AOL Money & Finance

Budgets posts

Feed

State governments look for hand-outs

There is increasing evidence that states like California and Michigan, which are running huge budget deficits, will need federal aid to keep their essential services operating. They could plummet an already battered federal budget billions of dollars further into a deficit.

The need for state bailout funds seems to be growing and growing quickly. According to MSNBC, "In Ohio, which has shed 100,000 jobs in the past year, Gov. Ted Strickland (D) and his budget team spend a lot of time delivering bad news to constituents and plotting ways to wring money from the federal government." The state's two-year budget deficit could rise to well over $7 billion.

In places like Ohio and Michigan, matters are only going to get worse. Big industrial states are extremely likely to lose more jobs and businesses as sectors from automotive to retailing may see some companies disappear completely.

The issue that becomes more troubling every day is whether there is a finite limit to what the federal government can spend to save the national economy. Of course there is, but no one knows that number, which means no one can predict which industries and municipalities will get capital.

With so many beggars, the new Congress and administration are going to run low on hand-outs.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

Presidential candidates say an extra $700 billion changes nothing

With both candidates trying to convince voters that they view an exploding national debt as a serious problem, the taxpayers' $700 billion bailout of the financials has given Senators Obama and McCain a chance to show their true colors.

And deficit hawks won't like what they see. McCain said that the surprise $700 billion dollar expense doesn't change his conviction that the Bush tax cuts should be extended. He added, hilariously, that he thinks he can still balance the budget. Meanwhile, Obama told The New York Times that the $700 billion item essentially doesn't change any of his plans either.

Maybe someone can help me out on this: Did either of these candidates have such roomy budgets that an extra $700 billion here or there isn't material enough to throw things off? I suspect not, and I'm calling both their bluff.

As with any budget plan presented by presidential candidates, voters would do well to question the realism of the estimates being put out by either campaign. When both candidates say, with a straight face, that they can still do everything they want without changing anything in the face of a sudden expenditure like this, you pretty much have to stop listening.

Symbol Lookup
IndexesChangePrice
DJIA+44.2910,291.26
NASDAQ+15.822,166.90
S&P 500+5.501,098.51

Last updated: November 11, 2009: 10:44 PM

BloggingStocks Exclusives

Hot Stocks

DailyFinance Headlines

Latest from BloggingBuyouts

WalletPop Headlines

AOL Business News

BioHealth Investor Headlines

Sponsored Links

My Portfolios

Track your stocks here!

Find out why more people track their portfolios on AOL Money & Finance then anywhere else.

BloggingStocks Partners

More from AOL Money & Finance