Dr. Krugman had another good one yesterday. Let me go find it. Here it is:

“I was going to dub the new financial plan TANF 2 — temporary assistance to needy financial institutions, without, you know, any of the means-testing or work requirements involved when poor people get help.

But Jamie Galbraith (private communication) has trumped me; he says it’s the Bad Assets Relief Fund.”

BARF

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/acronyms/

Arrra! That’s hilarious – thank you for posting that URL – I needed a laugh! (And good post overall.)

Gene

“Am I wrong in believing that the final name of the stimulus bill will be the American Recovery and Reinvestment Reconciliation Act, or ARRRA? Arrr!”

Ardell, the credit was still a subsidy to the purchase and could be used to help with say renovating a fixer. But you make a good point – it could not be used at the time of purchase, “people would still need the same amount of money,” — which begs the question of how much real value the credit would provide to anyone in the housing industry aside from as a marketing item for realtors…

The credit issue has nothing to do with saving more. The credit could not/can not, be used at time of purchase. People would still need the same amount of money to buy with or without the credit.

In case you don’t have WSJ access, here’s the section:

“Democratic negotiators have also jettisoned a proposal from Georgia Republican Sen. Johnny Isakson that would have provided a $15,000 tax credit to consumers who purchase a principal residence before the end of 2009. The plan was strongly supported by the National Association of Home Builders and many Republicans.

But after Mr. Isakson and most Senate Republicans voted against the overall stimulus package Tuesday, Democrats stripped it from the final legislation. Instead, they extended an existing $7,500 tax credit for first-time homebuyers though the end of the year. The change cuts the cost of the home-buyer proposal to less than $3 billion over 10 years from more than 10 times that amount.”

“Home buyers who hoped for a $15,000 tax credit to buy a new home, as promised by the Senate, will be disappointed. A $35 billion tax credit to support home sales was jettisoned in favor of a more modest $2 billion to $3 billion proposal, which would eliminate the repayment requirement in an existing $7,500 tax credit for first-time home buyers.”

http://wsj.com/article/SB123436825805373367.html

(subscription not required)

I guess (most) people will have to save more, and buy a place they can actually afford without government assistance.

“A proposed $15,000 tax credit for homebuyers was reduced to $8,000, Baucus said. ”

I’m going to wait until something is signed at this point. I’m hugely disappointed…I can’t even begin to describe how hugely disappointed I am in this change. But let’s see what it is actually changed to, before we talk about the effect it will have. That means, let’s wait until something is signed.