If and when do you think this stimulus plan will work?

If Obama were doing that...I'd be on your side.

It seems to be exactly the wrong thing to be doing at this point. Maybe 8 years ago that would have made sense...but right now, the more spending, the better.

Spending more is what the package is all about.

You know damn well we're not talking about houses built on top of volcanoes.

The homes we are talking about are impacting all levels of Americans; poor, middle class and the wealthy.

Some financial experts are saying there's still 2.5 trillion dollars worth of values to be written down by the banks and financial institutions; that's three times more than the stimulus plan.

At this rate, we're just pissing on the fire hoping for the best.

We are talking about propping up an economy that is currently based on borrowing and spending money, by borrowing and spending MORE money.

If that's not "saving a home built on a volcano with the last of our drinking water" than I don't know what is.

Not passing the stimulus bill is also gambling with our future, and to take a line from your own repetition you don't know what will happen either.

So why do you go around saying that what they are doing is wrong because nobody knows what will happen, when you too don't know what will happen and don't know whether not doing it would make things worse?

You're missing the most important issue; our economy is headed towards a depression, and doing nothing now means "everybody" will suffer.

FACTS: The US population is about 305 million. Of that, about 135 are workers, but losing 600,000 jobs every month will impact the country's economy in ways that will be irreversible.

Creating more debt can be a bad thing, but we are now talking about economic survival. It's not simply a matter of letting the houses burn down; it means the whole country going up in flames.

Job one for our country is to save our economy; debt takes a second seat.

During WWII, our government did not worry about debt; they had to build the tools of war at any cost; it was all or nothing.

If not, we would now be speaking German or Japanese.

There would not be US of A.

-GWB

That sounds like silly buzzwords, but I'd be happy to be shown otherwise. How exactly would this plan work?

A common way to encourage savings would be to raise interest rates. Do you know what would happen if we do that? Do you think it would make things better to slow down the economy even further at this point?

Yes, Americans need to save more, but that is a long-term solution that isn't going to fix the big hole we are in. If all Americans started saving the maximum they can right now, our hole will get a lot bigger.



You have such a simplistic way of looking at this. So I'm going to give you a simple example:

Would you rather have $4 of debt and $10 a year or $0 debt and $0 a year.

You seem to act like the deficit spending is the only generational threat, and ignore that a the total collapse of the economy (which is the solution according to the people you tout) would be a generational burden as well.

If the US were to undergo an economic collapse like that of Argentina we'd be paying for it in the form of lost future revenue as well.

Taxes aren't the only way we can screw ourselves in the future, this economic crisis is a threat to the future as well. If none of those bailouts happened, I bet you and me would have lost more money over the courses of our lifetimes than the taxes we'll pay to pay for the deficit spending. I don't know this, of course, but neither do you, but you apply the ingorance argument to only one side of the debate.

I personally would rather have a job and pay 40% more taxes than not have a job. I don't know whether or not this is the choice we face but neither do you. So you can't just repeat that those who support the bailout don't know if it will work, and are gambling with your future. Those who don't support it also don't know if it's necessary and are also gambling.

No matter what is done, there is risk involved and the ignorance argument works both ways.



Are you trying to argue against the bailout or score political points? What on earth does this have to do with the validity of the bailouts?



Well this is just not "the exact same thing". Yes, the public deficit spending is a grave danger, and can be another bubble that bursts on us. But no, it's NOT the reason we are in this hole.



Well then it's a bit hypocritical to deride others for repetition if that's your only stock and store.

Do you know that it will hurt generations to come more than it would if we do nothing? Or are you just repeating this and clicking your ruby slippers?

Make up your mind, you say you fear total economic collapse and then in the next breath seem to want it to happen.

So which is it? Your prophets of doom (hawkeye, Peter Schiff) want the collapse. They don't see it as a problem, they see it as a solution.



Ok, so now you are suddenly the one who does know what is what? You go on about how "nobody" can know to criticize action taken, but then make claims like this that are predicated on knowing that the action is not helpful.

Oh I'm just full of contradictions Robert, continue on.

