The economic collapse was caused ENTIRELY by regulation, namely the communist re-investment act which started the enforcement of riskier and riskier loans. If that act was not in place there never would have been the massive housing collapse since the normal rules of finance would have applied, not the distorted REGULATED market.
I do have to agree with the original poster, track record being any indication, the $15K tax break will actually cost $100K once you figure in the buerocratic cost. Want some proof, the cash for clunkers, the epitome of Government in action...
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/08/05/lurita-doan-cash/
Federal government staffing for 3 divisions doesn't come cheaply. Add to it other administrative and overhead costs for office space, telecommunications, power, equipment and furniture, as well as costs for meetings, photocopying, paper, pens, help desk support. When the government's costs of running the program are totaled up, each clunker is likely to cost taxpayers around $6,000 per car.
So it cost $6K to give away $4K. Or more explicitly, it cost the taxpayer $10K to get $4K into the hands of the consumer. Right on track, it costs exactly twice as much for the government to do anything.
Also, they could practice what they preach...
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2011/01/26/government_wants_you_to_turn_off_your_lights_while_they_keep_theirs_on
For several months, we kept track of the lights left on in a dozen federal buildings, including the Departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Transportation and Energy always checking after 10 p.m., each on at least six occasions
...
The low end is about $200,000 a month. The high end more than a million. One month's electricity bill at the Department of Labor topped a MILLION dollars. That was a bill paid in July of last year. The month before, the department paid a bill of nearly $700,000. And utility costs of that magnitude are not unusual.
So, lets leave the government out of EVERY aspect of this except they should ADVERTISE and EDUCATE that people/companies can save a lot if they become more energy efficient. I could personally do without having to pay $100K for every $40K tax rebate.
TripleII
Discussion on:
Message 3 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
