18
   

Despite a bipartisan effort...

 
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:00 pm
@maporsche,
I never saw that level of vociferousness, Map. If you say there was, then I guess there was.

Still, you're getting your panties in way too tight a bunch over what are drops in the bucket.
Cycloptichorn
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:03 pm
@slkshock7,
slkshock7 wrote:

True, Cyclo, the WSJ is a fiscal conservative rag and Obama's certainly proving himelf to not have a fiscally conservative bone in his body....


Good. The Fiscal conservatives have made a mess of our economy lately.

Quote:
I don't happen to agree with WSJ 89% pork figure, but just read thru the bill and the pork is most certainly there. In addition to the $50M for the arts, you've got $650M for laggards who were too lazy to request converter coupons before analog TV signals are cut off


2.5 million more people applied for the program than they had anticipated, and there weren't enough coupons. It's not that they didn't request them in time, the program ran out of money. There's a waiting list now.
Quote:

$100M for scientific research on global warming, $60 million for the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship program and $40 million for Mth and Science Partnerships, $300M for rebates to folks buying "Energy Star" appliances,


Chump change, it's an 800 billion dollar bill, you are complaining about less than .1% of it. We spend that much in Iraq every two days. Never hear you bitching about that though.
Quote:


$100M for Non-Intrusive Inspection Technology (Cargo) (incidently this appears to be owned by an Australian company so I guess Congress is intent on spreading our tax payer dollars to help unemployment in Australia as well),


I thought you Republican pussies were all worried about terrorism? And this is going to technology to fight it? And you're complaining?
Quote:

and $79B to help states whose Governors refuse to make the hard decisions that would make their own states solvent.


Snort. You have simplified an incredibly difficult problem into nothing with this statement, and that's a stupid thing to do.

Quote:
It doesn't take any digging at all to find that this bill is rampant with pork and needs some severe surgery before it should be supported by any fiscally responsible congressman.


mmm hmm. See, the country isn't being ran by your team, because your side has proven themselves incompetent. So your complaints are pretty weak.

Perhaps if Republicans had done a better job managing things when they were in charge, their concerns would be taken more seriously now. But they didn't, they wrecked the place, and now we have to clean up the mess. Nobody's looking to hear from the people who wrecked the place, on the best way to clean it up...

Cycloptichorn
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:08 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


I thought you Republican pussies were all worried about terrorism?


My, my Cyclotroll... your panties are really bunched up today!
I love how you are sweating what PrezBO is doing to this country.
You and your ilk made a big time mistake when you backed O boy.

On the bright side, your pain and suffering is entertaining.

http://www.athenswater.com/images/PrezBO.jpg
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:11 pm
@H2O MAN,
I'm wondering just how many ways a guy with your limited intelligence can paraphrase this meme.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:15 pm
@FreeDuck,
All the (primary source) information you'd ever want about the stimulus package
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:20 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:

One day you will be drawing your 'entitlement' check just like everyone else. And you won't bitch about it then. Until the day I see Republicans turning down their piece of our social programs, I really could care less about the bitching.


This would crack me up if it wasn’t so scary. For you speak the truth here, don’t you, Cyclops?

This is the 'progressive' wet dream, isn't it? To turn the US into another European socialist-democracy where every citizen is dependent on the government in some manner or another?

Where we all get an entitlement check in one form or another, where the best 'job' one can find is one working for the government? But that’s only if you really want to work; if not, the government (but in reality, those still paying taxes) will take care of your food, medical, and housing needs.

What libs such as yourself never seem to figure out is the government does not produce anything of value. They don’t manufacture anything, or raise income on their own. They only take money from those who already have it.

Someday, the gravy train just might dry up.

Until then, I'll continue paying my taxes (in all the forms they come in) while people like you cash in on my hard work...
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:21 pm
@JTT,
"Drops in the bucket" !?!?!?!?!?

Now you're losing it JTT. Billions of dollars BORROWED by our government should NEVER be talked about so casually.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:23 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cyclops....stop this 'chump change' BULLSHIT.

