This Election is BIG!

In Tuesday's post, I briefly overviewed the importance of strengthening the United States for the benefit of our own people and to be a global leader and help foreign nations. Today I read an article in the Washington Post that has given me even more reason to find this argument valuable-everyone is watching us. "The Election That Has the Whole World Blogging" naturally caught my eye, connecting it to my personal blogging experience over the past month. Upon clicking the link to the article, I presumed it would be focused on the progressiveness of blogging and its relation to a modern world, and an evolving election...I was wrong. People all over the world are tracking the U.S. political campaign-religiously-even more so than many Americans.

Voices Without Votes, a blogging site dedicated to non-Americans speaking on the U.S. elections is truly fascinating to look at. The health of countries that are connected to others globally is of great importance, but I never knew that so many foreign nations were focused more on the U.S. than their own countries. Other nations' elections have recieved some internet recognition, but according to Al Hussaini, editor of Voices Without Votes, nowhere near the attention America has recieved, reaching to 1,100 blogs on the site. Hussaini was quoted in the article saying "Americans can see, if they don't already, that their voices affect the rest of us when it comes to foreign policy, the environment, the global market, you name it." Not only is it a little eerie that we're being watched and discussed so closely, but it shows the impact we have on foreign economies and nations. Which makes me wonder...are they positive or negative? We can only hope for positive intentions when they are following our every move...

As I have mentioned before, the U.S. economy is connected to social programs, individuals, and global economies. After reading this article, it has put the economy into an even greater perspective...highlighting previous thoughts in Tuesday's post...we have to be a strong nation for ourselves and to keep global markets running smoothly.

The Self-Analysis

The blog project has truly opened up my eyes to a new form of communicating and receiving ideas that I find beneficial to my growth as a thinker, student, and individual. Through having to research profusely on an issue which I was previously uninformed on has given me the skills to investigate biases, and realize that everything posted on the internet (scholarly or not) is not the ultimate answer-you can always dig deeper because each issue has so many underlying causes and influences.

In relation to the economy, I learned how subprime mortgages, U.S. national and consumer debt, the war, 9-11—are all not only causes of our ailing economy, but directly connected with one another. Before conducting research and questioning my findings through writing and being questioned by fellow bloggers, I would have never truly grasped the intricate connections within my issue. Digging even deeper, understanding (in relation to the campaign) what each party and candidate contributes to the rescue plan and future economy by researching their past actions and deciding if they are indicative of what they claim…then understanding that political parties and candidates ALSO have forces influencing them-sometimes ones that even connect back to the very face of the problem! Refrencing to my Analysis Post, with Fannie Mae endorsing Obama with $42,000 of campaign money and McCain’s involvement with the Keating Five shows the very tangled web of political issues and how there is so much to be researched for a better understanding. And less influential than presidential candidates, but still highly powerful in the American market, is the companies we choose to support that may not actually be supporting us. I came across this posting today in The Huffington Post, blogging on Wal-Mart's image of "low prices," and their contradictory habits of underpaying employees, avoiding some taxes, not giving out full and promised healthcare benefits, and supporting foreign economies when our own is struggling. Every consumer, every producer, every major legislation, every global event...they all have an affect on the economy. The research is endless, but becoming informed is so valuable to every citizen.

Blogging on the economy, especially, has shown me how this is related to almost every other topic. Without a healthy economy, there is no money to endorse student loans, renewable resources, healthcare, no child left behind, jobs for immigrants, etc., issues that affect American citizens on an even more personal level. This is a big deal…and before this project, sadly, I had no idea how important every issue was to the survival and success of the United States and the world for that matter. All of the great ideas legislators have proposed and America has critiqued in order to better the U.S. will not be able to go into action without a healthy economy. And how can a healthy economy configure itself from the wraths of credit-swaps and subprime mortgages? Well through a well thought out rescue plan...which I have had the privledge of documenting its many twists and turns through the past month. The development of the rescue plan started as a hasty one, and the U.S. government soon realized that while they needed to take swift action, it had to be decisive and actually work, because it had to. The rescue plan along with revisions in goverment interaction in the economy will help the U.S. to recover from the crisis.

