Glad we spent that stimuls money (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2012-07-06 2:06 PM in reply to: #4297678 |
Pro 6767 the Alabama part of Pennsylvania | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:01 PM ... I never believed him to begin with. However that's what the President is supposed to do. Tell the country the truth. People have to be held accountable to their promises. So he lied to us. Fine. Vote him out. The next guy lies, fine. Vote him out too. Since when has this ever been true? The job of the president is not necessarily to tell the truth. Politicians, like children, are always lying. Even when they are telling the truth as they see it, it is probably a lie. And does anyone honestly believe here that the president can improve the economy? ANY president? By what magic device would this happen, and if it could, why wouldn't they activate the "Bat-phone" and fix things? |
|
2012-07-06 2:22 PM in reply to: #4297677 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money JoshR - 2012-07-06 2:00 PM tuwood - 2012-07-06 12:42 PM morey000 - 2012-07-06 11:37 AM It would have been worse. -kind of unarguable. You could absolutely be right, but now because of the "fix" we put in place we're staring down the barrel of a far worse problem. So us kicking the can down the road "hypothetically" made things better the last 4 years, but in another 5 or 10 years (maybe sooner) we're going to have a debt implosion far greater than it ever would have been in 2008 with nobody to bail us out. Remember, we were all fat dumb and happy back in 2008 and all of a sudden boom, OMG, all the banks are going to fail. What's the next big surprise that none of us know about? Inflation? Student Loans? Europe? I don't know, but I do know that something's going to give. The rest of the world isn't going to let us continue to print money forever to finance our reckless spending and trying to falsely prop up our economy. Think about it.
This is a little bit misleading. The government isn't "pumping" more money into the economy right now beyond what they were already planning on doing prior to the financial meltdown (okay maybe a little more). The budget has increased by $800B since 2008, whereas the budget increased by $500B in the previous 4 years. This is mostly due to annual increase in spending that are already factored into the budgets. The deficit is much higher than before because spending is still rising as it normally does, but the revenues have fallen below the levels they were in 2004. Really? Quantitative easing (QE) is an unconventional[1][2] monetary policy used by central banks to stimulate the national economy when conventional monetary policy has become ineffective. A central bank buys financial assets to inject a pre-determined quantity of money into the economy. This is distinguished from the more usual policy of buying or selling government bonds to keep market interest rates at a specified target value. A central bank implements quantitative easing by purchasing financial assets from banks and other private sector businesses with new electronically created money.[3][4][5][6] This action increases the excess reserves of the banks, and also raises the prices of the financial assets bought, which lowers their yield.[7] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing The fed has continued buying long term bonds (stealth QE) and dumping short term bonds which is falsely pumping up the economy or what I call "printing money" Here's another article that explains it a little better. The fed is continuing to dump money into the economy outside of the stimulus money. |
2012-07-06 2:56 PM in reply to: #4297724 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money tuwood - 2012-07-06 1:22 PM JoshR - 2012-07-06 2:00 PM tuwood - 2012-07-06 12:42 PM morey000 - 2012-07-06 11:37 AM It would have been worse. -kind of unarguable. You could absolutely be right, but now because of the "fix" we put in place we're staring down the barrel of a far worse problem. So us kicking the can down the road "hypothetically" made things better the last 4 years, but in another 5 or 10 years (maybe sooner) we're going to have a debt implosion far greater than it ever would have been in 2008 with nobody to bail us out. Remember, we were all fat dumb and happy back in 2008 and all of a sudden boom, OMG, all the banks are going to fail. What's the next big surprise that none of us know about? Inflation? Student Loans? Europe? I don't know, but I do know that something's going to give. The rest of the world isn't going to let us continue to print money forever to finance our reckless spending and trying to falsely prop up our economy. Think about it.
