Bring on the pork ...

[Tex]

Washington Times reports:

President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

Meanwhile ...

[Obama] warned that failure to act quickly "will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession."

Sounds like scare-mongering to me. Maybe Obama needs to check-in with his buddies at the CBO.

On the other hand, it explains this:

Democrats hunt for Republican support on stimulus

U.S. President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats worked to revise their $900 billion economic stimulus bill on Wednesday, hoping to drum up enough Republican support to get it across the finish line next week.

If this bill is going to save us from catastrophe, one wonders why they need to hunt for Republican support. Seems like they should cheer their one-sided willingness to act now to save the Republic. Maybe even they don't really believe in it.

And finally, just for fun:

President Obama used the announcement of restrictions on executive compensation for banks receiving federal aid to remind Congress and the American public who won the election and to push for passage of his recovery plan.

There's some skillful negotiating for ya: "I won." Guess what Obama: the Republicans whose votes you want also won. You're going to have to be a little more convincing then rubbing the Presidential Seal in their faces.

[Tex]

Barack Obama in the WaPo today:

Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

If we don't pass his bill, we are headed for permanent recession. Wow. Republicans got nothin' on this kinda fear mongering.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020403174.html

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Washington Times reports:



Meanwhile ...



Sounds like scare-mongering to me. Maybe Obama needs to check-in with his buddies at the CBO.

On the other hand, it explains this:



If this bill is going to save us from catastrophe, one wonders why they need to hunt for Republican support. Seems like they should cheer their one-sided willingness to act now to save the Republic. Maybe even they don't really believe in it.

And finally, just for fun:



There's some skillful negotiating for ya: "I won." Guess what Obama: the Republicans whose votes you want also won. You're going to have to be a little more convincing then rubbing the Presidential Seal in their faces.

So is your new argument that it WILL stimulate the economy but cause long-term harm? That isn't even close to your original argument.

Stick with posting highlights from other articles, Tex. When you try to editorialize, you get completely lost and confused.

[MikeWaters]

The Obama admin is lost and in over its head. Read politico.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

So is your new argument that it WILL stimulate the economy but cause long-term harm?

I don't think it will stimulate much other than key Democrat constituencies. The long-term harm part comes from your Democrat-run CBO.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I don't think it will stimulate much other than key Democrat constituencies. The long-term harm part comes from your Democrat-run CBO.

And they may be right. I have plenty of qualms with the bill. But I know for certain you aren't right.

Like I said, stick to posting clips from other sources. You are less likely to get confused.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

And they may be right. I have plenty of qualms with the bill. But I know for certain you aren't right.

Like I said, stick to posting clips from other sources. You are less likely to get confused.

You never answered my questions nor have you expressed your qualms.

[Tex]

Now here's the right kind of stimulus ...

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator John Thune today introduced an across-the-board middle class tax rebate amendment (S. AMDT #538) to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Senator Thune’s amendment would strike the entire $936 billion Senate stimulus bill and replace it with a $936 billion across-the-board-middle-class tax rebate for 182 million Americans. The amendment would result in a tax rebate of $5,143 for single filers and $10,286 for married couples who file jointly. Eligibility is capped for all tax filers at 2007 adjusted gross income of $250,000.

Bring it on.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...M2MGZiZGUwMjE=

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

Now here's the right kind of stimulus ...



Bring it on.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...M2MGZiZGUwMjE=

But Tex, that isn't fair to the people who don't work and don't pay taxes!!!!!! They deserve thousands of dollars as well!!!!

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Now here's the right kind of stimulus ...



Bring it on.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...M2MGZiZGUwMjE=

That isn't a stimulus, Tex. Once again, you are really struggling with the concept of a stimulus. A tax cut is about the least efficient way of stimulating the economy.

Look at these figures from Moody's for some help.

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/do...lan_012109.pdf

The numbers below represent the increase in the GDP for every dollar spent:

Tax cuts:$1.01
Food stamps: $1.73
Infrastructure spending: $1.59
Extending Unemployment Insurance Benefits: $1.63
General aid to state governments: $1.38

The LEAST stimulative action listed above is tax cuts. You spend a dollar, you get back basically a dollar. Not a great program, as far as efficiency goes. There may be other arguments for tax cuts, but economic stimulus isn't one of them (by a long shot). This is my biggest beef with the Senate version. They are eliminating spending that actually WILL stimulate the economy in favor of other actions that will have a far lesser impact on the economy. If this bill is a stimulus bill, it ought to actually be designed to accomplish that purpose (that was Tex's complaint on the first page of this thread- he just didn't understand the issue enough to realize he was arguing against tax cuts and for the items he listed as "pork").

Spending money keeps people employed. Employed people have money to spend. Poor people must spend money (they can't save), so the best stimulus involves money directed towards them. If that makes you feel bad, take it up with principles of economics, or spend money on infrastructure, or something OTHER THAN tax cuts.

I also wish more of the money in the bill was allocated for immediate spending, rather than so much being reserved for spending more than 18 months down the road. But, many of the long-term allocations are second phases to projects also being funded for immediate spending, and it doesn't make a lot of sense to fund 1/5 of a dam, for example, but leave the state to guess about whether it will ever see the remaining 4/5 or if the state will have to pay for it later (which they can't see fitting in their budget right now).