Friday, January 30, 2009

Guiliani--heard of the guy, can't quite place him.

This statement comes recently from a guy who about a year and a half ago, was seriously considered the top contender of a major political party for the highest office of a major superpower. He said:

"If you somehow take that bonus out of the economy, it really will create unemployment," he said on CNN's "American Morning." "It means less spending in restaurants, less spending in department stores, so everything has an impact."


This is from...CNN

The bonuses he's talking about are compensation to individuals. Yeah. Lots of money to, wait for it, not businesses. Those bonuses are, like, W-2 income. So they can and will do whatever they want. "Their money, we paid for it," to paraphrase George W. Bush. Hire a domestic employee? A dog-walker, since nobody likes scooping poop in a New York winter? (Whoo-whoo! Targeting job creation! One temporary pool boy at a summer home or kitchen help job at a time.) Or they'll just not decide to fire somebody. (You could call that "job retention"!) But obviously, I'm being silly.

Rudy's serious.

So to address what he's talking about, the bonuses are going get all spent at department stores and restaurants. You have any idea what kind of money were talking per person? Let's just say, um, nooooo, Rudy. It isn't all gonna get spent on Louis Vuitton purses and what must be really, really expensive lunches. It's going direct into the early retirement fund, because banking isn't a really "banker's hours" job, no matter what people say. Not since big banks started getting bigger. It is grueling and these folks don't want to spend their 50's and 60's still pushing products and writing off bad debt and trying to maximize revenue or whatever they do. It's going into the house, and the ex-wife's house. It's paying for the kids' college. At a really, really good school. But mostly, it's going into the retirement fund.

It is not going to buy a bunch of big screen t.v.'s, American automobiles, build swing sets in the backyard and finally get the g.d. screen door fixed. It isn't getting spent at J.C. Penney or Target. It isn't actually trickling down far enough to save or create jobs for retail or industry or any of the other major employers.

And most of these big corps doling out taxpayer-funded bonuses were headquartered....where?

Oh, yeah. Probably donated a lot to a NY mayor, once upon a time. So my question is--he thinks his line of reasoning is for real because he doesn't know any better? Or he's flinging this nonsense because he would prefer other people get the wrong impression?

2012, here he comes. (Reality, there he goes.)

No comments:

In Defense of Wonks

  Klippenstein is a good reporter and a generally good egg, but my God, the juxtaposition of housing as a problem (which can be understood i...