks a year for the foreseeable future to keep it seaworthy.

I really don't care if McCain does or doesn't support the cellphone and broadband "stimulus". I really don't care if a Republican or Democrat proposes bailout and stimulus packages. What I care about is sound economic and monetary policies. This is neither of them because it is attempting to get things back to where they were a few years ago.

I know this money is as good as spent, assuming the rest of the world is still stupid enough to buy our debt but that doesn't make it right. I am in the watch and learn mode as all this unfolds. I want Obama to succeed but he sure seems bent on spending the last dollar China is willing to loan us and then printing many trillion more just like the last administration.

Nemont

 

[huntindude]

Who's against tax cuts? the problem is a plan that's pretty much nothing but tax cuts won't work. it won't work for several reasons, first off taxes inspire businesses to spend for depreciation, second people with no job or income really don't see the gain in tax cuts and third those who do save money by tax cuts are going to spend a good amount of that money on foreign crap that does little good for the economy.

If you want a tax cut that will do some good slash capitol gains, that will get money flowing that otherwise will just sit around doing nothing. this will never happen though, too many would rather starve than have what they see as the rich get a break.

 

[NeMont]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-09 AT 12:14PM (MST)[p]HD,
That is true about capital gains but that was not my question.

My question is this: How come the democrats put tax cuts in their stimulus package? For eight years it has been explained by the democrats that tax cuts do not work. Now 33% of the stimulus is tax cuts. Either the democrats believe tax cuts do work or they were lying to us for 8 years.

The Republicans didn't write one line of the Stimulus plan that passed the House. That is 100% democrat concieved, voted on and passed.

You can blame the Republicans for some stuff but this one is soley a democrat program.

Nemont

 

[Forthewall]

Nemont,

Are the 33% of tax cuts you mentioned for the top 2% of wage earners for the country? If they are not then we are talking apples and oranges. I don't think the Dems ever stated tax cuts do not work, just tax cuts for the top 2% does not work. The only thing 25 years of trickle down economics has achieved is a diminished middle class and larger divide between the haves and the have nots.

I believe 2 things are going to happen with the stimulus, a few Republicans will crossover and the amount will go higher.

So have you played on Forex yet? Next week I will be completely out of gold.

 

[NeMont]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-09 AT 01:37PM (MST)[p]I can pull the quotes from leading democrats from Hillary, Durbin, Frank, Obama, Dodd, et al. where they specifically state tax cuts do not work. Tax cuts to people who don't even pay taxes especially don't work IHO. None of this will work. If it were so simple then why would there ever be an economic down turn?

I have played around with it. Tell me your theory on gold. It seems the price of gold is set to reach new heights in the near future.

Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers among others are advising holding gold, oil or other commodities as those are the only asset classes where the fundementals are unimpaired.

Nemont

 

[huntindude]

FTW pretty well covered it but I might add maybe tax cuts are there to gain republican support as much as anything else. Obama doesn't need the republicans but he wants them,imagine the screaming if tax cuts weren't in there at all.

If you buy gold you better know when to sell gold is what everyone is telling me, it may go up but it will almost for sure take a dive in the next year or two. you guys can have my share.

 

[NeMont]

HD

I understand the whole thing about who get tax cuts or not but I can pull up the quotes where the leading democrats insist tax cuts do not work.

Anyway explain how gold is going to take a dive with the looming financial crisis. People are already dumping their treasury bonds and dollars. As the flight from the dollar and the Pound Sterling gain steam where will all the money go? Gold seems like a safe play. At least as safe as almost anything else. Maybe Japanese Yen would be an okay play also. I guess you could make money shorting the dollar as well.

Oil would also appear to be an extreme bargain right now. Even if demand doesn't pick up the collapse of the dollar will drive prices higher.

Maybe I am missing something but it appears to me that right now being long in commodities is an okay move.

Enlighten me.

Nemont

 

[huntindude]

Let's face it if either one of us was smart enough to know how this was going to play out we'd have better things to do than bicker on a dumb forum.

The way it was explained to me by a pretty sharp investor is gold is where unimaginative investors look, and there are a lot of them. he thinks the gold market may climb a little more and then when people feel the market on real estate or stocks has bottomed they'll want their money fast and a gold selling rush will be on. also if we go into a true depression there will be many better places to spend money, then we have another gold selling rush and few buyers.

As I said nobody knows, but I'd be on the edge of my seat every second watching the market if I had gold.

 

[eelgrass]

My thoughts exactly on gold. Demand is what drives up the price? A lack of demand will cause the bottom to drop out.

Timing is everything.

 

[Forthewall]

Well..................Nemont,

Although I agree with many of the financial experts like Rogers, I don't subscribe to 100% of their advice. There is a triangulation effect between the ppb of oil, gold, and the value of the dollar.

Most gold plays are on a 3-5 year outlook, I made mine in 2006. Real estate at 40% gdp was about to burst, toxic loans were abundant, the dollar was dropping in value, trillion pumped into the economy, and oil was on the rise.

These were all flags that the economy was heading downhill. My time horizon on gold was 3 years and this week I will be out completely. Why Feb.? Chinese New Year Gung hey fat choy my brother from another mother, every Feb, gold gets a bump as buying gold pieces is a part of Chinese tradition.

A smell of panic in the air (I love Paulson and Bush) caused a lot of money to head into gold. Now there are commercials on radio and TV about buying your used gold. Predictions are rampant that gold may jump to as high as $1,500.00 an ounce.

When Ed McMahon wants to buy my Gold it's time to sell.

The Spdr Gold Fund Index (bullion backed) has a record number of shareholders. Gold has enjoyed a very welcomed Chinese New Years which has caused this latest temporary uptick ( I love the Chinese).

Which is exactly why I will be out within a few days. Gold in and of itself is a poor investment over time. It is a place to stay safe when it's price is not being dictated by a speculative market.

The market over the last year has been completely speculative. Leaving time-horizon buyers such as myself in desired position. However, as is the nature of gold, panic buyers which bought at $850 in Oct. during the Paulson Pleas have seen very little movement on their investment.

Take a look at Gold on the macro level. Largest importer of gold is India. India imports of gold are down 90% due to high prices. However prices for gold are not high due to a lack of gold, because there is no shortage of physical gold in the world market. Prices are up based on speculation largely due to a world recession and falling currency values.

This is not the first time gold has escalated quickly in value and the history of it's booms and busts are well documented. We are seeing a classic gold boom, exacerbated by the financial crisis/meltdown, 2 wars, multiple areas of political instability, skyrocketing national debt, falling currency values, and well deserved panic.

China has basically walked away from the metals markets. Although the recession is touted as global, China's economy will still grow at 8-9% instead of 11-13% we only wish we had their problems. Overall China, Russia, and Dubai are responding to the global slowdown by curtailing building projects.

This has left metals such as copper, zinc, and steel as very attractive buys with a 3 year window. The Economic Stimulus along with low interest rates will enable short-term recovery nationally compounded with corrections in the global credit markets. We may see a restart or resumption on the global demand for raw building metals.

Now back in 2006 I thought Hillary would be President and we would have a rather predictable presidency. Now with Obama I think we will see the gold bubble bursting earlier than I originally thought. I figured with Hillary 2/11, but with Obama I think it will be 9/10, only 7 months away.

India's shrinking imports along with gold's use in consumer products is actually causing less global demand. Gold was having a hard time just holding at $875.00. Now it may go further up in speculation value no doubt, but the global market simply cannot support $1,000, let alone $1,500. for very long.

If gold can maintain $1,500.00 than us hunters will have plenty of an even more desired commodity...Guns and Ammo.

Your charge for my gold outlook is 6,000 rupees Nemont.

 

[NeMont]

FTW,

Thanks for the explanantion, I just wish it were longer.

I never put 100% faith in any investment advisor. Look at where that got Madoff's clients.

Gold is a very small part of my current portfolio and I have only bought it through EFT's. I think oil and industrial metals are a bargain right now.

I am not dumping my gold yet. Call me a dunce but I think further panic buying is in the air. Some irrational fears will drive it up.

I do believe the U.S. dollar is going to be worth a lot less as the year progresses and the move downward will probably be rapid.

Nemont