Talkin’ 2 Myself
Eminem released a new CD in June. There is a track on the album titled “Talkin’ 2 Myself.” Sometimes I feel the exact same way:
Can anybody hear me yeah, I guess I keep talking to myself
Feels like I’m going insane, am I the one who’s crazy?
The president recently signed the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act. I might favor this type of reform if the fraudulent payments it intends to target were recovered in a cost-effective manner. But is this law even needed?
Here’s a quote from the White House Blog:
Last year, improper payments by the Federal Government added up to $110 billion.
If a publicly owned corporation misplaced $110 billion dollars, it would be more than reprimanded — it would be bankrupt and out of business.
This legislation shows in unadulterated clarity the inherent flaws of government. The federal agencies responsible for this irresponsible behavior will be fined and face “penalties and other repercussions,” but I wonder who exactly the federal government thinks pays for penalties levied on federal agencies.
And people wonder why consumer confidence is low.
$110B is 2.5% of revenue. Yes, the number is big, and probably low, but 2.5% probably wouldn’t sink a company.
Comment by Papillon — July 29, 2010 @ 2:50 p.m.
Good point. But certainly there would be an administration change.
Comment by Joseph Steelman — July 29, 2010 @ 4:32 p.m.
I’m not sure what you mean, Joseph. Do you think this law is a good idea or not?
How much of these improper payments derived from the wars abroad?
Also, I’m sure you make a clear and coherent link between the White House’s recognition of the scale of improper payments and consumer confidence. I can sketch the argument but I don’t know how you make those links. Clarify?
Comment by Eapen Thampy — July 31, 2010 @ 2:51 a.m.
Also, I find it awkward that you are willing to cite Eminem by name but not Barack Obama.
Comment by Eapen Thampy — July 31, 2010 @ 2:52 a.m.
You can’t use His full name (B-H-O). Repent.
Comment by iLuvObama08 — July 31, 2010 @ 10:31 p.m.
Joe Steelman is delightful!
Comment by Ace Harnbison — July 31, 2010 @ 10:40 p.m.
I’m always hesitant to say any law is a good idea without reading the language of the entire statute…which I didn’t do in this case. Also, I am entirely skeptical of its ability to accomplish it’s said goal.
The loss of revenue that is highlighted by this legislation confirms what most people suspect, that the federal government has accountability issues. Consumer confidence is not a short-term function, any consumer decision (theoretically) is a cost-benefit analysis of discounted future consumption patterns. To properly discount future consumption patterns an individual has to form expectations of future consumer climates and prices.The lack of accountability in the federal government influences those expectations; huge (unfunded) entitlement expenditures combined with already large deficits can be attributed to higher costs of future consumption (across the board). When this administration’s policies begin to be capitalized into tax receipts the only cost that will decrease is the opportunity cost of leisure.
Comment by Joseph Steelman — August 2, 2010 @ 12:45 p.m.
I have felt like I have been “talking 2 myself” for years, Joe (some of it may have to do with you)! However, I agree with you about consumer confidence particularly when you consider that mistrust in government is at an all time high and this kind of behavior undoubtedly contributes to it.
Comment by Sarah Steelman — August 4, 2010 @ 6:09 p.m.