The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   The American stimulus package (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=168563)

Gengarchomp February 10th, 2009 8:22 PM

The American stimulus package
 
With the economy in the worst recession since the Great Depression, Congress has decided to pass a Stimulus Package (here is the link to an online version if anyone wants to read it: http://readthestimulus.org/) which will cost $819 billion dollars. The package is supposed to create or save 4 million jobs by 2010. In my opinion, this is completely ridiculous. Not only would this create jobs for roughly 1% of America, which would, by the way, be temporary construction jobs, but it would cost $205 Thousand per job. That is such a massive amount of money to waste that it would likely bankrupt the U.S, but also the countries that depend on America for their own economic survival. Since there is a pretty good chance that this will fail in the long run, and that almost all jobs created would likely be temporary, in addition to the fact that the next 3 or 4 generations will be paying this off, can anyone really think that wonton spending will solve anything?

BenjiTheKid February 10th, 2009 8:44 PM

I honestly don't know what to think of it yet.

On one hand, it will help some families to get back on their feet for a while. However, when it runs out- if they're still at the same dead-end job- it won't do much to help. On the other hand, it seems a lot of money to waste while we're in such a terrible recession.

Agent Cobalt February 10th, 2009 9:05 PM

Since when hasn't spending trillions, enslaving future generations of Americans with debt, and integrating socialism into the economy helped us? After all, spending got us out of the Great Depression and Jimmy Carter's recession. Oh wait.

This whole situation was brought about because of government intervention in our economy, and the dumbies like Barnie Frank and Chris Dodd that created this mess are the geniuses we need to fix this? Why can't the people demand their representatives legislate and execute the law along the guidelines of the Constitution? I have to wonder if the jerks in Congress that can't be bothered to read the spending bills they vote to pass because they're hundreds of pages long even have the time to read the Constitution.

I wish we'd stop thinking that the government's job is to ensure the general welfare rather than promote it; that they'd stop supporting the nanny state. I wish we'd return to Laissez-faire economics and remember that government that governs best governs least. But then if the Obama administration and the do-nothing stalinists in Congress want to ruin our currency, raise taxes, give in to big labor and the unions, and start a trading war with Europe, Canada, and our other trading partners, then by all means let them.

Hope. Change. Obey.

Gengarchomp February 10th, 2009 9:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent Cobalt (Post 4349241)
Since when hasn't spending trillions, enslaving future generations of Americans with debt, and integrating socialism into the economy helped us? After all, spending got us out of the Great Depression and Jimmy Carter's recession. Oh wait.

This whole situation was brought about because of government intervention in our economy, and the dumbies like Barnie Frank and Chris Dodd that created this mess are the geniuses we need to fix this? Why can't the people demand their representatives legislate and execute the law along the guidelines of the Constitution? I have to wonder if the jerks in Congress that can't be bothered to read the spending bills they vote to pass because they're hundreds of pages long even have the time to read the Constitution.

I wish we'd stop thinking that the government's job is to ensure the general welfare rather than promote it; that they'd stop supporting the nanny state. I wish we'd return to Laissez-faire economics and remember that government that governs best governs least. But then if the Obama administration and the do-nothing stalinists in Congress want to ruin our currency, raise taxes, give in to big labor and the unions, and start a trading war with Europe, Canada, and our other trading partners, then by all means let them.

Hope. Change. Obey.

I completely agree with this post. It has been about three weeks since America became an "Obamanation," and I've already had enough change. I miss captialism already. If government decides to just inflate the economy for every little downturn, we're doomed. A free market economy is bound to have some recessions, and it is best to just let them go away naturally. If anything, this package will make things worse.

Agent Cobalt February 10th, 2009 9:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gengarchomp (Post 4349260)
I completely agree with this post. It has been about three weeks since America became an "Obamanation," and I've already had enough change. I miss captialism already. If government decides to just inflate the economy for every little downturn, we're doomed. A free market economy is bound to have some recessions, and it is best to just let them go away naturally. If anything, this package will make things worse.

