Trickling Up II - Addendum Part II

My world traveling friend Dave left a comment (I read it after posting my Addendum Blog) on my Trickling Up – Part II Blog. He puts forward some interesting questions about my proposed Economic Recovery Plan.

First he asks if “it would include well-off folks who can afford their mortgage payment with no problem?”

It depends on what is considered to be well-off.

Three years ago I considered myself to be well-off. I paid all of my bills (including rent) before the due date. I had no debt. I dined out at least once per week. I went to my favorite watering hole at least two nights per week. I could easily afford my bad habits (drinking and smoking). I was able to take a two week (unpaid) vacation every summer. My Medical costs were fully paid (Prescriptions, if any, cost me $7). I could lavishly entertain out of town guest when they came to visit me. Yet I was still able to put money into savings each month.

But there are millions of people that were far better-off than me. There are people who are able to pay their mortgages and bills with ease and yet put a good amount of money into savings. These same people were able to take two or three extended overseas vacations per year.

But since we are giving away the taxpayers money; let’s add Subsection A to Amendment #1 (People that own homes (outright) valued at $750,000 or less would get a one time cash payment of $10,000).

Subsection A, would give the above benefit to Homeowners (homes valued at $750,000 or less) that the people who own there homes outright get. With the stipulation that the money would be paid to them after they had spent the money on Durable Goods purchased in the USA (receipts required).

Dave then goes on to ask “And shouldn't it be considered an interest-free loan from the government (from the taxpayers, actually) that has to be repaid when the place is sold, at least to the extent there's a gain from that low market value?”

I though that this was implied in the original Blog. We are giving the money to the people rather than the Corporations and Banks. The Banks and Corporations would be getting it as a loan; therefore the people that we are bailing out of foreclosure would have to repay the loan when their property sold.


Dave then states “But more importantly, it ain't a stimulus if it goes in the bank, and as you pointed out, this money definitely goes in the bank.”

My point as well as Jon Stewart’s; was rather than give the money directly to the Banks and lending institutions, give it to the people, who will in turn give it to them. This way the Banks and lending institutions get their bailout money indirectly from the Government. The homeowners now have lower affordable mortgages. And with the extra money they are saving, on their mortgage, they spend it and therefore stimulate the Economy.

Thanks for your comments Brother Dave.

The Beach Bum