The purposes aren't new, or sudden. They have been spelled out hundreds if not thousands of times from before the bill was even drafted: to stimulate the economy while addressing other issues that America currently faces. Poor research spending in some areas, technological upgrades, poor infrastructure, etc. etc.
The purposes aren't new, or sudden. They have been spelled out hundreds if not thousands of times from before the bill was even drafted: to stimulate the economy while addressing other issues that America currently faces. Poor research spending in some areas, technological upgrades, poor infrastructure, etc. etc.
I bet they did. If the people have realized the truth about the bill, then surely you won't mind Obama giving his side of the story for awhile.
People who understand stimulus disagree, strongly.
Or is the Cato institute and all those economists at those universities...wingnuts?
I missed that one.
First of all, these purposes are new or sudden. You just missed them because the GOP has been concentrating a lot of energy to control the media and spin it in such a way where a lot of the secondary purposes were ignored.
This plan is being called a recovery plan for a reason. There are many things in this country which are not working well as a result of the economy and other various problems. The entire idea is the following:
1. To preserve what we have now.
2. To create some quick stimulus to get the ball rolling in the near future to the point where it is hopefully able to take care of itself again effectively
3. To work towards the later future through various improvements.
That is a very general way of putting it and I am sure you will ready to start typing with your middle fingers about how you think it is a bunch of BS, but that is the bottom line. The GOP has done nothing but try to sell to the public that bill is only supposed to be about #2 and that #1 and #3 should not even exist. That IS NOT what Obama has been trying to sell. He has been trying to sell the whole picture while primarily focusing on #2 since it is currently the most important.
Again, you may agree or disagree with as much as the bill as you wish, but understand that just because you do not believe that certain things should be in there it does not mean that they are not intended to be there in order to fulfill its entire purpose. Therefore, it is not pork.
Yah sure it is because you said it was. And all those economists are working at all those right wing universities.
The Cato Institute is a self described libertarian think tank. As far as economics go, libertarianism is about as far to the right as you can go. So no, it's not because he said it was, it's because they say they are.
The purpose of their ad was to call out Obama for saying there is 'no disagreement' on the need for a stimulus package, and they were right on that. Your post that 'people who understand stimulus disagree strongly', is equally misleading however as there are legions and legions of economists, professors, and Nobel laureates who strongly agree that we need a stimulus package.
Exactly, the real debate is all about how to properly stimulate the country. It is not about whether or not we need it period. What is both interesting and disappointing is that I rarely see or hear about any stimulus opposers talking about different and well thought out ways to stimulate the economy beyond doing nothing and letting the market magically fix itself. I agree that our market it a powerful entity, but the idea here is to give it a boost so there is a lot less suffering and much faster recovery.
MovingTarget
Diamond Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 9,002
- 115
- 106
Yeah, and get lambasted for not sticking to his campaign promises. I guess he should just ignore everything he said in the campaign and switch to "governing" mode. I guess you mean govern how YOU want instead of how he said he would govern. Good one, winnar!
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Except how does any of that fit into "stimulus", "jobs" and "must pass it now" or the world will end gum flapping he and the libs congress critters have been doing?
Also, there is plenty of time and plenty of POLICY and SPENDING bills that BHO could put forward instead of trying to cram/hide it all in one bill - no? But no, he won't because he knows those won't stand up in the sunlight so he bleats on and on about EMERGENCY! and CATASTROPHE!
Hmmm... didn't you libs have a problem with Bush doing this sort of thing with Iraq even though there multiple reasons to do what we did?
Seems to me his rhetoric doesn't add up here.
bolded part is true. then perhaps you should keep your mouth shut and start listen.
the real problem with Bush administration is not what he did, its what he didn't do...basically he has done NOTHING for our economics, while kept trying to push for more military spending.
economics does not go up or down over night, its YEARS and YEARS of Bush neglecting our worsing finance industry,at the same time increasiing military cost, that has got us where we are today. Had he done anything... ANYTHING at all, we would not be so deeply in the hole as we are.
Obama may or may not suceed in rescuing our economics, but at very least he is being honest about, this economics will require many years to recover. He also tries hard, and tries his best, and focuses on the economy and tries to act ASAP. a Depression is a failure in economic FOUNDATION, during 8 yrs of Bush presidency, our foundation has been demolished to nada.
The only person in history who brought us back from the Great Depression was Franklin D. Roosevelt., and at the same time he build the great foundation that has lasted for many many years. Had you not skipped your college history GE class, you would have found nearly 100% similiarity between Roosevelt and Obama 's economic rescue plan. No one knows if its gonna work now, but at least Obama tries.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
:laugh: and the morAn is you. None of those polls address what I stated. I posted the polls in one of the many threads around on this subject. I could go find it again if you are to blind or stupid to look for yourself.
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Except how does any of that fit into "stimulus", "jobs" and "must pass it now" or the world will end gum flapping he and the libs congress critters have been doing?
Also, there is plenty of time and plenty of POLICY and SPENDING bills that BHO could put forward instead of trying to cram/hide it all in one bill - no? But no, he won't because he knows those won't stand up in the sunlight so he bleats on and on about EMERGENCY! and CATASTROPHE!
Hmmm... didn't you libs have a problem with Bush doing this sort of thing with Iraq even though there multiple reasons to do what we did?
Seems to me his rhetoric doesn't add up here.
Actually, I would be perfectly fine with him doing it either way but I don't know if both ways will get the job done in a timely fashion. I voted for him to make those kinds of decisions for me and I am happy so far. The man listed problems that he wanted to solve during his campaign and the vast majority of funding, minus the 2.7% that is pork, contributes to such things imo. He could also separate it all into a different bill and I would be ok with it, but part of playing politics and being a good leader is understanding how to get a group of people to work together towards a common goal. If sticking a ton of it into one bill makes that happen then it is good leadership skills.
Face it. The problem here isn't so much that a lot of different things are in this bill. The real problem you have is what specifically is in it.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
:laugh: Another FDR knobslobber... go figure... FDR was a failure and has caused us many of the problems we have today with his new deal crap. It created more dependence on the gov't and it has snowballed since then. What we don't need is more gov't dependence so while you are correct about BHO being like FDR(to a point) you are dead wrong about the policies being good.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Except how does any of that fit into "stimulus", "jobs" and "must pass it now" or the world will end gum flapping he and the libs congress critters have been doing?
Also, there is plenty of time and plenty of POLICY and SPENDING bills that BHO could put forward instead of trying to cram/hide it all in one bill - no? But no, he won't because he knows those won't stand up in the sunlight so he bleats on and on about EMERGENCY! and CATASTROPHE!
Hmmm... didn't you libs have a problem with Bush doing this sort of thing with Iraq even though there multiple reasons to do what we did?
Seems to me his rhetoric doesn't add up here.
Actually, I would be perfectly fine with him doing it either way. The man listed problems that he wanted to solve during his campaign and the vast majority of funding, minus the 2.7% that is pork, contributes to such things imo. He could also separate it all into a different bill and I would be ok with it, but part of playing politics and being a good leader is understanding how to get a group of people to work together towards a common goal. If sticking a ton of it into one bill makes that happen then it is good leadership skills.
Face it. The problem here isn't so much that a lot of different things are in this bill. The real problem you have is what specifically is in it.
He campaigned on a "stimulus" that was about 1/5th the size of this one. That one he campaigned on would be infinately better than the BS bill(s) we have now.
Of course FDR was a failure... of course he was.
According the the compilation of studies by historians, political scientists, professors of law from across the ideological spectrum, FDR was ranked as one of the three best presidents in all of American history. When you include public opinion surveys as well, FDR never fares worse than the 5th best president of all time.
But who are the people who actually know what they are talking about to judge? FDR was a failure according to CAD! Who is the entire rest of the country to say? CAD knows best! I guess the majority of the remainder of humanity is just a bunch of FDR knobslobbers.
prove? bringing us out of the great depression is a failure? wtf?
[/quote]
FYI, many states are already bankrupt.. so you want all state governments to disassemble due to bankrupsy? which will end up with only one single federal governemnt? wtf is wrong with you?
MovingTarget
Diamond Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 9,002
- 115
- 106
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Except how does any of that fit into "stimulus", "jobs" and "must pass it now" or the world will end gum flapping he and the libs congress critters have been doing?
Also, there is plenty of time and plenty of POLICY and SPENDING bills that BHO could put forward instead of trying to cram/hide it all in one bill - no? But no, he won't because he knows those won't stand up in the sunlight so he bleats on and on about EMERGENCY! and CATASTROPHE!
Hmmm... didn't you libs have a problem with Bush doing this sort of thing with Iraq even though there multiple reasons to do what we did?
Seems to me his rhetoric doesn't add up here.
Actually, I would be perfectly fine with him doing it either way. The man listed problems that he wanted to solve during his campaign and the vast majority of funding, minus the 2.7% that is pork, contributes to such things imo. He could also separate it all into a different bill and I would be ok with it, but part of playing politics and being a good leader is understanding how to get a group of people to work together towards a common goal. If sticking a ton of it into one bill makes that happen then it is good leadership skills.
Face it. The problem here isn't so much that a lot of different things are in this bill. The real problem you have is what specifically is in it.
He campaigned on a "stimulus" that was about 1/5th the size of this one. That one he campaigned on would be infinately better than the BS bill(s) we have now.
You are aware that much of the financial situation in this country has been changed since he began his campaign? Have you seen any of the data out since November? To not change your approach given new data is pure idiocy. Sure, he could have kept a little more of his original bill, but I can understand why he didn't keep it entirely the way it was. Remember, it has only been a few weeks.
Geez, this thread is so contradictory it isn't even funny. First the resident repubs claim that he hasn't "switched from campaign to leadership mode" i.e. changed his policies to suit current reality, and yet they also b*tch about doing just that, i.e. changing from his campaign positions to suit what is going on better. Gimme a break.
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: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter