Message to Senator Charles Schumer

Sir,

I refer you to my blog of 20 November 2008 here: http://dmonyar.blogspot.com/2008_11_20_archive.html. I will post this message on my blog today as well.

The idea hit me that November morning while tired and after a strong cup of coffee. The government is bailing out the wrong folks. We, the taxpayers, should get the money so that we can pay bills, put some away in savings and spend a little on necessities.

Money going to corporations bypass us taxpayers because the prevailing idea is that corporations which have been helped will help the consumers. Unfortunately, that train of thought is wrecked as is evidenced by the current state of our economy. They're not hiring (firing instead) and are trying to figure out ways to unload inventory (which we taxpayers can't afford to buy). We taxpayers have a double bullseye on us: stagnant pay and unemployment (no pay; thus, no spending).

With money going to corporations, how do we taxpayers/consumers benefit? Will the corporations make better products which they will sell to us at a lower price? No, they're in the business of making as much money as possible. No help to us. Will it cause them to hire? No, they rather sit on the money until the economy turns for the better, but the question is when. So, still no help to the taxpayers. This is the first bullseye.

The second bullseye is that we, the taxpayers, are on the hook through future tax increases to pay for this bailout. It is inevitable given the misuse of our tax money. The Treasury won't disclose where the earlier bailout money has gone. Abuse of our bailout tax dollars have been reported already. We taxpayers are getting virtually nothing for our money. If the money went to us, we'd at least could pay bills (to prevent delinquencies/foreclosures while payments passes through to corporations, aka lenders and banks), put some away to wait out the downturn (money in the banks <-- the banks get low cost funds for future prudent lending) and spend on necessary products (money is put back into the system to generate sales, consider that Walmart saw sales increases over the holiday season given their price advantage).

The obvious conclusion is that OUR tax dollars would be better spent if given to the taxpayers instead of corporations which don't provide US relief or benefit.

Sir, I met you once at Chinatown fund raising event in 2005. It was a brief handshake as you made your way through the dining room to greet the other local dignitaries. I believe my idea is one that will greatly benefit not only New York but our beloved country. Should you be in New York City soon, I hope you will grant me an audience of 15 minutes so that I can give you a more detailed outline of this proposal.

You are my Senator and have access to my President-elect Obama, who seeks positive and innovative ideas to rehabilitate and reinvigorate this country. I am sure I can persuade you of this economic solution which you could present to President-elect Obama whom we all believe and want to fix our nation's economic woes.

Having read that $7.7 trillion (NY Daily News, 25 November 2008: http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/11/25/2008-11-25_what_could_we_buy_if_we_werent_funding_t.html) is the cost of the bailout as estimated by Bloomberg News, my idea costs a smaller $1.55 trillion. Even at $3.1 trillion through doubling it to provide greater relief and help to the taxpayers, it is still less than 50% of Bloomberg News' estimates. The taxpaying people need the help more than tax-averse corporations do.

I hope you read this message and seriously consider my proposal. I am optimistic that any conversation you may have with your economic staff about this will produce various "hmmm, that's a decent out-of-the-box idea" looks. Sir, the economy has been blown out-of-the-box and we need out-of-the-box solutions.

Your fellow taxpaying American and State of New York constituent.