I need some clairfiaction on Obama's econ plan...

[mooseracing]

I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

Well from people making 250K or more duh

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

Well from people making 250K or more duh

Or the greedy oil companies.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

Well from people making 250K or more duh

Or the greedy oil companies.

True, bringing in record profits. Wonder what happens now that oil has tanked? Think that talking point is off the table again?

 

[JS80]

I think the better question is what are these people going to do after the projects are over? Be unemployed again and re-enter a recession? Or are they going to sit in job banks and government grows even more?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: JS80
I think the better question is what are these people going to do after the projects are over? Be unemployed again and re-enter a recession? Or are they going to sit in job banks and government grows even more?

I thikn the answer is pretty clear. How many govt programs get shut down?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

Only if you used the stupidest possible method of evaluating those two things. Are you doing this on purpose?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

Only if you used the stupidest possible method of evaluating those two things. Are you doing this on purpose?

I think adding to our debt is BAD...period. But thanks for enlightening me with your typical partisan spin.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD

Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this.

Bout time

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

Only if you used the stupidest possible method of evaluating those two things. Are you doing this on purpose?

Come on your change of tune is like night and day. Deficit spending under Bush was terrible. Under Obama is ok because of a recession and these supposed infrastructure upgrades.

Bush deficit spent his way out of the recession of 01-02 but Ill assume that was bad in your view?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

Only if you used the stupidest possible method of evaluating those two things. Are you doing this on purpose?

I think adding to our debt is BAD...period. But thanks for enlightening me with your typical partisan spin.

Have you ever heard the saying 'if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail'? That appears to be your problem. You are so constantly trying to detect partisanship in everything that you are incapable of evaluating issues on the merits. Did it ever occur to you that someone could view deficit spending to finance extralegal wars that harm US national security as bad, but view deficit spending to build better roads and schools while attempting to avert economic catastrophe as good? That this view could exist independent of partisanship?

Of course not. It must just be people cheering for their political football team, because all you have is an intellectual hammer.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Come on your change of tune is like night and day. Deficit spending under Bush was terrible. Under Obama is ok because of a recession and these supposed infrastructure upgrades.

Bush deficit spent his way out of the recession of 01-02 but Ill assume that was bad in your view?

Oh really? Why don't you try arguing against what I've actually said as opposed to what you think I said? For some reason you and our good friend Doc Savage think that I need to respond as if I were some amalgamation of left wing posters on here.

My two enduring criticisms of Bush were that he financed tax cuts for the rich with deficits as part on overarching policy independent of economic conditions. I've always been a supporter of Keynesian economics, and when Bush passed the economic stimulus package in the beginning of the year I supported that in principle.

What burns me about Bush's deficit spending is that we have literally nothing to show for it. If you go a billion dollars into debt to build a bridge, at least you have a bridge out of it. A billion dollars in debt for a billionaire gives us exactly what?

 

[dullard]

From Obama himself (go to his website):

1) Tax more people and businesses. This means closing international tax loopholes and domestic tax loopholes.
2) Eliminating tax breaks for companies.
3) Calling more forms of income as income. Right now a single small business owner can pay himself $30,000 of salary and $200,000 of dividends. The $30k would be taxed at the 15% income tax bracket since the income is so low and the $200k would be taxed at the dividend tax bracket (15% or lower). Obama would call that $230k of salary which is in the 33% tax bracket.
4) Repeal (or let lapse) the Bush tax cuts for the top tax brackets and readjust the brackets so that anyone making over $250k has increased taxes and under $250k is lowered or flat taxes.
5) Raise capital gains and TRUE dividend taxes to 20% for top earners.
6) Keep the estate tax for estates over $7 million per couple but end the rest.
7) Reduce or end some government programs.

He certainly won't be able to pass all of that. But of course, he won't be able to pass all of his spending increases either. Hopefully they roughly match.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: dullard
From Obama himself (go to his website):

1) Tax more people and businesses. This means closing international tax loopholes and domestic tax loopholes.
2) Eliminating tax breaks for companies.
3) Calling more forms of income as income. Right now a single small business owner can pay himself $30,000 of salary and $200,000 of dividends. The $30k would be taxed at the 15% income tax bracket since the income is so low and the $200k would be taxed at the dividend tax bracket (15% or lower). Obama would call that $230k of salary which is in the 33% tax bracket.
4) Repeal (or let lapse) the Bush tax cuts for the top tax brackets and readjust the brackets so that anyone making over $250k has increased taxes and under $250k is lowered or flat taxes.
5) Raise capital gains and TRUE dividend taxes to 20% for top earners.
6) Keep the estate tax for estates over $7 million per couple but end the rest.
7) Reduce or end some government programs.

