This isn't the "Miss me yet?" billboard, but it's close. (Photo: synthstuff.com)

You know how these things go. A story begins on the World Wide Web that seems outlandish, but there’s just enough truth to it for the idea to stick. Like payday loans for what ails your budget, there is a real connection to the waking world. And the idea spreads virally, snowballing until it becomes a mass of sticky, gooey fun – a guilty pleasure people can dive into with grasping hands. Forget Photoshop and digital image alteration and check your brain at the door.

But sometimes these stories have a way of being true

Considering President Obama’s struggles with stimulus, bailouts, Nobel prizes and universal healthcare, it comes as no surprise that some Americans have questions. That’s the real-world connection that makes the “Miss me yet” billboard so believable. But as Bob Collins of Minnesota NPR reports, it’s also quite real.

It’s on the I-35 outside Wyoming, Minnesota. As you can see from the video below, former President George W. Bush has a question for all of us: “Miss Me Yet?”

Who-what-when-where-why?

It’s unclear at this time who paid for the billboard, but I think it is safe to say that Mr. Bush has better things to do with his time. Collins claims that his currently investigating the matter and will inform the nation once the secret is uncovered. My guess is that those who posted this “Miss me yet?” billboard gem won’t be too far removed from the people who erected the Barack Hussein Obama turban billboard. Yes, I chose the word “erected” intentionally, as certain folks get excited by racial malice. I am not one of those people; I just report about it, then taint the notion of impartiality with my rhapsodical wax.

Or did the “Miss me yet?” billboard come from ironic Obama supporters

I’ll leave that one to falsely accused ironists like Alanis Morrisette. I’m just a payday loans blogger today.

Related Video:

It was designed to break your heart. And its falling value has an impact on all our lives. (Photo: flickr.com)

Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, U.S. government spending – financed by government borrowing – has skyrocketed, resulting in a prolonged decline of the value of the dollar. This trend escalated with the Federal Reserve’s reaction to the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis and the dramatic drop in interest rates. Today, with interest rates still low and government borrowing still rising, the dollar continues its steady decline. Recently the dollar has reached new all time lows against the Euro and other major currencies resulting in a lot of concern about the dollar’s viability internationally. It has even been argued in some quarters that the United States may have its national credit rating lowered.

Does it Really Matter to Most Americans?

Economic optimists point out that most Americans do not travel abroad for significant periods of time, meaning that currency conversion rates do not matter to them. They also argue that a weak dollar helps the economy by stimulating American exports. Both of these arguments are valid, but they fail to take into account the ways that a declining dollar does affect the domestic economy. While your average American may not have to worry about converting his cash into euros, your average American does buy a lot of imported goods and though the weak dollar does help exports, exports constitute less than 15 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), so only a few benefit.

The Weak Dollar and the Cost of Imports

Goods that are imported into the United States, even if the trade is denominated in dollars, are directly affected by the value of the dollar. The weaker the dollar is, the less value it has abroad, so those countries exporting to the United States have to increase the price to compensate for this. Among the most vital of these imports is oil, upon which the United States is largely dependent. A weaker dollar means that oil and all of its derivatives increase in price. The same can be said for all imported goods, from clothing and textiles to components in ostensibly “American-made” products. The lower the dollar, the more expensive all imported goods are to the average American consumer.

Dollar Value and Foreign Investment

The United States has been heavily reliant on foreign investment for decades now. Foreign investment in government debt is what keeps the federal government solvent. Similarly, foreign investment in our financial system – banks, major corporations, securities markets – is also essential to keeping the economy sound and money circulating through the system. However, since virtually all of these investments are denominated in dollars, a declining dollar discourages foreign investment. Since the U.S. requires this foreign investment, the logical answer is to make American investments more attractive by increasing the interest rates, but this significantly hurts domestic debtors.

Yes, the Declining Value of the Dollar Does Matter

Although most Americans do not have to worry about directly converting their dollars to foreign currencies, virtually all Americans do have to deal with the increased price of imported goods, from gasoline to running shoes. The point that the weak dollar helps American exports is also valid, but the export sector amounts to less than 15 percent of the economy, whereas the more expensive imports affect virtually all Americans. Further, since the government and financial industry have to encourage continued foreign investment, it means that interest rates are likely to increase, putting increased pressure on domestic debtors, from mortgage holders to people with large credit card bills.

Is There Anything You Can Do About This?

The factors behind the declining dollar are macroeconomic in nature and the key player, the Federal Reserve, is not directly accountable to the public. Those with large investment portfolios may want to consider diversifying some of their holdings into assets denominated in other currencies to serve as a hedge, but this is only an option for a minority of Americans. There may also be some value in investing your retirement and savings in international mutual funds, those based on foreign assets. Otherwise, there are few options available to your average American. Nevertheless, it is important to understand that the declining dollar does directly impact you.

Mortgage loan modification programs aim to make these signs less popular. Image from Flikr.

Consumers seeking debt relief may be one step closer, if the president has his way. President Obama is set to revamp financial products in an effort to protect borrowers from delinquency and foreclosures. The recession has brought the number of defaulting loans and people losing their houses to record highs. It caused the lending and banking crash, that pushed banks and lenders perilously close to complete financial ruin.

The goal of the government is to make the loan process as simple as possible for consumers. They cite the intricate and wordy loans of the past as the number one cause people defaulted on their loans in the first place.  Their vision is to create an easy loan process that works with the customer instead of the lending institution.  The Obama administration has taken a lesson from the new 401(k) procedure where a record number of companies are automatically signing new employees up for the retirement savings plan, unless they opt out. The same ease of inclusion that is a characteristic of 401(k)s will hopefully be enacted with home loans.

The financial overhaul

Several weeks ago, Obama unveiled his plan to overhaul the financial regulatory system by creating a Consumer Financial Protection Agency. The purpose of the agency would be to “monitor consumer financial products and revamp the entire home-loan process.”  In March the administration began embarking on its $50 billion plan to aid lenders in modifying home loans and lowering payments for customers.

The Consumer Financial Protection Agency is the next step to making housing affordable. As spokesperson Gary Ulbreicht stated, “The initial stimulus for the lending industry was for short-term help. … It’s meant for people who are currently in trouble and need assistance. The Consumer Financial Protection Agency is for long-term change. …Hopefully, it will successfully monitor financial actions of lenders for years to come.”

Critics of the plan

Critics of the plan maintain that its slow start will deter any real change for desperate consumers.  Many lending counselors are criticizing the plan, stating that lenders and banks nationwide are reluctant to cooperate.  Currently, approximately 50,000 homeowners are enrolled in a three-month trial mortgage modification program under this plan. However, initial goals of the administration were for 4 million households to be on board by this time.

Critics are also saying that the plan is paternalistic and would “restrict borrowers’ options and make loans harder to get and potentially more expensive.”  Making loans more difficult to procure would make consumer debt relief impossible.  Once that happens, people will stop spending again and less money will be fueling the economy. This situation could create an even greater recession for the entire market.

Still help is needed

Despite criticisms, the reality is that help is needed in the mortgage arena.  Although there is a fear that the Obama administration is limiting loan products and thwarting innovation, if they can make loans more affordable for the many homeowners in serious financial trouble, it might be worth it. Once homeowners can get a handle on their mortgages, they will be able to  work on complete debt relief.

Possibly the standard “30-year fixed mortgage” that so many critics are decrying is just the thing the nation needs to get back on its feet.  Kevin Iverson, mortgage broker for Reed Mortgage Corp., stated, “This country’s home owning pool was built on the 30-year fixed mortgage. …It worked to create a steady base of homeowners who could pay their bills and at the end of that time, owned their homes. Why not get rid of all the diverse and confusing loans and return to the old model?  It worked for the country once, why won’t it work again?”

While the old “fight fire with fire” saying doesn’t really make any sense, it does make sense to fight the internet with the internet. In response to all of the outlandish rumors and lies surrounding health care legislation, the Obama administration has launched Reality Check, a web site that addresses health care legislation concerns — fabricated or not.

Not surprisingly, at the top of the Reality Check site is a video addressing “the malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors.”

Why such a hot topic?

I often get frustrated when reading about the arguments against the Obama administration’s health care reform program. So far, all I have seen are arguments against fabricated claims, not the actual legislation. Sure, people take exception to the cost, which isn’t going to be covered with cheap loans or out of thin air, but the only individuals who will be paying for health care reform are those who make more than $350,000 a year.

These are the six videos that appear on Reality Check, addressing the main concerns that have popped up in various media:

• Reform will stop “rationing” — not increase it
• The “euthanasia” distortion on help for families
• Vets’ health care is safe and sound
• Reform will benefit small business — not burden it
• Your medicare is safe, and stronger with reform
• You can keep your own insurance

Paying for priorities

The Republican Party is falling back on two of the main blocks in the party foundation: freedom and money. Although the party is bound and determined to prove that health care reform will infringe on people’s freedom, that simply isn’t true. For people who want to keep the insurance they currently have, nothing will change. For people who want to use the national health care option, there are rules and regulations very similar to a private health insurance plan.

People opposed to health care reform also argue about the cost, but what could possibly be more important than the health and well-being of our country’s citizens? The same people who jump at the chance to spend billions fighting wars in other countries won’t even listen to arguments for why we should take care of our own people at home, and they’re willing to lie and cheat to stop it. Mind-blowing.

More resources on Reality Check

Besides the videos debunking the major myths, the Reality Check web site also has a section on consumer protections and a Frequently Asked Questions section.

Before you jump on the bandwagon, one way or the other, I highly recommend you head to Reality Check to watch short, simple, clear, accurate videos that address questions about health care reform. If you keep an open mind and focus on the well-being of individuals rather than politics, talking points or party affiliation, you just might learn something. You still might not agree with health care reform, but at least you’ll have your facts straight.

You can also sign up for newsletters and share Reality Check on your Facebook page with the click of a button.

The Obama administration has garnered some praise and faced significant heat for the way in which it has handled cash advance bailouts and faced down executive bonuses. I hope they’re prepared for citizen revolt and the necessity for martial law soon, however.

That’s what they’ll get if the Pay For Performance Act of 2009 legislation makes it through as it is currently conceived. All of you know what will break loose. Clarice Feldman blogs for American Thinker that the United States government wants to regulate ALL pay levels, not just those of executives. She cites Byron York’s recent piece in the D.C. Examiner:

The House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the “Pay for Performance Act of 2009,” would impose government controls on the pay of all employees — not just top executives — of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

The measure is not limited just to those firms that received the largest sums of money, or just to the top 25 or 50 executives of those companies. It applies to all employees of all companies involved, for as long as the government is invested. And it would not only apply going forward, but also retroactively to existing contracts and pay arrangements of institutions that have already received funds.

In addition, the bill gives Geithner the authority to decide what pay is “unreasonable” or “excessive.” And it directs the Treasury Department to come up with a method to evaluate “the performance of the individual executive or employee to whom the payment relates.

Bailed out? Big Brother controls your pay rate now!