You got that right. Free markets for free people. :cool:

Guest123_x1 February 13th, 2009 5:36 PM

unmitigated disaster
 
The federal government is once again, experimenting with failed economic policies that will only make things worse in the long run and continuing to prop up the biggest financial bubble in history with dangerous monetary pumping, "bridge loans", trillion dollar "recovery packages", among other things-all in the name of "jump starting the economy", "reducing unemployment", even "saving the middle class" and "preventing certain economic doom"!
Instead of listening to people like Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers, Ron Paul, and Lew Rockwell, they chose to follow the broken and otherwise disproven fallacies of Keynesian economics.
How can more spending, more debt, and more inflation get us out of a depression caused by these very things?
As the late economics professor Murray N. Rothbard put it-
Quote:

(the federal government has) proposed to cure the disease--the crash and future recession--by pouring into the economy more of the very virus (inflationary credit expansion) that caused the disease in the first place.
The quote was written in early 1988 in response to the stock market crash the previous October.


This latest inflationary (and I mean Inflationary) "stimulus" package will do little good to "revive the economy" or "save jobs". In fact, there will probably be a third (this is the second one), and a fourth, and so on, with even larger spending. As Peter Schiff said, they'll keep upping the ante on this stuff, and eventually a currency crisis (such as in Iceland) will result-with no real recovery in sight.

Despite what the mainstream media wants you to believe, economists across the board do NOT "agree" that we need big government spending to "stimulate the economy" to "prevent a much worse downturn" and whatever other lines of propaganda may be pitched justifying such.
Austrian School economists such as Lew Rockwell and Peter Schiff vehemently disagree with government/Federal Reserve intervention by inflation/monetary pumping and giveaway programs.

Lots of malinvestments and other bad decisions were made during the boom (which we were told would never end-that home prices would keep rising forever and ever). A recession such as this is neccesary to clean out these malinvestments and allow for solid recovery-basically starting over from scratch.

See my previous posts on this Fed-created 'crisis':
How bad it will get (with links to Fed M1, M2, Monetary Base)
Monetary Policy history
Banking Policy and Moral Hazard
On Bailout Propaganda and power grabs

John Stossel also has written about the dangers of Fed intervention in our economy
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=6385348&page=1

This is NOT "change we need" but more of the same-policies right from the Hoover/Roosevelt playbook. The change we need is to abolish the Federal Reserve, return to a gold standard, and become a nation of savers again.

Netto Azure February 13th, 2009 5:44 PM

Argh...XD

I was hoping to make this thread once the Bill is signed on Monday. XPPPPP

Eh IMO, this bill is just what we need at a time like this. I can see that the Conservatives and Libertarians are squeeling like crazy on this but this thing has 1/3 in Tax-cuts already for you guys!

Seriously 5/8 Years of Republican rule/deregulization not enough for you guys?

Guest123_x1 February 13th, 2009 5:59 PM

wrong points
 
Quote:

this thing has 1/3 in Tax-cuts already for you guys!
Problem is, we've cut taxes so much and expanded the size and scope of government so much we've become $11 TRILLION in debt. You can't keep cutting taxes and expanding the size and scope of government (without turning up the printing presses and stoking massive inflation).

Quote:

Seriously 5/8 Years of Republican rule/deregulization not enough for you guys?
The last 8 years of Republican rule have been nothing but imposing new regulations, expanding the size and scope of government, and spend spend spending like never before.

Agent Cobalt February 13th, 2009 6:14 PM

Otter Mii-kun is pretty much right on the money, though I must say I almost threw up because he referenced nutjobs like RuPaul and Pete Schiff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Netto Azure (Post 4349857)
Eh IMO, this bill is just what we need at a time like this. I can see that the Conservatives and Libertarians are squeeling like crazy on this but this thing has 1/3 in Tax-cuts already for you guys!

Tax cuts? You mean welfare checks right? And even assuming they were taxcuts, it won't do squat considering the Congress is planning on spending trillions of dollars. You can't outspend yourself out of poverty. Look at FDR's New Deal, JFK's New Frontier, LBJ's Great Society and the War on Poverty. If making government programs, regulating the system, destroying the foundations of capitalism and free markets, enslaving future generations of Americans with debt, making new government departments, raising taxes, and spending unprecedented amounts of money could end economic downturn and fix our problems it would have worked by now. In fact the opposite is true; every time the government has tried to play the role of knight in shining armor when it came to the economy, the government has screwed things up and made them worse off than before. I'll take supply-side and Laissez-faire economics over progressivism any day of the week.

Quote:

Seriously 5/8 Years of Republican rule/deregulization not enough for you guys?
I'm sorry, what? Republicans were the ones shouting about the upcoming economic crisis, and liberal Democrats like Maxine Waters were defending Fannie Mae and such and saying there was no problem. Anyone with an understanding of the economic crisis knows its origins are in overregulation of the economy and social engineering, not capitalism and Republicans. Bush warned us about this, McCain warned us, the Republicans in Congress were warning us since the 90's. The housing bubble and this economic crisis can be traced to liberal Democrats like Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter supporting things like the Community Reinvestment Act which interfered in banking structure and encouraged a business environment where people could be given loans and sold houses despite their bad credit and inability to pay what they owe.

It is a myth, no a lie, that this crisis started because of free markets or unregulated capitalism; it was started by a trend since the 70's where big government bureaucrats and politicians decided to interfere with the markets.

Mario The World Champion February 13th, 2009 8:05 PM

I really don't know what to expect in the long run. The only thing I'm concerned is trying to find a new job after I got laid off at my last one. With the economy this bad and just about everybody having layoffs and or hiring freezes, it's difficult for anybody laid off to find a new job.

Gengarchomp February 14th, 2009 8:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Netto Azure (Post 4349857)
Argh...XD

I was hoping to make this thread once the Bill is signed on Monday. XPPPPP

Eh IMO, this bill is just what we need at a time like this. I can see that the Conservatives and Libertarians are squeeling like crazy on this but this thing has 1/3 in Tax-cuts already for you guys!

Seriously 5/8 Years of Republican rule/deregulization not enough for you guys?

Yeah, we definitely need Nancy Pelosi giving $30 million to some mouse that I've never heard of to stimulate the economy. And how can we go without all those temporary construction jobs, which will result in just as many people loosing their jobs when the projects are over? And how has this nation survived so long without being $11 Trillion in debt? This plan is the absolute antithesis of what we need. If we're this far in debt, and the Dems in Congress are being like this, we might as well learn L'internationale.

TRIFORCE89 February 14th, 2009 8:37 PM

I think a little spending on the government's part is needed. But the bill is too large and a lot of stuff in it isn't long-term or job-creating. I think that overall it will hurt the economy even more. There is good in the bill, but there is also a lot of unnecessary bad.

I'm a little more accepting of a stimulus package than I am of a bailout.

Ruphire February 14th, 2009 8:48 PM

I really don't know what to think of it yet. We'll just have to see.

Working Class Hero February 14th, 2009 8:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent Cobalt (Post 4349241)
I wish we'd stop thinking that the government's job is to ensure the general welfare rather than promote it; that they'd stop supporting the nanny state. I wish we'd return to Laissez-faire economics and remember that government that governs best governs least. But then if the Obama administration and the do-nothing stalinists in Congress want to ruin our currency, raise taxes, give in to big labor and the unions, and start a trading war with Europe, Canada, and our other trading partners, then by all means let them.

Hope. Change. Obey.

