3 posts tagged “government”

Parking-ticket

So this valentine's day I got a parking ticket, which came in a wonderful pink envelope. I got on to the SLC government's website to pay my fine. When you pull up the page, you go to https://apps1.slcgov.com/ManagementServices/ALE/ale.asp. On this page there are 4 options for looking up citations and parking fines. You can search for fines by the number on the citation, the driver's license number, the case number (for more serious violations) and last but not least, the license plate number. I suddenly realized the power this gave me, looking up violations by plate number. I was able to see the several $100 plus violations that our UPS driver had incurred, such as handicap violations and such. What a serious hole SLC!! Maybe you should restrict it to something that isn't shown to every person who can see your car? Not that it's really bad, but its a small glimpse into people's lives. Thanks government!

Reading this, I can't help but wonder what sort of 'catastrophic emergency' will unveil itself as the '08 election nears?

With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.

In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.” Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled "National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51" and "Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20."

The White House released it on May 9.

Other than a discussion on Daily Kos led off by a posting by Leo Fender, and a pro-forma notice in a couple of mainstream newspapers, this document has gone unremarked upon.

The subject of the document is entitled “National Continuity Policy.”

It defines a “catastrophic emergency” as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in California, I imagine, since it says it would include “localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies.”

The document emphasizes the need to ensure “the continued function of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government,” it states.

But it says flat out: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.”

The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches, saying there will be “a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government.” But this effort will be “coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers.”

Among the efforts coordinated by the President would ensuring the capability of the three branches of government to “provide for orderly succession” and “appropriate transition of leadership.”

I only hope that I'm wrong.

From: http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807

After reading this article about the possibility of a $120 Billion bill for subprime bailouts, I want to scream. Is anyone seriously considering this plan? Having the US Government pay off the mortgages of people who were stupid enough to sign up for a subprime loan is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. Rarely do I find government bailouts to be necessary or right. The Savings & Loan bailout is an exception - the government made that mess, they should have to clean it up. However, other government bailouts (see the airline bailouts) are stupid. If an industry or consumers can't support themselves, why are tax dollars being spent to clean it up? Maybe if the government spent $120,000,000,000.00 on education, people wouldn't be so damn stupid to sign a subprime loan against their house to begin with.

Don't get me wrong. I sympathize with those in debt. It's a hard situation. I myself was foolish and ran up several large debts in a short amount of time. However, the silver lining to debt is paying it off. It's a hard lesson to learn that really hits the message home. But if people are using the equity in their homes for pure consumption or other investments that they can't guarantee (pretty much anything outside of buying a high rate CD), should they be saved from the wrath of having to pay it back? Not just no, but hell no. People won't learn that way.

Consumer advocate groups are crying out for this bailout because they claim that subprime lenders tricked consumers into signing these loans. This sentence kills their own argument, because consumers signed for the loans. If these slimy lenders who offer subprime loans, interest only loans, and the like did something illegal that's another thing. But they didn't. They presented the facts of the loan in writing in a contract within the letter of the law. The consumer who is stupid enough to sign it is responsible. These consumer advocate groups who are arguing for bailouts should focus their efforts on litigating the lenders to save their consumers.

Here's my hypothetical situation - I could write a contract that requires you to give me all your possesions and all your future earnings. If you sign it, that's your own damn fault. A government bailout in this situation would amount to them paying me the value of your current possessions and future earnings instead of fixing the problem.

Government Subprime Bailout = Sawdust on the vomit at Disney Land. Nothing gets cleaned up and no warning signs get posted. It just gets covered up.