Holding intellectual discussions on topics through the internet has challenged me in two ways-1) tapping into a new form of communicative interaction, and 2)demanding continuous research on my own topic and others, both of which I had merely a base knowledge on. Before the start of this project, my internet communication consisted of emails, facebook, and im-chatting. Through researching, blogging, and responding to the issues of others I feel that I attempted to progress as an individual within an evolving society and will continue to do so.

As for evolution of thought in current situations regarding the 2008 Presidential election…has my thinking changed on my favored political party? Or Candidate? Actually not. I have waffled back and forth a bit; coming into the project I had the intentions of voting for McCain, having always been a Republican, or at least thinking of myself as a Republican. And while I had a surface understanding of what the party represented and a family history of Republicans, I was unaware of how Republican’s dealt with issues currently and in the past…which is the best way to decide on the future. I had never researched why the party has the beliefs they do (the driving forces if you will). In conducting my research on the economy, I initially found McCain’s plan for the economy very vague, just focusing on various tax breaks. Obama, on the other hand, provides a detailed outlook on stimulating the economy, creating new jobs through clean energy and infrastructure, and stabilize the housing market by preventing foreclosures. Obama seemed like the candidate of change, which our struggling nation obviously needed, and my opinion was quickly changing. Then, not even meaning to, more research and discussion allowed me to realize that a struggling nation does not need to be overhauled with potentially expensive programs and diverted away from the most pertinent issues; the U.S. needs a simple, yet effective plan to jumpstart the economy and encourage economic success for the long-term. McCain’s plan actually has more than meets the eye, and due to criticism, he has elaborated his plan to enlighten America. He plans on making healthcare more affordable, lowering capital gains and eliminating unemployment taxes, selling to global markets (which make up 95% of profits from goods sold by the U.S.), not endorse any program that lacks importance in our time of crisis, and helping those who are struggling to pay their mortgages. McCain proposes to lower taxes for the majority of income brackets, and even corporate taxes and new cell-phone taxes. Both candidates provide plans within their campaign that will help the U.S. grow and bounce back from the current financial crisis. And disregarding specific candidates, the blog project in relation to the campaign has enlightened me on why I am choosing to vote the way I am.

Lending Patterns

Today’s headlines for the Washington Post read “Financial Meltdown Worsens Food Crisis.” According to the article, 923 million people in the world were severely undernourished in the year 2007. That staggering number seems like it will only become greater with recent higher costs for imported food and limited funding given to agriculture, due to the financial crisis. Not just the United States, but global markets around the world are facing huge recessions and trying to protect their economies as well. More money is being injected into the economy and taken away from money previously spent towards agriculture. Third-world, less-developed, and many Asian and African cultures are the ones hurting the most.
The article states, “Richer countries from the United States to the Persian Gulf are busy helping themselves and have been slow to lend a helping hand.” The head of the Eastern Africa Farmers Federation also commented that “The amount of money used for the bailouts in the U.S. and Europe—people here are saying that money is enough to feed the poor in Africa for the next three years.” This raises a question for me: Should the U.S. always be turned to for financial aid when other countries opt out of helping us?
This question may sound a little egocentric, but it’s really true. Granted, our intentions for helping other countries may have had hidden motives behind them in some instances, but overall the U.S. is a nation that is always helping others in need. Is anyone helping us with our financial crisis? No. Do we have the money to help other struggling countries at the risk of becoming equally hard shipped? Probably not.
On February 14, 2008, President Bush discussed the U.S. Africa Policy before a national visit to five African nations, mentioning the equal partnership that was being created to help the continent’s economics, disease prevention, and process of building their nations’ governments systematically to leave the dangers of chaotic organization. The president discussed the implementation of investment funds to increase profitability in Africa. This partnership is aimed at helping struggling nations, not gaining power to overtake their resources. But the U.S. can only do so much. This has to be understood globally-and other nations have to start taking initiatives to help themselves also. No country is perfect, and ideally, every country should be willing to lend a helping hand to those who are struggling.
Unfortunately, this rarely happens…and while I’m not suggesting we dismiss the Good Guy act and stop helping others, the U.S. can’t be blamed for other nation’s hardships when there is a lack of funding to support our own country. So what should the U.S. government do? What should other “richer” countries do? Well, if we want to hold global power and be sought after for help, which seems to be a motivating factor for helping others, the U.S. has to be smart. Bringing it back to the rescue plan, we cannot let financial crises consume us, or be blind sighted enough to allow them to occur. Strong countries demand strong governments, and when it comes to the economy, some regulation is required to keep economic cycles stable. Similar to the Africa Policy, the U.S. is creating a helping partnership with their nations, but also mandating organization within their governments for stability.
To put it sweet and simple-You must expect out of yourself what you expect of others. We have the great ability to help struggling nations, but we need to get on track ourselves. And while it is unfair that the rest of the world is reluctant to help us, we shouldn’t allow it to prevent the U.S. from being a greater nation.

