More and more economist are coming out against Stimilus Bill.

[NYBamaFan]

Kind of like the people trashing the stimulus package?

Kind of like the people who are supporting a package that they have not read?

 

[jthomas666]

If you have not read it, you have no idea, but stick with the sarcasm. It is far more effective than actual debate.

Oh, get over yourself. There are these things called summaries, that extract major information from exceptionally long documents. And if you read summaries from various sources, you end up with a pretty good idea of what's going on. Keeps you from having to read pages and pages of things like this:

(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
(1) Section 1324(b)(2) of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘or 6428’’ and inserting ‘‘6428, or 6432,’’.
(2) Section 54A(c)(1)(B) is amended by striking ‘‘subpart C’’ and inserting ‘‘subparts C and J’’.
(3) Sections 54(c)(2), 1397E(c)(2), and 1400N(l)(3)(B) are each amended by striking ‘‘and I’’ and inserting ‘‘, I, and J’’.
(4) Section 6401(b)(1) is amended by striking ‘‘and I’’ and inserting ‘‘I, and J’’.
(5) The table of subparts for part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the following new item: ‘‘Subpart J. Taxable bond option for governmental bonds.’’
(6) The table of sections for subchapter B of chapter 65, as amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
‘‘Sec. 6432. Credit for qualified bonds allowed to issuer on advance basis.’’.

I'm sure that reading through that made you feel all tingly, but it doesn't really increase your understanding of the package. But it lets you get all high-falutin' with statements like "If you have not read it, you have no idea"; so by all means, stay on your high horse.

Is it a perfect bill? Far from it. Obama, IMO, made a grave error in letting the House write the bill (Frankly, Pelosi poses more of a threat to his administration than the Republicans). The infrastructure spending works for me--I like the provision that US steel must be used; I'm good with the education spending focused on building new schools; that spending will have immediate and long term benefits. I'm not as thrilled with the education spending to address budget shortfalls, but that's almost a necessary evil. There's little point in building new schools if you have to lay off teachers because you stupidly fund education through sales tax.

Overall, the tax cuts are too targeted for my tastes; more general tax cuts are more likely to produce sustained relief. Tax breaks for making your home more energy efficient--OK, i guess. Tax cuts on car sales tax? Not so much. That may give a short term boost, but there's no way it will generate enough sales to help American car makers. Unfortunately, there's no effective way to give UAW a clue via legislation.

I'd like further justification for the provisions on making federal buildings more energy efficient and the expansion of unemployment and food stamps.

Should we scrap it and start over? I dunno. Based on two key indices (the Dow Jones and my 401k balance), the economy continues to slide. The worse the economy gets, the harder recovery becomes. (You advocated a bank bailout of some form when thing first went south, though I can't recall if you were satisfied with that finished product at the time.) If I seriously thought that a substantially better bill could be produced quickly, I'd probably be content to wait a little longer. But more than likely, things would get drawn out and the next generation bill wouldn't be substantially better than what we have now.

Does that cover every widdle provision of the bill? No. Does that invalidate my considered opinion? No. Sorry.

PS. Dem pundit Paul Begala has an interesting suggestion:

If Republican politicians are so deeply opposed to President Obama's economic recovery plan, they should refuse to take the money. After all, if you think all that federal spending is damaging, there are easy ways to reduce it: Don't take federal money.

PPS-You must have a crappy connection--I downloaded the thing in seconds.

 

[tidepws]

PS. Dem pundit Paul Begala has an interesting suggestion:

Could I just not pay federal income tax or pay a reduced amount for mandated services?

That would reduce the amount of wasteful federal spending.

 

[Bamaro]

Could I just not pay federal income tax or pay a reduced amount for mandated services?

That would reduce the amount of wasteful federal spending.

or it would make the debt larger. Since when have taxes and spending been connected.

 

[tidepws]

Very true. I'm giving the government way too much credit.

 

[NYBamaFan]

...Is it a perfect bill? Far from it. Obama, IMO, made a grave error in letting the House write the bill (Frankly, Pelosi poses more of a threat to his administration than the Republicans). The infrastructure spending works for me--I like the provision that US steel must be used; I'm good with the education spending focused on building new schools; that spending will have immediate and long term benefits. I'm not as thrilled with the education spending to address budget shortfalls, but that's almost a necessary evil. There's little point in building new schools if you have to lay off teachers because you stupidly fund education through sales tax.

Overall, the tax cuts are too targeted for my tastes; more general tax cuts are more likely to produce sustained relief. Tax breaks for making your home more energy efficient--OK, i guess. Tax cuts on car sales tax? Not so much. That may give a short term boost, but there's no way it will generate enough sales to help American car makers. Unfortunately, there's no effective way to give UAW a clue via legislation.

I'd like further justification for the provisions on making federal buildings more energy efficient and the expansion of unemployment and food stamps.

Should we scrap it and start over? I dunno. Based on two key indices (the Dow Jones and my 401k balance), the economy continues to slide. The worse the economy gets, the harder recovery becomes. (You advocated a bank bailout of some form when thing first went south, though I can't recall if you were satisfied with that finished product at the time.) If I seriously thought that a substantially better bill could be produced quickly, I'd probably be content to wait a little longer. But more than likely, things would get drawn out and the next generation bill wouldn't be substantially better than what we have now....

