No Surprise: Government's 'HOPE for Homeowners' Program Hasn't Worked

Let's see, we turn over a big problem to the federal government to solve and they mess it up even more. Why should anyone be surprised?

If you want to see how well the Federal Government works at solving economic problems, read this article from CNN: Renewed HOPE for Homeowners

Hope for Homeowners has a 1 in 400,000 success rate.

Government's ‘Hope for Homeowners’ foreclosure rescue plan, rolled out last year, was set to target 400,000 distress families in some stage of foreclosure. The program was geared to keep those families in their homes. When the program was rolled out, many complained that it didn't go far enough, only helping 400,000 families of the millions facing foreclosure. Now we find the bar for ‘too little’ was set way too high for the government to meet. Out of the 400,000 families targeted to be saved by this program only ONE family/home was actually saved. This is a program with massive overhead, a huge staff, and there success rate was 1 out of 400,000.

As if we needed yet ANOTHER example of government's ineptness, this gives you an idea of what results we can expect if the government gets involved in health care, or further involved in the financial markets or banking industry. The Federal Government has bankrupted soc. sec., medicare, etc., and has shown they are incapable of solving hardly any problem. Why would you want to turn MORE over to them? This would be like having a basketball team and your best shooter misses one jump shot, so you turn to the worst shooter on your team and tell him to start taking MORE shots. (More examples of Government's failure to solve problems.)

Letting the worst shooter (Fed. Gov.) take more shots.

If you think the bank industry and the financial markets were inefficient before, give it some time with new regulations and government involvement, and watch the cost to borrow, and the cost to invest, sky rocket. If you think health care costs are high now, just wait 'till they're "free."

Kevin

John Stossel's "You Can't Even Talk About It"

Another very good special by John Stossel, taking on politically sensitive topics. Stossel is one of the few journalists who will take on these taboo subjects.

PART 1: Should Pregnant women get paid as much as others?



PART 2: Should food be radiated?



PART 3: Should tax payers pay for other's who take dumb risks?



PART 4: Is killing and eating tigers the best way to save them?



PART 5: Should steroids be legal?



PART 6: Shouldn't America start doing LESS for the elderly?

John Stossel's "Bailouts and Bull" on 20/20

John Stossel gets it.

John Stossel has once again gotten it right. He's one of the only reporters in the mainstream media who will tell you the truth. If you missed his special last night, here it is. You may also want to watch his previous special, which I blogged about and posted here.

You can watch the six different segments below, or you can also watch this episode in its entirety here at ABC.

Everyone in America should watch this and John's previous reports. Pass it around!

Fed. Government's Failed Bailouts


Fed. Government Scares the Middle Class


Fed. Government's Failure to Control Traffic and at Building Roads


Fed. Government Wants to Controll Pre-School


Fed. Government Spends Billions and Fails to Control Border


Fed. Government's Control Over State Rights


Kevin

Obama Makes the Big-Spender Bush Look Thrifty

If Obama gets his way, by his own admission, the deficit will be above $1 TRILLION over the next THREE YEARS, for a total of around $3.7 T. That's nearly what the big spender Bush II took EIGHT years to do ($4.3 T). And all this put into motion in Obama's first couple of months. Eeegads. Spending under Bush was terrible, but apparently it's going to be even worse under Obama and the D-controlled congress.

Big spender Obama. So much for change.

Obama's $3.6 trillion spending and tax plan is the biggest effort to shift the federal government's role in the economy since Reagan's in 1981. But instead of rolling back government, Obama advocates growing it. ....Shudder.... If Congress declines to raise taxes on carbon emissions, or other areas, it will force the deficit even higher. Likewise, should all his tax increases pass, that could slow the economy even more, and the deficit goes higher still.

I might be for raising taxes if I thought for one minute the Gov would use it to pay down the deficit like Bush I and Clinton did, but I don't trust Obama to do that. He's got way to big of a social agenda and seems to lack a basic understanding of economics. (Clinton also did not control federal spending, considering it increased by almost 30% during his tenure. What saved him was the dramatic increase in tax revenues from a healthy economy created in the tech and other sectors during that time.)