Oh dear mother of god, are you serious? Do you really think doing nothing at all is better? It is our government's job to help us out and it is our government's job to help the economy in which IT destroyed. In the Depression, Hoover believed that people shouldn't get help from the government. We have to tighten our belts and it will fix itself. Well guess what, that made to economy worse. Ten-fold. Hoover is now down as one of the worst presidents because of that very thing. And it wasn't until someone, would you look at that, who actually DID something which fixed the economy. Doing nothing is the worst thing to possibly do. And this stimulus isn't all about giving us money. It is also about tax cuts. Which is when I last checked, good. The concept of actually doing something to help people is such a strange and scary thought but we have to do it! Even if it means...-tear- helping middle class families. Now I admit, this stimulus package is not the best. But it is better than nothing. Doing nothing will put us in a depression. Stimulus plans helps the economy, which we both already establish. My point is, this plan is good, we should support it because it will help! It is the governments job to provide welfare, and help. If they don't, welcome back Black Tuesday. And news flash, we are already in a trillion dollars of debt. Another trillion wont really effect us right now. We are still paying off the first and it will take awhile to do that. Something is better than nothing, this plan is something, a good (but not the best) something. It will put money into our economy, helping it to recover. It will create tons of jobs which is another plus.

You know what would be funny? If I read the quoted post wrong and this rant was for nothing. o_O That happens a lot.

Agent Cobalt February 14th, 2009 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey (Post 4352931)
Oh dear mother of god, are you serious? Do you really think doing nothing at all is better?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Quote:

It is our government's job to help us out and it is our government's job to help the economy in which IT destroyed.
Uh, no, actually it's not the government's job. Show me where in the Constitution the government has to "help out" failed businesses and spend trillions of dollars. I dare you. I've read and studied our Constitution, the supreme law of the land, for years and I can tell you that the limits on government are very clear in the Constitution. It's not nor has it ever been the government's job to control the economy. The government was intended to have very little influence regarding money. The government's job when it comes to the economy is to coin money, set tax rates, and set commerce between the states and foreign nations. No, it's not our government's job to strangle us with debt, central planning, and welfare statism. Look up a term called "enumerated powers." Then look up the Tenth Amendment. The powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution belong to the states and the people.

Quote:

In the Depression, Hoover believed that people shouldn't get help from the government. We have to tighten our belts and it will fix itself. Well guess what, that made to economy worse. Ten-fold. Hoover is now down as one of the worst presidents because of that very thing.
Correction- Hoover increased government spending for public works projects like the Hoover Dam because he, like Obama, thought it would stimulate the economy and create jobs. He also, like Obama, went after free trade and worsened our economy by supporting protectionist policies and high tariffs. Take a look at the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act. Was that a hands off approach to the economy? Hoover should have stood by the legacy of Coolidge and instead went the progressive route and it screwed us in the long run and lost him the presidency.

Quote:

And it wasn't until someone, would you look at that, who actually DID something which fixed the economy.
Like... Like what? What did FDR do to *fix* the economy? The New Deal was a failure. All of FDR's government spending, tax hikes, business regulations, wealth redistribution, central planning, and welfare programs failed to stimulate the economy or recover our industrial base. Do you have ANY idea how long FDR was president? He was the only president to get four terms. Four. You'd think if his policies were such a success that the economy would have done well under him. It didn't. Unless your idea of fixing the economy is increasing food stamps and lines at unemployment, he didn't fix anything. In fact it's generally understood now that FDR did even more damage to the economy than Hoover and in fact prolonged the Great Depression. The United States endured many depressions and recessions before the Great Depression and yet always managed to get out of them over time. FDR's decades of rule did nothing to help us and in fact hurt us. The reason FDR gets credit for "fixing" us is because of the sentimental connection people have to his era because he kept the faith, and because he was president during WWII which is what really ended the Great Depression. WWII saved us, not the government. WWII forced us to go back to our industrial base. Tanks and Planes don't build themselves. But no, someone "doing something" really did nothing but hurt us.

Quote:

Doing nothing is the worst thing to possibly do.
History says otherwise. When left to itself the economy corrects and returns to normal. Any free economy should experience downturns every now and then. The crisis we have now wouldn't have happened if the government minded its own business and didn't try its hand at social engineering.

