So, here is what I know. Corey gave an interview, early this morning, on WMAL. The focus was on the 1.5 million dollar grant to create affordable housing. So Corey, maybe thinking this was Obama stimulus money, spoke, clearly, before he truly understood the question, therefore prohibiting a thoughtful and knowledgeable answer.
Back in the Bush era, Housing and Urban Development was handing out money to blighted neighborhoods, i.e., The Neighborhood Stabilizaton Fund. Prince William County recieved approximately 5 million dollars to help infuse some new life into some communities that were in dire need. Fast forward to today, apparently there was still some money left in this fund. The federal govt. hands over money to States, the State of VA gets 1.5 million.
This is where Corey loses his fact compass because during this interview on WMAL, he keeps talking about how government shouldn’t be in ” the business of being a landlord.” First of all, the Prince William County government wrote a letter supporting/endorsing that this grant money be given to Catholics for Housing, a nonprofit organization, NOT a government entity, who have an excellent track record of fiscal responsiblity and success in putting public servants into affordable housing. Second, this government is absolutely in the business of being landlords, go to any base and you will find a myriad of government housing that our soldiers live and raise their families in.
Thanks for letting us know about this Elena. May I ask, was the journalist who interviewed him informed and educated enough to clarify these issues? Or did he or she just allow the misinformation to go on live feed into the public consciousness as per usual?
land⋅lord
/ˈlændˌlɔrd/
–noun
1. a person or organization that owns and leases apartments to others.
2. a person who owns and leases land, buildings, etc.
3. a person who owns or runs an inn, lodging house, etc.
According to the definitions, giving money to private organizations to provide affordable housing would not make him/BOCS/government a landlord.
I also wonder that Stewart would not fully endorse funding that helps his employees with affordable housing.
As for military housing–does the government make money off of base housing? Does the government “own” it? I am not sure we could call the government the landlord of base housing. Maybe it’s just getting late and I am confused, though.
Sorry Elena. I didn’t notice you had a link. Thanks for that as well.
After listening to the interview, I see that the journalist didn’t seem to have done the research on this program, i.e. he didn’t realize that this was a Bush administration program for the “Government to become the landlord.”
However, Corey did not sound over-the-top, he didn’t shout, he didn’t use outrageous language or talk of Virginia succeeding from the Union. In other words, I was glad to hear that he didn’t embarrass the county. Sure he didn’t have his facts straight but neither did the reporter.
In light of the McDonnell debacle, Corey is seeming less and less like an extremist, at least comparatively speaking.
I agree Witness, Corey did not shout or say anything outrageous. It was too early in the morning 😉
But, for me, this demonstrates that Corey knew very little about this issue and yet, still, spoke about like he knew what he was talking about. Was he not told ahead of time about the interview? Does he just have a standard, albeit uninformed, talking point about how ineffective government can be? What Catholic Housing does is an incredible source of benefit to the county and Corey should have known this in order to provide a well informed response the interviewers questions.
Too many people are forgetting that the first ‘bail out’ was a Bush bail out. (and for the record, I supported it.) Corey seems to be falling into the same partisn trap and that is blaming everything Democrat even when it isn’t.
The fact that it was a Bush (with Dems in control of the Congress) bailout doesn’t make it right.
guess what Slow, this country avoided a repeat of Great Depression, Bush and Obama acting correctly. Had they done nothing, we would be castagating them for sitting idly by while the world economy collapsed.
Uh… no. The majority of that money was wasted and not used the way it was supposed to. Chrysler is being bought and GM will go under eventually. Ford, the only one that didn’t take money, is doing better. There are still MANY banks that will go under. Cash for clunkers did little for Chrysler and GM (even with Govt. intervention, the free market still works) and helped the two companies already doing fine the most (Toyota and Ford).
We are most definitely not out of the woods yet. But we will be. But no thanks to the trillions the fed govt wasted that WE are going to have to pay back.
Don’t feel bad though. There are many that are drinking the koolaid.
It’s econ 101. If you artificially drive the economy with bank created debt (and think about the degree to which we’re doing it now) you’re guaranteed market volatility and inflation. And the short-term false signals it sends to the public makes it worse.
Think about it in simple terms. As an individual, is it smart to spend money you don’t have? Is it smart to invest in a failing business?
The free market rewards the prudent and punishes the imprudent no matter what the govt. does. Its a natural law no different then physics.
The first ‘bailout’ money had nothing to do with cars. It had to do with unfreezing credit so that payrolls could be met and money could move.
Sometimes things need tweaking. Frankly, I will always think Bush did the right thing. I heard it from too many people who know and deal with money, lots of it, on a daily basis.
