I want to apologize for Robert Reich's latest blog article, it is so stupid his blog is being removed from the right two columns.

All I can say is "Gasp", Robert Reich is wrong as wrong can be. His blog article... How Obama Can Convince Congress to Enact a Larger Stimulus, and Why He Must. Is just outrageously wrong.

-------------------------------

I have a suggestion Mr. Reich,

GO AFTER THE BANKS AND MAKE THEM STOP CHARGING INTEREST ON EXISTING CREDIT CARD DEBT FOR CUSTOMERS WHO ARE PAYING DOWN THEIR CREDIT CARD DEBT.

A credit card interest rate incentive program would create an impactful, instant and worthwhile stimulus package. It would create 15-25 billion dollars a month going to YOUR NEIGHBOR, YOUR PLUMBER, YOUR LANDSCAPER, YOUR LOCAL BUILDER, BEFORE the money goes back to the bank to pay down a debt, AND, it would involve NO TAXPAYER MONEY!

I am about the only one I know who is advocating the no interest rate credit card pay down program. I have virtually a 100% pay on time credit card history so I'm not advocating something that has penalized me the way it has penalized others who are paying horrendous credit card interest rates and treading water as a result.

We are being robbed of neighborhood money so that it can stay on Wall Street and be handed back and forth between Wall Street and the politicians they elect. Robert Reich, you are a sell out.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Putting the Klunk in Cash for Clunkers.

There have been a few complaints against the cash for clunkers program as being just another government bailout boondoggle. One writer calculated that the actual increase in the number of cars that would be sold this quarter would be around 22,000. They then divided that figure by the one billion dollars and determined that the cost per additional car sold was around 40-44,000 dollars per car! Ouch!

I don't think the above calculation takes into account mitigating circumstances such as would sales have really been only 22,000 cars less without the discount? Also, were I a superficial ninny and my friend who was driving a real clunker suddenly shows up in a car nicer than mine, I'm heading to the car lot and I'm going to buy a newer, better car, and WITHOUT the clunker discount!

So it may be too early to predict how many more cars will be sold. Plus, there are a LOT LESS dealerships around these days, so actually gaining 22,000 more car sales could actually work out to a significant percentage increase among the remaining car dealerships.

However, I think there is a more tangible concern to roil over in regards to the cash for clunkers progrm. Some of the clunkers being turned in are simply being replaced by an 09 clunker. Check out this ad,

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
What does purchasing a huge SUV have to do with the cash for clunkers program? You have to really study the ad to see that the bottom car in the ad, the Yukon, has no cash for clunkers discount attached, they just chose to add a similar discount to try and get the super hatchling out the door with the other slightly less clunkery vehicles.

Which brings me to my gripe.

ONLY A 2 MPG INCREASE and a customer can turn in an old super heavy clunker for a new super heavy clunker?

I understand that 2 miles per gallon improvement on a big heavy clunker is percentage wise better than it sounds. However, I would have tied the clunker discount directly to the MPG of the New Car Being purchased, that's what really matters, isn't it? Any new car that gets 27 miles per gallon combined, or over, gets a 2,500 dollar discount. For every additional mile per gallon over 27 that a new car can squeeze out in the miles per gallon category, I would have added an extra 250 dollars discount, up to 40 miles per gallon ceiling on the new car purchase. If you turn in a clunker and buy a car that gets 39 miles per gallon combined, you would get a 5,500 dollar rebate.

The higher the MPG of the car being purchased, the higher the likelihood that that new car won't tear up the streets and make potholes out of the newly minted pavement that has been resurfaced with infrastructure stimulus money, and, perhaps, we stall off making new potholes from bombs in other parts of the world as we seek out new sources of oil.

Lets have some perspective here. Is it really that big of a deal to drive a car that gets really good gas mileage if it means less wars around the globe, AND the government is willing to help you pay for the car? It's just too bad the government had to put the k in klunker and just not go far enough with this program in terms of really promoting higher miles per gallon cars.

I talked about the importance of combining stimulus programs so they end up complementing each other. The more fuel efficient cars on the road, the longer the roads last, ergo infrastructure money going towards roads is an investment that now lasts longer. In my opinion paying people to barely upgrade their miles per gallon on their new car purchase misses the whole point of the cars for clunkers program.

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

Why Infrastructure Projects are a hit and miss proposition when it comes to Stimulating the economy.

Yes, infrastructure projects are a necessary part of government. The problem is, we can't use the acceleration of infrastructure projects to help the economy, unless something else is also done. I'll get to that something else momentarily.

Infrastructure projects should be a constant, steady part of the budgeting process on a yearly basis. To suddenly say we need massive infrastructure projects wrapped inside of a stimulus package means we either are creating busy work, or government skimps on infrastructure projects year after year.

Creating busy work is ok, but NOT when it uses too many resources that could be used to create new job streams and new technologies.

As for our government not spending the proper infrastructure budget on a yearly basis, that means the money that was supposed to be spent on infrastructure every year, has already been spent elsewhere.

So now we are paying TWICE for the same infrastructure project, and therein lies the problem. Paying twice for the same infrastructure project, the first time the money was reallocated elsewhere, is not a good deal and DOES NOT stimulate anything that would help the economy.

There is a solution to avoid paying twice for the same infrastructure project. Any infrastructure project that was previously delayed so money could be reallocated elsewhere, CAN ONLY BE DONE NOW IF IT IS COMBINED with a NEW, PROGRESSIVE, INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT that is generally regarded as helping save energy or resources, or create new products that save energy and or resources.

So if there is bridge that needs to be refurbished, FIND SOMETHING that creates energy efficiency that the refurbished bridge connects to.

Will the refurbished bridge support other types of transportation besides automobiles?

