Several states are on the edge of default. What does default mean? Not paying your obligations. What obligations? Money owed to vendors who supply goods and services to the state; money owed to state employees in the form of wages; money owed to state retirees in the form of pension payments. What happens when one of these states defaults? What will Obama do, if anything?
Is there support in the constitution to give money to states? Does it make sense for the federal government to "lend" money to a state? Shouldn't a state simply borrow money in the capital markets? Should the federal government lend money to a state whose credit is so bad they cannot obtain credit in the capital markets?
If the US gives money to states, isn't this a matter of the defaulted states levying a tax on citizens of other states? Why should I, a tax payer in Texas, pay for the spend thrift spending of other states such as Illinois or California?
Thoughts and comments.
By the way, this has not happened, but it seems something that our present spendthrift, self-serving administration would be prone to do -- take from the conservative Republican voting states and give to the liberal Democratic voting states.
I dont know-( it didnt happen already?) i really dont keep up with these things.
But didnt the fed gov - using taxpayers moneys already prop up failing states to the tune of billions apon billions in the form of stimulus funds & dollars handed out by the fed gov to keep those states running & to save there teachers jobs, fire , police etc & them afloat? X amount of created or saved jobs etc?
Granted imo some of the $ was throwen bones/poltical pay offs etc.
But we got some for our education system i believe( though as far as i know we didnt need a penny of it- as we have a very large perment school trust fund & very well funded school systems)
Now our states budget & its very large surplus of money is now down some( we still have extra)- means we will have to curtail our wastefull ways "some " & stop throwing huge sums of moneys at the schools & other pet boondoggle projects the state gov cant spend the extra moneys in our budgets fast enough on( while cutting other services?).
And im sure if uncle sammy keeps throwing that money around- we will take our small taste of it to- uncle sammys obammy big suga teats
__________________
Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these.-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Things ain't what they used to be and probably never was. ~Will Rogers
Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday.
"Shouldn't someone tag Mr. Kennedy's 'bold new imaginative program' with its proper age?" "Under the tousled boyish haircut it is still old Karl Marx—first launched a century ago.
There is nothing new in the idea of a government being Big Brother to us all. R.Reagan-1960
The polticans( those running the goverments- that are called public servents) while milking the public/taxpayers of moneys really need to be hooked up to helmet camaras & lie detector equipment- se we know what kinda crooked corrupt crap there up to while on the job.
For some- thats bussiness as ussal- like obammy its the only way he knows.
And we talk down to other countrys about there corruption?
__________________
Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these.-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Things ain't what they used to be and probably never was. ~Will Rogers
Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday.
"Shouldn't someone tag Mr. Kennedy's 'bold new imaginative program' with its proper age?" "Under the tousled boyish haircut it is still old Karl Marx—first launched a century ago.
There is nothing new in the idea of a government being Big Brother to us all. R.Reagan-1960
But i do agree -lets see where those donations are coming from & the "gifts" bribes & the palm grease etc etc too- whatever it maybe called.
Cuz i cant agree with my late grandfather on gift horses either.
I believe every gift horse should be looked at- in the mouth. Dont forget what happened with the wooden greek gift horse.
And if you payed for it - it isnt a gift- the goverment is & has nothing of its own - maybe where theres rulers & kings & queens & dictators- But not this country.
Some i noticed said Obamy was elected- i say he bought the election( with others money )( with most of the medias help etc also).
And hes now using the US treasury & taxpayers moneys, the courts the laws, lawmakers etc for his & his partys agendas.
Bo Bo is very good at BS,n the dble speak poltical language of a meat puppet( that make him a good poltician to some ppl).Foolin the easly fooled masses. Smiling & lieing to your faces while picking your pockets- with his hands out always asking for more.
8 -- The number of lobbyists hired by special interests to influence health reform for every member of Congress in 2009
__________________
Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these.-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Things ain't what they used to be and probably never was. ~Will Rogers
Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday.
"Shouldn't someone tag Mr. Kennedy's 'bold new imaginative program' with its proper age?" "Under the tousled boyish haircut it is still old Karl Marx—first launched a century ago.
There is nothing new in the idea of a government being Big Brother to us all. R.Reagan-1960
The polticans( those running the goverments- that are called public servents) while milking the public/taxpayers of moneys really need to be hooked up to helmet camaras & lie detector equipment- se we know what kinda crooked corrupt crap there up to while on the job.
For some- thats bussiness as ussal- like obammy its the only way he knows.
And we talk down to other countrys about there corruption?
If we could thorw all politicians in jail for lying, our jails would be over flowing by now. It is rare for a politician to ever answer an "yes" or "no" question with either of the above, they just can't do it! And depending on who thier listening audience is, the same question can and will have several different answers........
__________________
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.
To answer the original question, I believe the federal government should stay out of it.
If a state is so corrupt and inept as to be driven to default, then they SHOULD default.
