Economic recovery package before Congress"would provide massive fiscal stimulus."

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Jagger, Feb 6, 2009.

  1. Jagger

    Jagger New Member

    Economic recovery package before Congress
    "would provide massive fiscal stimulus."​

    ABC's Gibson stated that "a lot of people" say spending in recovery bill isn't "stimulus" -- but CBO director says "most economists" disagree

    Summary: Interviewing President Obama, ABC's Charles Gibson repeated assertions that "not enough" of the economic recovery package before Congress "is really stimulative," that the bill "really doesn't stimulate," and that "it's a spending bill and not a stimulus." But according to the director of the Congressional Budget Office, "most economists" believe "all of the increase in government spending" included in the bill "provides some stimulative effect." The CBO director has further stated that the bill "would provide massive fiscal stimulus."
  2. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Ask yourself, How many jobs are created by this measure??
    We don't need to just throw $$$ at anything that moves.

    Hell, we could about pay off our debt if we quit throwing $$$$ at illegal aliens, but don't get me started.:knockedout:
  3. Baba gounj

    Baba gounj pensioner

    This farce has 90% pork and 10% jobs.
    Is this the kind of example you want to set for "the children" ?
  4. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    When it comes to economics, I'm of the Austrian School of thinking but all that aside and taking a purely Keynesian if not more Fabian Socialist or even a Mussolini Fascist/Corporatist approach, the CBO you pointed out with such glee in your original post also poses many cons that bode not so well if we do move along with this stimulus package as it appears we are going to do. Appears republicans got enough pie filling on their fingers to make it worth their while so it's away from the "Yellow Brick Road" we go.

    Here is a link to the CBO site with many pdf's and other comments on the stimulus package with both pros and cons of what some of the short and longterm effects will be.

    It appears we've made our bed and we are taking a cue from the Hoover/Roosevelt approach and use economic intervention to try and force the business cycle to conform to our gov't will. We just better hope Obama is the messiah because Hoover & Roosevelt's intervention made the problem worse and lenghten it for close to 20 years. It will take the hand of a god to violate the laws of economics and make it actually work.
  5. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    I mean really, what do we know, whether this economic stimulus package will work or not. It's so comical watching all BC's economic experts crawl out of the cyber woodwork and chime in with historical references, biased links from the blogasphere, and my personal fav "I took econmics in College" so I must be right and the rest of you are dumb. Just one novice point I'll make to all my Brown Cafe Economist's out there, Just how many brillant economist and knowledgable investors lost their :censored2:'s with Bernie Madeoff ?...It just goes to show that economic recovery is a real life game of chance, sprinkle in some luck, say a prayer with 10 Hail Mary's, then factor in concensus knowledge and experience to come up with a workable solution.

    What we do know is that tax cuts for the rich and famous, de-regulation of the loan/credit markets, job outsourcing, corp. relocating abroad, bending over and spreading for lobbiest, and waiting endlessly for CEO free willy's to poop out a trickle down stimulus ain't cutting it. So what does the public want ? They voted "change". Hence Plan B....Sorry Obstructionist's, the people have spoken. And for all those hoping for failure because you still have a bad taste in your mouths over losing the election and power, first, give back the American flag that you wrap around yourselves, and then try stepping in the shoes of someone who just lost their highly productive job and then cry me a river.
  6. 1989

    1989 Well-Known Member

    I ain't no econ-o-mist but I am going to stop all 401K contr-o-butions. I'll still max my roth and pay all my taxes now.
  7. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    the american public voted for a change from politics as usual. This fat laden hog is politics as usual. The birth control provisions of this fat hog will not stimulate anything other then sexual activity. Sexual activity will not stimulate the economy unless the government will now promote prostitution and tax hookers.
  8. Sammie

    Sammie Well-Known Member

    Let's see. If this is our money we're talking about, why weren't
    we allowed to vote on how it was spent? It's being handed out like a deck of cards. Would we have agreed hands down on -

    $4 billion to fight crime in small communities like Frog Suck, Wyoming and Lizard Lick, North Carolina.

    $450 million to NASA for “climate-research missions”. Is Al Gore somewhere out in space studying global warming?

    $50 million for the National Endowment of the Arts. Yes. We are totally furious that we might miss that next big abstract film festival.

    $350 million for new Agriculture Department computers.

    $87 million for a U.S. Coast Guard polar icebreaking ship (Earth to Al Gore. We need you down here!!!)

    $150 million for Smithsonian renovations.

    $380 million for a rainy-day nutrition fund.

    $600 million to buy the feds new hybrid cars

    $500 million to spruce up the National Institutes of Health offices.

    $448 million for a new Homeland Security Department building.

    $88 million to move the Public Health Service into new digs.

    (I'll take a new $5 million dollar home.. and a hybrid, please)

    $79 billion to the states. Dummy me. Here I thought we had state taxes...

    $1.1 billion to research health care.

    $245 million to upgrade IT at the Farm Service Agency (???)

    $500 million to speed up processing applications for S.S. disability claims.

    $6 billion to college and universities, who already receive hundreds of billions a year. Yet the only decent financial aid my kid found, who does well in school, was with the military.

    Now. Not that these issues don't need to be addressed, but this money will not make jobs appear. It will create more dependency on the government -
    $20 billion for food stamps
    $1.7 billion for the homeless
    $ 5 billion for public housing
    $87 billion for Medicaid, which already costs a $400 billion year

  9. chev

    chev Nightcrawler

    Just about the only thing being stimulated are the pockets of Obamas supporters. Great job digging more money out of the tax payers pocket for more pet/pork projects.
  10. Baba gounj

    Baba gounj pensioner

    Well if this bill passes I suppose everyone on Capital Hill can go home. They will have spent every cent available , meaning there is nothing more for them to do.
  11. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

  12. JimJimmyJames

    JimJimmyJames Big Time Feeder Driver

    I would like to read that article but screw the NY Times I am not jumping through the hoops they want you to in order to read their website. I have despised that rag ever since I was forced to read it by one of my professors in college.
  13. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    Here ya go....
  14. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    At the link I posted the piece comes right up. No hop jumping, no nude posing, etc.


    Thanks Jones
  15. JimJimmyJames

    JimJimmyJames Big Time Feeder Driver

    Thank you Jones :happy2:.

    wkmac, maybe it is my cookie settings. As for the nude posing, I will not do that simply as a symbol of my love for humankind :funny:.

    Reed Hastings has an interesting take on what should be done with executive compensation. I don't believe in caps myself but I also do not think companies who accept welfare from the public should use that money to reward executives who had to go around with their hands out because of their poor managing in the first place. If we just didn't give these undeserving companies a bailout to begin with we wouldn't have to worry about this problem :angry:. As for soaking the rich with a 50% tax rate, I don't think that is the answer either. I am always leery of giving the government more money.
  16. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Your party is not getting any sexier, Tie, because if the Rep's look in the mirror, their overgrown wastlines are preventing them from seeing their talley wackers as well....Obama's giving Rep's opportunity to debate line item to line item spenditures. Unfortunatly, As much as your still trying to push the small Gov't myth upon us there was never a fatter Administration than the one that transitioned power to Obama. Thanks to the Rep's we've taken a skinny kid from Chicago and sized him up in a fat suit to begin his presidency....
  17. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

  18. JimJimmyJames

    JimJimmyJames Big Time Feeder Driver

  19. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Yeah, what, maybe 10% of the whole package ??!!
  20. Overpaid Union Thug

    Overpaid Union Thug Well-Known Member

    This new "stimulus" plan should work pretty well. The last one sure did. Oh wait.......