This is a little bit misleading. The government isn't "pumping" more money into the economy right now beyond what they were already planning on doing prior to the financial meltdown (okay maybe a little more). The budget has increased by $800B since 2008, whereas the budget increased by $500B in the previous 4 years. This is mostly due to annual increase in spending that are already factored into the budgets. The deficit is much higher than before because spending is still rising as it normally does, but the revenues have fallen below the levels they were in 2004. Really? Quantitative easing (QE) is an unconventional[1][2] monetary policy used by central banks to stimulate the national economy when conventional monetary policy has become ineffective. A central bank buys financial assets to inject a pre-determined quantity of money into the economy. This is distinguished from the more usual policy of buying or selling government bonds to keep market interest rates at a specified target value. A central bank implements quantitative easing by purchasing financial assets from banks and other private sector businesses with new electronically created money.[3][4][5][6] This action increases the excess reserves of the banks, and also raises the prices of the financial assets bought, which lowers their yield.[7] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing The fed has continued buying long term bonds (stealth QE) and dumping short term bonds which is falsely pumping up the economy or what I call "printing money" Here's another article that explains it a little better. The fed is continuing to dump money into the economy outside of the stimulus money. I was referencing congress, but if we're talking about the Fed see below. The Fed is TRYING to pump money into the economy but it's not working as it is "supposed to", i.e. increasing the money supply. Notice how excess reserves increased drastically right when the Fed began pumping money? Instead of the money making it's way into the system, the banks are just sitting on it. That's one of the reasons we haven't seen hyper-inflation with the massive pumping the Fed tried to do. (I just googled the chart, not sure what the note is for)
|
2012-07-06 3:10 PM in reply to: #4297695 |
Champion 7347 SRQ, FL | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money gearboy - 2012-07-06 3:06 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:01 PM ... I never believed him to begin with. However that's what the President is supposed to do. Tell the country the truth. People have to be held accountable to their promises. So he lied to us. Fine. Vote him out. The next guy lies, fine. Vote him out too. Since when has this ever been true? The job of the president is not necessarily to tell the truth. Politicians, like children, are always lying. Even when they are telling the truth as they see it, it is probably a lie. And does anyone honestly believe here that the president can improve the economy? ANY president? By what magic device would this happen, and if it could, why wouldn't they activate the "Bat-phone" and fix things? So we sit here and complain that politicians lie but you are telling me you think it's not the job of the leader of the country, for the most part, to be truthful? I'm sorry. It is their job. They just all suck at it. Can the President snap his fingers and fix the issue? No. Could he have saved us $800 billion dollars. Yes that was 100% in his power. And furthermore there are ways he can help to push the economy slowly in the right direction. To date this administration has not done any of these things. They are just sitting back and waiting for it to fix itself. Edited by TriRSquared 2012-07-06 3:11 PM |
2012-07-06 3:14 PM in reply to: #4297851 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 4:10 PM gearboy - 2012-07-06 3:06 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:01 PM ... I never believed him to begin with. However that's what the President is supposed to do. Tell the country the truth. People have to be held accountable to their promises. So he lied to us. Fine. Vote him out. The next guy lies, fine. Vote him out too. Since when has this ever been true? The job of the president is not necessarily to tell the truth. Politicians, like children, are always lying. Even when they are telling the truth as they see it, it is probably a lie. And does anyone honestly believe here that the president can improve the economy? ANY president? By what magic device would this happen, and if it could, why wouldn't they activate the "Bat-phone" and fix things? So we sit here and complain that politicians lie but you are telling me you think it's not the job of the leader of the country, for the most part, to be truthful? I'm sorry. It is their job. They just all suck at it. Can the President snap his fingers and fix the issue? No. Could he have saved us $800 billion dollars. Yes that was 100% in his power. And furthermore there are ways he can help to push the economy slowly in the right direction. To date this administration has not done any of these things. They are just sitting back and waiting for it to fix itself. No they are not that is part of the problem. They are persuing an economic agenda that is predicated on the politics of envy. |
