| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 2:41 pm Post subject: Stimulus Bill--Final Version Passes |
 |
|
While details are still incomplete, it appears the package, as initially brought to the Senate floor, will be scaled back by about $82 billion in spending reductions and $25 billion in tax cuts. In addition, tax cuts approved on the Senate floor this week for car and home purchases would be modified, and the total bill then would be in the range of $800 billion.
Lost in the process�or scaled back significantly� are some important Democratic initiatives and at least $47 billion in promised aid to the states. New Pell Grant funding is largely preserved, but $16 billion in school construction funds would be cut, and increases for popular programs like Head Start cut in half.
Obama�s own agenda is not immune. The deal would trim back new funds committed for expanding broadband access and improving the electrical grid as well as investments in health information technology.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=4D06DC0B-18FE-70B2-A8FCB72B5CCFB694
I'm not very happy with this at all.
The report I heard was that (at this time) 42% of it would be for tax cuts in return for only 2 or 3 Republican votes. Moody's says non-refundable tax cuts only create $1.02 for each dollar spent while infrastructure spending generates $1.59. Food stamps generate $1.73.
According to the report above Head Start funds were cut 50%. I think that's terrible. Hiring teachers is job creation. Building schools is job creation. And they are an investment in the future.
At this point, I think the Democrats should cancel the deal and go back to their original bill and pass it as is. All this bipartisanship has only gained 3 Republican votes total. Not worth watering down the bill for that tiny amount of support.
Also, the Dems should add a rider: The stimulus money will be spent in districts whose representatives supported the bill. Clearly districts that didn't support the bill don't feel they need any of the money.
Last edited by Ya-ta Boy on Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Your prefer the original Porkulus Bill?
What the Democrats in Congress did was throw in a lot of special interest spending in the mix, assuming it will pass without anyone bothering to read it.
| Quote: |
$50 million for the National Endowment For the Arts
$380 million in the Senate bill for the Women, Infants and Children's program
$300 million for grants to combat violence against women
$1.2 billion to provide youth summer jobs, and this bill defines "Youth" to people up to the age of 24
$2.4 billion for neighborhood stabilization activities
$650 million for digital TV coupons
$150 million for the Smithsonian
$34 million to renovate the Department of Commerce headquarters
$44 million for repairs to the Department of Agriculture headquarters
$88 million to help move the Public Health Service into a new building, not for a new building. To help them move to a new building.
$1 billion dollars for the census bureau
$87 million for a polar ice breaking ship. Let's not look too deeply into why we would need a polar ice breaking ship if the poles are melting and won't have any ice!
$160 million for paid volunteers at the Corporation for National and Community Service for the community volunteers. PAID VOLUNTEERS?!?!?
|
Obama says the US economy may NEVER RECOVER if Congress doesn't pass those things in the Stimulus Bill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It's a spending bill. While I disagree with the idea of a "stimulus", such a plan would be quite a great deal different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| It's a spending bill. While I disagree with the idea of a "stimulus", such a plan would be quite a great deal different. |
Really? Wow, are you sure about that?
Judging by the language used by Obama and Democrat leaders, this bill will MAKE or BREAK American economy FOREVER.
Of course, Obama is the "People's Champion" and would never lie (*cough* no lobbyists in my cabinet *cough*) or deceive the public like the evil Bush. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What the Democrats in Congress did was throw in a lot of special interest spending in the mix |
Which amounted to something like 2% of the total. All of this frothing at the mouth and foot dragging has been about 2% of the bill...while almost 600,000 people lost their job in January. How many of those were heads of families? While 3.something million jobs have been lost in the last year, half of those jobs have been lost in the last 3 months--the thing is falling off a cliff.
There are a good number of very smart people saying the bill is way too small. No one really knows how effective it will be when it finally passes. And it's only part of what needs to be done. There is the bank mess that still hasn't been stabilized.
| Quote: |
$380 million in the Senate bill for the Women, Infants and Children's program
$1.2 billion to provide youth summer jobs, and this bill defines "Youth" to people up to the age of 24
160 million for paid volunteers at the Corporation for National and Community Service for the community volunteers. PAID VOLUNTEERS |
All three of those are about food and money in the pockets of real people. That's what stimulus is all about.
From the tone of your posts over the last months, I get the feeling that you wouldn't support a stimulus bill no matter what was in it, so what's the real point of complaining about a few minor details when you object to the whole idea? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
From the tone of your posts over the last months, I get the feeling that you wouldn't support a stimulus bill no matter what was in it, so what's the real point of complaining about a few minor details when you object to the whole idea? |
You are partially correct on that. I believe that the best way for the economy to turn around is for Americans to spend money, not the government.