He certainly won't be able to pass all of that. But of course, he won't be able to pass all of his spending increases either. Hopefully they roughly match.

You are wrong on #3. Pass through entities such as S-Corps the income goes directly to the owner's income on their tax form and pays standard income tax rates, NOT dividend rates. If it is a C-Corp there is double taxation - once at the corporate rate, and then again at the dividend rate.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Come on your change of tune is like night and day. Deficit spending under Bush was terrible. Under Obama is ok because of a recession and these supposed infrastructure upgrades.

Bush deficit spent his way out of the recession of 01-02 but Ill assume that was bad in your view?

What exactly did he spend the deficit money on?

Ohh yeah, 2 wars where we support foreign countries, blow shit up, and shove equipment and men into a meat grinder.

Then, we give tax breaks to the rich.

Wow, great use of money. Way better than schools, roads, and bridges built in the US (not Iraq and afghanistan).

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Genx87

Come on your change of tune is like night and day. Deficit spending under Bush was terrible. Under Obama is ok because of a recession and these supposed infrastructure upgrades.

Bush deficit spent his way out of the recession of 01-02 but Ill assume that was bad in your view?

What exactly did he spend the deficit money on?

Ohh yeah, 2 wars where we support foreign countries, blow shit up, and shove equipment and men into a meat grinder.

Then, we give tax breaks to the rich.

Wow, great use of money. Way better than schools, roads, and bridges built in the US (not Iraq and afghanistan).

What, No Child Left behind and the Drug Benefit plan dont work for you? Two social service plans that added billions to the budget.

Tax breaks to top 50% or selling bonds. Does it really matter where the money comes from? I am trying to guage people's views of deficit spending from one administration to the next.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm slightly confused and not finding the answers I was looking for when using google.

So he wants to start more gov jobs that will do road/bridge work, school buildings, and broadband access.

I'm confused to where the money is actually going to come from in the end. I mean the workers have to be paid, we have to get more equipment, we have to get the materials and so on. Road Repair and bridge fixing/construction is not cheap when done correctly.

The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

So in the end is this whole process just going to add to our national debt or am I missing a corner of this confuzing puzzle?

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

Don`t be bitter that Obama won........but then again you probably voted republican because you felt Sarah Palin was qualified...lolol

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: Genx87
What, No Child Left behind and the Drug Benefit plan dont work for you? Two social service plans that added billions to the budget.

No Child Left Behind is a disaster. My mother is a teacher, and the standards of teaching have gotten so shot to Hell with NCLB that basically all they're reduced to is teaching to the lowest common denominator so that as many children as possible can make their way through a standardized test. So what do they teach? Rote facts. No critical thinking or anything like that, because how do you build a standardized test around that? And what are you left with? A bunch of students who make their way through high school memorizing dates and places, forgetting them as soon as they're no longer relevant, and having no concept of real research or critical analysis. And sure, you could try to switch it up and teach critical thinking, but then the students don't know the specific date the Magna Carta was signed, and they get a lower score on the standardized test, and the school loses money, because apparently schools with lower scores need less money, not more... What the fuck?

NCLB is an absolute fucking travesty. That Bush would have to hold it up as a sign of success shows just how miserable this presidency has been.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Genx87

Come on your change of tune is like night and day. Deficit spending under Bush was terrible. Under Obama is ok because of a recession and these supposed infrastructure upgrades.

Bush deficit spent his way out of the recession of 01-02 but Ill assume that was bad in your view?

What exactly did he spend the deficit money on?

Ohh yeah, 2 wars where we support foreign countries, blow shit up, and shove equipment and men into a meat grinder.

Then, we give tax breaks to the rich.

Wow, great use of money. Way better than schools, roads, and bridges built in the US (not Iraq and afghanistan).

What, No Child Left behind and the Drug Benefit plan dont work for you? Two social service plans that added billions to the budget.

Tax breaks to top 50% or selling bonds. Does it really matter where the money comes from? I am trying to guage people's views of deficit spending from one administration to the next.

Where did I ever criticize the principle of adding a drug benefit to medicare? The only problem I ever had with it was the refusal to allow the government to negotiate for lower prices with the drug companies but that's an efficiency thing, not a principle thing.

I've never even argued for smaller government budgets on the whole. If anything I've argued for larger ones.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: Genx87
What, No Child Left behind and the Drug Benefit plan dont work for you? Two social service plans that added billions to the budget.