Want to see just how much Obama want's to borrow from your children, watch this:

Glenn Beck graphically depicts our Federal Government's out of control spending.

Politicians, R's and D's alike, just can't resist spending your money, and mortgaging your children's future. The national debt is already nearly $11 TRILLION, that's $35,000 for every person living in America, and this all BEFORE Obama starts with his crazy spending!

The stock market clearly isn't liking what they are hearing from Obama. It's down 20% in the short time since Obama's inauguration and down nearly 40% from the time it was evident that Obama was going to become President. Ouch!

The Stock Market Isn't Buying Obama's Tax and Spend Plan

Look at what CNN's Mad Money host Jim Cramer has to say about Obama's policies.

According to a recent poll, over a quarter of those who voted FOR Obama now regret it.

26% of those who voted for Obama wish they hadn't.

Obama's DISapproval rating has increased from 10% to 26% in just over a month as more people, like me, who had hoped that Obama would be different, have learned about his same-old higher taxes and bigger government programs.

Obama's Disapproval rating goes up from 10% to 26% in just over a month.

So, what's to be done? How do we get our economy back on it's feet?

I would encourage everyone to read Free to Choose by Milton and Rose Friedman. (A 10-part TV series was also made along with this book.) If ever there was a time for people to understand how our economy works, it's now, while Obama and the Democratic-controlled congress try to reshape our country into the great society.


Milton Friedman, he was was an American economist, statistician and public intellectual, and a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Even though this book and his ideas are from a few decades ago, they remain true principles that seem to have been lost.

If you're not familiar with Milton Friedman or his beliefs, you can find several good video interviews with him on YouTube. Here is one small sample of him being interviewed by Phil Donahu.



Get this book, read it, and see if it doesn't make a lot of sense, and if it does, is Obama putting us on the right track?

Kevin

World's Smallest Political Quiz

Click here to take the World's Smallest Political Quiz and see where you stand.

Here are my results, which might help people understand me and some of my views.


Kevin

John Stossel's "Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics"

John Stossel, one of the few level headed individuals in the media and a fellow Libertarian, has made yet another excellent 20/20 Special. John looks at the fallacies of big government.

I would HIGHLY encourage everyone to watch this entire program BEFORE voting. I'm glad at least someone from the mainstream media is debunking the concept that we should turn to government to solve all our problems.

For your viewing convenience, I've put the entire program below. (Note: If you'd prefer to watch this in a higher resolution directly from the ABC News website, go here.)

PART 1 - False promises from politicians. Spontaneous Order. Central planning and government vs self organization and business.


PART 2 - Housing crises. Regulation vs deregulation. Bailout. Necessity of business failures.


PART 3 - Rebuilding New Orleans. Government vs volunteers and the private sector. Government bureaucracy.


PART 4 - Campaign finance reform. Law of unintended consequences. Using regulation to prevent competition.


PART 5 - Farm subsidies. Job obsolescence. New Zealand eliminates farm subsidies.


PART 6 - People run America, not Government. People bring change, not politicians. Personal responsibility.


BONUS SECTION FROM PREVIOUS WEEK - Should some people not vote?


Kevin

The Very Heart and Soul of Conservatism is Libertarianism

"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism." ~ Ronald Reagan

Read more of Ronald Reagan's views on Libertarianism from this interview he did in 1975. At that time, Reagan used the term "libertarian-conservative" to describe his political philosophy. Reagan’s record, while generally conservative, was not particularly libertarian, but one’s administrative decisions, constrained as they are by existing laws, institutions, and politics, do not necessarily mirror one’s underlying philosophy (consider Mitt Romney when governing the very liberal state of Massachusetts). This interview gives an interesting glimpse into the real Ronald Reagan.

It's good to get to know where a candidate comes form, where their true roots lie and what their underlying philosophy is. Elections have a way of pulling candidates to the center as they pander for votes, so if you want to know what will actually drive a politician once they're in office, look to their core values and beliefs, and not just what they say months before an election.

