Another stimulus package: the only solution, my friend says?

[manlymatt83]

One of my friends, a very die hard liberal, has informed me that he feels the only solution to the problems we are having is to spend spend spend, primarily by another stimulus package, this time much larger than the one before it. By doing so, we reduce the value of the dollar, and cheapen the cost of exports to other countries. He says people like me (I'm moderate, but don't like the high government spending at all) have it all wrong, because without spending, there's no way to bring back jobs and no way to stimulate the economy.

For some reason, spending money that doesn't exist just doesn't seem right to me. What are everyone's thoughts? Is this really the only solution? Surely there's a way to stop the spending and quit legislating reform?

 

[StageLeft]

ar, and cheapen the cost of exports to other countries.

Won't this also increase the cost of imports to the US? And since the US is already a net importer with a fairly substantial trade deficit this will merely increase it further?

 

[Double Trouble]

OP: sorry, but your friend is a retard. He's a good example of the kind of moronic "thinking" that's driving the country into the ground and gotten us to this point in a mess. The country is due for a correction, for wasteful fat to be trimmed. These spending measures just prolong the inevitable and further damage our country by putting us into an even deeper hole.

Government does not create anything. Additional "stimulus" is just code for "more funding for unsustainable wasteful spending". It would go towards saving all the government jobs at state/city and local levels, further increasing long term government spending and decreasing the efficiency of the country.

No matter how much spenders try to twist the reality, spending money you don't have does not make sense unless you spend it in such a way as to increase future earnings by more than what it cost to finance the spending. That hasn't happened in the past, and until I see a solid plan for actual investments in long term growth (rather than the usual waste), I'm against any kind of additional stimulus.

 

[Modelworks]

The only solution is for people to be told NO.
No we are not going to bail you out
No we are not going to pay you for not having a job
No we are not going to feed you
No we are not going to give you a place to live because you spend too much
No we are not going to provide you a job because you cannot find one

The only way to change things is let people do without. The way it works right now is like trying to raise a child and give them everything they ask for all the time. What you get as an adult is what we have now. People that can't provide for themselves without complaining to the government to fix things for them. As long as you keep helping people out of their bad choices nothing will change.

People need to ask themselves what they would do if there was no government ?

 

[Ronstang]

Your friend is an idiot.

 

[Bitek]

Vs the alternative conservative plan to slash all the unemployment insurance, etc so they can completely Hooverize the economy? ( aka the GOP Double Tap)
We all know the current economic conditions are the result of a massive outbreak of laziness and all would be fixed everyone just filled all those empty job postings and help wanted signs you see all over the country.

I think a stimulus plan is good in theory, but I think gov't spending has to be more well defined and targeted to be effective stimulus spending. Altho much of the 1st stimulus was tax cuts, I'm not so sure on some of the ancillary programs such as weatherizing and BS like that accomplishes effective stimulus. I think Obama did waste a lot of political capitol by pissing around with stuff that didn't have a clear and targeted goal.

The only plausible way to get it done politically would be to offset some of the spending with cuts in other gov't spending which did not have a efficient stimulative effect on the economy.

 

[PeshakJang]

Vs the alternative conservative plan to slash all the unemployment insurance,

...

The only plausible way to get it done politically would be to offset some of the spending with cuts in other gov't spending

Funny how you would mischaracterize the Republican stance on extending unemployment benefits (wouldn't "slash" anything, it would keep it how it is now), and then turn around and say the only way to do something is to offset spending in other areas... which is actually what the Republicans want the Dems to do before extending benefits... PAY for them by cutting something else instead of going further into debt.

 

[piasabird]

Every time the USA borrows money the value of our $$$ declines and we have to spend more money for the same things. We have stimulus money left from last stimulus.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Someone is going to have to spend money to get us out of this rut. The companies aren't doing it. The consumers aren't doing it. Only one other option.

 

[child of wonder]

Clearly when my family budget is suffering the solution is to max out another credit card. When the bill collectors come calling, it is time to max out another credit card.

I must maintain my lifestyle at all costs and delay any negative repercussions as long as possible.

 

[Craig234]

I'm a strong advocate for deficit reduction.

But each good economist I've seen has said that the solution to the current crisis is a massive stimulus by the government - and that the fist effort is too small to do it.

They support a strong second stimulus. I suspect they're right.

We need to fix the economy, so that we can get rid of the deficit. This means many things - possibly higher taxes, cuts in subsidies and spending, etc.

The road we're on is one where the few get to buy up America on the cheap for their own good, but the country is greatly harmed, with a risk of money-printing and inflation.

 

[drebo]

The only "stimulus" that should be supported is a tax rebate to every citizen who actually OWED taxes last year. This puts money back in the pockets of consumers without it going through tons of dirty hands on the way down.

Give people the chance to stimulate themselves.

 

[Moonbeam]

Funny how you would mischaracterize the Republican stance on extending unemployment benefits (wouldn't "slash" anything, it would keep it how it is now), and then turn around and say the only way to do something is to offset spending in other areas... which is actually what the Republicans want the Dems to do before extending benefits... PAY for them by cutting something else instead of going further into debt.

Simple, let the tax cuts to the rich expire and up what they pay even more. The ones who don't like it can move to China.

 

[theeedude]

Your friend is right, but noone wants to admit it.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Your friend is right, but noone wants to admit it.

He's right, but in the wrong way. A stimulus IS needed. However, it needs to come not from the GOVERNMENT. But from BUSINESS. A lot of companies (Apple anyone?) are sitting on a TON of cash. They need to be encouraged to SPEND that cash.

How do you do that? Tax cuts and incentives. Give companies encouragement to spend it by not threatening top take it away in higher taxes.

 

[rudder]

I'm a strong advocate for deficit reduction.

But each good economist I've seen has said that the solution to the current crisis is a massive stimulus by the government - and that the fist effort is too small to do it.

They support a strong second stimulus. I suspect they're right.

You must have a whacked out definition of "good."

Government spending to get us out of a recessions is a lose/lose proposition. It is now and always has been a bad idea.

 

[Pens1566]

Your friend is right, but noone wants to admit it.

^ This. Every economist I've heard is saying the first was too small and the only solution is a 2nd, bigger one. But the wanna-be rich right wing blowhards around here that still live in their parent's basement will call them idiots.

 

[Throckmorton]

You must have a whacked out definition of "good."

Government spending to get us out of a recessions is a lose/lose proposition. It is now and always has been a bad idea.

Open a history book

 

[irishScott]

If his goal is to stimulate the deficit, sure.

 

[Jaskalas]

Another stimulus package: the only solution, my friend says?

If you want to fuel a government run economy, then government spending is the only solution.

 

[MotF Bane]

Someone is going to have to spend money to get us out of this rut. The companies aren't doing it. The consumers aren't doing it. Only one other option.

Has it occurred to you that both parties are waiting to see what kind of shitstorm the government is going to continue kicking up with its flailing?

 

[MotF Bane]

I'm a strong advocate for deficit reduction.

But each good economist I've seen has said that the solution to the current crisis is a massive stimulus by the government - and that the fist effort is too small to do it.

They support a strong second stimulus. I suspect they're right.

We need to fix the economy, so that we can get rid of the deficit. This means many things - possibly higher taxes, cuts in subsidies and spending, etc.

The road we're on is one where the few get to buy up America on the cheap for their own good, but the country is greatly harmed, with a risk of money-printing and inflation.

You only define good economists as those that agree with your opinion.

 

[MotF Bane]

OP: sorry, but your friend is a retard. He's a good example of the kind of moronic "thinking" that's driving the country into the ground and gotten us to this point in a mess. The country is due for a correction, for wasteful fat to be trimmed. These spending measures just prolong the inevitable and further damage our country by putting us into an even deeper hole.

Government does not create anything. Additional "stimulus" is just code for "more funding for unsustainable wasteful spending". It would go towards saving all the government jobs at state/city and local levels, further increasing long term government spending and decreasing the efficiency of the country.

No matter how much spenders try to twist the reality, spending money you don't have does not make sense unless you spend it in such a way as to increase future earnings by more than what it cost to finance the spending. That hasn't happened in the past, and until I see a solid plan for actual investments in long term growth (rather than the usual waste), I'm against any kind of additional stimulus.

/thread

 

[Fear No Evil]

Has it occurred to you that both parties are waiting to see what kind of shitstorm the government is going to continue kicking up with its flailing?

DING DING DING. We have a winner! Why is Apple sitting on BILLIONS of dollars of cash? They are scared of what government is going to do.

 

[JS80]

In practice stimulus = transfer of wealth from the collective to a few
Regardless, stimulus in a highly leveraged environment will only make it worse and lead to higher inflation when the tide turns.