Quote:

And this stimulus isn't all about giving us money. It is also about tax cuts. Which is when I last checked, good. The concept of actually doing something to help people is such a strange and scary thought but we have to do it! Even if it means...-tear- helping middle class families.
That's a lie. The left has been saying that a third of the package goes towards taxcuts. However the budget analysis says otherwise. $100 billion is government spending because it's giving government handouts to people that don't pay taxes; that's a welfare check, not a taxcut. Any real tax cuts would only be around 22% of the final package. You know what the rest of the more than $600 billion remaining will go towards? The federal government! It's a SPENDING BILL! I'm middle class and this "stimulus" isn't going to help me at all. It doesn't help me when Congress is giving billions of dollars to failed businesses that can't push their products to make a profit, is printing money to fund itself, and is giving tax cuts to people that don't pay taxes. Propping up failure isn't a form of success, never has been, and never will be.

Quote:

Now I admit, this stimulus package is not the best. But it is better than nothing.
No it's not. Spending nothing would be better than wasting money we don't have. You know what could have been done with this money? We could have paid off every American's mortgage instead of giving it to water parks. We could have given every American $5,000 dollars each, direct stimulus, which would actually make a difference in the lives of Americans unlike giving the money to bureaucracies. Are we doing any of that? No, instead we're trusting the same government that bankrupted social security to raise our economy from the ashes like a phoenix. Guess what- much of the money isn't even going to take effect for two to three years. Just in time for the next elections. Yay. The Democrats stuffed this thing full of pork to hold on to their constituencies. In fact it almost cost us trading partners because of the "buy American" portions influenced by big labor. Europe threatened us with a trading war. This is really different from Hoover though, right?

Quote:

Doing nothing will put us in a depression.
No it won't. Bad fiscal policy, high taxes, the wefare state, protectionism, overregulation of business, redistributing wealth, punishing success, and devaluing our currency will.

Quote:

Stimulus plans helps the economy, which we both already establish.
Yes, they do, when there's actual stimulus involved. Paying a guy to dig a hole and paying another guy to fill in that hole might be job making in the eyes of liberals, but in the long run those are temporary jobs which will have no impact on our situation and will only prolong our problems. This idea that calling something a stimulus plan cuts off debate and requires people to give up their common sense and just accept that it has to be passed is absurd. People are supporting this package and they don't even know why. What is being stimulated? What jobs are going to be made from this? Honest to God- More than 800 billion dollars for WHAT? Almost 1600 pages, and no one has read it! But we're all just supposed to take Obama's word, Nancy Pelosi's word, and Harry Reid's word that we need this? We're supposed to just accept that all these people in Congress voted for this thing without even reading it? You know, the economy isn't great, but I think the American people are patient enough to wait to see what exactly it is their representatives are voting for. I'm willing to bet there'd be little to no support from the people for this spending package if they knew the details.

Quote:

My point is, this plan is good, we should support it because it will help! It is the governments job to provide welfare, and help. If they don't, welcome back Black Tuesday. And news flash, we are already in a trillion dollars of debt. Another trillion wont really effect us right now. We are still paying off the first and it will take awhile to do that. Something is better than nothing, this plan is something, a good (but not the best) something. It will put money into our economy, helping it to recover. It will create tons of jobs which is another plus.
No, the government's job isn't to provide welfare; it's to promote the general welfare. The best way to do that is to create favorable business environments and decrease taxes, not control our wallets, spend more money, and ruin our capitalist system. Black Tuesday? Fear is a powerful motivator indeed, but facts are too. So instead of realizing that trillions in debt is wrong and trying to pay it off, you'd rather just add to it? Yeah, don't stop the bleeding, make the wound bigger. In this case, less is more. No jobs will be made. This is so reckless. It's been tried before in America, in Japan, and darn near every part of the world and it doesn't work; it only hurts us.

Gunn February 15th, 2009 12:14 PM

Well, I don't have any opinion yet, but the Republicans are bashing Obama as a president just because they don't believe the bill is bipartisan ...AND WHADDYA KNOW, Sen. John McCain just happens to be first on the scene.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/15/obama.gop.stimulus/index.html :B

Aurafire February 15th, 2009 1:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disintegration (Post 4354358)
Well, I don't have any opinion yet, but the Republicans are bashing Obama as a president just because they don't believe the bill is bipartisan ...AND WHADDYA KNOW, Sen. John McCain just happens to be first on the scene.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/15/obama.gop.stimulus/index.html :B

When only three Repubilcans from Congress vote for it, I wouldn't call it bipartisan either. The fact of the matter is there was no way that Obama was going to get any good amount of support from the Republicans for this particular bill...Not with all of that frivolous spending. I'm shocked that anyone from the Obama administration could say with a straight face that this was a bipartisan effort. I'm glad that the Republicans are calling Obama out on this and standing up for what they believe.

