Saturday, May 29, 2010

Better Plan than paying Business to hire Lobbyists

I might as well give my Readers these numbers, and perhaps put a little analysis to them. Only 1 in 5 had found a Job, and only a little better than 1 in 7 a good Job. Over One-Half had taken a Pay Cut, and 1 in 7 had lost over One-Third of their previous Salary. The length of their Unemployment will have meant that their financial reserves were no longer existent. Reviewing the rest of the information, one can determine that it has been an almost universal Recession, with no segment of the population enjoying a better position. I expect that defeatism may be the worst enemy in this Recession, while business will not reinvest until the Consumption pattern improves. Any Government program cannot be more of the same, but come up with something which will actually shake up the Status Quo.

This article discusses How this legislation does not meet that criteria. The whole thing lacks punch of any kind, with hardly Anyone suspicious of where the money is actually going. One has to understand: Where is the Stimulus when most of the Bill simply continues payments which no one noticed in the past, and whose continuance will mean relatively nothing to Anyone, even the Recipients? The entire picture lacks for both cohesion and identity. There is obviously absolutely no impact behind the measures, and no businessman states that his bottom line is going to improve. Business statements that same store Sales year-over-year improved does not a boom make! Don’t laugh too much–the American Consumer may be the only people keeping faith with the American economy.

I might wrong Maxine Udall by presenting this Post as counterpoint to my own argument; she being one of the truly good minds. The proposals are all sound, and mean absolutely nothing to Anyone’s bottom line. As opposed to the legislation presented in the Economist’s article, I would propose legislation which granted 12 Weeks of Severance Pay to Everyone who had worked over one year for the Employer; all paid by Tax rebate of the exact amount of forwarded Wages from previous Tax assessments in prior years–paid in Cash. The rebate must show the Accounting of previous Paychecks before Layoff, current Paychecks after Layoff, which must match; plus an reactive Statement from the Employed that they have received the Pay. The plan would be to make the legislation retroactive back to 2008, and canceled only at the point where the Employed finds subsidiary employment. There will obviously be much fraud in the program, but even more Stimulus; and I have always enjoyed putting business personnel in prison. lgl

No comments: