Obama's Stimulus

[Paul Fuentes]

Here is the demand side of the plan ( sheer genius ):

"The legislation would reduce taxes withheld from paychecks. This involves a refundable tax credit worth up to $500 for single filers and $1,000 for joint filers over one year".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090202/pl_mcclatchy/3159110

I.E.  Less than $10 a week for a someone single.  But if your married, you will get an additional amount of less than $20 per week.  So go crazy, live large, and stimulate the economy ( yeah right ).


Meanwhile, the former Commy Regime regains its Bawlz in the face of rookie:

Taliban violence spreads in Afghanistan: US report
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090203/wl_afp/afghanistanusmilitaryunrest

North Korea preparing for ballistic missile launch
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090203/wl_nm/us_korea_north_4

Russian newspaper mourns another murdered reporter  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090131/ap_on_re_eu/eu_russia_murdering_a_newspaper;_ylt=AjqFOgqNouaFk8H4uJDyLsJI2ocA


Good luck. 

Gen. P

[OakParkSpartan]

From the article:

To counter this, the Senate measure would put more money into people's paychecks in small amounts that would be more likely to be spent than saved. Academic research shows that small increases in paychecks are viewed as "spendable" income, while larger lump sums are viewed as wealth to be saved.

So basing policy upon academic research is worse than following a tax cutting ideology blindly?  Come on Paul.

[mustang54]

  I guess another way to stimulate the economy is surround yourself with a cabinet of people who don't pay taxes. First you put a guy in charge of the IRS who didn't pay for four years. Then says hes sorry, yea sorry he got caught. And now the great Tom Daschle
owes over 130 grand. I don't hear any dems speaking out against these practices. Maybe we should all just stop paying ours too. Like I said many times the Dems and the Republicans are the two biggest organized crime groups in the country.

[n01_important]

Another article on how much this stimulis package is going to cost us.  The question to ask ourselves, could we have better spent some or most of that money better ourselves.  After all, it is our money (or more like a loan that our children will have to pay).

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/news/0901/gallery.money_summit/index.html

[Berwyn Patsy]

How did we let this happen?

[OakParkSpartan]

How did we let this happen?

The "Free Market".  Lack of financial regulation.  Financing debt with exports to China.  Shipping billions of dollars overseas to OPEC.  Making loans to people without the means to repay them.

[Paul Fuentes]

From the article:

To counter this, the Senate measure would put more money into people's paychecks in small amounts that would be more likely to be spent than saved. Academic research shows that small increases in paychecks are viewed as "spendable" income, while larger lump sums are viewed as wealth to be saved.

So basing policy upon academic research is worse than following a tax cutting ideology blindly?  Come on Paul.

Even if I were to concede to the theory of Keynesian (Demand Side Economics....which I do not), how much more would the Senate put into our pockets per week, per month, per year??  Moreover, how much of this Trillion Dollar Spending Package (in percentage terms) can actually be labeled as "stimulus" under ANY economic theory??? 

The vast majority of these TRILLION DOLLARS goes to pay off political support and grow government bureaucracy. Am I wrong??


Tax cutting ideology blindly??  That is called Supply-side economics.  It is also supported by academic research.

Please let me know where I am wrong or off track.

Milton

[n01_important]

Maybe economists and politicians have it all wrong.  They are trying to pump money into a system that they believe is like the 1929-34 depression.  That depression was caused by liquidity.  People had no faith in banks and pulled money out.

Today's problem is not a liquidity issue.  It's a risk issue compounded by a huge debt problem. 

On the risk-side, people developed fancy risk models to increase returns that proved itself wrong - all the risk came true.  People with money have lost money on even the areas believed to safe a few year back.  They have no appetite for risk.  Proof of this theory?  The 3 month T-bills which is at or near zero.  That says that people would rather loan the government at a loss (0 return minus inflation) than put the money anywhere else.  No money in the credit system is like running an engine with no oil, the engine will die.

The debt problem is average consumer goes got into debt and have zero savings.  Remember, the US economy is about 70% consumer-based.  But the consumer has piled on debt, lost money in home equity, and if they had money in the stock market (listenng to the Suzie Ormans of the world who told them to "buy and hold"), that money is practically lost.  The average American owes $11k in revolving debt (if you subtract those without CCs) so where are they going to find money to consume?  If they can't consume, our economy will shrink.

As the economy shrinks, people will loose jobs (experts predict 8%... they are smoking something and not sharing.  It could go as high as 10-15%) putting us into a vicious circle that perpetuates the cycle.

So all this "pumping money into the economy" is a misdiagnoses.  What will be the side-effects of the wrong medicine?  Sort of like a man with VD going to a doctor and getting diagnosed for prostate cancer.  After all is said and done, he still has VD and now has no p-p.

So how do we fix this issue?

[OakParkSpartan]

Let me guess...cut taxes?

[n01_important]

If I knew the answer, I would be writing books and getting paid for lectures 

I know that as an individual, if I had that problem.. I would cut my spending, pay debts and save a little to invest on the areas that give the biggest return.  Can we apply the same logic to an entire country?  Not sure.

I do think we have lost sight as to what made our country the most powerful in the recorded/modern history.  One of the factors was we opened our doors to the best/brightest of the world.  Those individuals helped fuel innovation.  Another factor was we had leaders who made bold decisions with the best intention for the country (Ike's highway system, Kennedy's "man on the moon").  Name me one such project in the last 2 decades?

[rbain]

Why, those are "big government" projects, aren't they? Don't tell Fuentes...

[MRS. NORTHSIDER]

If I knew the answer, I would be writing books and getting paid for lectures 

I know that as an individual, if I had that problem.. I would cut my spending, pay debts and save a little to invest on the areas that give the biggest return.  Can we apply the same logic to an entire country?  Not sure.

I do think we have lost sight as to what made our country the most powerful in the recorded/modern history.  One of the factors was we opened our doors to the best/brightest of the world.  Those individuals helped fuel innovation.  Another factor was we had leaders who made bold decisions with the best intention for the country (Ike's highway system, Kennedy's "man on the moon").  Name me one such project in the last 2 decades?

After spending last summer lnto early fall looking at colleges for my daughter I still believe most of the best and the brightest will be attending university in the United States.  The kids who are going into the top 50 universities in the United States have great minds.  Thirty five years I thought I was smart but I have nothing on these kids - they are brilliant.

[Paul Fuentes]

Why, those are "big government" projects, aren't they? Don't tell Fuentes...

Infrastructure and defense related projects should be the realm of government (if you believe the US and Russia were sending rockets into outer space was just as a glorified kite flying episode, and NOT who will have the upper hand on military superiority...you are naive).

By comparison, here are just few portions of Obama's Trillion Dollar Stimulus:

$25 million to improve all-terrain vehicle trails
$34 million to renovate a federal building in Washington
$600 million to buy new cars for government workers
$650 Million Digital TV Coupons
$50 Million National Endowment for the Arts
$200 Million Repairs to National Mall (including $21m for sod)
$246 million tax break for Hollywood movie investors
$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
$448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters
$248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters
$400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's
$150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities
$75 million for "smoking cessation activities
$200 million for public computer centers at community colleges

Lot's of $$ to special interests....where is the job creation???

[OakParkSpartan]

It was announced that the National Mall, STD and smoking cessation were all out of the bill.  Not sure about the others.

But I agree with you that much of what you list is tangential, though I would argue that $600 million worth of autos would have some impact on the auto industry.  Assume $25k/car, that is 24,000 autos.

[Berwyn Patsy]

$246 million tax break to movie investors?  650 million digital TV coupons?
What the hell is that?  Our country's financial structure  is falling rapidly and this is
what they come up with?  It's beginning to be a joke!

[rbain]

Why, those are "big government" projects, aren't they? Don't tell Fuentes...

Infrastructure and defense related projects should be the realm of government (if you believe the US and Russia were sending rockets into outer space was just as a glorified kite flying episode, and NOT who will have the upper hand on military superiority...you are naive).

By comparison, here are just few portions of Obama's Trillion Dollar Stimulus:

$25 million to improve all-terrain vehicle trails
$34 million to renovate a federal building in Washington
$600 million to buy new cars for government workers
$650 Million Digital TV Coupons
$50 Million National Endowment for the Arts
$200 Million Repairs to National Mall (including $21m for sod)
$246 million tax break for Hollywood movie investors
$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
$448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters
$248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters
$400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's
$150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities
$75 million for "smoking cessation activities
$200 million for public computer centers at community colleges

Lot's of $$ to special interests....where is the job creation???

