Who is this guy?

[McDuck]

But if all you know about Goebbels is his role as Propaganda Minister, you may want to look into this little event called Kristallnacht that is attributed to him. Wiki says that night killed 91 jews and sent another 25,000-30,000 to concentration camps.

 

[Boghie]

What kind of spending do you think would stimulate the economy? The trickle down theory with tax cuts has been tried and it doesn't work.
Do you think there shouldn't be a stimulus package at all?
I agree that there was alot of crap in the Democratic house's stimulus bill. But there was some good things in there also. I hope they are fine tuning it in the Senate.
I thought the extension of unemployment benefits was good (the states need help paying for this, so giving the states some of the money is necessary) this isn't going to create any jobs, but it is necessary with the millions of people who are out of work.
Tax credits for businesses buying equipment or hiring new workers, this would bring some jobs.
Roads and bridges definately need some work
Weatherizing government buildings, this would create jobs and will help save energy.
I don't know what all else is in the package, I wonder if they have it online somewhere.

Momacs,

A well reasoned and executed and budgeted spending program would have some benefit. However, let us look at the big picture. What will be created over the next few years from the Porkulus Bill that will continue to offer support to America's economy.

• A hydroelectric power dam. Nope.
• An improved freeway between LA and Las Vegas. Nope.
• Some nuclear power plants that will reduce the use of coal, gas, and oil plants. Nope.

The problem President Obama has with Democratic ideas of stimulus is that they can't stimulate anything but love-ins without pissing off huge parts of their constituency. So, those morons settle for the dinky, small, and insignificant things they do so well. Maybe a bunch of post offices – right as I type this entry into an online blog. Maybe an AIDS clinic in Topeka. Maybe another anti-smoking campaign add.

Nobody in 2060 will stand atop a President Obama inspired TVA dam - generating power for millions of citizens - and wonder at the foresight and drive and American go-get-it-doneness of the new New Deal.

This new New Deal’s debt load will be punishing those people - and will have been spent on STD education decades past. Remember, Momacs, No Glove – No Love. That is advice Pelosi thinks cost billions.

 

[XL-entLady]

I love ya, CB, but I really thought this cartoon was funny.

Lady

 

[momacs]

Momacs,

A well reasoned and executed and budgeted spending program would have some benefit. However, let us look at the big picture. What will be created over the next few years from the Porkulus Bill that will continue to offer support to America's economy.

• A hydroelectric power dam. Nope.
• An improved freeway between LA and Las Vegas. Nope.
• Some nuclear power plants that will reduce the use of coal, gas, and oil plants. Nope.

The problem President Obama has with Democratic ideas of stimulus is that they can't stimulate anything but love-ins without pissing off huge parts of their constituency. So, those morons settle for the dinky, small, and insignificant things they do so well. Maybe a bunch of post offices – right as I type this entry into an online blog. Maybe an AIDS clinic in Topeka. Maybe another anti-smoking campaign add.

Nobody in 2060 will stand atop a President Obama inspired TVA dam - generating power for millions of citizens - and wonder at the foresight and drive and American go-get-it-doneness of the new New Deal.

This new New Deal’s debt load will be punishing those people - and will have been spent on STD education decades past. Remember, Momacs, No Glove – No Love. That is advice Pelosi thinks cost billions.

I was reading fat wallet last night, and they have a thread discussing the $15000 tax credit for buying a home. And this is a credit, not an interest free loan for 15 years. This is $19 billion of the package being considered. The abuse of just this part of the program is going to be awful. People who don't qualify because they bought a house in the past few months are furious. And others are trying to figure out how to trade houses with their neighbor, or buy their girl/boy friends house to qualify.

Sellers in the depressed housing areas aren't going to lower their prices because of this $15000 of free money the buyers are going to receive, and sellers in rest of the country, are just going to jack up their selling price to try to get it.
This isn't going to do anything to restore the confidence of the American people. The proprosed 4% interest rate for refinancing or for buying a house has been dropped from the bill.

I'm starting to think the stimulus package isn't going to help at all. And I was totally against the Tarp program. It'd be awful, but maybe they should just go ahead and let everything go and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[James48843]

I was reading fat wallet last night, and they have a thread discussing the $15000 tax credit for buying a home. And this is a credit, not an interest free loan for 15 years. This is $19 billion of the package being considered. The abuse of just this part of the program is going to be awful. People who don't qualify because they bought a house in the past few months are furious. And others are trying to figure out how to trade houses with their neighbor, or buy their girl/boy friends house to qualify.

Let me see if I got this right.

Dems propose a stimulus bill, after the republican controlled administration for eight years let uncontrolled spending, two wars, and an unregulated banking industry go hog wild and take down the economy. Then the republicans yell for tax cuts to fix everything. So the dems propose a 15K tax credit to jump start home sales. So then the republicans scream that a 15K tax credit for new home sales is a bad thing.

Yeh, I get it.

Dems cut $137 billion out of the stimulus package in an effort to placate republican objections, but republicans still object ot everything.

From where I sit- this is what it looks like to me. The right wing cares nothing about humanity. They care nothing about fixing the economy. They are bankrupt of ideas. The only thing they care about is right-wing power. Plain and simple.

If they can't have everything their way, then they will poison any attempt at fixing things.

That's what it look like, anyway.

Yes, it would have been nice if dems brought republicans into the room during the writing of the House bill. They are being consulted now, and have been given billions in compromises already.

But if republican ideas were valid, why is it that after eight years of Republican control of the White House, and 6 of the last eight years with republican control of BOTH HOUSES of the Senate, you only give the new Congress and Administration two weeks to fix what took eight years to break? If republican ideas to fix the economy were valid,and worked- we'd be in the greatest economic situations right now, wouldn't we?

I say let's let the Senate work out what they can, and then let's pass a Stimulus bill, and see what happens.

It sure couldn't be a whole lot worse than what we've had out of the results of last eight years.

 

[XL-entLady]

Let me see if I got this right.

 

[OBGibby]

Let me see if I got this right.

Dems propose a stimulus bill, after the republican controlled administration for eight years let uncontrolled spending, two wars, and an unregulated banking industry go hog wild and take down the economy. Then the republicans yell for tax cuts to fix everything. So the dems propose a 15K tax credit to jump start home sales. So then the republicans scream that a 15K tax credit for new home sales is a bad thing.

Yeh, I get it.

Dems cut $137 billion out of the stimulus package in an effort to placate republican objections, but republicans still object ot everything.

From where I sit- this is what it looks like to me. The right wing cares nothing about humanity. They care nothing about fixing the economy. They are bankrupt of ideas. The only thing they care about is right-wing power. Plain and simple.

If they can't have everything their way, then they will poison any attempt at fixing things.

That's what it look like, anyway.

Yes, it would have been nice if dems brought republicans into the room during the writing of the House bill. They are being consulted now, and have been given billions in compromises already.

But if republican ideas were valid, why is it that after eight years of Republican control of the White House, and 6 of the last eight years with republican control of BOTH HOUSES of the Senate, you only give the new Congress and Administration two weeks to fix what took eight years to break? If republican ideas to fix the economy were valid,and worked- we'd be in the greatest economic situations right now, wouldn't we?

I say let's let the Senate work out what they can, and then let's pass a Stimulus bill, and see what happens.

It sure couldn't be a whole lot worse than what we've had out of the results of last eight years.

Well, actually, you don't have that right. The $15K home buyer tax credit amendment was introduced by Senator Johnny Isakson, a Republican from Georgia. Your oversimplification of the global economic mess and pinning it's origins at the feet of the Bush administration and the past few Congresses is laughable, but understandable. Your assertions that the right wing [read Republicans], to use your words, "care nothing for humanity" is as absurd on its face as the rest of your post which seems to imply that Republicans have not goals or guiding principles save those associated with power. Tired rhetoric that plays well rousing the base but utterly, to borrow one of your themes, "bankrupt" of usefulness in fostering success for our country.

