o make right -wing radio colleagues lust for blood, let me say that I almost entirely reject their negative and vituperative message that government is the enemy and perhaps even the cause of our current crises. Like it or not, government is the only solution to spur the needed regeneration of private economic enterprise. As a people we understandably hate bailing out the banks, but if we don't have massive recapitalization, financial institutions will remain frozen, unprepared to provide credit to the economy, The question we must address is simply, what is the best way to get this credit system working again? How can we stop the foreclosures which add to the bank's burden? In major part the banks are not extending loans because the US economy is weakening and the economy is weakening because the banks aren't lending. The duration of this credit crunch will determine our economic life for many years.

As well we know our problems reach beyond housing and President Obama's task is, in large measure, to restore confidence . If anyone has the presence and skills necessary to help us shift from despair to hope, he is blessed with the rational intelligence needed and a great gift for oratory. Can you imagine the kind of leadership we would be getting had President G.W. Bush still been in office or if Senator McCain had won the presidency.

alifornia has a budget, at last, and it is one that leaves very few people happy. In an effort to close a $42 billion deficit there will be much belt-tightening during the current economic downturn.The state has been saved from insolvency but we remain far short of curing the Golden State's financial troubles. Under the new budget Californians face tax increases and spending cuts. Under the new budget we will be paying as much as $13 billion in new taxes. State spending will be cut considerably, including cutting $8.6 billion from public education. California's lawmakers, both Republicans and Democrats alike have made it clear that they despised much of the budget, yet they feared that further inaction could have been disastrous.

Highlights of the new budget include:

Up to $13 billion in new taxes by the middle of next year A one percent sales tax increase Cuts to state programs totaling $15 billion Cuts to education of nearly $9 billion, which surely won't do much to help California's stressed and ailing education system.

Much more is incorporated in the budget, but, frankly, what this all means is that a cut in state spending will result in even fewer jobs, while the increase in taxes can only further inhibit consumer spending, which means that when the state starts to grow out of the recession, we will not grow with the same energy.

Horrace Greeley, you might remember, exhorted earlier Americans to "go West". Horace, we followed you then, where to next?

A brief addition, thanks to "Common Cause and their quote from the Nobel laureate Paul Krugman. He calls the current scenario "a classic exercise in what he calls "Lemon Socialism": taxpayers bear the costs if things go wrong, but stockholders and executives get the benefit is things go right."

Frankly, what would be wrong with "us", "the people" owning the banks? If taxpayers are bearing the costs and footing the bill for rescuing the banks, why shouldn't we get ownership, at least until private buyers can be found.? Democrats are fearful of the "N" word- nationalization!

Again, we the people are becoming major owners in many of the major banks, but we have no voice in the way in which they are run!

When Congressed passed the George W. Bush $700 billion bank bailout, the goal was to rescue the banking system that had become "too big to fail". The bailed out banks certainly didn't use our money to start lending more. No, they paid out big bonuses to executives and bailed out the banks' shareholders. So we got nothing in return for our money. Is that fair?