I don’t think econ 101 applies. It all depends on whose teaching the course.
“The first ‘bailout’ money had nothing to do with cars. It had to do with unfreezing credit so that payrolls could be met and money could move.”
Didn’t say it had anything to do with cars. It’s still delaying the inevitable at a cost and circumventing natural forces. Is there an actual “receipt” showing exactly how the money was spent?
“I don’t think econ 101 applies. It all depends on whose teaching the course.”
The principles are static. There is no interpretation.
If you want something that delves deeper, google the Chicago and/or Austrian school of thought. You don’t have to accept their style of thinking but it is good food for thought.
Even for the layperson, econ is a VERY interesting and important subject. If we all understood a little more about it, we’d all be much better off.
I’ll help you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_school_of_economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
@Moon-howler
I think you’ll find this very interesting. It was one of my favorite courses in college.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_choice_theory
I know these are all wiki links, but at least they can whet your appetite for more.
one of my posts is in moderation
Thanks Mando, I will check into those. The moderation thing happens if you put 3 or more links up. (sometimes it happens with fewer). Sorry. It is a protection against spam dumps.
Thanks for letting me know….it speeded things up. I might have missed it for half a day.
Boning up on public choice theory will shed much light on why politicians do what they do and what causes a democracy to be so irrational.
Did I just hear Chairman Stewart say that PWC no longer has a foreclosure problem? Where are these houses that are up 20% in value? Is this like the $400 tax cut that I was promised? My house is back to the value it had in about 2001 and my tax cut was only about $25. When will people realize that this man promises the sun and then delivers a flood?
“My house is back to the value it had in about 2001”
That’s a good thing. I think we can all agree that home values after 2001 were EXTREMELY overvalued. Hence, the crash.
The TARP funds was necessary to keep the banking system alive. But, the Bush Stimulus program was a mistake – all it did was postpone the inevitable, and allow even more liar loans to be made.
One problem in the US, which is not being solved, is the exporting of nearly all of our manufacturing to other countries. Manufacturing is a necessity, and could be considered an asset during war time (and repurposed). If one wants to talk about the distribution of wealth, it is the movement of money from the US to China – and then China comes back in with cash and buys up US Assets at depressed prices.
“Government efforts to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars
into the U.S. economy appear to be helping the country climb out
of the worst recession in deccades.” Wall Street Journal (9-2-2009)
I predict in the next presidential election, the tussle will
be over who gets credit for the stimulus – not who gets blamed
for it.
I think it is safe to say that none of us here are economics experts. We each have an opinion. Time will judge us.
“Government efforts to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars
into the U.S. economy appear to be helping the country climb out
of the worst recession in deccades.” Wall Street Journal (9-2-2009)
Key word -> APPEAR
“One problem in the US, which is not being solved, is the exporting of nearly all of our manufacturing to other countries.”
Blame minimum wage laws. Unless you want to pay $50 for a $15 Polo Shirt.
“I think it is safe to say that none of us here are economics experts.”
Bingo. That’s why I suggest you read what the experts have to say rather then trust the politicians.
I told you I would check out the sites. I just haven’t had time yet. Tree trimmer here and I was busy doing a radical left thread.
When the financial meltdown happened last fall, I steered away from politicians for my advice and talked to someone who had a thumb on the pulse of all that is money, out in the silicon valley area; someone I have known for years. They are fiscally conservative and a Reagan Republican. He told me that the tweaking had to happen and that Paulson was a smart man. Made sense to me and it was someone I trusted a great deal.
Finally, this new meltdown is uncharted waters. I am not sure business as usual was/is an answer…but I will look at your sites later this afternoon.
I cut and pasted this comment from a new poster that needs to change their name, it’s already taken. I invite you to return under a new moniker that will not be mistaken for someone else.
However, I wanted to respond to your question. You may find this hard to believe, but I still like Corey as a person. As infuriating as he can be, I would sit down and have a cocktail with him today if he wanted to. Having said that, I have found Corey to show very little interest in really getting into the nitty gritty of issues. He likes to have you give him the easiest and fastest recap. I think my best example of this is when I saw Corey at the only DOE hearing for the Dominion Power line proposal. He shows up, with Gary Friedman, to the meeting in Arlington and says, “Elena, what should I say”? I replied, “Corey, I don’t know, I’m not gonna give you my speech though.”
Gary and I sat together with Corey and he worked on what he was going to say to the DOE.
My point is that Corey likes to take the easy way out, but as the Chairman of the Board, before he speaks to an issue, any issue, he should know his facts first.
Oh… there’s a grudge. You’d have to be blind not to see that. Be prepared to be labeled “right wing extremist” ad-nauseum.