Obviously, many strong opinions held by all. A healthy debate is always to the benefit to everyone. I would offer that those opposed to the Stimulus Bill (on both the left and the right) are extremely dissatisified with the break-neck pace that Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and President Obama seem hell-bent on pushing this nearly $1 trillion gamble, especially considering that the merits of the aspects of the bill remain in doubt. Contrary to President Obama's assertions, I think the world will keep on spinning regardless of whether the proposed bill makes it to his desk for his signature this week, or three months from now, or even not at all.

But hey, James, you always seem to know everything on this Board (and I don't mean that in a snide way - it's a compliment!), so I couldn't resist bustin' your chops on your claim that the Democrats introduced the $15K home buyer tax credit.

 

[Boghie]

James,

The Democrats controlled the Senate from 2000 – 2002. The Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate from 2006 – 2008. Thus, the Republicans controlled ‘the levers of power’ from 2002 – 2006. And, that control (in the Senate in particular) was tenuous. So, no, the Republicans haven’t been in control of the government for the last eight years.

Regardless, a valued discussion of the options arranged before us with regards to the ‘fiscal crisis’ is in order.

Can a fiscal conservative like me get behind a temporary tax increase? Yes, under the following conditions. 1) Spending is cut substantially and before a revenue increase is talked about. 2) The revenue enhancement process is triggered on proof of said spending cuts. 3) When we come out of recession (2 or three quarters of growth) both spending and revenue adjustments come under review with equal parts removed. By the way, 'substancially' does not mean Draconian - it may mean a budget that does not increase with inflation.:suspicious:

Why do I ask that the cuts to spending are proved? Because I am not confident that government can do so – at least the government we have elected over the past 44 years. We citizens must not ask our government to borrow from the big 'Chinese and Oldster and Saudi' ATM in the sky to pay for trinkets now. Like the average citizen, the government must review its current debt load, get a bit scared, and pay some of it down. I live in the petri dish we call the ‘Land of Fruits and Nuts’ – California. Very Progressive. Ready for a complete collapse – and the folks we elect to office are clueless. Watch us before you promote more spending and borrowing. We ain’t living in the roaring 20’s or the go-go 90’s. We are in a period of deflation – where tax revenue and revenue from Treasuries will dry up. It’s time for a new set of chaps in suites to come to the fore in both private and public sector finance – the boring trolls who are all about reducing debt load and increasing cash flow.

Do I think tax cuts are the answer? No, not really. Maybe a corporate tax cut, but maybe not. I don’t think an income tax cut is in order. I don’t think a capital gains tax cut is in order. I, however, don’t think a dividends tax increase is the smartest thing one can do –ever. As an investor I don’t want to emphasize capital gains over dividends – see ENRON. Besides, EXXON dividends are paid after that rapacious and evil Halliburton of a company shows a profit and pays the taxes. Capital gains, not so much, eh. I kinda want EXXON to prop up my TSP ‘C Fund’ account after they pay their taxes. I don’t think we can tax cut ourselves to prosperity.

So, to summarize. Give me proof that spending is legit, coming under control, and adjustable to the revenue stream. I will then enthusiastically agree with revenue enhancements. If that simple metric cannot be met, than at least create a bloated spending bill that makes things I can take my grandchildren to see. Things that help our society and improve our productivity. I like Hoover (Bolder) Dam. The TVA stuff has value. The San Diego City Hall building has been useful for decades. The municipal pool is still a gem. Don’t waste time and money on the small and insignificant. The problem with a spending program in 2009 is that we are not running a Federal surplus. We were in 1929. We haven’t run a true surplus since I think 1960 something. We haven’t even run a reasonable fake surplus since the early 60’s. The $120 Billion surplus of 1998 included Social Security lockbox money and was to the order of rounding error anyway in relation to expenditures.