2012-07-06 3:24 PM in reply to: #4297862 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money trinnas - 2012-07-06 3:14 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 4:10 PM gearboy - 2012-07-06 3:06 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:01 PM ... I never believed him to begin with. However that's what the President is supposed to do. Tell the country the truth. People have to be held accountable to their promises. So he lied to us. Fine. Vote him out. The next guy lies, fine. Vote him out too. Since when has this ever been true? The job of the president is not necessarily to tell the truth. Politicians, like children, are always lying. Even when they are telling the truth as they see it, it is probably a lie. And does anyone honestly believe here that the president can improve the economy? ANY president? By what magic device would this happen, and if it could, why wouldn't they activate the "Bat-phone" and fix things? So we sit here and complain that politicians lie but you are telling me you think it's not the job of the leader of the country, for the most part, to be truthful? I'm sorry. It is their job. They just all suck at it. Can the President snap his fingers and fix the issue? No. Could he have saved us $800 billion dollars. Yes that was 100% in his power. And furthermore there are ways he can help to push the economy slowly in the right direction. To date this administration has not done any of these things. They are just sitting back and waiting for it to fix itself. No they are not that is part of the problem. They are persuing an economic agenda that is predicated on the politics of envy. Yeah, if the politicians would just sit back and wait it would fix itself a lot faster. lol |
|
2012-07-06 3:26 PM in reply to: #4297724 |
Pro 5361 | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money I believe that I read that the Fed had pumped $7.7T into the econonomy in the year after the 2008 crash. yup, that's half of our GDP. It's probably what saved us from having the economy of Greece. for those who wish we hadn't spent that $800B, you would have been criticizing Obama for doing nothing. There's no win here. Ultimately, I'd rather have the gov't give money to states so that they could keep teachers employed, than have even more people laid off, who would then need assistance, be losing their homes, and make the system crash even further. Fact is- economics isn't a science, it's an art mixed with politics. If it were a science, all economists would pretty much agree. And one of the things they did pretty much agree upon was that in early 2009, the gov't needed to spend money. the only argument was how much and on what. I certainly read articles from the left that predicted (perhaps rightly so) that the stimulous package was woefully insignificant. |
2012-07-06 3:37 PM in reply to: #4297915 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money morey000 - 2012-07-06 2:26 PM I believe that I read that the Fed had pumped $7.7T into the econonomy in the year after the 2008 crash. yup, that's half of our GDP. It's probably what saved us from having the economy of Greece. for those who wish we hadn't spent that $800B, you would have been criticizing Obama for doing nothing. There's no win here. Ultimately, I'd rather have the gov't give money to states so that they could keep teachers employed, than have even more people laid off, who would then need assistance, be losing their homes, and make the system crash even further. Fact is- economics isn't a science, it's an art mixed with politics. If it were a science, all economists would pretty much agree. And one of the things they did pretty much agree upon was that in early 2009, the gov't needed to spend money. the only argument was how much and on what. I certainly read articles from the left that predicted (perhaps rightly so) that the stimulous package was woefully insignificant. The problem is the economics that does explain why our economy tanked is mostly ignored by all of the government economists. If you care to, go read some of Friederich Hayek's works and you'll see how he clearly laid out what will happen when you have a massive debt bubble, like we did. The problem is no one knows who Hayek is, but everyone knows who Keynes is. |
2012-07-06 3:39 PM in reply to: #4297915 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money morey000 - 2012-07-06 4:26 PM I believe that I read that the Fed had pumped $7.7T into the econonomy in the year after the 2008 crash. yup, that's half of our GDP. It's probably what saved us from having the economy of Greece. for those who wish we hadn't spent that $800B, you would have been criticizing Obama for doing nothing. There's no win here. Ultimately, I'd rather have the gov't give money to states so that they could keep teachers employed, than have even more people laid off, who would then need assistance, be losing their homes, and make the system crash even further. Fact is- economics isn't a science, it's an art mixed with politics. If it were a science, all Keynesian economists would pretty much agree. And one of the things they did pretty much agree upon was that in early 2009, the gov't needed to spend money. the only argument was how much and on what. I certainly read articles from the left that predicted (perhaps rightly so) that the stimulous package was woefully insignificant. Fixed that for you Edited by trinnas 2012-07-06 3:41 PM |
2012-07-06 3:41 PM in reply to: #4297915 |
