Piggy pols in hog heaven with pork-packed pact

[Zguy28]

PIGGY POLS IN HOG HEAVEN WITH PORK-PACKED PACT


By DAPHNE RETTER, Post Correspondent

Last updated: 5:59 am
October 2, 2008
Posted: 3:50 am
October 2, 2008

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10022008...cke_131770.htm

WASHINGTON - Here, little piggies!
Congressional deal-brookers yesterday slopped a mess of pork into the $700 billion financial rescue bill passed by the Senate last night - including a tax break for makers of kids' wooden arrows - in a bid to lure reluctant lawmakers into voting for the package
Stuffed into the 451- page bill are more than $1.7 billion worth of targeted tax breaks to be doled out for a sty full of eyebrow-raising purposes over the next decade.

"This is how Washington works," said Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington research group. "A big pot of pork is their recipe for final passage."

The special provisions include tax breaks for:
* Manufacturers of kids' wooden arrows - $6 million.
* Puerto Rican and Virgin Is- lands rum producers - $192 million.
* Wool research.
* Auto-racing tracks - $128 million.
* Corporations operating in American Samoa - $33 million.
* Small- to medium-budget film and television productions - $10 million.

Another measure inserted into the bill appears to be a bald-faced bid aimed at winning the support of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who voted against the original version when it went down in flames in the House on Monday.

That provision - a $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill - has been the subject of fervent lobbying by Alaska's congressional delegation.

Some of the pork-barrel measures buried in the financial rescue package had been contained in a bill that previously passed the Senate, but died in the House.

The Congressional Budget Office said the package of breaks - including obvious pork and some more defensible tax-relief measures - will add about $112 billion to budget deficits over the next five years because the bill doesn't contain enough offsetting revenue hikes to keep the budget balanced.

Full Article at link

[Teller]

You calling me out, Zguy?

[Zguy28]

You calling me out, Zguy?

Soooooeeeeeey!

[dockeryfan]

Bingo. This is the problem with bailouts.

[Burgold]

Isn't the bailout itself almost by definition a pork product?

[PeterMP]

Isn't the bailout itself almost by definition a pork product?

Pork is usually defined as wasteful spending so whether this bailout represents pork or not depends on whether its needed.

[dockeryfan]

Isn't the bailout itself almost by definition a pork product?

Pork is usually defined as wasteful spending so whether this bailout represents pork or not depends on whether its needed.

Right. The investment banking industry is going to try to roll all kinds of losses into this bailout. Someone already posted the possibility of these banks buying up foreign owned mortgage backed securities and rolling that into their own bailout. That seems to have been quashed.

But credit card debt?
Student loan debt?
These are still on the table, and have no business being there.

Also on the table,

The losses incurred with the ownership of both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Every one of these houses lost billions, and they want to include those losses in the bailout.

That's right. Individuals that owned these stocks? Nada. But they deserve a bailout for holding those positions. Honestly, I think I'm starting to think like Ken here, because this is a huge scam, and out and out theft from the American public. Paulson and Bush are criminals in my mind.

Also, this goes to show the absolute lack of imagination on the Bush administration with regard to crisis management. This bailout bill has been a poor idea from the start, and variations of this bill are just as bad. "Just throw money at it" is not a way to solve this. Not when the money is going to the investment banks. If it were going to the American people and American businesses, that would be one thing. It's not, and never can be with the bill set up as it is.

[Zguy28]

What was really telling this morning was Steny Hoyer basically saying we needed this because Americans can't live without credit.

[Hersh]

I would like to know who these other measures are aimed at.

[Burgold]

What was really telling this morning was Steny Hoyer basically saying we needed this because Americans can't live without credit.

That's just a really sad statement. It's probably close to true these days. Too many people live in debt and well above their means.

[Xameil]

I thought there was going to be bacon in here.....YOU SUCK!!!!!

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Pork is usually defined as wasteful spending so whether this bailout represents pork or not depends on whether its needed.

That is too broad a definition. Pork is wasteful spending not associated with the intent of the bill. Under the definition you provide, every time someone votes against a bill because they don't like it, they can call it pork. These "sweetners" sound like pork. But voting on whether we should bailout Wall Street (and at least to some all of America) is not voting on pork. Its voting on a bill.

[Zguy28]

I thought there was going to be bacon in here.....YOU SUCK!!!!!

Nope only Turkey sausage.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

What was really telling this morning was Steny Hoyer basically saying we needed this because Americans can't live without credit.

Americans can't live without credit though.... what's your point? Small business need credit. Small businesses create jobs. Jobs employ individuals.

The capitalist system that we aspire for relies on the availability of credit.

[MurrayH81]

I am sure that some components of our society do need credit. People and businesses that are over-leveraged do need some help, but this bill (other than tiny $ pork provisions -- tiny in respect to the 700bn main prize) isn't aimed at them per se. It's directly aimed at the big companies that bought these financial instruments based entirely on the sub-prime loans, excessively leveraged, and worth way below the book value. These companies have told congress that they want them off their books now or they will go under and take everything down with them.

They don't want discussion, they don't want a solution that works for everyone, they just want OUR MONEY NOW.

and they are going to get it no matter what it takes http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=262667

Just look at the pork in the bill now, just look at what gets added to entice the Congressional Reps. It's hard for these guys to vote no under the pressure, with the underside of the Christmas tree packed with everything they have ever wanted. And it's all a scam to get your money.