What has GW Bush ever done anything right? His talk about mushroom clouds couldn't happen, because Saddam didn't have any WMDs. On top of all that, he chased out the UN weapon's inspectors to start his illegal war. Iraq was never a threat to the US or Americans; only in the minds of dangerous deranged men.

I was merely pointing out the fear mongering.

Mr.Gentel -That's not what I read:

Note:

Blog About SubmitThe Foundry
Stimulus 101: The Pelosi-Reid-Obama Debt Plan
Posted January 27th, 2009 at 8.52am in Ongoing Priorities.
With countless news stories, papers, editorials and experts giving their view of why Congress should or shouldn’t enact the Pelosi-Reid-Obama Debt Plan, we thought it would be helpful to give you a short index of why spending does not equal stimulus.

HIGH COST TO AMERICAN TAXPAYERS

After Congress appropriates the FY’09 omnibus bill, they may have spent over $1.4 Trillion in less than one month!
The current “stimulus bill” will be the LARGEST SPENDING BILL EVER enacted by Congress, making the New Deal look small, accounting for inflation.
The “Stimulus” Bills Your Family " $825 Billion is equivalent to borrowing $10,520 from EVERY FAMILY IN AMERICA. This money has to be paid back.
If all families were asked to equally shoulder the burden of $825 Billon, this debt would be equivalent to what they roughly spend on food, clothing, and health care in an entire year.
If Government Spending solved recessions, we would never have recessions.
BAD IDEAS " “THE DEVIL IN DISGUISE”
The hidden liberal policy agenda inside the ‘stimulus bill’…

Over $142 Billion in Federal education funds: Nearly double the total outlays for the Dept. of Education in 2007 " making good on Reid-Pelosi-Obama education promises to the NEA.
$87 Billion Medicaid bailout: Medicaid is funded by a formula that matches state spending levels with federal dollars. If we keep bailing states out, they will have every incentive to continue irresponsible spending. Fiscally responsible taxpayers in Indiana are now paying for fiscally irresponsible bureaucrats in Illinois.
Expanded Medicaid coverage and SCHIP: Reid-Pelosi-Obama are enacting a nationalized health care policy with no debate. The government will soon be responsible for more health care spending than the private sector, i.e. socialized medicine.
Green Jobs?: The myth of ‘green jobs’ merely means replacing one job lost, with a new job that fits the left’s agenda. It is a zero sum game. More than doubling spending, the stimulus also has over $35 billion for the Dept. of Energy. DOE’s current budget is $23.8 billion.
Family Planning and birth control for children, immigrants and the wealthy, which could also be used as a backdoor to allow federal funding of abortions. How is this stimulus? **UPDATE: Nancy Pelosi agrees this is not stimulus and has removed it from the bill proving these measures are allergic to sunshine.**
Redistribution: Refundable Tax Credits for people who don’t pay taxes.
Pork Spending: Digital TV Coupons ($650 Million), Gov’t Cars ($600 Million), Nat’l Endowment for the Arts ($50 Million), Repairs to National Mall ($200 Million, including $21m for sod).
BAD RESULTS

No Jobs: While they have not been able to support these claims, Pelosi/Obama promise between 3 & 4 million jobs, yet House Tax Committee staff can’t estimate even ONE job will be created.
Ineffective: The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 52% of the spending in the ‘stimulus bill’ can even be spent by the end of FY’10. Well short of the 75% benchmark set by President Obama.
“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work.” " FDR’s Treasury Sec. Henry Morgenthau
*****************************************************************

Can you answer these objections, Mr.Gentel.

I am ALARMED at the 142 Billion in Federal Education Funds. When I can get the breakdown on how these funds will be spent, I am sure that I can show with evidence and documentation, that this money(especially if any of it is directed towards elementary and high school education is largely a waste of money. I am sure that you are aware that Millions have been directed towards Elementary and High Schools since the Great Society YET there has been no improvement in achievement scores.

Will do. ;-)



If it's right, it's not fear mongering. But as you say, nobody knows, right?

So when you predict the doom and gloom in the future as a result of the bailout are you fear mongering or do you somehow know what you claim nobody does?

