The Bailout

I wasn't going to post about this, but I have to. I can't think of anything else to write about, for one, and I'm just sick of hearing about this and having no where to voice my opinion. So, you lucky people, you get to read it. :)

1. If I owned my own business and let people buy on credit there would be no bail-out for me if they couldn't pay me back and it killed my business. I would be able to declare bankruptcy, but that is all the help that would come my way.

2. I realize that the businesses that are in trouble will probably cause an economic crisis if they are allowed to fail.

3. I also know that many of these businesses are in trouble because their board members, CEOs, Presidents and assorted high management make more money than anyone really needs to survive, and therefore the business does not have enough savings to support themselves after making bad credit decisions.

4. The government (read: tax-payers) did not force any of these businesses to extend more credit to people than they could afford.

5. The government did not force any of these businesses to advertise about the low credit rates available and make people believe that a variable-interest mortgage (read: debt) was a good idea simply because of the low rates available now.

6. The government did not force any of the people now in trouble to borrow money without looking at their true financial situation, what they could realistically afford, or without reading the fine print and understanding that the current interest rate and payment will not stay as it is, but will most likely rise to a point that is, perhaps, unaffordable by the borrower.

EDIT: Apparently the government (read: democrats) did require a certain amount of sub-prime mortgages to be given by each bank. How in the world did democrats think that would be a good idea? Seriously! I took AP Macroeconomics in high school, aced the exam at the end of the year, and could have told you it was a bad idea. You don't force banks to lend money. That's like forcing lactose-intolerant people to drink milk and eat ice cream: All you end up with is a big pile of poo. Gucci Mama posted a video that explains.

7. I have never met anyone that could not live comfortably on an income of $100,000 per year. Also, I see no reason for someone who makes more money than that (and also does not pay social security taxes on much of their earnings, because of the level) to need large bonuses every quarter, every Christmas, every time their birthday, wedding anniversary, work anniversary, or any other excuse they can come up with comes around.

8. My husband and I live comfortably on a household income of less than $50,000 per year. I can only imagine what we could accomplish with twice that.

Now, my opinion of the bailout may be clear from what I have said, but allow me to state it plainly. It disgusts me that something like this is considered necessary by the leaders of our country when it is clear to me that people who are getting rich and fat off of other people's woes are the cause of this whole thing. And who will benefit? Those same because even if the government puts a cap on what they can earn if their company is bailed out they probably still have enough savings to keep them living comfortably for years. And the 'tax-payer' benefit of having a stake in these companies? Paltry. For one, we will never see it, because the government will have it and reason that it needs to be held there to settle the debt Bush has caused (from a falling debt, might I remind you, and despite that during most other wars in history, our economy has strengthened). Also, even if we manage to ever get back to a surplus budget, will we really see the benefit? I think not. The credit companies are not the only ones hemorrhaging money. The government is bleeding to death and doesn't seem to realize it. The national debt, at the moment, is

The Gross National Debt

That's crazy! But since it's in the trillions, so why don't we just add another 700 billion? That'll fix everything.

Imagine if you could Poke the Pope!

If you've been reading my blog I thank you, and you know that I am Catholic. If you haven't been reading my blog, thanks for stopping by, you should know from the previous sentence that I am Catholic. Now that we're all on the same page, I'd like to tell you about one of my Facebook groups, which is call the Papal Facebook Initiative.

This group is dedicated to gathering 1 million members, and then petitioning the Vatican to create a profile for the Pope on Facebook. The idea is that this would be an awesome way to connect with and minister to the younger generation of Catholics and Christians, as well as the general youth. Also, if you read the group page, there are some really cool things you could do if the Pope was on Facebook. These are my favorites:

Pope Benedict was on your friends list. You "Worked together for Christ" and "Met him through a friend."

A new Vatican Office of the Curia had to be created, called the "Papal Facebook Attendant." (Credit: Joe Mileski)

the pope sends you a gift: "You have received the Holy Spirit." (Credit: Jessica Condon)

thanks your superpoke application, you could throw a lost sheep at the Pope. (Credit: Giovanni De Stefano)

♥ Pope Benedict XVI is now in a relationship with God. (Credit: Valerie Banas)

Currently, this awesome group only has about 21,500 members. That's not even a tenth of the people they want, so here's what I'm asking: If you have Facebook, if you know anyone that has Facebook (even your kids), or if you know someone who might have Facebook, or someone who is Catholic, ask them to:
a)join Facebook if they haven't,
b)join this group,
c)invite everyone they know to do the same.

I think this would be an awesome thing, and I think the people who started the group are aiming for 1,000,000 people because of the impact that kind of request would have. If 1,000,000 people wanted you to create a Facebook profile, wouldn't you? Thanks in advance, and God bless!