Anyway, Agent Cobalt said it all...This is just the beginning of an administration that is going to increase the size of government, which I am not in support of at all. I shudder to think what Obama plans on doing next >.<

Agent Cobalt February 15th, 2009 1:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurafire (Post 4354427)
When only three Repubilcans from Congress vote for it, I wouldn't call it bipartisan either. The fact of the matter is there was no way that Obama was going to get any good amount of support from the Republicans for this particular bill...Not with all of that frivolous spending. I'm shocked that anyone from the Obama administration could say with a straight face that this was a bipartisan effort. I'm glad that the Republicans are calling Obama out on this and standing up for what they believe.

Anyway, Agent Cobalt said it all...This is just the beginning of an administration that is going to increase the size of government, which I am not in support of at all. I shudder to think what Obama plans on doing next >.<

Not to mention that those Republicans are RINOs, so it's no shocker they voted with the libs. No Republicans in the House voted for this, and almost none in the Senate. On the other hand, a noticeable amount of Democrats dissented from their party and refused to support the package. If anyone's bipartisan, it's the side against this bill! :laugh:

Netto Azure February 16th, 2009 5:30 PM

Ok I guess I won't be able to post much right now since I'm Lazy XD there's no time.

First of all the Plan is just the start at stabilizing things across the world.

Secondly, this is just a temporary measure really. It's just trying to lessen the impact of the recession. Yeah we like to say "Putting on the backs of our children" but then again it's not politically viable to NOT do anything. Aid to States is included in that. My state of California has already cut back one day of each month in government services (Furloughs) to save money.

Third, You guys think this is big? Wait until the next Crappy TARP program comes out.
If it was me, let's go trust busting and break up the banks that are "too big to fail" since "they're too big to exist."

Eh, I know my explanation isn't really good right now but time...

Maybe tomorrow?

Gengarchomp February 16th, 2009 5:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Netto Azure (Post 4358146)
Ok I guess I won't be able to post much right now since I'm Lazy XD there's no time.

First of all the Plan is just the start at stabilizing things across the world.

Secondly, this is just a temporary measure really. It's just trying to lessen the impact of the recession. Yeah we like to say "Putting on the backs of our children" but then again it's not politically viable to NOT do anything. Aid to States is included in that. My state of California has already cut back one day of each month in government services (Furloughs) to save money.

Third, You guys think this is big? Wait until the next Crappy TARP program comes out.
If it was me, let's go trust busting and break up the banks that are "too big to fail" since "they're too big to exist."

Eh, I know my explanation isn't really good right now but time...

Maybe tomorrow?

I hope it isn't just the start. I don't like being $11 Trillion+ in debt. And define"politically viable." Are you saying that the only way to get re-elected is to vote for something that looks appealing on the outside, but is really a wolf in sheep's clothing? Or are you saying that spending money will get us out of debt?

Aether February 16th, 2009 7:53 PM

I'm neither a politician nor a debater, so I'm just gonna drop my $.02 and say the package is all that can be done. It can't really get any worse anyway.

Raven-NAR-32450 February 16th, 2009 9:06 PM

I've said it time and time again, the US Economy is f***ed, there is nothing that we can do to save it, and if there is our current politicians or whoever it is that actually writes the bills that "supposedly" save us from recession don't want to use it because it probably means a nice little pay cut for them, and all of the other big rich CEOs of all that banks that can't even maintain themselves, personally if a bank can't even keep ITSELF going, then there is no way in the 9th circle of hell that you will see me deposit my money in that bank!

UltimaLink007 February 16th, 2009 11:47 PM

My answer simply: No.