The item you list total $5.3 Billion. OR about .6% of the total bill, OR about three weeks in Iraq!



Please, we can't take much more of your conservative "fiscal responsibility".


Incidently, millions of people are employed in part through grants from the NEA, myself included.

-Rob

[Paul Fuentes]

Why, those are "big government" projects, aren't they? Don't tell Fuentes...

Infrastructure and defense related projects should be the realm of government (if you believe the US and Russia were sending rockets into outer space was just as a glorified kite flying episode, and NOT who will have the upper hand on military superiority...you are naive).

By comparison, here are just few portions of Obama's Trillion Dollar Stimulus:

$25 million to improve all-terrain vehicle trails
$34 million to renovate a federal building in Washington
$600 million to buy new cars for government workers
$650 Million Digital TV Coupons
$50 Million National Endowment for the Arts
$200 Million Repairs to National Mall (including $21m for sod)
$246 million tax break for Hollywood movie investors
$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
$448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters
$248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters
$400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's
$150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities
$75 million for "smoking cessation activities
$200 million for public computer centers at community colleges

Lot's of $$ to special interests....where is the job creation???

The item you list total $5.3 Billion. OR about .6% of the total bill, OR about three weeks in Iraq!



Please, we can't take much more of your conservative "fiscal responsibility".


Incidently, millions of people are employed in part through grants from the NEA, myself included.

-Rob

CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul
Stephen Dinan
Wednesday, February 4, 2009

P

resident 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.
CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.
The House last week passed a bill totaling about $820 billion while the Senate is working on a proposal reaching about $900 billion in spending increases and tax cuts.
But Republicans and some moderate Democrats have balked at the size of the bill and at some of the spending items included in it, arguing they won't produce immediate jobs, which is the stated goal of the bill.
The budget office had previously estimated service the debt due to the new spending could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost of the bill -- forcing the crowd-out.
CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.
CBO said there is no crowding out in the short term, so the plan would succeed in boosting growth in 2009 and 2010.
The agency projected the Senate bill would produce between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent higher growth in 2009 than if there was no action. For 2010, the plan would boost growth by 1.2 percent to 3.6 percent.
CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.

Nuff Said

[n01_important]

Lot's of $$ to special interests....where is the job creation???

Agreed, it would be one thing if the money being spent was an investment in our future.  But spending money on sod seems hardly like an investment that future generations will benefit.

We should be debating investments in roads/bridges as long as they STOP subsidizing the trucking industry.  The trucks destroy the roads and we pay.  Or, high speed rail.  Updating our power grid.  Incentives for researching alternative fuels and bring to market.  BUT tax break for movie investors?!  Why, so they produce more crap with the aims to brainwash the masses into submission of the current oligarchic power structure!?

[k6s2zvfw]

  I guess another way to stimulate the economy is surround yourself with a cabinet of people who don't pay taxes. First you put a guy in charge of the IRS who didn't pay for four years. Then says hes sorry, yea sorry he got caught. And now the great Tom Daschle
owes over 130 grand. I don't hear any dems speaking out against these practices. Maybe we should all just stop paying ours too. Like I said many times the Dems and the Republicans are the two biggest organized crime groups in the country.

#1) i think the reason obama doesn't think tax cuts will help is 45% of americans don't pay any federal income taxes,
so, by and large, most of his constituents wouldn't be affected. ha ha, sort of

#2) "make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter"
       whoops, that's actually quoting then-senator Tom Daschle (1998)

#3) biggest ponzi scheme ever: social security; um, by definition, it's taking today's monies to pay past benefits


mike

[jake]

The item you list total $5.3 Billion. OR about .6% of the total bill, OR about three weeks in Iraq!
Please, we can't take much more of your conservative "fiscal responsibility".
Incidently, millions of people are employed in part through grants from the NEA, myself included.

-Rob

Great point.  If Obama and the dems can make the proposal even larger they can add even more pork as long those projects remain less than 1% of the total, right?.  I love the logic.

And, incidently, the spending in Iraq also results in employment for millions of people.