I just don't freaking believe this. I'm.....I'm....speechless !!
Every time I read about how saving money is bad for the economy
my jaw drops.

Rick and Noreen Capp recently
reduced their credit-card debt,
opened a savings account and stopped
taking their two children to
restaurants. Jessica and Alan Muir
have started buying children's
clothes at steep markdowns,
splitting bulk-food purchases with
other families and gathering their
firewood instead of buying it for
$200 a cord.

As layoffs and store closures grip
Boise, these two local families hope
their newfound frugality will see
them through the economic downturn.
But this same thriftiness, embraced
by families across the U.S., is also
a major reason the downturn may not
soon end. Americans, fresh off a
decadeslong buying spree, are
finally saving more and spending
less -- just as the economy needs
their dollars the most.

And what pray tell is their flipping point ?? Listen....
when I was growing up in the 1950s and 60s, everybody
except the rich lived that way. Whether you made $5000.00
a year or 50,000 - it did not matter. People simply did not
spend their money on useless, overpriced stuff.

If you needed or wanted something you did not have, you
saved for it.  Except for those on the extreme ends of the
economic spectrum, it was difficult to determine some ones
income by the clothes they wore, house they owned or
car they drove.

People shopped for a month at a time, had freezers to freeze
their food (and/or canned). As a kid, most of what you wore
or played with came from Sears or Montgomery Wards.  And
the family car was a Chevy, Dodge, Plymouth or Ford.

And everybody used store coupons and had a garden of some
sort, even in the city. Eating out was for special occasions. 

I did not know one kid in High School who ever got a new
car from "Daddy" for any reason. If they had a car, it was an
old one that they worked for themselves. Gated communities
were for the very rich, who were usually not home anyway.

So if the current economic situation brings this kind of sensible,
modest life style back - where people saved rather than spend
like a sailor -  I say Bravo !!!

C
 

Well I see that5 Obama's answer to out toilet economy is
a tax cut. Didn't the republicans try this once ??

Economists of all political stripes
widely agree the checks sent out
last spring were ineffective in
stemming the economic slide, partly
because many strapped consumers
paid bills or saved the cash rather
than spend it.

The nerve of them !! Saving and pay bills. How unpatriotic can
you be ??

But Obama aides wanted a provision
that could get money into
consumers' hands fast, and hope
they will be persuaded to spend
money this time if the credit is
made a permanent feature of the tax
code. 

And they need to make sure this time that the populous will
spend it. Frivolously. So as to stimulate the economy.

As for the business tax package, a
key provision would allow companies
to write off huge losses incurred
last year, as well as any losses
from 2009, to retroactively reduce
tax bills dating back five years.

Doe this include the huge bonuses payed to the CEOs of
these companies that are on the verger of tanking ??

A second provision would entice
firms to plow that money back into
new investment. The write-offs
would be retroactive to
expenditures made as of Jan. 1,
2009, to ensure that companies
don't sit on their money until
after Congress passes the measure.

Like replacing the current crop of greedy, inept CEOs with
even more greedy, inept CEOs while busting the unions.
Union busting is expensive.

Face it. This is just more of the same voodoo, doo doo economics.
Just in a plain brown wrapper.

C