It is not heartless to want to set oneself up to support the less well off in our society. It would be heartless (or dumb) to continue – unchanged – to offer increasing benefits till the day it all collapses.

 

[James48843]

Well, actually, you don't have that right. The $15K home buyer tax credit amendment was introduced by Senator Johnny Isakson, a Republican from Georgia.

You are correct, I stand corrected. The point I was trying to make is that the new president asked for ideas that would help the economy. So they passed the home buyer tax credit to make it a part of the package on a voice vote. But now some republicans are complaining that they don't want the home purchase tax credit. Which is it? Do they want it, or don't they want it? Will it work? Will they at least be able to try it?

Your oversimplification of the global economic mess and pinning it's origins at the feet of the Bush administration and the past few Congresses is laughable, but understandable. Your assertions that the right wing [read Republicans], to use your words, "care nothing for humanity" is as absurd on its face as the rest of your post which seems to imply that Republicans have not goals or guiding principles save those associated with power. Tired rhetoric that plays well rousing the base but utterly, to borrow one of your themes, "bankrupt" of usefulness in fostering success for our country.

Ok- so it's over simplification. The point is we need action, ideas, and to try things. Simply sitting on the sidelines saying "what you want to do won't work" isn't going to get things done. Candidates had months to float ideas on how to solve the economic problems. The people looked at the ideas - and made a choice of a direction to go. So let's go!

But hey, James, you always seem to know everything on this Board (and I don't mean that in a snide way - it's a compliment!), so I couldn't resist bustin' your chops on your claim that the Democrats introduced the $15K home buyer tax credit.

Thanks- I like getting busted from time to time. Keeps me in line. Keep it up!

Anyway- it was a nice rant for a Sunday afternoon. Now let's all get out there, and get the economy moving again-

And, oh yes, BUY AMERICAN!

 

[James48843]

P.S. I agree the Social Security and Medicare systems need a major adjustment- everyone knows that. I would say raising the retirement age (or at least the bottom where now, at age 62, people get a reduced SSA benefit) is likely to be done, and soon. I'm already in the age 67 for full retirement class, so I don't think they are likely to change that portion of it. But the Age 62 thing is probably going to have to be raise to 64 or 65 to do the real reform that SSA needs. Along with removing the cap on earnings taxed. You do those two things, and SSA goes fine into the next century, at least for the foreseeable future.

Medicare is a tougher nut to crack. Only real health care reform from top to bottom will be the solution there. the cost of medical care in the US is double most other nations. We've got to do what they do- a single payer system, in order to bring costs under control. Our quality of care is way below many other nations- we can bring quality up and costs down by eliminating all the middle men who run up costs and add nothing to the quality of care.

That statement should provoke a few to comment.....

(Yes, I do love a good verbal debate..)

 

[momacs]

I wasn't saying that we shouldn't help out the less fortunate. Heck, I'm a Democrat. What I'm saying is the abuse and the waste that is going to happen because of these programs is going to be awful. And when the public sees this, their confidence that things are going to be getting better isn't going to happen. And that means no one will be spending to get the economy started again. Until the government can set up these programs with safeguards, it'd probably be better to hold off on pushing this bill through so fast. This is just one part of the bill, it just scares me as to what else is in it, and how much waste there will be. The country can't afford to get this wrong.

 

[momacs]

P.S. I agree the Social Security and Medicare systems need a major adjustment- everyone knows that. I would say raising the retirement age (or at least the bottom where now, at age 62, people get a reduced SSA benefit) is likely to be done, and soon. I'm already in the age 67 for full retirement class, so I don't think they are likely to change that portion of it. But the Age 62 thing is probably going to have to be raise to 64 or 65 to do the real reform that SSA needs. Along with removing the cap on earnings taxed. You do those two things, and SSA goes fine into the next century, at least for the foreseeable future.

