President Obama

[ElfDude]

I've been silent in here for a long time. But I have to say something. I've been asked to compromise my principles.

I was furious when President Bush signed that pork-laden $750 billion "TARP" bill. I was furious that both my senators voted for it. I wrote to them both and swore I'd never vote for them again.

One of the complaints I heard over and over about the Bush administration (and I agreed with it) was deficit spending. Now, President Obama has proposed a new even more pork-laden "stimulus" bill at the cost of nearly $1 trillion.

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who complained about deficit spending during the past 8 years had better be absolutely outraged about this bill. If they are not outraged they have no credibility whatsoever. They are nothing but partisan hacks.

End of rant.

I apologize if this topic has already been covered somewhere. I haven't been keeping up.

[Big Blue Owl]

I'm with you (although maybe not quite as furious) on hating the deficit spending, both then and now, but I haven't seen the entire bill and what all is proposed in it. You say more pork laden. Unbelievable to me that Obama would Ok something like this. I must find a draft of it and dive in to see who wants what. Then write some letters as you have.

[zepboy]

When are these people going to figure out that we cannot get out of debt by increasing our debt?

Dudes, it ain't rocket surgery!

[ElfDude]

I must find a draft of it and dive in to see who wants what. Then write some letters as you have.

Here's a partial breakdown:

Some highlights of the package, by the numbers:

? $825 billion total (as of 1/15/09)
? $550 billion in new spending, described as thoughtful and carefully targeted priority investments with unprecedented accountability measures built in.
? $275 billion in tax relief ($1,000 tax cut for families, $500 tax cut for individuals through SS payroll deductions)
? $ 90 billion for infrastructure
? $ 87 billion Medicaid aid to states
? $ 79 billion school districts/public colleges to prevent cutbacks
? $ 54 billion to encourage energy production from renewable sources
? $ 41 billion for additional school funding ($14 billion for school modernizations and repairs, $13 billion for Title I, $13 billion for IDEA special education funding, $1 billion for education technology)
? $ 24 billion for "health information technology to prevent medical mistakes, provide better care to patients and introduce cost-saving efficiencies" and "to provide for preventative care and to evaluate the most effective healthcare treatments."
? $ 16 billion for science/technology ($10 billion for science facilities, research, and instrumentation; $6 billion to expand broadband to rural areas)
? $ 15 billion to increase Pell grants by $500
? $ 6 billion for the ambiguous "higher education modernization."

[Source: Committee on Appropriations: January 15, 2009]

Here is a further breakdown of the package:

NOTE: The following are highlights of the package; for the full 13-page summary from the Appropriations Committee, click here:

(as of 1/15/09)

Energy
$32 billion: Funding for "smart electricity grid" to reduce waste
$16 billion: Renewable energy tax cuts and a tax credit for research and development on energy-related work, and a multiyear extension of renewable energy production tax credit
$6 billion: Funding to weatherize modest-income homes

Science and Technology
$10 billion: Science facilities
$6 billion: High-speed Internet access for rural and underserved areas

Infrastructure
$30 billion: Transportation projects
$31 billion: Construction and repair of federal buildings and other public infrastructure
$19 billion: Water projects
$10 billion: Rail and mass transit projects

Education
$41 billion: Grants to local school districts
$79 billion: State fiscal relief to prevent cuts in state aid
$21 billion: School modernization ($15.6 billion to increase the Pell grant by $500; $6 billion for higher education modernization)

Health Care
$39 billion: Subsidies to health insurance for unemployed; providing coverage through Medicaid
$87 billion: Help to states with Medicaid
$20 billion: Modernization of health-information technology systems
$4.1 billion: Preventative care

Jobless Benefits
$43 billion for increased unemployment benefits and job training.
$39 billion to support those who lose their jobs by helping them to pay the cost of keeping their employer provided healthcare under COBRA and providing short-term options to be covered by Medicaid.
$20 billion to increase the food stamp benefit by over 13% in order to help defray rising food costs.

Taxes

Individuals:

*$500 per worker, $1,000 per couple tax cut for two years, costing about $140 billion.
*Greater access to the $1,000-per-child tax credit for the working poor.
*Expansion of the earned-income tax credit to include families with three children
*A $2,500 college tuition tax credit.
*Repeal of a requirement that a $7,500 first-time homebuyer tax credit be paid back over time.

Businesses:

*An infusion of cash into money-losing companies by allowing them to claim tax credits on past profits dating back five years instead of two.
*Bonus depreciation for businesses investing in new plants and equipment
*Doubling of the amount small businesses can write off for capital investments and new equipment purchases.
*Allowing businesses to claim a tax credit for hiring disconnected youth and veterans

[Sources: Associated Press: Highlights of Senate economic stimulus plan; January 23, 2009; WSJ: Stimulus Package Unveiled; January 16, 2009; Committee on Appropriations: January 15, 2009]

When is the money being is going to be spent, and on what?

