Bipartisan stimulus proposal

Open discussion about the world we live in today. Topics in here can get heated, but please keep it civil.

Moderator: Priests of Syrinx

CygnusX1
Posts: 17310
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: We don't call 911 here.

Post by CygnusX1 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:10 am

Speaking of attacks and spew...

Imagine if Obama picked ONE republican who had tax "deficiencies"
before THEIR confirmation for a Cabinet position....

And please - have the balls to tell me that said republican would get
better treatment than the democrats currently involved in the
"Chaos-in-the-Cabinet" scandal enjoy.

It would be a witch hunt. The democrats would SCORCH his/her ass -
and everybody damn well knows it.

But hey - Just keepin' it real, yo.

Gotta go - I have a mission to support.
Don't start none...won't be none.

User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11084
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:39 am

CygnusX1 wrote:Speaking of attacks and spew...

Imagine if Obama picked ONE republican who had tax "deficiencies"
before THEIR confirmation for a Cabinet position....

And please - have the balls to tell me that said republican would get
better treatment than the democrats currently involved in the
"Chaos-in-the-Cabinet" scandal enjoy.

It would be a witch hunt. The democrats would SCORCH his/her ass -
and everybody damn well knows it.

But hey - Just keepin' it real, yo.

Gotta go - I have a mission to support.
If Bush had picked appointees with tax-fraud problems like this... yeah, I know.
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image

User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11084
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:42 am

Big Blue Owl wrote: As to the stimulus package, I sincerely hope that all of the Republicans and the few Democrats that voted to kill it refuse the money for their states and constituents when it is released. Publicly oppose it, publicly refuse it. Otherwise they are as hypocritical and criminal as you all deem the left to be.
Publicly opposing it would be a smart PR move to make. I don't know if it's within their power to refuse it, since it's not going to them personally.

I wish my state governor would refuse it though. That would be noble. He won't though. :x
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image

User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11084
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:57 am

Big Blue Owl wrote: A few missteps and dumb-ass moves aside, everything I expected, hoped for and had foreseen seems to be developing. It's still only two weeks, my fear-filled friends!
In all seriousness, this is one time I really hope you're right and I'm wrong.

I hope that the march to Socialsm I'm seeing in proposed economic policies and legislation is all in my head.

I hope that the moves towards nationalizing private industry that I'm seeing are all in my head.

I hope the moves I'm seeing toward taking away 2nd ammendment rights are all in my head.

I hope that the moves I'm seeing toward silencing dissenting speech are all in my head.

I hope that the economy improves and that the 30's and 70's do not repeat themselves due to government meddling with the markets.

I want things to be great at the end of the year and for you to say, "See? Told you it was all fear-mongoring! Relax, man!"

I want to be completely wrong and for you to be able to gloat over how wrong I was. :)
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image

User avatar
Big Blue Owl
Posts: 7457
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Somewhere between the darkness and the light

Post by Big Blue Owl » Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:03 am

Do you see how much hope that Obama has instilled in you already? :lol:

Seriously, though...other than a small amount of short-sited chest-thumpers in the country, everyone wants B to succeed and all that you listed to fade like mist in the sunlight.
(((((((((((((((all'a you)))))))))))))))

CygnusX1
Posts: 17310
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: We don't call 911 here.

Post by CygnusX1 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:32 am

Big Blue Owl wrote:...other than a small amount of short-sited
chest-thumpers in the country..
I'm absolutely 100% sure that there are no liberals in this country that fit
THAT description, but I could be wrong. I'm sure you're talking about
short-sighted chest-thumpers on both sides of the fence. :wink:

I can't help but think of a guy named Conyers......that wants Dubya's
head on a pole...

If they don't throw his wife in the poke first - for HER political scandal
(as if there aren't enough already, God help us) - he may get his chance,
but I'm betting he doesn't.

Talk about having your cake and eating it too!

Something's a little rediculous about that whole mess, but I digress.



ooooooh sandwiches! Gotta go....


***poof***
Don't start none...won't be none.

User avatar
awip2062
Posts: 25518
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:15 am
Contact:

Post by awip2062 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:38 pm

I've got a sandwich! :-D

CygnusX1
Posts: 17310
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: We don't call 911 here.

Post by CygnusX1 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:42 pm

awip2062 wrote:I've got a sandwich! :-D
keep it on the downlow t, or they'll redistribute it! :shock: :lol:

**looks for trouble elsewhere** :-D

**poof**
Don't start none...won't be none.

User avatar
awip2062
Posts: 25518
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:15 am
Contact:

Post by awip2062 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:48 pm

If they want to redistribute it they're gonna have to wait until it comes outta my butt! ;-) LOL

User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11084
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:50 pm

"Honey, that's nasty..."
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image

User avatar
awip2062
Posts: 25518
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:15 am
Contact:

Post by awip2062 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:56 pm

ElfDude wrote:"Honey, that's nasty..."
Should I just have said it isn't available for redistribution at this time?

CygnusX1
Posts: 17310
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: We don't call 911 here.

Post by CygnusX1 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:00 pm

You guys.... :roll: :???: :lol:

Anyone seen spot?

Here boy...what the...git yer nose out of that antifreeze!

...git over here...

***howling noises***

***grabs the dog leash***

***poof***
Don't start none...won't be none.

User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11084
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:02 pm

WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama warned on Thursday that failure to act on an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into a long-lasting recession that might prove irreversible, a fresh call to a recalcitrant Congress to move quickly.
Gee... and they called Bush a fear monger.

Uh... no. Doing nothing would be far better for our economy than passage of this kind of new debt/spending bill.

But since I'm no economic expert, let's see what a real economic expert (Walter Williams) has to say:
Here is what my George Mason University colleague Professor Richard Wagner wrote, which was published by Office of the House Republican Leader: "Any so-called stimulus program is a ruse. The government can increase its spending only by reducing private spending equivalently. Whether government finances its added spending by increasing taxes, by borrowing, or by inflating the currency, the added spending will be offset by reduced private spending. Furthermore, private spending is generally more efficient than the government spending that would replace it because people act more carefully when they spend their own money than when they spend other people's money." A short translation of Wagner's comment is: There is no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy. Let's examine the ruse.

Suppose the value of all that we will produce in 2009, our gross domestic product (GDP), totals $14 trillion. There cannot be any disagreement that if Congress spends $4 trillion, of necessity there is only $10 trillion left over for us to spend privately. In other words, if Congress is going to spend $4 trillion, it must find a way to get us to spend $4 trillion less. The most open and aboveboard method to force us to spend less privately is to tax us to the tune of $4 trillion.

You might say, "Congress doesn't have to tax us $4 trillion. They could tax us $3 trillion and run a $1 trillion budget deficit." You have that wrong. There is no way for Congress to spend $4 trillion out of our 2009 $14 trillion GDP by getting us to spend only $3 trillion less privately. It has to be $4 trillion less. Another method to force us to spend less privately is to print money and inflate the currency. Rising prices reduce our ability to spend privately since each dollar we hold will not buy as much. Another way is for Congress to borrow, thereby reducing our ability to spend privately. By the way, all of this means that in any real economic sense the federal budget is always balanced. That is, if Congress spends $4 trillion we must privately spend $4 trillion less whether it is accomplished through taxation, inflation or borrowing.

The stimulus package being discussed is politically smart but economically stupid. It's that bedeviling, omnipresent Santa Claus and Tooth Fairy problem again. Let's say that Congress taxes you $500 to put toward creating construction jobs building our infrastructure. The beneficiaries will be quite visible, namely men employed building a road. The victims of Congress are invisible and are only revealed by asking what you would have done with the $500 if it were not taxed away from you. Whatever you would have spent it on would have contributed to someone's employment. That person is invisible. Politicians love it when the victims of their policies are invisible and the beneficiaries visible. Why? Because the beneficiaries know for whom to vote and the victims do not know who is to blame for their plight.

In stimulus package language, if Congress taxes to hand out money, one person is stimulated at the expense of another, who pays the tax, who is unstimulated. A visual representation of the stimulus package is: Imagine you see a person at work taking buckets of water from the deep end of a swimming pool and dumping them into the shallow end in an attempt to make it deeper. You would deem him stupid. That scenario is equivalent to what Congress and the new president proposes for the economy. A far more important measure that Congress can take toward a healthy economy is to ensure that the 2003 tax cuts don't expire in 2010 as scheduled. If not, there are 15 separate taxes scheduled to rise in 2010, costing Americans $200 billion a year in increased taxes. In the face of a recession, we don't need that.
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image

CygnusX1
Posts: 17310
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: We don't call 911 here.

Post by CygnusX1 » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:06 pm

I like a term I saw for it earlier this week:

"The Obama/Pelosi/Reid Theft Act of 2009."

ROFL

It is what it is...


***poof***
Don't start none...won't be none.

User avatar
awip2062
Posts: 25518
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:15 am
Contact:

Post by awip2062 » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:21 pm

*saysin an enraptured voice* Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, Waaaaaaaalter!

Mmmmhmmm this man has a great point...it is a way to get votes from the people who will get the money taken from others. But, not all who will get money will vote for these guys. I expect I will get some money from you all out of this (although who knows maybe not). I sure am not gonna vote for any incumbant from my state, though!

Post Reply