Who Do You Trust?

What do you do when you cannot trust your own government to tell you the truth or to make the best decisions?

Maybe you haven't trusted them for a long time and I am just naive. However, I am noticing a bit of a pattern that leads me to be very untrusting of our government and their motives.

Take the swine flu...oh, excuse me, the H1N1 virus. Isn't the situation kind of like the boy who cried wolf? What will we think the next time there may be a health emergency? I don't think that we may feel quite as alarmed. After all, there are 36,000 people who die from the regular flu every year and look at the stats for this flu. I know that next flu season it may come back heavier. However, it isn't resistant. Looking back at the article that I posted about the swine flu during the '70s, it is the same thing and caused panic back then and then deaths from the inoculations to "prevent" the virus. Why would we trust new inoculations now? I wouldn't until a bunch of other people take them and live to tell about it. CDC LINK HERE

Let's address the issue of Homeland Security putting out information that said that our veterans, those who have served our country on the front lines, may be recruited into terrorist organizations. No, let's not reward them and welcome them home. Let's demonize them and make them feel like outcasts in society. That will most certainly help tame the masses. www.fas.org...the official Homeland Security Document PDF

"Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities...

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities
could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks...

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented ...It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration...

Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement...

...the historical election of an African American president and the prospect of policy changes are proving to be a driving force for rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization...

Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat."

...and they think that other people may be paranoid? Hmmm. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black to me. I mean, I don't need to dislike Obama because of his race. That's not the reason I dislike him at all. Plus, it's not a matter of disliking him as a person. I just dislike his policies.

One more thing for this post (I could go on and on). I don't trust the motives of the Obama administration getting involved in the bankruptcy of Chrysler (or involved in the business dealings to begin with...other than insuring the money side of things because of the trickle down effect).

"An attorney representing several Chrysler bondholders accused the Obama administration of intimidating his clients by issuing threats of public humiliation if they opposed their brokered deal to resolve the automaker’s debts. Speaking to WJR, Thomas Lauria said that the White House called the bondholders “vultures” for insisting on their rights as senior creditors and told them that the Obama administration would use the White House press corps to attack them in the media."

HOT AIR.com

"...the lenders who dared to oppose the deal, undoubtedly considering that the bargaining had been too one-sided, were excoriated by the president as “speculators” for raining on his parade. Over the weekend it emerged that would-be auto czar Steve Rattner threatened to sic the White House press corps on bondholder Perella Weinberg if they continued to oppose the deal on the table...

...the effort by the Obama administration to protect the UAW will likely leave Chrysler permanently uncompetitive..."

CLICK HERE FOR MORE

So, why is it that there is a bit of siding...okay totally siding with the union workers? Here is a bit of info you probably already know.

"The UAW, which has more than 1 million members, announced today the union is endorsing Obama after a unanimous vote of its International Executive Board."

- June 10, 2008 AFLCIO

"You deserve a leader in the White House who not only understands the difficulties you and your families face, but who will stand up for you every single day. That’s exactly what I’ll do as your President." - July 18, 2008

UAW.org

Now, there are many sources indicating that there was anywhere from $4 million to over $400 million in donations from the UAW to Obama's presidential campaign. Evidently those claiming that have a secret source (or they could just be bent) because I couldn't find that exact number. Here are a couple of sources you may want to check out.
NEWSMEAT

OpenSecrets.org

Anywho, I don't know about you, but I don't trust much that is being done in the government these days. There seems to be ulterior motives for all of it and none of those motives seems to reflect the needs of the average American citizen. On the upbeat news, I can leave my house now because the CDC says that the swine flu wasn't as bad as they thought it was going to be.

Nearly 5 million are getting unemployment benefits

Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The number of laid-off workers receiving unemployment benefits has jumped to an all-time high near 5 million while new jobless claims remain well above 600,000. Both figures were worse than expected and new projections from the Federal Reserve show unemployment rising for the rest of this year.

The Labor Department reported Thursday that the number of people receiving regular unemployment benefits rose 170,000 to 4.99 million for the week ending Feb. 7, marking the fourth straight week those receiving benefits have been at a record level on data going back to 1967.

The continuing claims figure also was significantly above the year-ago level of 2.77 million and underscored the difficulty people are having in this recession finding another job once they are laid off.

An additional 1.5 million people are receiving benefits under an extended unemployment compensation program approved by Congress last year, bringing the total number of people receiving unemployment benefits to 6.54 million for the week ending Feb. 7.

"The labor market is in disarray," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. It's possible that job losses for all of February could total between 700,000 and 750,000 based on what weekly claims have done so far this month, he added.

Employers slashed a net total of 598,000 jobs in January, the most since 1974.

