If the majority of the money is for putting people to work, I'm all for it. We sure need better roads and bridges. I want to see where the money goes.
If the majority of the money is for putting people to work, I'm all for it. We sure need better roads and bridges. I want to see where the money goes.
I do not support the use of the so-called nuclear option by either party under any circumstances. Threatening to do so is one thing, if it achieves compromise and resolution, actually doing it would forever change the way the Senate does business, and not in a good way.
Had repubs done so a few years back in the judicial appointments squabble, dems would undoubtedly return the favor today, despite the hair-splitting by PJ and others.
As many have alluded to, the whole idea of a stimulus package is largely psychological, anyway. Hopefully, it gives people the confidence to spend and invest, even if they don't actually receive any of it themselves.
Had repubs done so a few years back in the judicial appointments squabble, dems would undoubtedly return the favor today, despite the hair-splitting by PJ and others.
As many have alluded to, the whole idea of a stimulus package is largely psychological, anyway. Hopefully, it gives people the confidence to spend and invest, even if they don't actually receive any of it themselves.
retrospooty
Platinum Member
- Apr 3, 2002
- 2,031
- 74
- 86
You gotta admit, this bill is full of pork - and crap. If the senate and/or Obama doesn't cut that crap ont he final bill that passes there are going to be alot of upset people, myself included... and the reps will gain back alot of the cred they lost.
I cant believe some of the stuid crap in that bill.
I cant believe some of the stuid crap in that bill.
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Exactly the point Red Dawn, that is what the debate in the Senate will be about.
But the GOP wants to totally rewrite the bill such that all the Stimulus bill becomes almost all direct rebates back to the tax payers based on borrowed money. With no resulting stimulation or infrastructure building. Or in other words, a continuation of GWB economic policies.
There will be a lot of smokescreen verbiage on both sides, but that is what it will boil down to. The idea of democratic investments or GOP based tax cut based on more spend and borrow.
I do not know how much compromise is possible on that clash.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
You know what would be great , if we had a publicforum like the English do where the different parties and the PM (or in our case, the President) could debate issues like this bill, especially now that we have a President who's capable of verbalizing his point without coming across like a moron. This way he and especially those who support the bill as it is could explain how all items included work to stimulate the economy. Odds are a lot of the items included wouldn't have been if it had to be explained publicly to the American voter.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
If Obama wanted some of the items off he would have said so. He is a typical democrat so far.. spend spend spend. GWB looks like a fiscal conservative next to Obama.
He may be saying that NOW that it looks like it may not pass. Before that he was throwing it in the GOP's face saying 'I won'. This is typical Obama..
You need to pull your head out of Obama's ass for long enough to realize this is a BAD BILL. You are so clouded by the tingle running up your leg you cannot admit it. The Republicans are right here and you know it - This bill needs to be redone. This bill is pure pork and needs to go down. This is not what people elected Obama for and NOT what he ran on.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Nice evasion.. I thought everyone was saying how intelligent Obama is and how he likes to consider all the facts before making decisions. Who is President.. him or Nancy Pelosi? Tell your President to grow a pair then and start telling these moron democrats in congress what he wants if its not this bloated POS bill. I suspect it IS what he wants, but now that the public caught it he's backing off. As I said, typical Obama.
'The Stimulus Plan'? What parts of it are pigshit? Which version of 'The Stimulus Plan' are you talking about? It doesn't even have a 'current form', it has a form that has passed one chamber of Congress that is not even being considered in the other, and even the form being looked at in the other chamber won't matter because the conference committee bill will be different than both of them.
Speaking of total fucking idiots...
If the Tax Cheats keep getting their nominations approved, with out being properly vetted, then you can expect gridlock.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
And you all need to 'get real' - 'confidence' has nothing to do with our woes- it's that people, in general, have no money to 'spend and invest' .. maybe you heard of collapse in employment, stagnation of wages for 30 years now, personal debt leveraged negative under new found old sound banking practices?!?!
What many people do not understand it's people at the bottom 80% that drive the whole economy, the top 20%, have money because, among other things, by their nature they don't spend, are frugal. They don't invest in new businesses, expand businesses, or do research and development or anything else if there's no demand. Demand drives the economy, not supply. Why would you invest in greater production capacity if no one is out there with money to spend? Good luck getting them to change their fiscal habits. The bottom labor pool OTOH makes things gets paid and spends like drunken sailors and the top reaps those benefits. However, they are totally broke and will remain so until policies are demanded which redistributes some profit back to the bottom. Everything from unions to shrinking the labor pool (H1B and illegals do not help) to higher marginal rates do this.
The MAIN problem with the economy of capitalism, our economy, is an endemic problem where wealth is concentrated in the hands of a select few. When dealing with a landless and destitute workforce, owners tend to get it all by their control of capital. The Term "original distribution" is a fantasy which will never happen - ie. where worker and owner get equal parts of profit of thier labors. Owners like to pay subsistence wages and eventually you have a work force fighting for starving wages because there's more workers than capital availiable. Eventually you get a depressed economy because investors don't invest in new businesses, expanding businesses, new equipment, research and development or anything else if there's no demand. There is no demand if there is no people out there with decent disposable income.
The way to fix this is to establish mechanisms to move wealth from the top back to the bottom. One simple way to do that is labor unions. The other simple solution is progressive taxation and low or no taxation at the bottom. Our modestly unionized, progressively taxed economy from the end of the war into the mid-1970's was just amazingly prosperous almost to the bottom of society. Also, every "rich" country has capitalism with strong redistributionist undertones. There was a lot of prosperity under Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Clinton because their policies put money in the pockets of the people on the bottom, creating demand and stimulating investment.
Republicans, in general, are thinking two move chess ahead against a four move opponent. They strive for policy that that furthers the divide and short term profit taking hence their crappy economies. Every republican president but Reagan left office with higher unemployment than they came in with. . They seek to eliminate taxes on where the wealthy get their money, primarily capital gains and dividends. They hate unions and the minimum wage like the devil hates holy water. If the economic history of the United States proves one thing it is that wealth get concentrated in few hands during Republican admins and the economy goes in the toilet top to bottom because they are also eventually hurt by by slow sales their paltry wages are yielding. They actually know this, but there is a thing called competition among them which makes paying high impossible for the most part...If I pay a guy $20 a hour to work in my liquor store I will lose money to my competition and over the whole deal and maybe go broke myself but if forced I woudnt. Also CEO's and business owners have a duty to maximize profit and minimize liabilities (wages). Makes for an interesting struggle and I hope Obama gets on board with redistribution rather than borrow/soon print and spend which is really a tax on the poor because of inflationary results.
Bad plan, period. You'll see.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter