Wednesday, February 04, 2009

If wishes were dimes

There are 305 million people in the United States.

Let's say there are about 150 million households (I think it is a smaller number than that - more like 130 million - but I didn't feel like sifting through the Census Bureau website.).

It seems to me that if the government is giving away money, it would be easier, faster and cleaner just to send it to the households.

Let's skip the banks and all of this other stuff and let the people manage their own money.

If the government handed out $100,000 to 150 million households, that would $15 with 12 zeros after it. I think (hope?) that is $15 trillion.

Okay, that's a lot. And it's out of the $800 billion range, so let's make it $10,000. That's $15 with 11 zeros after it, and I think that is $150 billion dollars. That would leave $650 billion out of the $800 billion stimulus fiasco which I think should go toward building infrastructure and doing only things that are job related. It should not go to banks and financial institutions, even though my bank is one of the banks apparently gaining windfalls from tax dollars these days.

A lot of people are going to save that $10,000, you know. That's money in the bank. Some will spend it, but others will pay off credit cards, maybe catch up on those delinquent mortgages. The banks would get their share that way. Good banks would benefit the most, if the market theories are correct.

If necessary, somebody correct my math if it is in error, please, because I majored in English and not math.

My point is, whatever the numbers, couldn't the populace do a lot of economic stimulating itself if we had the money? If you're going to throw away dollars, why not give it to the people who actually need it?

Couldn't every household use $10,000?

I don't have a problem with the government stepping in to help. Government should do that. I just wish it would step in and help the people who really could use the help, and not the high rollers and the folks who created the problem in the first place.

5 comments:

  1. i totally agree with this...and yes, many could/would benefit from such a windfall and my gosh it isn't like a lot of money when you think about it. in comparison to all the bonuses the ceos are receiving for failed companies...now that doesn't make sense to me at all.

    there has got to be something in this whole ordeal to help the people who are the backbone of this country and not continue to reward those who mismanage our money.

    good topic.

    have a warm evening

    erin

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry .... 15 with 11 zeros after it is $1.5 trillion, not $150 billion. $1,000 per household would yield 150 billion (a billion is one thousand million), and $3,000 per household would yield $450 billion. Not to worry -- there was another figure flying around the 'net last fall that was seriously out of whack also. This problem is, more than anything else, the result of people living beyond their means. The time to pay the piper has arrived.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, something better be done quickly because according to Nancy Pelosi every month that this bill isn't passed, 500 million Americans lose their job!

    After reading how many jobs it would create and at what price it would cost with this particular "stimulus" bill, I'm with you, just give us the cash and we'll infuse it back into the system.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Agreed that some different approach is needed to avert a bigger crisis.

    I just read Paul Krugman's column, which was called something like, Bailouts for Bunglers, and it is obvious that giving vast amounts of money to people who have lost other people's money is insane.

    However, he points out that when they don't bungle, the bunglers amass great profit. When they do, it is the taxpayers who pay yet again.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I could really use $10,000. You got my vote.

    ReplyDelete

I enjoy your comments and always appreciate the opportunity to visit the blogs of my readers. I hope you have a great day!