Ha ha very funny. Actually one of my favorite phrases is "Don't confuse me with details; just tell me what to do." It was a defense against wasting time and my Dad's tendency to build a watch instead of just telling me what damn time it is. I just wanted to get the chores done so I could get the hell outta the house.
-Don On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:34 PM, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > Don't confuse 'em with the facts fran! > > On Dec 7, 10:20 am, 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.
