« Rooting against the US basketball team? | Main | Sistani is not a fool »
August 21, 2004
Owners versus owers
All that's missing is the N. A friend of mine filed for bankruptcy recently, only to discover to her chagrine that afterwards, when she sold some personal items and tried to deposit a $500 check in her savings account to withdraw later for her school expenses and fees, the bank froze the account and took the money. Apparently, after you file for bankruptcy, you have to be very careful about never having more that $100 in your account, or the bank can take it from you, unless you do everything right, take them to court, get lawyers involved, etc.
To make a long story short, now she is pretty apprehensive about what the next seven years will bring, until her credit is finally re-established. It was in that light that I read the following news article and could not help but laugh. Not one of those feel good laughs, either. I kept seeing "owe" not "own", too.
Bush Pressing Case for 'Ownership Society'WASHINGTON - Amid signs that the economy is cooling, President Bush is showcasing initiatives for a second term under the banner of an "ownership society" in hopes of bolstering his economic stewardship credentials....
"I want people owning something in America," Bush told a rally in Hedgesville, W.Va., last week, sounding a theme he is expected to amplify in his Sept. 2 acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in New York.
"If you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of America," Bush says in a television ad being run in battleground states. It shows images of a home, a business, older Americans, children and construction workers....
Bush's "ownership" platform includes several unfulfilled campaign proposals from 2000. One would allow younger workers to divert some Social Security taxes into private government-sponsored retirement accounts. Another would create tax-free "health savings accounts" that workers could take from job to job.
Bush aides say the ownership theme helps underscore differences with Kerry, who advocates raising taxes on the most affluent households and spending more on health care, education and other domestic programs.
Democrats counter that the strategy just shows Bush is out of touch.
"How can George Bush talk about encouraging ownership when his administration has made it a hardship for families to get good-paying jobs or pay for the skyrocketing costs of health care and college?" asked Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer.
Easy answer, Phil: They just don't care. (I realize the question was rhetorical.)
I also remember something about it being more likely that a child's parents will file for bankruptcy than divorse. This in a nation where half of all marriages end in divorce. In other words, there are a lot of people really hurting financially, and in no danger of owning anything out right any time soon. Guess Bush's ownership society must have a sign on the gate: Debtors not welcome!
Either you're an owner, or you're one of the people they own.
Posted by Mike at August 21, 2004 07:33 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.topdog08.com/cgi-bin/mt-trackback.cgi/462
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)