You really are full of contradictions maporche. Your arguments work against your position just as well as they do against the positions you employ them against.

If you claim they are fear mongering then so are you when you predict the doom and gloom that this will cause. You compared the arguments for stimulus as using the last of our drinking water to save houses on a volcano.

Well how the hell is that not just your own version of ignorant fear mongering as well? You compared the stimulus arguments to the Bush administration's mushroom cloud, do you know that volcanoes create mushroom clouds?

I have never said that I want a collapse, and you are in no position to know what I want outside of my statements. My position is that the old order IS collapsing, that it will not/can not be saved, and I am in a hurry to get on with birthing what ever comes next. This clinging to the way things were, and can not be now, is sad and harmful. Humans have done so well because we have the capacity to be smart, to adapt to changes.......modern humans don't seem very smart or easily adaptable compared to our ancestors, at least to me. We can argue the point, but it is unfair of you to claim that those of us who don't agree with you are idiots and/or sadistic. I don't want to see people in pain, I wish we did not need to be in pain, but we do. Pain is a teacher, we are in pain because we have done something that is wrong or bad for us, the economic pain is with us to teach us. It will go away after we have learned our lesson and make the changes that we need to make. You Robert, and a whole lot of our leaders, want only to avoid pain. You are willing to go to great lengths and great expense to attempt to avoid the pain, but it will not work. It will only eat time and money. The pain does not go away until whe make the necessary changes.

Robert you have successfully beaten me down to a bloody stump. Thank you.

I have no retort; my knowledge is inadequate to argue you. I know nothing.

Have you stated that the collapse is the solution? Yes.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect you to find the "solution" desirable. You said you are a socialist and that the capitalist system needs to collapse.



So you do want the collapse, you see it as an inevitability and don't want it to be fought. I don't, I don't see it as the solution like you do.



I don't claim that those who don't agree with me are idiots. I'd have the same low opinion of your intellect regardless of whether or not you agree with me.

hawkeye, Like in most crisis, not everyone is guilty of having caused this crisis. Many of those who have lost their jobs and homes and those who are going to be losing their jobs and homes must look to our government to minimize more pain to the citizens of our country; that's their job description. It's about security.

Doing nothing now means this trend will only get worse, and many more families will suffer.

If Americans feared Saddam and the security of our country; this one really deserves our attention.

If Americans and our congress were willing to spend $10 billion every month in Iraq to fight this war going on now for six years, why are they questioning spending money to help ourselves?

Where is the common sense and rationale?

we have violated children's generational rights when we obligate them to pay for stuff, when we don't let them decide for themselves what they do with their lives, decide for themselves what to build. It does not matter if we think what we buy and bill to them will be good for them. We don't even claim that, we spend our kids money on ourselves, it is the height of immorality. We get all superior about our rights based morals, about letting people do what they want to do, protecting out kids from imagined harm (see all rights, abuse and child protection threads) but in truth when it comes to doing right by our kids we are scum. The WILL come to see us in this light.

This isn't my intention maporche. I think you are a very principled thinker and my intention is to get you to analyze your own arguments and improve them.

Here, I'll do it for you:



If that's your argument we'll just have to agree to disagree and I'd have no qualm with it, I personally don't know that that claim is wrong. But I do know that the arguments you are employing are deeply flawed.

You criticize the stimulus as a gamble, where we don't know the results. Well doing nothing is also a gamble and we don't know the results.

You may well be right that the stimulus is too little too late and we are going to pay the bill without the benefits it's intended to bring. I can't argue with that as we'll just have to see. But arguing that all economists should be ignored about basic economic theory just because they didn't predict how much certain institutions risked is daft. Arguing that the stimulus is a gamble while ignoring that no stimulus is also a gamble is daft. And arguing that others are merely repeating themselves in hopes it is true is also daft if you are going to employ the same tactic.

I am not trying to bludgeon you (and I'm sincerely sorry if you've felt that way), and I don't even want to change your mind, but if the arguments you use are so deeply flawed I am going to criticize the arguments.