Just because I have a job doesn't mean that I shouldn't be worried about the economy. I went through an unemployed stint last year so know what it feels like.

I'm not really sure what your point is. You blog about lots of topics on here.

Your data also includes things that were not up for vote last week. Republicans two seats of the 51 districts north of the PA border isn't really relevant to how you want to classify last week's results. How many of those seats in those districts were up for re-election last week or this year?

You also cite the change in Obama's approval rating from last year to now, which is also irrelevent in whether last week was a "win" for which side.

Most of the media is very much on the left already. I don't see why they would want to "spin" this as some sort landslide for the right.

Peoples' habits won't change if it's one-time. But they will change if they think it's a permanent shift. That's why one-shot "tax rebate checks" never work. People say thanks and use it, but it doesn't change their long term habits.

Your idea won't help those who are unemployed get jobs. And their unemployment benefits are already getting extended.

How about we not have a second stimulus since the first one didn't work very well?

Have a nice day.

Don't you remember what a miserable idea it was for Bush in 2008 to give out those one-time credits? That was a huge waste of taxpayer money. When credits are one-time people tend to just save them.

Any credit - like a suspension in the payroll tax - needs to be viewed as more permanent so people change their habits and don't just use the money to pay off their debt.

Now we've moved up to number 1, which is nice, but it wasn't so bad when we were #2 or #3.

Rather than force writedowns, we can go back to your "good old days" by stopping the bailouts. CIT just went under and the world didn't end. Next is GMAC.

Banks are renegotiating lots of mortgages already. If we stopped the bailouts and made them think they aren't too big to fail, they will do what's in their best interest. If that is to foreclose, that's too bad for the consumer. But the banks are taking losses too when they foreclose on a house.

Refinancing at a low fixed-rate might work for some people, but alot of people will still go into default even at a new low rate. For a lot of people the size of the mortgage is just too big.

It's just not practical to say that they should be able to modify the mortgage and take the principal down to the current market value. I think that should be up to the banks, not a 3rd party. If the bank wants to do that because they think it's in their best interest, then they can do that. But it shouldn't be forced on them.