Champion 7347 SRQ, FL | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money morey000 - 2012-07-06 4:26 PM for those who wish we hadn't spent that $800B, you would have been criticizing Obama for doing nothing. The choice was not either spend $800B or do nothing. The choice was spend $800B or do something else. EDIT: and not all economists agreed we needed to spend money. Lots of them agree with Hayek that stimuli do not work. And had the stimulus actually been used to improve the infrastructure of the country I would have been OK with it. But even Obama himself admitted "those shovel ready (jobs) were not as shovel ready as expected". Why? Because it was knee jerk recreation. It was not thought out correctly. Now the auto bailout. It was wrong on every single level. Edited by TriRSquared 2012-07-06 3:44 PM |
2012-07-06 3:41 PM in reply to: #4297915 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money morey000 - 2012-07-06 3:26 PM I believe that I read that the Fed had pumped $7.7T into the econonomy in the year after the 2008 crash. yup, that's half of our GDP. It's probably what saved us from having the economy of Greece. for those who wish we hadn't spent that $800B, you would have been criticizing Obama for doing nothing. There's no win here. Ultimately, I'd rather have the gov't give money to states so that they could keep teachers employed, than have even more people laid off, who would then need assistance, be losing their homes, and make the system crash even further. Fact is- economics isn't a science, it's an art mixed with politics. If it were a science, all economists would pretty much agree. And one of the things they did pretty much agree upon was that in early 2009, the gov't needed to spend money. the only argument was how much and on what. I certainly read articles from the left that predicted (perhaps rightly so) that the stimulous package was woefully insignificant. I say it ensured us of having the economy of greece down the road. I know most economists agreed on what the government did (at least initially). However, I think they just took trillions of dollars they didn't have to try and prop up a bubble that should have been allowed to pop. Now the bubble is even worse and when it pops (and it will) the fallout will be far worse than just letting it go in the first place. Ironically it will probably pop under the next administration so whoever wins the election will get saddled politically. Hopefully that will open up a fiscally responsible 3rd party ticket in 2016. <fingers crossed> |
|
2012-07-06 3:57 PM in reply to: #4296959 |
Expert 1146 Johns Creek, Georgia | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money Besides being great with economic theory the Keynesians are great runners! Seriously, the unemployment rate at 8.2% is bad, actually it's above 14% but the real monster under the bed is 15 Trillion and growing. Someone please give me an example of how we can repay this debt assuming our GDP grows, rates do not increase,and oh say we increas tax revenue 20%. Kicking the can down the road. |
2012-07-06 4:04 PM in reply to: #4298020 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money hrliles - 2012-07-06 4:57 PM Besides being great with economic theory the Keynesians are great runners! Seriously, the unemployment rate at 8.2% is bad, actually it's above 14% but the real monster under the bed is 15 Trillion and growing. Someone please give me an example of how we can repay this debt assuming our GDP grows, rates do not increase,and oh say we increas tax revenue 20%. Kicking the can down the road. WWIII |
2012-07-06 4:47 PM in reply to: #4297678 |
Master 1826 | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:01 PM JoshR - 2012-07-06 2:54 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 12:21 PM gearboy - 2012-07-06 1:42 PM It's as if you have surgery and I give you some pain meds. You have some break through pain and complain that the pain meds did no good. Whereas if you had no meds, the pain would have been worse. You really can't prove the effect of the stimulus one way or the other with this graph. The difference is that you charged me $800 billion for the pain meds and PROMISED me it would make most of the pain go away. Then, the pain was WORSE than you ever told me it would be even w/o the meds. So now I'm in agony AND I'm broke. Wait, your Dr. promised you, so it has to be true? You must believe everything politicians tell you too huh. I know you can come up with a better analogy than that Seriously though, nothing Obama or Romney have proposed (what have either of them really proposed anyway?) is going to do much of anything to fix this. I never believed him to begin with. However that's what the President is supposed to do. Tell the country the truth. People have to be held accountable to their promises. So he lied to us. Fine. Vote him out. The next guy lies, fine. Vote him out too. you are making another assumption by using the word lie. A lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive. Are you saying that the president knowingly knew that the stimulus package would fail but went ahead and did it and lied to the American people? I personally would beg to differ, it was more likely that the president has many advisers, and the consensus opinion provided to the president would be a positive impact on the economy, he then made his decision based on what he felt would be in the best interest of the country. I do not think he did it with an intent for it to fail, and lied about it. |
2012-07-06 6:53 PM in reply to: #4298157 |
Champion 7347 SRQ, FL | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money FeltonR.Nubbinsworth - 2012-07-06 5:47 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:01 PM JoshR - 2012-07-06 2:54 PM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 12:21 PM gearboy - 2012-07-06 1:42 PM It's as if you have surgery and I give you some pain meds. You have some break through pain and complain that the pain meds did no good. Whereas if you had no meds, the pain would have been worse. You really can't prove the effect of the stimulus one way or the other with this graph. The difference is that you charged me $800 billion for the pain meds and PROMISED me it would make most of the pain go away. Then, the pain was WORSE than you ever told me it would be even w/o the meds. So now I'm in agony AND I'm broke. Wait, your Dr. promised you, so it has to be true? You must believe everything politicians tell you too huh. I know you can come up with a better analogy than that Seriously though, nothing Obama or Romney have proposed (what have either of them really proposed anyway?) is going to do much of anything to fix this. I never believed him to begin with. However that's what the President is supposed to do. Tell the country the truth. People have to be held accountable to their promises. So he lied to us. Fine. Vote him out. The next guy lies, fine. Vote him out too. you are making another assumption by using the word lie. A lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive. Are you saying that the president knowingly knew that the stimulus package would fail but went ahead and did it and lied to the American people? I personally would beg to differ, it was more likely that the president has many advisers, and the consensus opinion provided to the president would be a positive impact on the economy, he then made his decision based on what he felt would be in the best interest of the country. I do not think he did it with an intent for it to fail, and lied about it. When he said (paraphrasing here) "We have to vote this stimulus in or unemployment will get over 8%" then yes, that's a lie. He a) had no way of knowing it would work and b) told us that we either had to support the stimulus or there would be dire circumstances. Essentially he painted a doomsday picture if we did not support it. That's is deception. Had the admin said, we believe that the only way to fix the country is to spend all this money, it may work, it may not and it's a LOT of money and we're not 100% sure how to spend it, I would then not consider that a lie. They had no evidence to support dumping money into the economy would fix it (e,g, Hayek), especially considering that had no game plan to spend the money (evidenced by the lack of "shovel ready jobs"). So do I think the President consciously decided to toss away $800B? No. Do I think he was winging it with no real plan and no idea if it would work, and tricked the American people into believing that it was this or Armageddon. Yep. 100% |
2012-07-07 3:56 AM in reply to: #4297967 |
Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 3:41 PM morey000 - 2012-07-06 4:26 PM for those who wish we hadn't spent that $800B, you would have been criticizing Obama for doing nothing. The choice was not either spend $800B or do nothing. The choice was spend $800B or do something else. EDIT: and not all economists agreed we needed to spend money. Lots of them agree with Hayek that stimuli do not work. And had the stimulus actually been used to improve the infrastructure of the country I would have been OK with it. But even Obama himself admitted "those shovel ready (jobs) were not as shovel ready as expected". Why? Because it was knee jerk recreation. It was not thought out correctly. Now the auto bailout. It was wrong on every single level.
Page two it took longer then what I thouhgt. I figured it would be in the first 5 comments. |
|
2012-07-07 7:11 AM in reply to: #4298337 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 7:53 PM When he said (paraphrasing here) "We have to vote this stimulus in or unemployment will get over 8%" then yes, that's a lie. He a) had no way of knowing it would work and b) told us that we either had to support the stimulus or there would be dire circumstances. Essentially he painted a doomsday picture if we did not support it. That's is deception. Had the admin said, we believe that the only way to fix the country is to spend all this money, it may work, it may not and it's a LOT of money and we're not 100% sure how to spend it, I would then not consider that a lie. They had no evidence to support dumping money into the economy would fix it (e,g, Hayek), especially considering that had no game plan to spend the money (evidenced by the lack of "shovel ready jobs"). So do I think the President consciously decided to toss away $800B? No. Do I think he was winging it with no real plan and no idea if it would work, and tricked the American people into believing that it was this or Armageddon. Yep. 100% Sorry Tri^2 I am usually down for agreeing with you but I just cannot go with this reasoining. This is the same sort of reasoning the left uses to accuse GWB of lying about WMDs. Do I believe BO stated his case in stronger terms than he had a right to... Yes. Do I believe he engaged in wishful thinking.... Yes. Do I believe he accepted one half of the argument because it dovetailed very nicely with his own personal belief system while ignoring the other half of the argument... most definitly! I do not believe he lied. The stimulus and Keynesian economics plays into the "left's" belief that the cure to all mans ills lies in government and that government can and should protect us from the vagarities of life and the market. I believe that belief system comes from a good place, the desire to help your fellow man. I think however it turns all men into powerless beings subject to the benevolence of the government. |