In other economic news, wholesale inflation surged unexpectedly in January, according to the Labor Department. Wholesale prices jumped 0.8 percent last month, the biggest gain since July and well above the 0.2 percent increase that economists expected.

The acceleration was led by a 3.7 percent surge in energy prices with gasoline prices jumping 15 percent, the biggest gain in 14 months. Even outside the volatile food and energy sectors, wholesale prices showed a bigger-than-expected increase, rising by 0.4 percent.

The New York-based Conference Board said its January index of leading economic indicators rose 0.4 percent, the second straight monthly gain. Economists expected no change in the index, which forecasts economic activity for the next three to six months based on 10 economic components, including stock prices, building permits and initial claims for unemployment benefits.

The Conference Board said the single biggest boost to the index was the real money supply. The government's effort to address the credit crisis has put more money in circulation. Other positive factors were the interest rate spread, an index of consumer expectations, and manufacturing orders for non-defense and consumer goods. Unemployment claims and building permits were among the biggest drags.

On Wall Street, stocks fell in afternoon trading. The Dow Jones industrial average lost more than 30 points, and broader indicators also slid.

New applications for unemployment benefits totaled 627,000 last week, the same as the previous week, according to the department. But that was still more than the 620,000 claims economists expected.

It also remained near the 631,000 claims filed three weeks ago, which was the highest tally since October 1982, when the economy was emerging from a steep recession, though the labor force has grown by about half since then. A year ago, initial claims stood at 342,000.

The four-week average for claims rose to 619,000 last week, up from 608,500 the previous week which was the first time the figure had topped 600,000 during the economic downturn.

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger, Ap Economics Writer – 56 mins ago
The cascade of layoff notices in recent weeks has heightened concerns about the current recession, already the longest in a quarter-century.

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., said Wednesday it will cut nearly 5,000 jobs, or almost 7 percent of the biggest U.S. tire maker's work force, this year after it posted a fourth-quarter loss and revenue sank 21 percent. The cuts follow the elimination of about 4,000 jobs in the second half of last year.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler on Tuesday filed plans with the government more than doubling their request for aid to a total of $39 billion and announced plans for thousands more job cuts. GM alone said it would cut 47,000 jobs globally by the end of the year — 19 percent of its work force, and Chrysler said it will cut 3,000 more jobs.

The Fed released a new economic forecast on Wednesday that reduced its growth forecast for 2009 and increased its unemployment rate projections. The new forecast predicts that unemployment will hit between 8.5 and 8.8 percent this year, up from the current level of 7.6 percent.

"The economy faces obstacles that are likely to work against a strong rebound of growth over the next several quarters," Dennis Lockhart, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and a voting member of the Fed's policymaking arm, said Thursday.

"Those obstacles include credit markets not yet returned to healthy functioning, a housing market still weighed down by an excess supply of homes for sale and low business and household confidence," he said in a speech in Alabama. "None of these is likely to turn around quickly."

President Barack Obama pointed to the deteriorating economy to win quick passage of an $787 billion economic stimulus program which he signed into law this week. On Wednesday, Obama unveiled a $75 billion program aimed at halting the surging level of mortgage foreclosures in the wake of the worst slump in housing in decades.

For the week ending Feb. 7, the states with the largest increases in jobless applications were Kentucky and Arkansas, which blamed the jumps on rising layoffs in the mining, trade and manufacturing industries. The biggest decreases were recorded in California and Tennessee, which reported fewer layoffs in the construction, trade, service and manufacturing industries.

Waste of Bailout Money. Chrysler Pays Approx. $600K of Our Money to Say Thank You.

"Chrysler Faces Criticism for Full-Page 'Thank You' Ads
Taxpayers and conservative groups are questioning why Chrysler spent the money to take out a series of full-page newspaper ads thanking Americans for the auto industry bailout."

"Chrysler is facing a backlash from taxpayers and conservative groups after the ailing auto company took out a series of full-page newspaper ads last week to thank Americans for "investing" in the company through the government's $17.4 billion auto industry bailout plan.


Critics say the company, which is expected to receive about $4 billion of that bailout money in the near term, should not be spending its already limited resources on pricey advertisements." -- Source: Fox News

Citizen Stimulus and Bailout Committee

"Stimulus", "bailout", whatever they call it, it is going to cost us a pretty penny (plus interest). Wouldn't we have a wise and "transparent" government if they were to incorporate a committee of citizens in various industries across the country to audit and evaluate who and how regarding stimulus and bailout? After all, it is the taxpayers' money.

In the circumstance of the auto bailout, wouldn't it be prudent that they incorporate an actual audit of those companies receiving consideration for the money? Or are they just going to take the executives at their word.