UPDATED Theory Post!

Before anyone can accurately predict how the rescue plan will help the future of the U.S. economy, it is important to take a good, hard look at the root of the problem. Yes, the subprime mortgage crisis was caused from the lending and selling of mortgage bundles that lacked backing collateral, as I have mentioned before. Taking this even further though, I am going to agree with "The Digerati Life" blog, which claims the fall of the U.S. economy can be traced all the way back to the dot com crash of 2000, followed by the 9-11 attacks.

146,100 jobs were lost in NYC just due to the direct attack. The markets were closed for several days and faced an immediate crash after reopening. For fear of a major recession, the Fed (which was already in the process of cutting Fed Fund rates after the dot com crash) cut rates even further. This created a boom in borrowing...money seemed to be moving more freely in the economic market...and thus inflation was on the rise. Inflation caused the value of homes to increase, and since credit was easily attainable, many people began investing in property they had no real money for...alas the crisis we are in now.

Not to forget the Iraq war we are engaged in, which isalso a direct effect of 9-11 and has been going on for seven years and counting. So far, the war has cost the U.S. over $500 billion in upfront costs...only contributing to national debt and taking out of taxpayers money.


The problem with the hefty debt the government and consumers are faced with, is now credit is much tighter, making it harder for those who were living beyond their means to live comfortably anymore. People are collapsing under their debt, foreclosing on homes, many have lost their jobs, and now have ruined credit lines. And really everyone is affected.


So out comes the rescue plan...Whats my theory on the outcome of this bill? Is it going to work? Yes, because it HAS to. It seems that as more and more ideas have been proposed for the bill to create jobs in different sectors to help the economy, and put money towards infrastructure, etc., the plan has gotten further away from solving the problem. Thankfully, congress is starting to realize that and take more conscious steps to a focused plan. With talk of a second stimulus package being implemented, legislators became wary because they felt if it was not enacted at the right time with the right measures, then it wouldn't help the economy.

In relation to the election, both candidates want to cut taxes and help those who are unemployed. Money will have to be put into the economy for it to keep circulating, but those who don't have the money should be helped. I think McCain's proposal to cut taxes on capital gains is a great idea and will help secure the housing market, and consequently allow investors to feel they are making more finacially sound decisions. Obama's plan to put money towards other programs to stimulate the economy is great on paper, but for this plan to work, it has to stick to the basics initially. A multi-step plan, addressing the most dire economic pains first and then less consequential ones later, will help the country long-term towards a better future. Thankfully, both candidates propose to cut unemployment benefit taxes, which illustrates a common understanding between the two candidates to focus on the most important issues first. Cooperation, patience, and diligence between the government and the people, along with timely implements in the bill, will allow the rescue plan to help the U.S. economy.

To stimulate the economy or not?

The U.S. economy, along with any developed economy, experiences fluctuations within their economic cycles. The two main cycles consist of booms and recessions. With our current recession, it is imperative for the status and health of our country economically, that we start booming. The catch is not be too hasty though.



Congress has been talking about implementing a second stimulus package to jumpstart the economy. Democrats believe food stamps should be increased, more money should be invested in infrastructure projects, and rates on loan mortgages should be increased. Republicans are focused on tax breaks and incentives, with a heavy influence on cutting or eliminating taxes on capital gains. This would help those who are struggling with house payments or fear buying new property, to stimulate the housing market and raise property value once again.



Both McCain and Obama support eliminating taxes on unemployment benefits, which makes a lot of sense. It is not logical to tax struggling individuals on money they are recieving from the government. Sounds like extra red tape.