2012-07-07 7:58 PM in reply to: #4296959 |
Member 239 Apex, NC | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money |
2012-07-07 9:01 PM in reply to: #4298715 |
Veteran 219 College Station, Texas | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money trinnas - 2012-07-07 7:11 AM Awesome comment!Sorry Tri^2 I am usually down for agreeing with you but I just cannot go with this reasoining. This is the same sort of reasoning the left uses to accuse GWB of lying about WMDs. Do I believe BO stated his case in stronger terms than he had a right to... Yes. Do I believe he engaged in wishful thinking.... Yes. Do I believe he accepted one half of the argument because it dovetailed very nicely with his own personal belief system while ignoring the other half of the argument... most definitly! I do not believe he lied. The stimulus and Keynesian economics plays into the "left's" belief that the cure to all mans ills lies in government and that government can and should protect us from the vagarities of life and the market. I believe that belief system comes from a good place, the desire to help your fellow man. I think however it turns all men into powerless beings subject to the benevolence of the government. |
2012-07-07 11:33 PM in reply to: #4296959 |
Master 2380 Beijing | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money I think if we're going to do a "stimulus" then we need to do it in a way that "stimulates" the economy: Take $1,700,000,000,000 (roughly the cost of our 2 stimuli packages) and dole it out directly to taxpayers, preferably in October when people are predisposed to be spending anyway. Yes, you're going to get real inflation. Yes, you're going to get some people saving instead of spending. However, you're also going to get a jump start on consuming... which is the only thing that our economy really responds to in any real way. |
2012-07-09 6:51 AM in reply to: #4298715 |
Champion 7347 SRQ, FL | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money trinnas - 2012-07-07 8:11 AM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 7:53 PM When he said (paraphrasing here) "We have to vote this stimulus in or unemployment will get over 8%" then yes, that's a lie. He a) had no way of knowing it would work and b) told us that we either had to support the stimulus or there would be dire circumstances. Essentially he painted a doomsday picture if we did not support it. That's is deception. Had the admin said, we believe that the only way to fix the country is to spend all this money, it may work, it may not and it's a LOT of money and we're not 100% sure how to spend it, I would then not consider that a lie. They had no evidence to support dumping money into the economy would fix it (e,g, Hayek), especially considering that had no game plan to spend the money (evidenced by the lack of "shovel ready jobs"). So do I think the President consciously decided to toss away $800B? No. Do I think he was winging it with no real plan and no idea if it would work, and tricked the American people into believing that it was this or Armageddon. Yep. 100% Sorry Tri^2 I am usually down for agreeing with you but I just cannot go with this reasoining. This is the same sort of reasoning the left uses to accuse GWB of lying about WMDs. Do I believe BO stated his case in stronger terms than he had a right to... Yes. Do I believe he engaged in wishful thinking.... Yes. Do I believe he accepted one half of the argument because it dovetailed very nicely with his own personal belief system while ignoring the other half of the argument... most definitly! I do not believe he lied. The stimulus and Keynesian economics plays into the "left's" belief that the cure to all mans ills lies in government and that government can and should protect us from the vagarities of life and the market. I believe that belief system comes from a good place, the desire to help your fellow man. I think however it turns all men into powerless beings subject to the benevolence of the government. I guess it depends on what you consider a lie. When it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck and you tell me.. nope.. it's a watermelon.... I kind of consider that lying. As I said before I do not believe they planned to waste $800B dollars. However I also do not believe we were given the entire story so that we could make our own statement about what should or should not happen. There are lies of commission and lies of omission. This was a case of the latter IMO. And it's good we disagree every now and then. Makes people believe we're not in cahoots Edited by TriRSquared 2012-07-09 6:53 AM |
|
2012-07-09 8:21 AM in reply to: #4299420 |
Pro 4675 Wisconsin near the Twin Cities metro | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money fatmouse - 2012-07-07 7:58 PM Are tax cuts considered "spending"? ahhhh....my pet peeve. Some politicians try to demonize tax cuts by saying they need to be paid for and usaully try to pander and say that someone is going to get "hurt" because someone else got a tax cut. Ummmm....no...a tax cut is letting people keep more of their own money. If you choose to continue with current spending levels, or increase spending levels, in the face of reduced revenues due to the tax cut then you are making a conscious decision to increase deficit spending. |
