Can some-one please explain to me why the Senate version of the bailout plan has a giant chunk o' money going to automobile race tracks, oh excuse me, so sorry, motorsports racetrack properties?
Double WTF?
Our economy is circling the drain. Part of the problem is sky-rocketing GASOLINE and DESIEL costs.
And the Senate thinks this is a good time to tack on a couple million (NBC this morning had a graphic of 125 million, but I can't find it on-line) for some idiots to clear cut land, pour concrete over it and have people come to watch stupid cars drive around in circles at high speeds, burning through thousands and thousands of gallons of fuel while spewing noxious pollutants into the air.
For entertainment.
Think about that NASCAR junkies next time you bitch at the pump. That your favorite driver blows more in one race that you probably use all year.
Auto racing is as stupid and as pointless as boxing.
The End.
Thor's Day!
Thor sez: About time, crazy human.
The new toy.
1 comment:
**Apology- this got too long too quick**
Before I start, I don't like this "bailout" any more than most normal people. I think it's rewarding failure, of both the government and huge financial institutions who took stupid risks.
The government encouraged the practice of granting mortgages to un- and under- qualified applicants. That's largely a Democrat deal, dating back to the 70s with the Community Reinvestment Act by Jimmah Cartah.
George Bush pushed home ownership as one of his major public policy agendas, and that compounded the problem magnificently. All of a sudden, you had lenders offering no-doc loans, interest-only loans, ARMs, 40 and 50 year mortgages, etc... And because it made his "home ownership" numbers look great, they largely avoided thinking too hard about the problem until it got too big to solve. And everybody who was screaming housing bubble for 4-5 YEARS now look incredibly smart, but that and 50 cents will get you a newspaper and not much more.
To be fair to the Senate, the characterization of this "bailout, rescue, whatnot" by the media is a bit oversimplified. They didn't attach all of those things to the bailout, the attached the bailout to all of those things. That spending bill had already been approved by the House and was in the Senate awaiting approval. The SENATE is not allowed by the Constitution to introduce new spending bill as standalone items, so they couldn't just start up a brand new bailout bill. So they just attached it to previously approved bill and sent it back to the House to "approve the changes" to the spending bill. Incredibly sneaky, a bit underhanded, maybe necessary for political cover for all parties involved.
Post a Comment