Thats the thing though; America has to be logical with economic decisions. The big question with the second stimulus package is when to install it. It would have to be implemented at the right time for the nation's economy to reap the most benefits. The first stimulus package was put into place last February and offered tax rebates, which clearly only helped in a short-term manner. With this plan Ben Bernake suggested to (as quoted by Jeanne Sadahi in a CNN Money article) "improve access to credit by consumers, homebuyers, businesses, and other borrowers." This seems like a short-sighted idea that would, again, result in short-term help for our crisis. Offering more credit to a country consumed in debt may temporarily boost the economy because people would be spending-but completely out of their means! This tricks the economy and creates those hasty and unstable fluctuations in economic cycles I mentioned previously-instead of long term help to ease staggering lows and sudden highs.



In closing on Tuesday, congress decided to not enact the second stimulus package quite yet. They are listening to ideas in hopes of implementing beneficial, smart changes-best move I have heard yet. Glen Hubbard (a former senior economic adviser to President George Bush) proposed for the U.S. government to buy negative equity from the private sector, which would restore mortgage rate levels to around 5 percent. He believes the U.S. might only need to spend $200 billion on the rescue plan if the government doesn't spend unnecessarily. Although we need our economy to start heading upward to its boom, it would be better to spend less, only where needed, and not make irrational, hasty decisions.

America the Great (Implications Post)

If the rescue plan fails to work and the economy continues to dwindle, I believe are nation will face the same diminishing future. Right now we are over $10 trillion in debt, U.S. consumers are $1.7 trillion in debt, we are currently in a war (which we are spending large sums of money on), U.S. citizens have lost their homes and their jobs...lets not say things can't get much worse for superstitions sake...but if the plan doesn't work, I think the U.S. will be far far away from its glory days.

We have currently spent over $5 billion on the war, and that price is only continuing to rise by the second. Wars are already devastating enough, and many times result in complete devastation. The nation is really at risk being so economically strained and then in a state of defense on top of that. It is estimated that total costs at the end of the war will exceed $3 trillion. The previously mentioned estimate on current war expenses does not include hidden costs, only upfront defense costs. According to an article I found in The Washington Post, the war in Iraq is now the 2nd most expensive and lengthiest war in the history of the world.

America has always been a country of "greats". Great land, great opportunities, great fortune. Well as I mentioned in my previous post, we now have the greatest amount of national debt in the world, the greatest amount of consumer debt, and are in one of the greatest and most expensive wars. At least were sticking to our reputation...

Frankly, the plan has to work. Changes have to be made. The rescue plan needs to cut back all extra money its implementing and stick to the basics. At first I thought Obama's plan of putting money in programs that help the economy and foster renewable energy was a great idea. But honestly, when it comes to a bill specifically focused on helping the economy, it needs to do just that. There is nothing wrong with attempting to improve the nation in many aspects, but we have to stay focused and not spend more than needed...because we definitely do not want to increase our debt. I feel that the once "great" nation of America will quickly fall and be nothing if we do not use common sense with spending and the government does not properly regulate the economy.

The Fall of a World Power...

In response to Tommy mentioning my brief post on global economies and wanting to see more of that...I am going to elaborate on the U.S. economy in relation to the global view we uphold.

One of the great things about America is it's "the land of opportunity." Abundance can be found in every aspect. People get used to abundance. A society gets used to that standard. As a nation, we are not frugal, and even in an economic crisis everyone is still trying to maintain abundance. No we don't want to put the nation in shock...we certainly don't want a depression...which would result from extreme frugality. But choosing to spend within our means for a change? Thats just common sense.

It's like learning bad habits from your parents. You don't think you have them, you hope you will never do the things they do, and in the end those habits you've been accustomed to make appearances in your behavior. America's parents, the government, have set a horrible example for their citizens. As a country we are over $10 trillion in debt. Yet we continue to fund other nations through imports and trade. Robert Hershey Jr., a NY Times journalist, stated in today's article "Trade Deficits Rise Again as Imports Continue to Climb" that October's trade deficit reached $25.9 billion. "Exports were essentially unchanged, while imports continued to grow." This cannot be happening if we are to "cut-back" and help our own nation.

The trade deficit is not solely the governments fault though. Yes, they are the ones in control, but the American people are highly demanding consumers. We want the imports from other countries. But we also want our economy to be good and to keep our homes, which we purchased with money we never had-and we're only paying the interest on. We cannot have our cake and eat it too. We may not have learned all of our bad spending habits from the government, but they have certainly allowed it to happen. And as a result: we are a nation in debt. Consumer debt in the United States is $1.7 trillion, more than any other country. And our national debt of over $10 trillion is also the highest amount compared with the rest of the world. The national debt clock in NY will be replaced at the beginning of the new year because our new number does not fit anymore; to have $10 trillion +, the dollar sign had to be deleted from the screen. This seems to be a sign of the times.

