You are correct. I actually knew that when I said I want my money back. I was thinking of that song "Life is a Lemon and I want my money back." I anticipated someone pointing out this to me so I'll try to make my point more clear. Here's the thing. I have a unique way of handling my personal budget. I make sure I have enough money saved before I make a large purchase. Such as a tv or car or computer. I use the card(Discover gives cash back) but I pay it off before I get charged interest. That's how I was taught and it seems to keep me out of debt and in trouble like so many of the people I know. Yes, I've made some mistakes and screwed up and paid late and got hit with some interest a few times. But I make it a priority to get that cleared up before things go back to "business as usual."
I know business and government have to borrow money to be competitive. I get that they don't operate like an individual nor should they. However, it irritates me that we are told a budget, money is earmarked for certain uses because it's an 'emergency' and when it's not needed for that instead of paying down the deficit it's used for some other boondoggle pork project. I know I'm not getting any money back from this program or any other program. When the government passes out money it seems to give a hell of a lot to folks that don't pay and haven't ever paid federal taxes. My tax dollars is used to 'spread the wealth around.' It seems like one big shell game. Bait and switch. I'm still waiting for the vaunted "transparency" we were going to get with this administration. Seems to me all the business is being done behind closed doors even blocking out those members of Congress who refuse to be bullied. I think only Republican Olympia Snow is allowed in to discuss HCR. Too much secrecy and skulking around for my liking. What are we not being told? I know we're getting the reform. It's just a question of how soon and how bad it's going to be. Not allowing conservatives to debate is going to prove a complete disaster. If the reverse was true I'd think the same way. We aren't getting the balance or checks we need right now because the President and Reid and Pelosi are shutting out the competition. This is a mistake. -Don On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:20 PM, fran the man <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 7 Dez., 18:32, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >> Here it is. > > I want my money back. >> >> -Don > > Hang on a minute, Don, there's something here I might be getting > wrong, but I don't think your call is accurate. > > (Let me state right at the beginning that, as a non-US citizen, I > don't intend to go into the rights and wrongs of particular use of > particular funds. This is an issue of comprehension - my > comprehension, which may be wrong.) > > As I understand it, in August the White House estimated the cost of > TARP over the next ten years at $341 billion, and the present estimate > is that TARP will actually cost $200 billion less over the next ten > years (an average of $14.1 billion anually, rather than $34.1 > billion). > > To the best of my knowledge, the US houses of parliament - in common > with most democracies - vote a budget annually. In the annual budget, > the government estimates the costs for the public purse for the next > twelve months and then presents its plan to cover these costs; so much > should be raised by taxation, so much should be borrowed, so much by > selling off assets, etc. Parliament then approves (or amends) this. > > So, given the reduced estimated costs of TARP, it is projected that > the annual deficit caused by TARP over the next ten years will be > considerably less than was originally estimated. The basic question > regarding a jobs programme is whether it is desirable to fund this > over a larger deficit or not - since the budget is not going to be on > the plus side any time soon. > > But ... and this is my basic point ... you can't have your money back, > because you haven't paid it yet! Whether you pay, and how much you > pay, is a decision taken every year with the parliamentary approval of > the annual budget. Projections for the cost of TARP are basically > planning instruments, used to help put the budget together. > > Francis > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > ""Minds Eye"" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
