Currency Issues

This may be a case of "I don't understand everything I know".

All evidence I've seen indicates that the US Dollar will be worth less soon than it is now.

But all this economic disruption, globally, may mean that the US Dollar loses less than other currencies.

This could be an opportunity to buy imports at an advantageous price.

I intended to link to www.ammoman.com for this post, specifically Wolf brand ammo (made in Russia), but I'm getting "Bad Request (Invalid Hostname)" when I try to bring the site up. Disturbing.

If other currencies are falling in relation to the US Dollar, this could be a good time to look at buying any goods imported to the US. Their prices should drop, at least for now. Anything on your shopping list, watch prices. But keep in mind, currency markets can and do turn on a dime, so don't wait TOO long.

Smarter People than Me

...are saying that this $700 Billion Bailout was not necessarily a good idea.

I agree that SOMEthing needed to be done, but I don't think piling on dollars we don't have was the right answer.

Expect the cost to go much higher. I expect 2-3 Trillion dollars, and even that probably won't do much good.

Expect high inflation, and worse performance by the economy and the stock market. The Carter Era may look mild by comparison. Figure out what you'll do about it now, or your family will probably be suffering.

Okay.

Rivrdog makes a valid point.

My answer? I don't have one. I don't know what's going to happen if Congress doesn't fix this financial mess. But I'm pretty sure Congress CAN'T fix it.

The rhetoric from Capitol Hill (aka the Big Top) and the White House has mostly been "panic, do something NOW!". Good decisions are rarely made in a spirit of fear and haste. Plenty of political hay can be made in that environment, however, and I think that's mostly what's going on.

In addition, the numbers simply don't add up. From what I've been able to find, liabilities from sub-prime loans and the "toxic waste" paper that's been based on them comes up to somewhere between 50 and 100 TRILLION dollars. Congress can't spend our way out of a mess that big; I'd really prefer if they didn't try. They'd just waste a lot of money, put us further into debt, and the piper will still need to be paid. $700Billion is like putting a band-aid on a sucking chest wound.

I've sent my congresscritters alternate ideas - mainly based on Dave Ramsey's proposals. Since I've been learning more about the depth and breadth of this problem, I'm not sure Ramsey's proposed fixes would be any more of a long-term solution than piling on borrowed money, as the White House and Congress want to do. But they'd cost us a lot less.

Honestly? I think we're headed for a crash one way or another. I think the bus has gone off the road, and now all we're trying to figure out is whether it ends up in a hay field, runs into a brick wall, or off a cliff. I don't know which one is most likely; I do know that piling borrowed money into the bus's tracks won't get it back on the road, it'll just waste a lot of money.

Anybody who claims (as the Administration and Congressional leaders have) to KNOW what's going to happen if this bailout doesn't happen is either fearmongering or guessing. He who lives by the crystal ball eventually eats glass. Or maybe gets re-elected for doing "something".

Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and I do mean worst. Reality will probably fall somewhere in between.

This is probably going to be a rough ride, though.

Open Letter to Kay Granger

Kay Granger is my Representative, from Texas 12, in the US House of Representatives.

Following is a letter I sent to her tonight:

Dear Congresswoman Granger,

First, shame on you for having your "email Kay Granger" link on your official http://kaygranger.house.gov/ website go to a phone number rather than an actual email link.

Second, and far more importantly, shame on you for voting to put the American people and your constituents seven hundred billion dollars further into debt.

I listened to Rep. Pete Sessions on KLIF this afternoon, and he dodged that issue shamefully. Shame on him too. Because there was some nebulous language about the "mark-to-market" rules added, and some of the more obnoxious additions by Frank and Dodd had been removed, he thought an initial price tag of $350bn, and upward limit of $700bn, was acceptable. Apparently you did as well.

I'm telling you, as I told you last week, that price tag is NOT acceptable, whatever else surrounds it.

In your email response to me last week, you mentioned that "too much private capital is sitting on the sidelines", and you were correct.

Get that private capital involved. Get FHA-style insurance on the table. Get capital gains cuts on the table. Continue pursuing revision of the "mark-to-market" rules (which, as you know, were an unintended consequence of regulations passed by an earlier Congress). Don't put us, the taxpayers and our children, on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars.

I'll repeat, just for clarity: Don't put us, the taxpayers, our children, and grandchildren, on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars.

And one more time, in case you weren't paying attention: Don't put us, the taxpayers, our children, and grandchildren, on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars.

I'm this close: "" to putting up a 4x8 sheet of plywood in my yard on the corner of Waltham and Welch, with the message "Kay Granger voted to put us and our grandchildren $700,000,000,000 into debt". I'll wait until your next vote on this issue before I do that. I think that sign might have more impact than the one "Re-elect Kay Granger" sign I've seen in my neighborhood.

If you want to spend $700bn, fine. But it better be balanced by $700bn in spending cuts, in the same bill. (Hint: the IRS and BATFE budgets would be a good place to start cutting.)

Strong message to follow.

Yours truly,
Aaron Neal
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Fort Worth, Tx 76133