If the refurbishing of the bridge will also create an improved route for other forms of transportation, such as electric bicycles, joggers, and pedestrians, then it becomes an infrastructure project with an obvious purpose other than just trickling down money to us minions on projects that don't make us feel connected to improving our countries method of operating.

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

Six Simple Ideas to help people, the economy, and reduce foreclosures.

1. All Renters should be allowed to fully deduct their yearly rent charges on their income tax. The renter's "deduction / savings" would automatically be deposited into a 4% interest bearing account that could be spent on education, medical emergencies / insurance, or used towards a down payment on a home.

2. Instantly reduce ALL primary home mortgages to a Fixed 4% interest rate.

3. Send Full Tax Disclosure statements to all tax payers that calculate and reveal the SUM TOTAL of all the taxes they paid throughout the prior year.

4. Reduce interest rate charges on ALL credit card debt that is older than 1.5 years to zero percent for those that can keep on making their monthly payments.

5. An Additional credit card incentive, pay twice the monthly minimum due and ALL INTEREST RATE CHARGES FOR THAT MONTH ARE WAIVED.

5. Make Tax Refund Checks instantly depositable into special savings accounts that pay 4%, allow citizens the ability to deposit a matching amount as well, don't tax the interest from this account.

6. Make balloon mortgages illegal, instead, have the monthly mortgage slowly inflate, even if it is a month by month increase, have it be such a small amount that the mortgage payer can afford the increases for a few years after the increases have started.

Daily PUMA releases its own PUMA STIMULUS PACKAGE and Daily PUMA readers are the beneficiaries!

After watching Congress effortlessly add money to the United States economy, Daily PUMA wondered if extra width could be added to the two, far right PUMA Blog columns. After playing with column width numbers, Daily PUMA is pleased to announce its very own PUMA STIMULUS PACKAGE! If you look to the right you will notice BOTH PUMA COLUMNS ARE NOW WIDER!

DailyPUMA hasn't quite mastered the art of creating column width out of non-existent space with the same ease that congress creates wealth out of thin air. It appears that when the right two PUMA columns were widened, the center, main column shrank by an equal amount.

In an effort to appease all points of view, the left column of the blog, the non PUMA blog column, was also widened just a tad, resulting in even more shrinkage (aka tax cut) of the center column.

For some reason, DailyPUMA can't seem to master the concept of increasing all the columns that demand increases while also maintaining the original size of the center column.

Fixing Infrastructure DOES NOT stimulate the economy, it actually does the opposite.

When it comes to "infrastructure" spending, unless a road, bridge, electrical line, or sewage system's collapse is imminent, not spending on infrastructure can actually stimulate the economy faster.

Instead of government prematurely fixing infrastructure, let the private sector know which potholes are not going to be filled so private investors can invest in alignment shops, tire stores, car repair bays, and build the repair shops on both sides of the potholes. Even rims and hubcap places will experience terrific economic stimulation if infrastructure is just left as is and assuming general safety is not being compromised. This will save the government billions on unnecessary infrastructure repairs, and many many new car repair businesses will crop up as a result of LESS infrastructure spending.

One key to a useful stimulus program is to stimulate the consumer to get the consumer to want to pay to fix things that they own that break, including their cars. Another aspect to not going crazy on infrastructure repair is to motivate the consumer to go out and buy a new, "stronger car" that comes with a pothole protection plan. (I bet some car manufacturer will now come up with such a program)

Flying road debris may also stimulate cars into being repainted more often. The less roads that are fixed the more overall stimulation is created, it's how the west was won.

The key to capitalism has never been about efficiency, it's always been about filling the needs of people in need. If we prematurely fix roads and bridges while they still work, we are just increasing the country's long term debt via this bailout bill while simultaneously hurting all aspects of auto maintenance and auto manufacturing.

Better roads mean people's cars will last much much longer than they currently do. Plus, those extra automobile fix it shops that were going to be built near the potholes, the people those new businesses were going to employ, and the taxes that these businesses were all going to pay, never happened because all the roads were fixed instead.

One pothole making machine can do a whole lot more economic stimulating than one hundred construction people fixing an unbroken road ever could.

"But, but, you can't be serious". Well, consider this a "Modern Proposal".

Assuming that infrastructure repair means the timely maintenance of roadways, bridges, electrical and sewage lines and has been done on an annual basis following a logical maintenance schedule, than it really should be business as usual and no stimulus program is needed for infrastructure at all....

....unless, the overall rate of yearly infrastructure deterioration has been occurring at a much greater rate than it was being repaired all along???

If the government is behind on its infrastructure repair maintenance schedule AND the economy is tanking as well, then clearly the government didn't spend wisely over the past few decades on infrastructure, and instead diverted infrastructure funds to pad their own pet projects in ways we'll never know. "If you don't have the money to do infrastructure right the first time, how are you going to have the money to do infrastructure correctly, later?" I would suggest that using taxpayer money to give roadways a new coat of asphalt before it is necessary, is not a way to stimulate the economy.

Fixing only the neediest bridges and roads is all that is needed for infrastructure, and that infrastructure money should already have been allocated within the yearly budget anyways. "What, you mean money that was supposed to go to annual infrastructure maintenance was being diverted to other projects? Really???" So the government now wants to borrow even more money to do the work that should have been being done all along anyways???

Just who wants to stimulate a bunch of politicians now, when it appears they have used prior years budgets to stimulate their own needs rather than fix infrastructure at the proper yearly maintenance level? I don't.

I hope you can understand that as silly as this blog article seems, everything in it is the truth, and that is why we have a MUCH BIGGER problem related to how to run a worldwide economy without it being stimulated by wasteful spending and inefficiency.