



The only way to prevent a deepening recession will be a temporary program of increased government spending.Marty thinks the tax rebates earlier this year did not do much to stimulate consumer spending. I think Marty is too quick in reaching this conclusion: Other scholars who have seriously analyzed the data disagree.
Hi,[no worries!]
Great idea! Forgive me, I really couldn�t stick to 4.
1) Poppies! I�m currently obsessed with Poppies � possibly due to the amazing tea set I inherited from my Grandmother. So I�d definitely go with poppy themed invitations, these were my favourite of many.
* Tip - Make sure you get matching thank you cards at the same time so you can start sending them out as soon as the early bird gifts arrive.
I would complement the poppy theme with a few more �poppy� items in addition to the centerpieces and flowers.
Guest book:
OR I love the idea of creating a poster sized invitation to have your guests sign.
Place cards:
A matching tie for the groom:
2) One signature item of clothing to really make the bridal ensemble pop and accent your theme.
Fascinator:
Fascinator 2:[sadly this listing has been removed, but check out the other fascinators at chameleondesignsaus]
{ Carrie Ivory Silk Flower and Feather Fascinator by chameleondesignsaus }
Wrap:
3) And now for some fun! I did homemade cupcakes for my own wedding instead of cake. Perhaps for a DIY favour, you could combine the recipe for your wedding cupcakes on a snazzy recipe card, with a small canning jar full of the pre-mixed dry ingredients. i.e. Just add milk, eggs etc for your own �eat at home� cupcakes!
4) Lastly, we can't forget about bridesmaid gifts. I like the fact that you can get wristlets by babycakesboutique in several different Amy Butler fabrics so your bridesmaids never have to show up to a party with the same purse after the wedding.
Bridesmaid Gift:
we propose legislation that moves the reworking function from the paralyzed master servicers and transfers it to community-based, government-appointed trustees. These trustees would be given no information about which securities are derived from which mortgages, or how those securities would be affected by the reworking and foreclosure decisions they make. Instead of worrying about which securities might be harmed, the blind trustees would consider, loan by loan, whether a reworking would bring in more money than a foreclosure.
The government expense would be limited to paying for the trustees � no small amount of money, but much cheaper than first paying off the security holders by buying out the loans, which would then have to be reworked anyway. Our plan would also be far more efficient than having judges attempt this role. The trustees would be hired from the ranks of community bankers, and thus have the expertise the judiciary lacks.
A reception, policy discussion and lunch was offered in Newark, N.J., with David Cutler, Obama for America�s senior health-care adviser, for $500 for a guest or $2,300 for a V.I.P.And you don't even have to travel to Newark!
This is like Zingales's Plan B.The way to do so is through the shared appreciation mortgage, or SAM. The concept is simple: Homeowners are offered the chance to write down a portion of their mortgage debt, but at the same time, they are required to share future appreciation gains with those who helped them out....
For example, a homeowner unable to support payments on a house purchased for $200,000 that today is worth only $150,000 might be offered a write-down of up to $50,000. But this would not be a free lunch.
With the SAM, once the value began appreciating above $150,000, the mortgage holders would be due their share. The details of the write down and the appreciation sharing could be tailored to different circumstances. But one way to give lenders a share of the upside would be to pay back some of the write down if the house is later sold.
Update: Andrew brings to my attention his longer, earlier treatment of the issue. He also responds to my questions. In response to the first question, he writes:
In response to the second question:The offer would come from the lender (not borrower) in cases in which there is a stop in payment on the mortgage. Offering this on top of a standard write-down is an option that is currently not in their arsenal, a fact that many of them are not aware of (essentially ruled out by the tax code). One offers incentives for the writedown e.g. by exempting the shared appreciation strip from capital gains taxes. This is then part of the workout routine that would be far more attractive than a pure write-down, and often superior to enforcing default.
Suppose someone stops payment on their mortgage without needing to just because this offer is potentially open. They can be offered some powerful discouragement: (a) Increasing share of appreciation with increasing write down; (b) Give lenders ability to check income. There would then be a high % dedicated to the loan (you won't want this if you are doing fine or expect to recover income); potentially, have payments on the mortgage rise with income if one needs to work this angle harder.
The complete incentive system could be designed in a dynamic manner, adjusting as evidence of excessive use came to light.
Thanks, Andrew.This would be voluntary negotiation. The idea would be to set up the incentives for it in the tax code. It simply dominates current options in most circumstances.
If any of my economist friends who are working for Obama wants to defend his positions on ethanol subsidies, tariffs on Chinese goods, the Byrd amendment, etc., shoot me an email, and I will gladly post it for my blog readers. But I am not holding my breath.McCain is one of the few American politicians in either party with the courage and conviction to stand up to protectionist populism. By contrast, Obama embodies protectionism....
McCain has voted 88% of the time against bills creating trade barriers, and 90% of the time against export subsidies for US producers. Few other senators have such a splendid record.
Obama has served a much shorter time in the Senate, and avoided voting on many key issues. He has voted against trade barriers only 36% of the time. He supported export subsidies on the two occasions on which he voted, a 100% protectionist record in this regard.
In 2007, he voted to reduce visas issued to foreign workers (such as Indian software engineers), and to ban Mexican trucks on US roads. He sometimes voted for free trade - he supported the Oman Free Trade Act and a bill on miscellaneous tariff reductions and trade preference extensions. More often he voted for protectionist measures including 100% scanning of imported containers (which would make imports slower and costlier), and emergency farm spending.
In 2005 he voted to impose sanctions on China for currency manipulation, and against the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). He voted for the Byrd amendment, a disgraceful bill (later struck down by the WTO) that gifted anti-dumping duties to US producers who complained, thus making complaining more profitable than competitive production.
Obama says the North American Free Trade agreement is a bad one, and must be renegotiated. He has opposed the US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement on the bogus ground that Colombia is not protecting its trade union leaders from the drug mafia. In fact, such assassinations have fallen steadily from 205 in 2001 to just 25 last year. Obama is cynically twisting facts to woo the most protectionist US trade unions. This cannot but worry India, which may also be subjected to bogus slander and trade disadvantages.
By contrast, McCain has consistently voted for open trade. He has opposed federal curbs as well as private curbs on outsourcing to countries like India. He opposed the disgraceful Byrd amendment on anti-dumping duties. He voted against farm subsidies and labour standards for imports (which are not necessarily bad but could become a disguised form of protectionism).
Unlike Obama, McCain voted against imposing trade sanctions on China for supposedly undervaluing its currency to keep exports booming and accumulate large forex reserves. India has followed a similar policy, though with less export success than China. But if indeed India achieves big success in the future, it could be similarly targeted by US legislators and, will need people like McCain to resist.
Obama favours extensive subsidies for US farmers, hitting Third World exporters like India. This has been one of the issues on which the Doha Round of WTO is gridlocked. McCain could open the gridlock, Obama will strengthen it.
Obama also favours subsidies for converting maize to ethanol. The massive diversion of maize from food to ethanol has sent global food and fertiliser prices skyrocketing, hitting countries like India. But McCain has always opposed subsidies for both US agriculture and ethanol. While campaigning, he had the courage to oppose such subsidies even in Iowa, an agricultural state he badly needs to win if he is to become president.