Let 'em recover, pay their debts, build their credit back up, and work back towards viability.
A state like Kalifornia going into default would also serve to educate the slobs on the dole
who do not care where the money comes from, or how they ultimately spend it. When the
state defaults, they get no money....so these among all others have the greatest
motivation to keep the states honest and thrifty. Right now, with no cap, this sector
ALWAYS has it's hand out, for WHATEVER the state can throw their way, and they do not
necessarily use it as it's intended, where Food Stamps are exchanged for drugs, Welfare Checks are cashed and gambled away in casinos, etc.
To me, a constitutional amendment banning federal bailouts to the states would serve to reign in the idiotic leftys and their entitlement programs so they would not spend as much and pay a lot closer attention to what they're spending taxpayer money on. Things might be a bit different if Kraphole Kalifornia or Idiotic Illinois did not have working conservatives to tap for a handout when their parasitic hordes demand more largesse from the state than is available to be given.
I dont know-( it didnt happen already?) i really dont keep up with these things.
But didnt the fed gov - using taxpayers moneys already prop up failing states to the tune of billions apon billions in the form of stimulus funds & dollars handed out by the fed gov to keep those states running & to save there teachers jobs, fire , police etc & them afloat? X amount of created or saved jobs etc?
Yes, good point. I think this accusation could be made. At the same time, I think the best way to analyze the stimulus is in the terms it was offered by the Democrats: a stimulus to resussitate the economy. My attack on this would be (1) Keynsianism [idea of government applying its money at sensitive points in the macro-economy to fine tune and coerce the macro-economy in desired direction] is largely discredited, (2) even a Keynsian would tell you that the money has to be strategically placed to have the desired coercive effect on the macro-economy, (3) clearly no such deliberation by our government was undertaken in meting out the stimulus money, and (4) the large deficit spending that the stimulus resulted in has a greater negative effect on the macro-economy (this is quite the talk right now, and is thought to be one of the reasons the stock markets are in a funk -- issue of debt crisis) than the good effect on the macro-economy that stimulus spending could have produced.
To some extent the stimulus money was spread more or less around to all the states, so it is less obvious that Texas is bailing Illinois out of its problem.
What I'm concerned with is a more direct bailout of a state, a la General Motors. Write a check that goes directly into the State of California coffers with largely no strings attached pay their creditors. That is what I think would be bogus and unconstitutional.
Yes, good point. I think this accusation could be made. At the same time, I think the best way to analyze the stimulus is in the terms it was offered by the Democrats: a stimulus to resussitate the economy. My attack on this would be (1) Keynsianism [idea of government applying its money at sensitive points in the macro-economy to fine tune and coerce the macro-economy in desired direction] is largely discredited, (2) even a Keynsian would tell you that the money has to be strategically placed to have the desired coercive effect on the macro-economy, (3) clearly no such deliberation by our government was undertaken in meting out the stimulus money, and (4) the large deficit spending that the stimulus resulted in has a greater negative effect on the macro-economy (this is quite the talk right now, and is thought to be one of the reasons the stock markets are in a funk -- issue of debt crisis) than the good effect on the macro-economy that stimulus spending could have produced.
To some extent the stimulus money was spread more or less around to all the states, so it is less obvious that Texas is bailing Illinois out of its problem.
What I'm concerned with is a more direct bailout of a state, a la General Motors. Write a check that goes directly into the State of California coffers with largely no strings attached pay their creditors. That is what I think would be bogus and unconstitutional.
It's sad to say, but I believe this admin will directly bail out states in danger of default, as they see no other option but to do so. States like Kalifornia with huge entitlement programs (and lots of electoral votes) will need to cut back but will never do so if federal tax money can be dumped into state's coffers to tide them thru the crisis. It's tough love, unfortuntely, but default is the only way these liberal states will become solvent and back to running 'in the black'; I will admit that the results are far-reaching and affect all Americans both directly and indirectly, but if the people who live in these places refuse to stop spending, even tho' the state faces bankruptcy and insolvency, then the lesson will be learned the hard way.
I would bet that he will bail out those states that contain a sufficient number of half-wits who voted for him that he carried the state, i.e. California, Illinois, etc., but, that he'd let the folks full of rational people who voted against him go bankrupt. Oh... wait.... the states that voted against him are not yet in danger of going under... He'll have to force through some more unfunded mandates and let in more budget destroying illegals so that those states go under as well. Once we're all bankrupt, then he can force his socialist agenda on all of us.
Quote:
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. Milton Friedman
Last edited by ipscshooter; 07-07-2010 at 10:40 AM.
Federal bailout of states?
The polticans( those running the goverments- that are called public servents) while milking the public/taxpayers of moneys really need to be hooked up to helmet camaras & lie detector equipment- se we know what kinda crooked corrupt crap there up to while on the job.