Thank you for a real reply. This stimulus plan is somewhere between 40% and 60% pork - as in spending bills that would never pass on their own merits. If you are okay with that, so be it. Should we scrap it? It should never have been passed. Our congressmen didn't read it - and they have admitted as much. That is a little more important than you or me reading it, IMO. If you are okay with that - well I don't want to get banned.

Not sure where the "get over yourself" personal attack comes from, but if makes you feel better.

You seem to be taking this personally. I support Obama. I think that he has a chance of doing something special over the next 4 years - so strong is his support from the people. But he is squandering his approval ratings supporting something that all but the most liberal Americans see as a pork project boondoggle...

 

[NYBamaFan]

...Since when have taxes and spending been connected.

Sad and scary question...

 

[Atlmetroguy]

I cannot lay claim to this as I saw it posted on another message board but it reeks of truth...(God forbid we should embrace the TRUTH)...

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

 

[NYBamaFan]

I cannot lay claim to this as I saw it posted on another message board but it reeks of truth...(God forbid we should embrace the TRUTH)...

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

That was very well said...

 

[TRUTIDE]

I cannot lay claim to this as I saw it posted on another message board but it reeks of truth...(God forbid we should embrace the TRUTH)...

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

Very enlightening. Unfortunately, No one in the party in power think like this. They think they have some kind of mandate to flip the country into socialism (Obama and Chavez should get matching jackets) and lead with a far left agenda. This may be good for the country. It might make the Republicans wise up take the conservative pulse of the people and act on it.

As far as this bill goes. It is an unsound plan. There is plenty of economic evidence and economic history against it. It is by far the biggest spending bill in the history of this country and has virtually no defense spending in it. At least with defense spending, it adds dollar for dollar to the GDP and it is something that we will most assurably be spending money on anyway. Defense spending is proven to be one way to immediately inject money into the economy. This is not some right wing fantasy, it is something that actually works. Instead we throw billions and biilions of dollars at pet projects like saving mice, preventing STDs, weatherstripping for homes, paying more for people to stay out of work and funding ACORN. Noble projects indeed (for some) but certainly not things that will help our current crisis. Now we have people saying "Obama's plan may work, just give it a chance". That is like saying "Hey bet your kids college fund on that short horse over there. Yea the one that is limping. He is a longshot but he could win". People do not realize the trillions of dollars of debt we are putting on our children. Our parents did not do this to us. We are truly living in the "age of irresponsibility". This should make the liberal crowd proud. Look at some economic models. Look at some economic history. Look at the CBO report. My goodness, just look at the current stock market. Spending in an economic crisis does not work. This bill needs to be scrapped and we need to start over. It would not be that difficult. There are some "real" economist out there that Obama can turn to. He is the only one that can stop it though. He would have to stand up against his party and be Reagan-like. I do not see this happening though.

 

[Pluck and Grit]

The more I think about it, the more I think we missed a good opportunity (me included) to vote for Mitt Romney. He was the one candidate with not just knowledge but also experience when it comes to turning around struggling companies and dealing with a slumping economy. Could've been the right guy at the right time. He probably has more business/economic knowledge in his pinky than the rest of the field had put together. Some of the others had their strengths over him in other areas, but that was his forte, and that's what we really needed in a President right now.

 

[NYBamaFan]

The more I think about it, the more I think we missed a good opportunity (me included) to vote for Mitt Romney. He was the one candidate with not just knowledge but also experience when it comes to turning around struggling companies and dealing with a slumping economy. Could've been the right guy at the right time. He probably has more business/economic knowledge in his pinky than the rest of the field had put together. Some of the others had their strengths over him in other areas, but that was his forte, and that's what we really needed in a President right now.

It would not have mattered. With a Democratic house and senate, the required changes in government expenses was not going to happen. He would have passed a similar plan, eventually.

Our country no longer wants a leader who will cut programs. Americans know what they deserve, and they are darned well going to get it...

 

[CrimsonNan]

The more I think about it, the more I think we missed a good opportunity (me included) to vote for Mitt Romney. He was the one candidate with not just knowledge but also experience when it comes to turning around struggling companies and dealing with a slumping economy. Could've been the right guy at the right time. He probably has more business/economic knowledge in his pinky than the rest of the field had put together. Some of the others had their strengths over him in other areas, but that was his forte, and that's what we really needed in a President right now.

I voted for Mitt Super Tuesday, and 2 days later he dropped out. I always thought that there was something "funny" about that, since it was said that he was a millionaire and could campaign on his own money. I think he was TOLD to drop out so McCain could win. What say you Pluck?

 

[bamacon]

That was very well said...

So exactly how do you square any support for Obama who has at the core of his political being an absolute disdain for that line of reasoning?

He firmly believes in the concept that the government's DUTY is to take from those who have succeeded to "even up the playing field" for those who have not. Simple, time-honored class warfare. I believe he refers to it as "social justice."

 

[NYBamaFan]

So exactly how do you square any support for Obama who has at the core of his political being an absolute disdain for that line of reasoning?...

I am a fiscal conservative, but I believe that liberalism has a very valid place in our society. I am not going to rip Obama apart for being a liberal. I will, however, rip every one of his measures that increases government.