The actual $700 billion bailout (TARP) was supposed to receive an audit of sorts in early December. But, no matter where or how I searched, I could not find any specifics on the actual grade, review, audit, or otherwise. So, what has become of that money? Shouldn't we be privy to that information, since it is our money (plus the interest of at least 5% that we will owe some foreign country, most likely China)?

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi touted the notion of a 'car czar' to supervise an auto industry bailout, saying Tuesday that Big Three executives haven't adapted well to changing conditions." -- December 9, 2008, Associated Press

Without and audit, how does Congress expect to know how much total taxpayer money will be needed to help General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC. to actually survive. After all, they are telling Congress that they need "a total of $14 billion to $15 billion to survive through early 2009". What happens after that?

"Dec. 16 (UPI) -- Stakeholders in the U.S. auto industry must show they're willing to sacrifice if assistance funds are to be allotted, a White House spokeswoman said Tuesday." -- UPI.com, Business News, December 16, 2008

Sure, they should make sacrifices, but what do they mean by "show they're willing to sacrifice"? Does that mean that they have to take business class airfare? Or does that mean that they have to drive themselves in their own brand of car instead of taking a limo? When you are talking about executives that "haven't adapted well to changing conditions", what are they going to consider change and sacrifice, versus what actually needs to be accomplished in our reality.

"(If) we're going to use taxpayer financing to assist the automakers, all stakeholders are going to have to come to the table and be willing to show that they are capable and willing to make really tough decisions about the way forward," spokeswoman Dana Perino said. "(We) need them to become viable, competitive firms in the future, and in order to do that, concessions are going to have to be made by stakeholders." -- UPA.com, Business News, December 16, 2008

When there is a Washington machine committee put together to evaluate this issue of "concessions" and "sacrifice", are they really living in reality enough to evaluate the issue? Or would it be more prudent to have some actual citizens involved in this process...people who are in various working industries and conditions around the country? After all, it is our (the taxpayers') money.

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Democrats are preparing a massive economic recovery bill in the range of $600 billion.

It would blend immediate steps to counter the slumping economy with longer term federal spending on infrastructure like energy efficiency projects.

The California Democrat told reporters that economist Mark Zandi has recommended to Democrats an economic stimulus in that range -- including $400 billion in infrastructure and $200 billion for tax cuts.

Pelosi says

Capitol Hill Democrats

are already "hard at work" writing a stimulus measure to pass next month. It's expected to combine tools like tax cuts and help to states suffering from big budget deficits with infrastructure projects like road and bridge repairs." -- The Associated Press, December 16, 2008 (note: italics added)

If you are not worried about future ramifications of all of these "stimuli", you should be. If it were as easy as just printing more money, that would be easy and we would not have these recessionary, depressionary, devaluationary, deflationary concerns. However, in the end, the buck stops with you and I...literally. In the end, since the money is coming from you and I, wouldn't you rather see a committee of folks who are a part of the various working industries around the country, and not just those who are a part of the Washington D.C. system?

Auto Bailout. Where are the economic advisers?

Tell me. Where are the economic advisers, the accountants, the good economists for the United States when decisions like the bailouts are being made in Congress?

If we are creating a bailout for these large auto corporations at 5% interest, how is it that we are making an investment? The reason I ask this is that we are paying out at least 5% in interest to foreign countries on the money we are borrowing for these bailouts. Doesn't the country have a good accountant/economist who can advise on a higher percentage of interest for these loans so that we can actually make money on this supposed investment?

Besides the interest issue, what about the profit being made by GM on its overseas sales? Are they really in such desperate need of the taxpayers money?

"Now GM is looking at its own international stable, and has its eye on China as a source of stopgap revenue for its North American operations. We've posted before on the fact that GM's international operations aren't doing too badly, and GM China sold 11.5 million vehicles last year -- more than any other manufacturer there. This year, it expects China sales volume to grow by 11- to 12-percent, and that means yuan in the bank." -- autoblog

So, shouldn't GM utilize its overseas profits at this time, instead of getting a handout that is composed of our future tax dollars with an interest our country is currently paying other countries for the money?

Additionally, shouldn't there be a mandatory restructuring of these enormous bureaucratic corporations in order for them to receive a dime of our money? And along with the restructuring, wouldn't it be prudent that the CEOs and other exorbitantly highly paid executives of these companies (Ford, GM, Chrysler) be taking a mandatory cut in pay, to a pay scale that actually fits standards of someone who should be accountable for the success of their company(s)?

The desire is not that additional U.S. jobs be lost. The desire is for accountability and basic accounting in general.

What do you think? Do you support this "bailout"? Or do you have a multiplicity of questions?