Ronald Reagan was, in my opinion, a great President, because deep down he believed in the libertarian ideals of smaller government and more personal responsibility. Barack Obama is one hundred and eighty degrees from Ronald Reagan in that belief. Obama may be pulling to the center to win your vote, but if you look at what he has said and done in years prior, you'll see someone who can't wait to raise taxes and let government step in and start solving your problems.

It's hard to find many things government does right, so why would anyone want to turn to government to solve more of their problems? This would be like choosing the worst shooter on your basketball team to shoot the technical free throws. It makes no sense.

Another good quote from Ronald Reagan, "I don’t believe in a government that protects us from ourselves."

I couldn't agree more. If I need protecting from myself, I hope friends, family, church, neighbors, and community support groups will be there for me, not the Federal Government.

Kevin

Why do so many people turn to Government to solve problems?

If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's "free."

Those who look to government to solve all their problems get exactly what they deserve. So many people criticize government as being completely inept, and yet it tends to be those very same people who then turn around and want that same government to solve all their problems. If history has taught us one thing, it's government doesn't do a very good job at most things. We should only use big, federal, bureaucratic government to do those things it absolutely must do (national defense, etc.).

I'm all for helping our children, but I certainly don't look to the most inefficient entity known to man to do it...government. Those who truly care about children wouldn't either.

A better way.

Kevin

Ron Paul - Right Message, Wrong Messenger

As a Libertarian (and as someone in the tech field), you'd think I might be supporting Ron Paul for President. I'm not, and it's not because I don't want to "waste my vote" on someone who I feel doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination. I DO think people who vote for Ron Paul could better "invest" their vote elsewhere, but that's not why I am not supporting Ron Paul. I just don't think he'd make a good leader of America.

As a Libertarian, I AM for many of Ron Paul's "ideals," but when you vote for President, you vote for A PERSON, not just their ideals. For me, Ron Paul does not have the leadership skills I look for in a President. He can have all the right ideals, be very passionate about them, and even be an honest and likable person, but if he can't LEAD effectively, and has bad ideas, then his influence will be nominal. (Ron Paul has only successfully had one of his bills passed in all the years he has served in congress.) I appreciate his honest, direct, tell-it-like-it-is approach. I think he's a very ethical and sincere man, but some of his IDEAS for executing on his IDEALS worry me.

Some will argue, "He MUST know how to lead, look at all the support he has! Look at the money he's raised! HE WON A POLL ON THE INTERNET!" The support he does have is for his IDEALS, but that will only take him so far. Ron Paul, the man, and his ideas for executing on those ideals, is what will keep him in single digits.

I may agree with many of the things other Libertarians say, such as Penn Gillette or Tom Leykis, but would I want them for President??? This is one of the big challenges Libertarians face, a lack of good, electable leaders.

Believe me, I LONG for the day I can vote for a Libertarian for President, but it won't be Ron Paul. Until then, I'll vote for the right PERSON who comes CLOSEST to my ideals.

Kevin

PS:
As a youth growing up, when I'd play basketball with my friends, we had a saying, "Scoreboard!" We'd use that anytime we'd win a game, and the other team would complain about why they lost. They'd always have all sorts of excuses, and we'd just reply with, "Scoreboard!" Suggesting, in the end, that's what matters. I'm sorry you had a bad day, I'm sorry your jump shot wasn't dropping, I'm sorry you couldn't find your lucky socks, but all that matters in the end is the score. I know I'm going to want to say that to all my Ron Paul friends, who keep telling me how Ron Paul really IS going to win and that the polls don't show his true support. They have a million reasons why he's the best, and a million more why no one seems to know it yet (rigged straw polls, media bias, conspiracy theories, blah, blah). If Ron Paul has what it takes to lead America, he SHOULD have what it takes to sell his ideas. I look forward to early next year when I can just say one word to my Ron Paul friends...Scoreboard. (I'll go on record here that Ron Paul will not win a single state's Primary or Caucus. OK, the whining polls are now open...I'm sure we'll see them start up below...)