I've been sick for two weeks, and last Thursday, I was sick enough to spend the entire day watching the Senate debate this "Stimulus Package" on C-SPAN2. It was introduced, and then thoroughly ripped apart. Using backing from Historical facts based upon the Kennedy Term and the Reagan Term, as well as the agreement from the Clinton Administration Budget Secretary, the Republicans led by Arizona Senator John McCain destroyed it. Most Republicans were quite vicious in their attacks, but John McCain was subtle, quiet, and offered a well thought out compromise plan which cut the cost by more than half, and planned for immediate relief and stimulation through the public. Others, including a Democrat came on to support this idea, but then Chuck Schumer (Democrat from New York) came on, and in summary stated "Yes this is a gargantuan waste of money. No it will not bring the immediate relief we need. Even if we waste money and don't get what we're paying for, we need to do this." Eventually it was passed. The reason why I believe this will not stimulate the economy, is that it's a larger-scale version of what Franklin Delano Roosevelt implemented with his "New Deal." Essentially, it's a massive increase in TEMPORARY jobs and work, such as construction and road repairs and the like, among other things. This also failed to stimulate the economy if you look back. The Great Depression lasted throughout the Thirties and went right into World War II, which the boom in production and such boosted the economy to a point where it leaped out of the Depression. This plan is also supposed to be spread out over ten years, so the relief won't be here anytime soon unless we get lucky. Jobs do not historically fix or stimulate the economy. They keep it running smoothly when it's up, sure. Tax Cuts have traditionally worked in stimulating a Recessive economy, using the Kennedy and Reagan Administrations as prime examples. Yes, the package holds tax cuts, but not nearly big enough ones. $13 a week is not going to dig you out of a mountain of debt or buy you a house if you were foreclosed upon. Tax cuts = Money to the People, and the flow of money goes: Government -> People -> Paying off Bills (Saves the People) / Liesure -> Businesses (Saved as well).

It's also cool to look at how this mess started anyway. The Economy has its ups and downs, and after the especially high point of the Reagan Era, it was headed downward for Bush Sr. and Clinton. Clinton did some decent things and was able to hold it off for Bush Jr., but he was not the one (despite popular ignorant belief) that set us into our current economic divebomb. Three major factors tore the economy down to its current state, those being: The greedy lenders and mortgage people, the banks and such; the Credit Card companies; the American Public. This is a very special case, where even people thinking "Oh, a Democrat who regulates every aspect of the economy would have prevented this." are completely wrong. The Lenders and Mortgage companies deceived the public into poor mortgages with extremely variable adjustable-rate mortgages, which rose and rose and rose in cost until the people could not afford them and in turn were foreclosed upon. I forget the complete process, but essentially it came down to the banks and lenders were betting on the loans and didn't get any collateral for them in case something happened, using a loophole and changing the terminology around so they could get around government regulations. They lost money every time that a foreclosure occured and someone could not pay their bills, and that quickly got out of control. To a lesser extent, the Credit Card companies are to blame, allowing people to drown themselves in debt and ruin their credit, and thus any chance at a good loan for a house, which is one of the factors that helped lead to the first part. As for the people, some are entirely innocent, others are not. Perhaps they never read the contract and were beguiled into signing upon the dotted line for the trouble they got themselves into. I am certain it is not completely their fault, there are many honest, good, hard-working people out there who are in situations that they don't deserve in the least...

Anyway, I digress...

Netto Azure February 17th, 2009 1:09 PM

US President Obama signs $787bn stimulus plan
 
US President Obama signs $787bn stimulus plan

Quote:

US President Barack Obama has signed his hard-fought economic stimulus plan in Denver, after Congress approved the $787bn (£548bn) package last week.
At a signing ceremony in Denver, he said it was "the most sweeping recovery package in our history".
The plan is aimed at saving or creating 3.5 million jobs and boosting consumer spending and rebuilding infrastructure.
Ok now that it's been signed...I hope it does something positive. =P
Yeah I know it's not a "Silver Bullet" but hey anything that Politicians do isn't perfect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gengarchomp (Post 4358234)
I hope it isn't just the start. I don't like being $11 Trillion+ in debt. And define"politically viable." Are you saying that the only way to get re-elected is to vote for something that looks appealing on the outside, but is really a wolf in sheep's clothing? Or are you saying that spending money will get us out of debt?