Aren't we a world power though? Don't we have abundant control? Well, we are going to lose this if the American people, along with the American government cannot excercise leadership over spending habits and our "want" of things. A good leader always puts other first. Maybe we should all start thinking in this manner, instead of focusing on ourselves and personal desires. Bad leadership has created defective government policies, the sub-prime mortgage crisis, and consumer debt. And all of those problems are rooted in spending more than we have or thinking about ourselves first.

Great Blogs!

Renewable Energy: The New Oil?
Tommy is quick to update his blog, never leaving readers wondering when he will return. His blogs are full of information that with just a mere surface understanding about fuel, you would never know. His blog is well-organized, attractive, and invites an audience in. With all of the information he provides in his posts, he explains details in an easy-to-read language and gives implications and benefits of each type of new fuel, resource, or other energy-related topic of the day. There are usually pictures or videos that accompany his posting and so far, he has gone into detail about every possible type of energy resource that I know of, and ones I have never heard of.

USA'S Anatomy
Grace Kelly truly shows a passion for the state of U.S. health care in her posts. She relates posts to all ages, concerns, and even brings it to a modern level with relation to TV shows and the internet. Although health care has not recieved quite as much press in the presidential debates due to the economy, she connects the economy's downfalls to the funding of health care. grace Kelly's blog is informative and enlightening on what is really going on with America's health care, to many readers who were previously uninformed.

The Issue on Taxes
I love how IGetNoSleep/Robert always seems excited about what he is talking about, it really makes it interesting for the reader. His blog is bright and colorful, drawing readers in, to then read a well-written and decisively organized post. His issue is centrally focused and he asks readers questions that are really thought-provoking and provide answers that help in understanding issues.

Theory Post

Although the economic crisis has been forming for quite some time now, its most recent downfall shocked the nation and brought fear and panic. Obama and McCain absolutely HAVE to prove to Americans they can provide measures to fix the economy. Having President George W. Bush in office for the past eight years, many Americans have been displeased with his handling of 9-11, The Iraq War, and not too mention the the economy that led us to this point. Right now before either candidate has recieved presidency, we as the people can determine who will help this nation and prevent further disaster.

Obama outlines a very detailed rescue plan to help the economy. He focuses on tax breaks, trade, and using gained money to help build the nation up. He claims he will help the middle class by creating jobs and helping to pay mortgages so families can stay in their homes. The new jobs created will foster the "green" movement, so while not only helping the financial market, research and action can be taken to help the environment. Tax cuts he proposes will be rewarded to business who create new jobs, and tax money that is recieved will go to programs to help the U.S.

McCain's plan is a little more vague with a concentration on keeping the housing market from further declines and cutting taxes. He plans to cut corporate taxes and help seniors with taxes. He also claims he will balance the federal budget. These are large committments that are not based on much detail.

I think both candidates have important ideas to add to the rescue plan and they both want to help jumpstart the economy of the U.S. Obviously with the election, one side will be chosen over another but I think Obama's plan helps a greater number of people, or at least promises to.

WASHINGTON HAS CONTROL

The government is stepping in. Big Banks and small banks will be helped. $250 billion will be invested, half for big and half for small. There will be guarantees for new debt. Small business will find help with increases in Federal deposit insurance. Hopefully they will stay afloat and lose fears of lending. This will be the only way to keep financing alive. At least according to Paulson. Then again, Washington is now controlling most of American banking. Their plans have not always worked before, but hopefully this will.



Good or bad? Conservatives cringe. Liberals like Brad de Long sing. Republicans are crying out ideologies of socialism with this plan. But is there any other way? Democrats have been preaching this since the beginning. Liberals want regulation, Conservatives are afraid of losing their deregulation. It doesn't benefit the nation anymore, but some Conservatives benefit. Either way, the banks have to accept for the good of the nation. The government will benefit from profits. And thats better than only corportate individuals recieving benefits.

More than just national debt...

From 1980 to 2005, credit card debt has soared from $69 billion to $1.8 trillion. Such a huge increase calls for a closer look at consumer debt within an entire struggling economic system. Should there be more regulations on credit card company policies to protect consumers?

The competitive credit industry is known for tricking cardholders by targeting vulnerable consumers and changing rates and terms without notice. Various regulations have been put in place over the years, but none take decisive measures and companies always seem to work around them. Economists even say that despite the credit industry's damage to consumers, the damage brings more benefits to the economy than negatives. Only to a certain degree though. This whole issue traces back to greed, as I have mentioned before, a sort of moral failure within the United State's economic structure. Companies and consumers alike are guilty of it. While personal debt is not the cause or major factor of the current crisis, it does play a big role on the state of the economy. People cannot put money back into the economy, invest in the market, and spend freely when debt is skyrocketing. New York has began taking measures to start regulating credit-default swaps between bond-buyers, and likewise, there should be regulation enforced for consumer credit too. Credit card debt, which consumes so many Americans, can drive individuals to bankruptcy and will only further the economic crisis.

Many economists have varying ideas on what could improve this situation, including a Georgetown analysts' thoughts of "standardizing annual fees, interest rates, and per-purchase transaction fees." The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008 was passed by the House of Representatives on September 23, and will be put into place to protect consumers. The bill largely focuses on consumer awareness and a universal default policy. Not much action will be taken until January of 2009, but it is encouraging to see the government enforce much-needed regulation on an abused free market.

Global Declines

The financial crisis in the U.S. is obviously very threatening to our nation's habits and motivations, but now markets all around the globe are facing huge declines. Markets in Asia, Europe, South America, Mexico...the list goes on...are all dropping. Monday the European Dow Jones dropped 7.6%, German DAX fell 7.1%, and French CAC-40 faced a 9% decline. These scary percentages reap huge consequences on global economies. Dow Jones in the U.S. has dropped a whopping 13% over the past 5 days, even despite the approval of the rescue plan. The main problem is all global markets are affected by eachother and important investors (big and small alike) are quickly backing out.

So what is being done about this? Well even more measures are having to be taken. Economist Carl Weinberg suggests "to cut rates as close to zero as you dare,'' pump money into the banking system ``hand over fist'' and increase government spending." Once people start to lose their fears of spending and investing, markets will rise again...but that won't happen until the government takes decisive action. On Tuesday morning the Fed said it would "purchase unsecured and asset-backed commercial paper from issuers in an effort to ease the log jam." This will help with short-term funding and hopefully have an impact on increasing the "rescue" of our economy, and consequentially global economies.

The Analysis

American citizens are very concerned with the current state of the economy. Unemployment rates have reached 6.1%, food stamp participation is on the rise, and global markets are facing major recessions. All of these facts point to disaster, and the American public seems to agree. A poll taken by CNN reported that most people see a depression as likely. While economists claim the U.S. is far from a recession, the evidence does not look good either way. With such clear signs of crisis, the real question is: Does the evidence in the "rescue plan" appear that it will actually rescue us?

I think there will be glitches that appear in the rescue plan through a trial and error process, but overall will help the economy and get the U.S. market back on the right track. According to the proposed bill, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be reconstructed by being placed under a conservatorship, a similar status to bankruptucy. Under government control, the companies lose many privledges, including their rights to lobby and have power in politics. The conservatorship is targeted at getting the companies in a stable place. Their ownership of about $6 trillion in U.S. home loans makes their recovery vital to the nation's market. The plan will auction off the mortgage-backed securities, which have been reduced by about 20% of their original face value. This will put money back in the market and hopefully drive inter-bank rates down, tremendously helping credit in the U.S.

In relation to the election, the financial crisis has placed a large amount of blame on the Republican party. McCain therefore recieves a lot of flack for the Republican ideals of deregulation, and not to mention his relations with the Keating Five, another bailout-type scandal that he and four other senators were caught in covering. Then again, take a look at the video in my last post and you may see a completely different spin, where the Democratic party is partially responsible. Obama was quoted saying that McCain "cannot be trusted to deal with the crisis because his strings are pulled by lobbyists, who shred consumer protections and distort our economy so it works for the special interests”. Yet, the video I mentioned shows Obama recieving around $42,000 for campaigning from Fannie Mae, while McCain only recieved a little over $800...so whose strings are being pulled? In all honesty, regulation may have prevented what the nation is currently held in, but as I have mentioned before-it is the greed (that is present in both parties) that cause scandals such as the lovely subprime mortgages to create disaster.

Both parties within the 2008 election play a part in the circumstances of the United States. The Republicans don't regulate enough and Democrats overregulate. What gives? The Senate and House of Representatives are comprised of individuals from varying parties, and their collective ideas influence the state of our nation. Therefore it is important for all voters to keep this in mind and understand that the financial crisis is now allowing Obama and McCain to show what they can do, and bring a lot of hype. It is our job to see through all the hype and determine what is fact and fiction, and what party's policies will really help the economics of our country.

I think both candidates have their strengths and weaknesses. I have always thought of myself as a Republican but with the state of things in the U.S. I think policy changes are definitely in need. McCain's proposed economic plan includes cutting government spending and lowering taxes. He wants to freeze all spending on government programs for a year to see which ones truly have an impact on the nation. This is a good idea in theory, to save the U.S. money and help our economy by not wasting money on social programs. At the same time though, we cannot only focus on the financial crisis. To be a successful nation it is pertinent that we keep all facets running as smoothly as possible. Freezing a years worth of funding for needed programs could be devastating. Obama, on the other hand would not support this idea and although his plan would raise taxes for wealthy and be a little more expensive over the next four years, it would put the U.S. in less of a deficit than McCain's plan. I find myself agreeing with Obama on his proposal because I think the outcome is more favorable than McCain's. From the way he presents himself and his ideas on "tough-love" for the corporate world, show that he is a candidate who might actually do more for the people. Also, the United State's recent history of Republican ruling and deregulation policies has not served the economy well, so I think it would be wise to try a new approach.

Confidence in new plan?

The bailout plan has finally been approved by the Senate and House of Representatives as the "Rescue Plan." Realizing that "bailout" seemed politically incorrect, the government back tracks again to make up for errors. Nonetheless, a plan is in action and hopefully will bring positive changes for the current state of the U.S. Last Monday (Sep. 29), the market dropped 778 points due to the House's rejection of the original plan. If the U.S. financial market continues to suffer, it will force severe consequences, but thankfully in this case it has brought a clear reality check that a better plan is in need, and fast. On Wednesday, lawmakers revamped the bill, which was passed by Senate later that day and by the House on Friday. The plan encompasses a 1-year increase in FDIC for bank and credit union accounts. The cap will be increased from $100,000 to $250,000, allowing depositors to feel protected, keeping banks safe, and allowing the economy to slowly begin flowing. Many new tax deductions are on the rise too, and thankfully more deductions than increases. Tax breaks will go to investments in wind and solar energy and plug-in electric cars, helping the environment while helping the economy. The plan is also enforcing insurance companies to provide the same level of medical assisstance to those with mental illnesses and other heath-related issues. And last of the more-emphasized tax cuts and increases; it will now be easier to tax on stock sales and hedge-fund managers. The proposal of the new bill is showing the government's efforts to revise the economy by promoting positive benefits for our nation as a whole. Such benevolent ideals the U.S. government is taking on...

Obama quoted Franklin D. Roosevelt [speaking on the Great Depression] last Wednesday, encouraging Americans to have "'confidence and courage' through what is likely to be an extended period of economic turmoil." Well if the plan really protects the economy and people, it is likely to elicit confidence and courage. After watching the following YouTube video
found on http://www.donttripoverthisblog.com/, I found myself surprised to see the blame of the economic crisis so demonstratively pointed to another side. The Pro-Republican video blames the crisis on the democratic party for their "unsightly" additions to the Community Reinvestment Act in past years. According to the video, the revisions to this act allowed subprime mortgages to be lended to "help" low-income borrowers. Subprime mortgage securities soon followed this, with no collateral to back them up. Once interest rates and gas prices rose, those borrowers could not even afford to pay just the interest and in turn lost their homes, and the housing bubble was formed. The video shows numerous laws and acts that Republican's proposed to fix arising problems, that Democrats shot down time and time again. They also pointed to closely-tied relations between noted Democrats and the corporations to blame (such as Obama and Fannie Mae). Moral of story, there are always two sides, and greed lie on both. Throughout the crisis so far, Republicans have been adamantly tied to economic problems. Neither party is perfect, nor are the individuals who represent their ideals. Even with a new promising plan there are likely to be glitches. Consumers need to be aware and smart, but most importantly positive that the economy is headed in the right direction...so for now we must continue to look at how the situation unfolds.