2012-07-09 8:29 AM in reply to: #4300848 |
Champion 15211 Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money Birkierunner - 2012-07-09 8:21 AM fatmouse - 2012-07-07 7:58 PM Are tax cuts considered "spending"? ahhhh....my pet peeve. Some politicians try to demonize tax cuts by saying they need to be paid for and usaully try to pander and say that someone is going to get "hurt" because someone else got a tax cut. Ummmm....no...a tax cut is letting people keep more of their own money. If you choose to continue with current spending levels, or increase spending levels, in the face of reduced revenues due to the tax cut then you are making a conscious decision to increase deficit spending. And the flip side is that when a Tax Cut is allowed to expire, the other side says it is raising taxes when in reality it is only just reinstating a previously delayed tax. To me, both sides are full of it when it comes to the tax discussion. |
2012-07-09 8:34 AM in reply to: #4300865 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money crowny2 - 2012-07-09 9:29 AM Birkierunner - 2012-07-09 8:21 AM fatmouse - 2012-07-07 7:58 PM Are tax cuts considered "spending"? ahhhh....my pet peeve. Some politicians try to demonize tax cuts by saying they need to be paid for and usaully try to pander and say that someone is going to get "hurt" because someone else got a tax cut. Ummmm....no...a tax cut is letting people keep more of their own money. If you choose to continue with current spending levels, or increase spending levels, in the face of reduced revenues due to the tax cut then you are making a conscious decision to increase deficit spending. And the flip side is that when a Tax Cut is allowed to expire, the other side says it is raising taxes when in reality it is only just reinstating a previously delayed tax. To me, both sides are full of it when it comes to the tax discussion. Both sides are full of it when it comes to a number of different discussions. |
2012-07-09 8:41 AM in reply to: #4300711 |
Champion 6056 Menomonee Falls, WI | Subject: RE: Glad we spent that stimuls money TriRSquared - 2012-07-09 6:51 AM trinnas - 2012-07-07 8:11 AM TriRSquared - 2012-07-06 7:53 PM When he said (paraphrasing here) "We have to vote this stimulus in or unemployment will get over 8%" then yes, that's a lie. He a) had no way of knowing it would work and b) told us that we either had to support the stimulus or there would be dire circumstances. Essentially he painted a doomsday picture if we did not support it. That's is deception. Had the admin said, we believe that the only way to fix the country is to spend all this money, it may work, it may not and it's a LOT of money and we're not 100% sure how to spend it, I would then not consider that a lie. They had no evidence to support dumping money into the economy would fix it (e,g, Hayek), especially considering that had no game plan to spend the money (evidenced by the lack of "shovel ready jobs"). So do I think the President consciously decided to toss away $800B? No. Do I think he was winging it with no real plan and no idea if it would work, and tricked the American people into believing that it was this or Armageddon. Yep. 100% Sorry Tri^2 I am usually down for agreeing with you but I just cannot go with this reasoining. This is the same sort of reasoning the left uses to accuse GWB of lying about WMDs. Do I believe BO stated his case in stronger terms than he had a right to... Yes. Do I believe he engaged in wishful thinking.... Yes. Do I believe he accepted one half of the argument because it dovetailed very nicely with his own personal belief system while ignoring the other half of the argument... most definitly! I do not believe he lied. The stimulus and Keynesian economics plays into the "left's" belief that the cure to all mans ills lies in government and that government can and should protect us from the vagarities of life and the market. I believe that belief system comes from a good place, the desire to help your fellow man. I think however it turns all men into powerless beings subject to the benevolence of the government. I guess it depends on what you consider a lie. When it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck and you tell me.. nope.. it's a watermelon.... I kind of consider that lying. As I said before I do not believe they planned to waste $800B dollars. However I also do not believe we were given the entire story so that we could make our own statement about what should or should not happen. There are lies of commission and lies of omission. This was a case of the latter IMO. And it's good we disagree every now and then. Makes people believe we're not in cahoots There was also a large margin of dishonesty into HOW the money was to be spent, and that part I believe was more intentionally deceitful. The Stimulus was sold as Civil Works-type program that would provide "shovel-ready jobs" and focus on improving "our nation's infrastructure" of long-neglected roads, bridges, etc. It turned out to be a huge payoff to public unions to protect public workers from the huge budget cuts that resulted from the recession and which hammered the private sector, along with a huge payback to campaign supporters pushing pet projects of varying degrees of, shall we say, necessity and credibility. But of course there was no time to implement any oversight as to how the money would be spent, it was "an emergency". (Feel free to add your own measure of eye roll.) |
|