Please don't put words in my mouth. ^_^

Let's be realistic here. The Democrats have been itching for spending and is using this as an opportunity to KEEP CAMPAIGN PROMISES. >.>
I know it's hypocritical, but they're politicians. They sway through the winds of public opinion, and right now the public wants regulation.

I have to say that at this moment we truly need bigger government spending and programs due to the lack of consumer confidence. We have already used the Conservative option of tackling recessions through tax-cuts and Libertarian de-regulization during the 2001-2002 US recession. It might have worked too well at creating the bubble of confidence that has exploded recently. An increased budget deficit due to the Bush Tax Cuts and resulting less government revenue, plus the massive increase in government defense spending for the War on Terror (Iraq, Afganistan, etc.) did not necessarily add up. Now were in quite a hole. Isn't it hypocritical that the Republicans are complaining the "We're saddling later generations with debt" when they signed into law BILLIONS in Tax-Cuts on 2001 (which was slanted heavily to the rich WHO DON'T NEED IT!) and keeping interest rates so low that unrelenting lending was spurred?

Yes, it might seem ironic on how spending got us into this and now the need to use the Liberal option of government spending and activism. But I have to agree that the long term needed investments in infrastructure, energy independence, health-care reform, education reform and domestic strengthening can be put forward much easier under this Activist Government. This needs massive Public Funds and commitment, and why not use the Economic Crisis as an umbrella to put these forward easier. No matter how much liberals are bashed, FDR comes into mind with the "New Deal." The Government Backstops created under his administration such as the FDIC, Social Security, plus the Infrastructure (ex. Golden Gate Bridge) has been life savers for this generations economic crash and has helped assured America's continued prosperity. =D




Corvus of the Black Night February 17th, 2009 1:36 PM

Ugh, I really hope that GM is able to keep itself afloat. I don't think that Chrystler is gonna make it.

In actuallality, pure capitalism is far worse than it seems. You guys are scaring me with your uber-capitalism posts, and it's important to point out that capitalism is solely based on greed and dog-eat-dog. Can't get a job? Too bad. Too old to work? Die in the gutter, worthless scum. Can't get health care? Let that infection kill you. One less worthless member of our society gone.

Now, we aren't all like that, right?

On the other hand, communism is bad as well, for the exact opposite reasons. It looks nice on paper - "Hey, we get supported no matter what, we get housing, food and health care! Yippie!!..." But then it soon comes apparent that if you don't have to work for your house, you're just given it, the government isn't getting enough money because people aren't making as much money, and everything collapses. Like the USSR.

I may not agree with a lot of Obama's plans, but the country does need to at least be a bit more like the socialist* countries of Europe. We need universal things, such as definate health care, food, water, housing, electricity, and the such.

But back on topic...

Living in Michigan, right near Detroit (only an hour's drive), I realize how imperative that at least GM stays afloat. Michigan is almost like a forecasting state - years before the recession hit the rest of the United States, we were feeling the pinch. People were moving outta there. I can't believe the rest of the country couldn't see it comming.

It is imperative for the survival of our economy that these steps are taken:
- STOP THE F*CKING OUTSOURCING. If people in the US don't have jobs, they can't buy your damn merchendise.
- Make more things in America. Just give the finger to China, they're a huge part of why our economy is failing.
- Cooperations such as Wal-mart get punished by law through their horrible way of treating employees. If Wal-mart can screw around with their employees and get payed with money though it, don't you think other companies will do the same? If we punish them, they'll be more inclined to give them humane services, and then, all those people on the welfare system will be off of it, and thus suddenly the government has a lot more money. Funny how it works, hmm?
- Make it so that foreign goods, especially Chinese goods, are raised in price so that American companies can actually compete. I.E. a tariff.

*Socialist is not synomonous with Communist. It's basically inbetween capitalism and communism.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:13 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.