Yes, I would support a sound Stimulus bill which would FOCUS on giving the economy a shot in the arm.
I absolutely am against extra "pork" thrown into the bill. I'm a fiscal conservative. I think it is outrageous that politicians can say, "Oh, there is already $100's of BIllions in this bill. I'll throw in my own little $100 million project here and no one will notice." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| What the Democrats in Congress did was throw in a lot of special interest spending in the mix |
Which amounted to something like 2% of the total. All of this frothing at the mouth and foot dragging has been about 2% of the bill...while almost 600,000 people lost their job in January. How many of those were heads of families? While 3.something million jobs have been lost in the last year, half of those jobs have been lost in the last 3 months--the thing is falling off a cliff.
There are a good number of very smart people saying the bill is way too small. No one really knows how effective it will be when it finally passes. And it's only part of what needs to be done. There is the bank mess that still hasn't been stabilized.
| Quote: |
$380 million in the Senate bill for the Women, Infants and Children's program
$1.2 billion to provide youth summer jobs, and this bill defines "Youth" to people up to the age of 24
160 million for paid volunteers at the Corporation for National and Community Service for the community volunteers. PAID VOLUNTEERS |
All three of those are about food and money in the pockets of real people. That's what stimulus is all about.
From the tone of your posts over the last months, I get the feeling that you wouldn't support a stimulus bill no matter what was in it, so what's the real point of complaining about a few minor details when you object to the whole idea? |
The government is like a heroin addict. Now, it is suffering from a kind of financial withdrawal following the previous binge. So, we give the addict another even bigger dose of H.
Giving heroine to addicts and deficit spending by the Government - neither will help those unemployed nor the suffering families.
Ponzi Economics has failed.
Yata, you need to wake up to the fact that the policies that you are advocating have been proven to make things worse. You are advocating hurting the people you claim to want to help. People on this board, people who actually care about the unemployed, the poor and suffering families, and actually understand and have studied economics for years keep explaining these things to you.
How awful for you when you find out that you helped to cause the problem and the suffering.
How awful for you when you are sleeping under that bridge in Iowa and you realize that it was the people and policies, that you followed and advocated for, that put you there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Yes, I would support a sound Stimulus bill which would FOCUS on giving the economy a shot in the arm.
|
So 98% stimulus, 2% pork is unacceptable. You wouldn't happen to be a born-again Christian true-believer, would you? All or nothing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
Yes, I would support a sound Stimulus bill which would FOCUS on giving the economy a shot in the arm.
|
So 98% stimulus, 2% pork is unacceptable. You wouldn't happen to be a born-again Christian true-believer, would you? All or nothing. |
Ya-Ta, by what criteria can we judge the "stimulus" successful or not. Also, what time line? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good question which I don't have a good answer for.
I'd be ecstatic if the total unemployment rate levels off by the end of the year.
Other things I'll be looking for are improvements in the infrastructure everyone has been talking about and progress in the new electrical grid and internet access. Soooo, around election time '10.
I'm waiting to hear about Geithner's plan. I'm going to want to see things straighten out in the banking sector and money starting to flow again. The stimulus ain't gonna have any good effect if that mess doesn't improve.
Basically what I'm looking for the stimulus to do is to stop things getting worse than they are now. That is success in my book. I'm not one who thinks government can do everything; I just want it to be used as a tool to do what it can. Ultimately, business has to straighten itself out and step up to the plate.
Addendum:
I'm also not expecting the stimulus bill to fix the rest of the world's economies. The US won't recover till other countries also start to recover. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The job losses will last for q1 and some of q2 of 2009. The US is already at somewhere near 13% unemployment.
|
If true, all the better for Obama and the Dems. It'll help make them look good while driving a stake through the heart of 'Government isn't the solution; government is the problem' thinking.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
The job losses will last for q1 and some of q2 of 2009. The US is already at somewhere near 13% unemployment.
|
If true, all the better for Obama and the Dems. It'll help make them look good while driving a stake through the heart of 'Government isn't the solution; government is the problem' thinking. |
It also means the stimulus is unnecessary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nosmallplans
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: noksapyeong
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I WANT BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It also means the stimulus is unnecessary. |
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
With 1.5 million jobs being lost in the last couple of months, I suspect things are not going to be all peppy by the end of the year. But it's fun to fantasize. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