You realize that they are borrowing this money right? You realize that every penny we borrow NOW will make it that much more difficult to fix/respond to these types of problems in the future.

People OUR age are getting fucked in the ass and saddled with debt that we'll have to pay back.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:25 pm
@A Lone Voice,
Quote:
What libs such as yourself never seem to figure out is the government does not produce anything of value.


... he says as he cruises down the Interstate __, pulls off on State __ and drives up to his dirt driveway on city paved streets.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:26 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

Yes, I was extremely frustrated about GWB's ENTIRE presidency. Well beyond my current level of frustration.


Well, I won't agree that I was frustrated over the ENTIRE presidency, but I was extremely frustrated over the lack of fiscal restraint and promotion of additional entitlements that we saw during GWB's administration as well as incompetency in some of the administration of things that the government needed to be doing.

But why don’t you (and others) who have some strong opinions about what fiscal responsibility looks like and should be, come over here and help express that. Or at least tag and follow along.

There has to be a better way to run this railroad than what either the Republicans or Democrats have been doing:
http://able2know.org/topic/113196-155#post-3554876
0 Replies
 
slkshock7
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:27 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cyclo,
We're talking about pork in the bill, and whether or not a particular earmark will achieve the goals of the bill, which the President continually reiterates is to generate millions of jobs. Perhaps you can explain to me how issuing hundreds of converter coupons contributes to that goal? Or how giving scholarships and rebates does so? Or buying new technological devices (which may be warranted and acceptable in a routine appropriations bill but doesn't stimulate the economy or add jobs in any way shape or fashion).

And I'll argue that the country was ran into this mess by the Congress your party controlled and have as much validity in my argument as you in yours that a Repub-controlled president did it.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:27 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
People OUR age are getting fucked in the ass and saddled with debt that we'll have to pay back


You can pay this back easily, the costs for the illegal invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, well not so quickly.
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:30 pm
@JTT,
Quote:

Re: A Lone Voice (Post 3554845)
Quote:
-$7 billion for modernizing federal buildings.
-$600 million to purchase cars for the Federal government
-$650 million for those digital TV coupons (adding to the millions already spent)
-
But here is the worst part:

$252 billion in pure entitlement spending:

-$81 billion in Medicaid
-$36 billion in expanded unemployment benefits
-$20 billion in food stamps
-$83 billion in 'earned income credit', which are tax rebates' for those who don't pay taxes.

I don't think this is what President Obama had in mind when he said his stimulus package was going to be pork free


Ummmmm, this ain't pork.


It's not the infrastructure recovery bill Obama was promising us. But you bring up a great point; 'progressives' will not look at this as pork, since it's not money dedicated to, let's say, a museum celebrating the mafia. (I think money for that is in there, btw, but only a few million. But hey, what's a couple million, right?)

But it is pure entitlement spending. Obama did not talk about entitlement spending to this degree when he spoke of his recovery plan.

Entitlement spending won't create jobs. It won't help the economy. It WILL create inflation in a few years that is going to hurt all of us, including the poor.

If Obama and congress want to pass an entitlement bill, go ahead and pass it. They have the power now, they have the votes.

Why do they feel the need to trick the American public?
slkshock7
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:39 pm
@JTT,
JTT,

ummm....you realize that, at $800B, this stimulus bill will cost more than the Afghan and Iraq wars combined...
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  3  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:39 pm
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:
But here is the worst part:

$252 billion in pure entitlement spending:

-$81 billion in Medicaid
-$36 billion in expanded unemployment benefits
-$20 billion in food stamps
-$83 billion in 'earned income credit', which are tax rebates' for those who don't pay taxes.

I don't think this is what President Obama had in mind when he said his stimulus package was going to be pork free.

How is entitlement spending "pork"? Have you simply redefined "pork" to mean any government spending you don't approve of?

The purpose of a stimulus bill is simple: to stimulate the economy. To jumpstart an economy at risk of freezing into stagnancy by injecting capital into the system that will be spent immediately on projects, products and services that create US jobs and small business profits.

Giving money in tax cuts to middle/upper-class people who will save it does not fulfill this function. (Yes, eventually, if enough people save enough, banks might become more liquid again and lend out more money again - but this is long-term when short-term impetus is needed, and wouldn't happen in any case as long as the banking system itself isn't fixed and keeps bleeding billions into existing toxic credits.)

Spending it on infrastructure does fulfill this function, as the money's spent immediately on hiring US workers and buying US building materials. But there's only so many infrastructural projects that building can start on right away this year.

Spending it on Medicaid, unemployment benefits and food stamps is stimulus pur sang. It may be politically tricky because the Republicans are always ready to warn people that the Dems are giving away money to lazy welfare queens and immigrants - but purely economically speaking it's one of the most effective ways to achieve the purpose of the stimulus. The money is spent immediately on mostly US-produced foodstuffs and basics, which creates jobs and pumps the money through into the economy on as close to 1:1 basis as you can get for your stimulus dollar.
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:44 pm
@JTT,
Quote:

... he says as he cruises down the Interstate __, pulls off on State __ and drives up to his dirt driveway on city paved streets.


Do you know that in CA little of the money we pay in gasoline and road taxes actually goes to fix roads? We have had to pass bonds to have basic road repair needs addressed, because the dems in charge of our state have mismanaged our spending so bad.

In fact, we've had to pass bonds for most of our basic state government services. Which my grandchildren will be paying on into their old age.

I have no problem paying taxes for good government. But when I see the waste, the overpaid government employees, the way our state and federal government (both repubs and dems at the federal level) have misspent tax dollars, I realize I'm throwing my money down a rat hole.

The only government entities I've seen make good use of tax dollars are small, local governments. Not big cities; they are just as bad and corrupt, in some cases, as the worst states. But small cities still seem to be accountable to the local taxpayer.
One day, the young people in this country are going to organize and get pissed at the Boomers and all the waste they've caused. Woe to us when that finally happens...
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:53 pm
Isn't an "economic stimulus package" pretty much entirely "unnecessary" discretionary spending? Kinda by definition?

IMO we ought ta be funneling all this into research, though.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  4  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 03:59 pm
@maporsche,
Your double standards are amazing, Maporsche.

Cyclops specifically quoted a total of $500 million in the stimulus package that slkshock complained about, and called it "chump change" - and you're furious, calling it BULLSHIT to talk that way.

You know how much that is? That's $1.60 per American. Paid once. Period. Add interest over the years and make it $3 per American.

"BULLSHIT" to call that chump change, you say -- and meanwhile, get this, on the other thread, you vociferously argue that tax cuts in the package that will provide an extra $40 in people's paychecks - EVERY MONTH - are meaningless, a "joke", something people won't "even notice".

I guess you've got your mind made up about what conclusion you want to reach, and you'll just adjust your double standards as much as you need to reach it.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  3  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 04:05 pm
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:
It's not the infrastructure recovery bill Obama was promising us.

Obama didn't promise an "infrastructure recovery bill"; he promised an economical stimulus package to help the economy. Infrastructure was always just going to be one of the means to do so. You're just making stuff up now.

A Lone Voice wrote:
Entitlement spending won't create jobs. It won't help the economy.

Is that a joke? What do you think people do with those unemployment benefits? They will buy food with them. Pay their bills. That money goes straight back into the economy - creating jobs. Which is more than what you can say for the Republicans' main proposals, like cutting taxes for higher-income people.
nimh
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jan, 2009 04:14 pm
Building a stimulus package - what kind of spending actually works best?

This chart comes courtesy of Prof. James K. Galbraith: December 8, 2008

------------

BANG FOR THE BUCK
What a dollar of stimulus puts back into the economy when spent on...


http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2009/01/bang-for-the-buck.jpg

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 10/21/2019 at 12:05:08