Medicare is a tougher nut to crack. Only real health care reform from top to bottom will be the solution there. the cost of medical care in the US is double most other nations. We've got to do what they do- a single payer system, in order to bring costs under control. Our quality of care is way below many other nations- we can bring quality up and costs down by eliminating all the middle men who run up costs and add nothing to the quality of care.

That statement should provoke a few to comment.....

(Yes, I do love a good verbal debate..)

:cheesy: I agree with both of these ideas!!!

 

[Boghie]

Social Security...

James,

I hate to break this to everybody, but BusHitler was right regarding Social Security. He campaigned on changing it in 2000 and 2004. He stated that FY2009 would be the year Social Secuirity revenue would be exceeded by Social Security expenditures.

That moron hit it on the mark.

Last fiscal year Social Security revenues/expneses were about even:
Revenue: 658,045
Expeditures: 657,799

This year's projection, not so good:
Revenue: 682,373
Expeditures: 699,976

Folks, this is the first year that the government doesn't get to incorporate a Social Security surplus into its revenue stream to buy 'Bridges to Nowhere'!!!

Obviously, with unemployment being 7.6% rather than 4.6% the revenue from payroll taxes will reduce - but that was NOT incorporated into the projections!!! So it will be worse!!!

And, now President Obama wants to spend more money - with comments that it is the spending that counts, not judicious spending. Just spending.

Finally, BusHitler was right. The long term benefits of compounding interest investment requires a long term. He figured eight years. Then prayed four years would be enough. Bubbas, we gave him nothing (and, noting todays stock market collapse if you just watched your investments rather than moved them, nothing might have been for the best!!!).

Now, President Obama is six inches into the hole - a hole he probably knew nothing about. He was talking about Hope and Change.

Folks, we punched ourselved in the face.

 

[McDuck]

That is the most stupid cartoon that I have ever seen.

 

[McDuck]

Source: http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20214569_5,00.html

 

[XL-entLady]

That is the most stupid cartoon that I have ever seen.

That's okay Greg. I've known since ... forever ... that your politics and mine are totally different. I can smile about it. I wish you could too. I guess some people just know that there is their opinion and the wrong one. :blink:

Lady

 

[tsptalk]

Let me see if I got this right.

Dems propose a stimulus bill, after the republican controlled administration for eight years let uncontrolled spending, two wars, and an unregulated banking industry go hog wild and take down the economy.

I agree the Bush admin spent way too much, but for the record, don't forget that the dems took control of the house and senate in '06.

I am not a fan of what Obama and the dems are proposing, but I admit I do like the enthusiasm and proactive approach he is taking. That is something we didn't really get from Bush, particularly in his 2nd term. He went into lame duck mode way too early.

Back to the economy...

 

[Birchtree]

"Single motherhood costs taxpayers about $112 billion every year, according to a 2008 study by Georgia State University economist Benjamin Scafidi. Single motherhood directly harms children, occurs at a rate of about 1.5 million a year and has a causal relationship to criminal behavior, substance abuse, juvenile deliquency, sexual victimization and almost every other social disorder." This is where we need hope and change but it ain't gonna happen during the next four years - only more social welfare spending. Someone should ask Squalebear how many of his inmates are illegitimate.

The Times-Union by Ann Coulter of the Universal Press Syndicate - 2/6/09

 

[kam]

I agree the Bush admin spent way too much, but for the record, don't forget that the dems took control of the house and senate in '06.

I am not a fan of what Obama and the dems are proposing, but I admit I do like the enthusiasm and proactive approach he is taking. That is something we didn't really get from Bush, particularly in his 2nd term. He went into lame duck mode way too early.

Back to the economy...

Without 60 votes in the Senate, the Dems never controlled anything in Congress and as long as Bush was President. If you recall, Bush started using his Veto power during the 110th Congress. The Senate majority was cobbled together with one Democratic Socialist and one very pro-war, pro-McCain Independent, for, I believe, a 51 vote majority.

This has been, effectively, a 99% Republican government since January 2001.

 

[KevinD]

Republican in name only...