Lack of Focus

I have completed several projects for work today, and while I have more, I find myself unable to focus and create any sort of forward momentum. This is not unusual for me, but it's my lack of ability to focus on ANYTHING, personal or work-related, that is bothering me. Here's what I've done so far today:

Finished billing cycle
Finished all address corrections available
Emailed new address requests
Finished third book of the Inheritance cycle, Brisingr

I was part-way through all of those things when I woke this morning, and now I am finished. I still have to correct old information from many of the physicians we associate with according to the new information I've been gathering, finish the COBRA billing, work on the bank statements, prepare the 3rd quarter revenue report and prepare my office to be moved. I can't seem to settle to a task, though. Thankfully none of these things are due soon, but if I don't continue work on them, they may never get finished. My brain doesn't agree, however. I seem to have lost the motivation to complete this day, and I really just want to get out of here, but I can't because it's short notice, I don't have any vacation time that I don't have plans for, and I have to pick Michael up from work after I get off, so I would be stuck in town anyway.

I think my problem is that I need to get away from here, away from the entire town and everyone I know, Michael included. Does anyone else have days like that? Or weeks? I can't remember the last time I spent a significant amount of time truly alone. Even right after the wedding when Michael was traveling for his job with the state I wasn't really alone. I still had to go to work, he still called me every few hours. I need to take a week and go somewhere without anybody. Maybe I'll talk to Michael again and see if the concept of alone time has sunk in yet...

I Hate it When I'm Wrong

So, when Michael told me that the piece of land by his parents house is the only one available in our price range, my first thought was that he's just not looking hard enough. Well...I was wrong. There is NO LAND for sale here that meets our requirements and is in a reasonable price range. Even when I widened my search area so that I would have a 30 minute commute every day, there's nothing that is 10 acres or more and less than $6000/acre. This is ridiculous. Almost nobody wants to sell, and therefore the few people who do are able to ask a premium, despite the condition of the economy. And, most of the tracts available are way more than 10 acres. If we could find something that was only 10 acres and was $7000/acre, we could probably afford that, but there's nothing like that. There are NO 10-acre lots. There are 5-acre lots (for a reasonable price, but Michael insists on more land than that). There are 20-acre lots and above. There is NOTHING in the middle. NOTHING!! This is horrible. I can't stand to live in the same house that we are in now for the rest of our lives. We can't afford the land around here. Michael won't move out of the area or on to a smaller piece of property. Michael won't sell the house that we're in because it was his grandfather's. I WON'T live next to his parents.

I have a headache.

You want me to move WHERE?!?!

Michael and I are currently hunting for land on which to build a house. If you live in a city, this may be a foreign concept for you, or one only the rich can afford. Out here, where 'town' or even 'village' is a more appropriate word than 'city' (no matter how hard they try to convince you otherwise), it's a fairly common practice. So, we're land-hunting.

Our requirements are pretty simple: Michael wants at least 10 acres and I want it to be no farther from where I work than we are now. So far, we have found one piece of land that meets these conditions perfectly. It is a 30-acre hay field about 15 minutes from my office (and I use that term loosely as well). It being a hay field is actually an added bonus as well because I would like to have horses, and the type hay that grows there is high-quality food for those of the equine persuasion. The problem? The price is $7,500/acre. The basic rate for land in this area is $3,500-$5,500 per acre. Which means they want at least $60,000 too much for the land. Their reason? A $5,000 per year federal subsidy the owner of the land is entitled to because of the type of hay that grows there and the ability to rent the field to hay reapers who would then sell the hay and split the profits with the owner. That sounds good in theory, but that subsidy and the hay profits would go down if someone, say, mowed down half of the hay to build a house like we want to do. The real estate agent is also advertising the land as a great home site (which it is, because it's gorgeous land). So on one side they're telling you it's worth the extra money (never mind that it would take over 10 years to see any profit on the extra expense) and on the other they're advocating that you pay the extra money for the subsidy and hay, and then throw away the ability to recoup the cost because it's a beautiful home site.

Our other option so far is a nice piece of land, which is about 17 acres, and the same distance from my office, with a very good price. The problem with this? It's literally next door to my parents-in-law. Yep, the land abuts theirs. For me, that is not an option. I would rather pay an extra $60-120,000 for the priviledge of living farther from Michael's parents than we already do. Mostly, it's not myself I'm worried about, because I would gladly use the excuse of being closer to them to also be more rude when his mother decides to put her two cents in where it doesn't belong. What I'm worried about is what will happen when we have kids. Oh, the horrors that being so close to them could open up. I shudder to think about it, and I'm probably going to have nightmares tonight.

The hay field has come down $1000/acre in about 2 months. The real estate agent (who represents both options we have so far) advises that we wait on it if we don't want to be so close to his parents and we don't want to pay that much for the land. I say, damn straight.