The government wouldn't be able to spend at least one-fourth of a proposed $825 billion economic stimulus plan until after 2010, according to a preliminary report by the Congressional Business Office that suggests it may take longer than expected to boost the economy. The government would spend about $26 billion of the money this year and $110 billion more next year, the report said. About $103 billion would be spent in 2011, while $53 billion would be spent in 2012 and $63 billion between 2013 and 2019.

? Less than $5 billion of the $30 billion set aside for highway spending would be spent within the next two years, the CBO said.

? Only $26 billion out of $274 billion in infrastructure spending would be delivered into the economy by the Sept. 30 end of the budget year, just 7 percent.

? Just one in seven dollars of a huge $18.5 billion investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy programs would be spent within a year and a half.

? About $907 million of a $6 billion plan to expand broadband access in rural and other underserved areas would be spent by 2011, CBO said.

? Just one-fourth of clean drinking water projects can be completed by October of next year.

? $275 billion worth of tax cuts to 95 percent of filers and a huge infusion of help for state governments is to be distributed into the economy more quickly.

[Note: The CBO's analysis applied only to 40 percent of the overall stimulus bill, and doesn't cover tax cuts or efforts; a CBO report outlining all of its costs is expected in the next week or so.]

? The Obama administration said $3 of every $4 in the package should be spent within 18 months to have maximum impact on jobs and taxpayers; if House or Senate versions of the bill do not spend the money as quickly, the White House will work with lawmakers to achieve the goal of spending 75% of the overall package over the next year and a half.

[Source: AP: Three-quarters of stimulus to go in 18 months; January 22, 2009; Bloomberg News: Much of Stimulus Wont Be Spent Before 2011, CBO Says; January 20, 2009; link]

Who will be spending the money? Will the states be receiving any money to spend, community organizations? Churches?

The economic stimulus plan now moving through Congress would shower billions of federal dollars on state and local governments desperate for cash:

? The House stimulus bill includes an extra $87 billion in federal aid to state Medicaid programs.

? It allots some $120 billion to boost state and city education programs.

? There's $4 billion for state and local anticrime initiatives in the legislation, not to mention $30-plus billion for highways and other infrastructure projects.

? $6.9 billion to help state and local governments make investments that make them more energy efficient and reduce carbon emissions.

? $87 billion to states, increasing through the end of FY 2010 the share of Medicaid costs the Federal government reimburses all states by 4.8 percent, with extra relief tied to rates of unemployment.

? $120 billion to states and school districts to stabilize budgets and prevent tax increases and deep cuts to critical education programs.

Overall, about one-quarter of the entire $825 billion recovery package would be devoted to activities crucial to governors, mayors, and local school boards - making them among the plans biggest beneficiaries.

[Sources: Committee on Appropriations: January 15, 2009; Reuters: Roads, energy, states win in US stimulus plan;15 January 2009; Christian Science Monitor: States to win big in stimulus sweepstakes; House bill allots almost one-quarter of the $825 billion recovery package to states, localities. How will that boost the economy?; January 25, 2009; Link]

To see it with working source links you can go here:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articl ... 198/20639/

[awip2062]

$825 billion total (as of 1/15/09)?


And this is coming from...

All I see is about the money they want to give out but what about where they plan to get that HUGE amount to spend? I've heard Obama wants to nix some current tax cuts Bush put in effect, but that won't do it.

The government doesn't have it now, and his tax plan....well....I don't see where it will come from.

Obama?s Comprehensive Tax Policy Plan for America will:

* Cut taxes for 95 percent of workers and their families with a tax cut of $500 for workers or $1,000 for working couples.
* Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.
* Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of healthcare and to reward investments in innovation.
Under the Obama-Biden Plan:

* Middle class families will see their taxes cut -- and no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. The typical middle class family will receive well over $1,000 in tax relief under the Obama-Biden plan, and will pay tax rates that are 20 percent lower than they faced under President Reagan.
* Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s. Obama will ask the wealthiest two percent of families to give back a portion of the tax cuts they have received over the past eight years to ensure we are restoring fairness and returning to fiscal responsibility. But no family will pay higher tax rates than they would have paid in the 1990s.
* The Obama-Biden plan will cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below the levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan (less than 18.2 percent of GDP). The plan is a net tax cut -- his tax relief for middle class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000. Coupled with his commitment to cut unnecessary spending, Obama will pay for this tax relief while bringing down the budget deficit.

Is he thinking that by cutting taxes, we will spend more and what he needs to give out will end up in the coffers of the government? While I do believe that cutting taxes stimulates the economy and does actually increase tax revenues, $825 billion is WAY more than I believe will flow in.

[zepboy]

I think it is simply poor fiscal policy built upon empty "hope" that things will happen just because that's what he wants.

Eventually reality will set in.

I pray that things will work out, but I agree. I just don't see where he is going to get that kind of scratch without heavily imposing it on the backs of the people.

Unfortunately, I think that will have a reverse effect, in that when the people are strapped, they will withhold putting money back into the system and brace for the storm ahead.

[CygnusX1]

^^^

^^^

Can I get a tiny slice o' that?

I wish someone would TARP summa that my way.

[Big Blue Owl]

[ElfDude]

Well... the porkosaurus bill passed in congress today.

WASHINGTON (AP) - In a swift victory for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House approved a historically huge $819 billion stimulus bill Wednesday night, filled with new spending and tax cuts at the core of the young adminstration's revival plan for the desperately ailing economy. The vote was 244-188.

"We don't have a moment to spare," Obama declared at the White House as congressional allies hastened to do his bidding in the face of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Not a moment to spare. Let's take a closer look at that.

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html ... d=playlist

[Sir Myghin]

interesting breakdown, canadas was slightly more reasonable HOWEVER of the 11.8 (out of 85b) going to infrastructure none was specifically for roadways, albiet our big toll highway is being extended ( a government portion not a private owned portion like the rest) Albeit our major highways although slightly congested in need of widening, are in very good shape in southern ontario, we won't touch northern ontario. (ps ontario is all that matters )

[CygnusX1]

Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes,
Becomes the First President to Skip Ball Honoring
Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/8627

The Cleveland Leader

Barack Obama may have stumbled over his words briefly during his
inauguration, but he made an even bigger blunder later on Tuesday
evening.

The newly sworn-in President opted not to appear at what should have
been one of the most important Balls on his agenda that evening -
The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President
Dwight Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the
Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48
Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly
disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief's failure to show.

Over the past 56 years and 14 inaugurations, no President has skipped
this event - until now.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball is sponsored by the American Legion,
and co-sponsored by 13 other veteran's service organizations, including
those such as the Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Military Order
of the Purple Heart.

Instead of attending this ball honoring our nation's heroes, Obama was
busy making stops at 10 other official balls. Obama and his wife's first
stop was at the Neighborhood Ball.

From there, they went to the Home State Ball for Illinois and Hawaii, the
Commander-in-Chief Ball, the Youth Inaugural Ball, and the Home State
Ball for Delaware and Pennsylvania.

They finished off the night with brief appearances at the Mid-Atlantic,
Western, Midwest, Eastern, and Southern regional Balls.

Celebrities were aplenty at the balls, with Stevie Wonder, Shakira, Mary
J. Blige, Faith Hill, Jay-Z, Alicia Keys, Adam Levine, will.i.am, Sting,
Mariah Carey, and Leonardo DiCaprio in attendance at the
Neighborhood Ball.

In addition, the other nine balls also featured a star-studded lineup
including Kanye West and Kid Rock at the Youth Ball, Marc Anthony at the
Western Ball, and Cheryl Crow at the Western Ball.

It was the party without all of the celebrities that Obama skipped.

The very people who he sought to have support him during his candidacy
and campaign, who have fought to protect this country, were snubbed in
favor of publicity and the opportunity to rub shoulders - yet again - with
the out-of-touch Hollywood elite.

Given Obama's already unsteady relationship with the military, this sort of
faux pas is unimaginable.

This had to be intentional.

What's more, the media's complete failure to report on this borders on
neglect.

[zepboy]

Well, this reminds me of a piece of Bible history when a young king came into power in Israel. He consulted with the elders as he saw the kingdom possibly slipping away. They gave wise counsel in how to keep the people loyal to him. He then sought the advice of the youngsters he grew up with. They counseled against common wisdom, and the young king swung with his buddies rather than sage advice. Well, the kingdom divided, and the young king lost a vast majority of what he could have ruled over. His name was Rehoboam, in case you're interested in looking it up.

Obama strikes me as very symptomatic of what we see in our society today. many younger people don't see the value in strength of character. Rather, the path of least resistance in the order of the day.

It seems to me that Obama considers himself an honerable man simply because he holds the highest office in the land, yet he publicly ignores those who put their lives on the line to earn true honor.

While the office of President is honorable, it does not impute honor to a person for merely attaining the desk.

I thin Obama should take that into consideration.

[ElfDude]

From the TimesOnline:

The European Union warned the US yesterday against plunging the world into depression by adopting a planned ?Buy American? policy, intensifying fears of a trade war.

The EU threatened to retaliate if the US Congress went ahead with sweeping measures in its $800 billion (?554 billion) stimulus plan to restrict spending to American goods and services.

Gordon Brown was caught in the crossfire as John Bruton, the EU Ambassador to Washington, said that ?history has shown us? where the closing of markets leads ? a clear reference to the Depression of the 1930s, triggered by US protectionist laws.

Last night Mr Obama gave a strong signal that he would remove the most provocative passages from the Bill.

Gee, everyone was saying how our European allies would suddenly love us again under the new adminstration. And he's already ticking them off...

[Big Blue Owl]

I think he may be playing it smart. Put something out there that is far beyond what you actually need to be successful, causing a bit of a shake-up and showing ball-size. Then, allow it to be strategically scaled back through negotiation, no farther than the actual need (often winning more than projected), illustrating strength, determination and the willingness to negotiate, all in one.

Sound feasible?

He doesn't strike me as a leader who would, given historical facts of the last depression, champion an all-or-nothing plan that would cause even more helter-skelter. If so he's a nut-job.

[ElfDude]

Sound feasible?

That is a standard technique of bargaining...