Forum Post: Silver Bullet Stimulus Plan - redirect revenue streams from BofA/others
Posted 11 years ago on Sept. 30, 2011, 1:25 p.m. EST by jblen536
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The SILVER BULLET STIMULUS PLAN
There’s a misconception if the politicians increase taxes on the rich or give businesses and individuals finite tax breaks, the economy will recover. Not so.
The Feds have spent billions feeding the monster they created (the financial sector) (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/financial-sector-spent-5-bln-lobbying-dc?dist=msr_10) and rescued with our tax dollars. What has this action done for the economy? Zip.
You CANNOT create long-term sustaining jobs without generating a steady stream of long term money back to the street. The consumer is the key to creating demand for products and services and, in following, creating jobs by creating demand for employees. You MUST put money back into the pocket of the consumer without it being a temporary government hand-out.
The Silver Bullet Stimulus Plan will not only generate a steady stream of long term money back to the street, it will redirect multiple revenue streams back to the government (read we-the-people) and rather than increase debt as opposed to tax increases and breaks, decrease federal debt.
So how do we get money back into the pockets of the consumer? And where does this money come from if not from the government?
The financial sector has siphoned off trillions of dollars from the middle-class (the street) and continues to increase the diversion of money off the street and into their coffers, daily. For the economy to recover, this has to stop.
In The Quiet Coup, Simon Johnson points out: From 1973 to 1985, the financial sector never earned more than 16 percent of domestic corporate profits. In 1986, that figure reached 19 percent. In the 1990s, it oscillated between 21 percent and 30 percent, higher than it had ever been in the postwar period. This decade, it reached 41 percent. (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/05/the-quiet-coup/7364/)
Mortgage lenders are refusing to lower rates “because, simply, they don’t have to. Lenders have raised their profit margins by 1.5 to 2 percentage points in the past month, according to Infroma Research Services, by offering borrowers slightly higher rates.” (http://www.smartmoney.com/borrow/home-loans/lowest-mortgage-rates-are-hard-to-get-1315320975909/)
These are desperate times. We need desperate measures. It will not only take a jolt to get the economy back on its feet, but continued long-term life support to keep the economy moving forward.
So what if we-the-people (the government) were to step in and make an offer to refinance ALL current primary home mortgages at 3% without any restrictive qualification other than the homeowner has been making his/her payments at a higher interest rate. What would happen?
Let’s take a look.
1) Government would redirect the revenue stream (at 3%) from the financial sector into its coffers through the foreseeable future. (Financial institutions would have the option to keep this revenue stream, but only by matching the government’s 3% offer.)
2) Government would increase its income tax return because now homeowners will have less of a mortgage interest write-off. (another redirect of revenue from the financial institutions)
3) At least for the first year, financial institutions will pay higher taxes on their surge in profits due to the government paying off of mortgages.
4) Home owners – numbering around 75 million – will, for the term of their mortgage loan, receive the equivalent of a monthly pay raise. (revenue stays on the street instead of going to the financial institutions) 5) It would be expected some home owners, with additional monies in their pockets, will pay down or off credit cards. Another redirect from the financial institutions and additional money staying on the street due to drop in interest payments. 6) It would be expected home owners would use their ‘pay raises’ to purchase products and services, creating a demand for employees. 7) It would be expected a certain percentage of elderly home owners would now be able to retire, which will add open jobs to the job market. 8) More workers due to job creation, more income tax flowing in to the government coffers and less government assistance flowing out = earlier pay down on federal debt = less taxes needed to pay interest on debt over long term. 9) Increased consumer confidence generated as the economic wheel not only receives a jolt, but sustains support throughout the term of the mortgage loans = a release of tied up funds = more consumerism = more taxes flowing into government coffers. (30 years?) 10) Stabilize housing market as all qualified buyers will know they can buy a 30 year mortgage at 3% either through the government program or financial institution.
Let’s make it happen. Forward this to your representatives in Washington, to your friends, neighbors, family. Act now, before it is too late. “…recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time.” The Quiet Coup
There are similar problems all over this government...there are no silver bullets, here.
Like how do we get the soft money out of government? Most of these problems never would have existed if the people that made our laws didn't get rich off of them.... but there is no silver bullet, there either.
This is why I prefer the movement remain disorganized... let our frustration carry us through rather than a single unifying voice. A single missile is easy to shoot down, but a thousand darts are hard to dodge.
I would like for us to retain the broad base of concerns... soft money, government lies, 9-11, the economy, corporate greed, a privately owned fed, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc etc etc.
All of these problems need to be addressed, and I am worried that focusing the movement too much on any single idea will result in a silver bullet mindset, and worse, a single target to shoot down.
I understand that the motivation to become unified is the result of 1) wanting to be taken seriously, 2) wanting to enact real change.
I get that.
There are big problems in that approach, though.
First off, if we all focus around one singular act that we want past, and get angry enough about it, it will happen (yay)... then what? We all go home? What about the rest of these concerns?
Secondly, a single issue is actually HARDER to carry forward than multiple issues... why?
Because a single issue means they only have to come up with a single solid-seeming counter argument to counter it in the face of the American public.
But when we come at them from numerous directions, and paint the REAL picture of what has been going on? That we have been worn out with being treated like machines? That we are tired of being ripped off? That we will not be lied to anymore? That we want the law to apply equally to everyone? The only real option we leave is REAL PUBLIC DISCOURSE.
And THAT is the real goal.
Additionally, the concern over being taken seriously? This is the wrong way to do it.
Ask yourselves this... who is it, exactly, that wants all of our concerns to be squeezed into a sound bite?
The media, for one...that lets them spend LESS time on us... "Here, at Occupy Wall Street, these protesters want the tax breaks for the wealthy repealed... now, back to you, Ted"... I don't think so.
As is, they have reported EXACTLY what we want them to. "These protesters seem very frustrated about a lot of concerns; their concerns are all over the board, Ted. Lets TALK TO A FEW OF THEM TO FIND OUT WHY THEY ARE HERE".
Frustration with the media will go away, if we hold tight.
They were assuming that they could ignore us for a week, and we would go away. More power to them... if we couldn't hold out that long, we probably weren't worth reporting on anyway.
The cops assumed the same thing.. they were both wrong.
As the movement grows, the media will see that there is a story there that people want to see and hear about (which means audience, which means money, which means cameras)...
The police will react as they have... make it rough on our people to see if we can be intimidated. The way to handle the police is to do as we have... be peaceful and calm, and let the cameras catch them beating us for no reason.