No Child Left Behind is a disaster. My mother is a teacher, and the standards of teaching have gotten so shot to Hell with NCLB that basically all they're reduced to is teaching to the lowest common denominator so that as many children as possible can make their way through a standardized test. So what do they teach? Rote facts. No critical thinking or anything like that, because how do you build a standardized test around that? And what are you left with? A bunch of students who make their way through high school memorizing dates and places, forgetting them as soon as they're no longer relevant, and having no concept of real research or critical analysis. And sure, you could try to switch it up and teach critical thinking, but then the students don't know the specific date the Magna Carta was signed, and they get a lower score on the standardized test, and the school loses money, because apparently schools with lower scores need less money, not more... What the fuck?

NCLB is an absolute fucking travesty. That Bush would have to hold it up as a sign of success shows just how miserable this presidency has been.

I am not going to argue it is a good program, but a program none the less. And what you describe was happening well before NCLB came along.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: mooseracing
The internet broadband I don't understand how that is fully going to help anything. No one NEEDS internet access, it's a luxury.

It's not that people need broadband, it's that schools need broadband. Our students need experience with the internet if our nation is going to remain competitive on the world market in the future. There's no way you can deny that.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: Genx87
What, No Child Left behind and the Drug Benefit plan dont work for you? Two social service plans that added billions to the budget.

No Child Left Behind is a disaster. My mother is a teacher, and the standards of teaching have gotten so shot to Hell with NCLB that basically all they're reduced to is teaching to the lowest common denominator so that as many children as possible can make their way through a standardized test. So what do they teach? Rote facts. No critical thinking or anything like that, because how do you build a standardized test around that? And what are you left with? A bunch of students who make their way through high school memorizing dates and places, forgetting them as soon as they're no longer relevant, and having no concept of real research or critical analysis. And sure, you could try to switch it up and teach critical thinking, but then the students don't know the specific date the Magna Carta was signed, and they get a lower score on the standardized test, and the school loses money, because apparently schools with lower scores need less money, not more... What the fuck?

NCLB is an absolute fucking travesty. That Bush would have to hold it up as a sign of success shows just how miserable this presidency has been.

I am not going to argue it is a good program, but a program none the less. And what you describe was happening well before NCLB came along.

NCLB guaranteed that schools with lower test scores would receive less funding. This was not the case before NCLB. WTF are you smoking?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

The money will likely come from deficit spending. Most economists believe that deficit spending is a smart move in a large economic downturn as it helps mitigate them. The good thing about this sort of spending on infrastructure is that unlike the deficits we've been running up the past 8 years, we will have something to show for it in terms of education, internet access, improved transportation networks, etc.

The internet has been one of the primary vehicles of productivity and economic growth over the last decade. Expanding access to this for all Americans increases not only the quality of their life, but the economic benefits that can be realized for groups and business.

So yes, it is going to add to our national debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.

Escalation of nation debt by Republicans - BAD
Escalation of nation debt by Democrats - GOOD

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. Lol.

Only if you used the stupidest possible method of evaluating those two things. Are you doing this on purpose?

I think adding to our debt is BAD...period. But thanks for enlightening me with your typical partisan spin.

Have you ever heard the saying 'if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail'? That appears to be your problem. You are so constantly trying to detect partisanship in everything that you are incapable of evaluating issues on the merits. Did it ever occur to you that someone could view deficit spending to finance extralegal wars that harm US national security as bad, but view deficit spending to build better roads and schools while attempting to avert economic catastrophe as good? That this view could exist independent of partisanship?

Of course not. It must just be people cheering for their political football team, because all you have is an intellectual hammer.

Assuming your questions were not rhetorical:
"Did it ever occur to you that someone could view deficit spending to finance extralegal wars that harm US national security as bad, but view deficit spending to build better roads and schools while attempting to avert economic catastrophe as good?" - YES (I think most everyone would agree with this)
"That this view could exist independent of partisanship?" - FOR SOME YES, BUT FOR YOU NO (answer based on your past history of highly partisan posts?IMO, you're deluding yourself if you think otherwise)

For the record...I'm fully capable of evaluating issues on their merits?I just happen to believe that responsible government starts with responsible spending and debt management. If I had to make a choice in picking a deficit spending poison?I'd pick roads and schools?who wouldn't? But who in their right mind would swallow one poison and, then realizing that it was a big mistake, turn around and swallow another? But oooooo?.the second poison tastes soooo much better!!! And it will definitely help us avert economic catastrophe as well?yeah right. Irresponsible economic practices got us into this mess in the first place and I have a tough time believing that continued irresponsible economic practices will get us out of it.

Well...I've evaluated the merits of your reasoning and I think your argument is weak at best. But don't despair?as usual...you get an A+ for partisan rationalization. Keep up the good work!