Can't the fed just print more money? How about they print 3 billion $100 bills, and give each and every citizen $1000 each? That's $308 billion! Then we could all go out and buy throw away crap from China and "stimulate" the economy.....the Chinese economy.
The first stimulus package was a clusterphuck, why in the world would we do it again?
Want to stimulate the economy? Cut taxes, downsize the federal government, stop allowing poison products from Asia, and go back to USA made products.
Dave, very enlightening. Thanks for the post. I am sure that there are some morons out there that will view this as right wing propaganda, and dismiss it.
The federal government is too large, too complex, and worst of all, very inept. We need a change, a change that IS going to hurt, but it is necessary for the future of the US.
Great explanation. I woke up a long time ago to the loss of purchasing power of the Federal Reserve Note. Nickels are the only real money widely circulated anymore.
If a trillion dollar* stimulus didn't solve the problems then why throw away more money? Maybe the Feds should just pay off everybody's mortgage this time, think about how much liquidity that would put into the economy.
*A billion $ is 1000 million $ so a trillion would be 1000 billion $. Just chump change I know.
The first stimulus was a colossal failure so why on earth would it be a good idea to do it again. Real stimulus comes in the form of jobs and consumer confidence. The few jobs created by the first stimulus were largely government jobs. Each time an uptick in the jobs forecast occurred, the administration claimed success. A closer look though revealed that employment surges were attributable to holiday hiring and census hiring. Sustained growth comes through long term jobs that inject overall confidence in the economy.
Just take the stimulus amount, divide it by the number of taxpayers and send a rebate to everyone. Most of it will go into circulation and stimulate the economy. We all have to pay off the debt, why not get a little benefit?
As long as we're all caught up in the red vs blue game nothing will ever change and this is what the powers that be want. fed.gov should only be concerned with the ENUMERATED POWERS granted by the states via the Constitution. If the citizens of the individual states want to create various programs now run by fed.gov, than so be it. That is what federalism was supposed to be about. Its the same as me not being concerned with what my neighbor does as long as it doesn't infringe on my freedoms.
The problem with everyone being in the same boat, is that if the boat sinks what then?
Oh, that’s right Mark. Republicans don’t spend money like drunken sailors on shore leave. Only Democrats are the problem. Don’t buy the Fox News propaganda, they all created the problem.
I agree with Charlie, I am a Republican but when given the opportunity they don't reign in spending either. I don't see this as a Red/Blue, Dem/Rep problem. This is a politics as usual problem and if there is one positive coming out of it, it would appear more people are becoming aware of the both the Washington and Albany shenanigans and will hopefully vote accordingly next time they enter the voting booth.
While I agree with Charlie that it is not a one party thing, I have to agree with Mark as well.
The majority of the readers on this site lean to the right. It is not surprising that the vote would be weighed in that direction.
The survey could ask if you would vote for a cow with a big "R" painted on it's side and the results would be the same.
Bea, I don't agree. I think the majority of readers are smart enough to recognize crap when they see it(we do live in the dairy belt). Bad policy is bad policy no matter who proposes it.
Charlie ..I agree Rep spent just as much..My point was more about the survey,since Obama proposed it I figured the ones that were for it were Dems..He wants 50 billion more stimulus,were did all the other stimulus go..were is this money coming from..And so far in the last few years it seems to be Democrats who keep on voting to keep spending....
Mark, I have little use for either party. If you remember back, G.W. Bush was the first guy to start the bailout ball rolling. So, I’m not so sure if the Republicans were in power they wouldn’t be playing the bailout game as well. The fact is the Republicans see some political capital in blaming the other guys because; they don’t need to make the tough calls right now.
As for the bailouts, who knows if they worked or they were a scam to suck money from the system. After brushing up on my history and learning about some of the missteps that were made during the Great Depression, maybe Bush and Obama are right to go with a government bailout after all. The problem is we will never know because, the lack of trust most of us feel with our national government, its hard to believe anyone.
I voted no, and I am neither a Repub. or Demo. (not a liberal or conservative either) like Charlie I don't have much use for either. I'd guess the lopsided voting reflects that most people here don't feel as though the stimulus has benefited us much. Former Speaker of The House, Tip O'Neil said "All politics is local".
It's hard to believe them, Charlie because we know they lie.
No one here has the knowledge or background to say whether the first two stimulus packages worked or not. Nor do we have the ability to predict if a third would be beneficial.
You don't need to be a physician to know when you are sick, you don't need to be a mechanic to know when your car needs fixing, you don't need to be a chef to know that you've had a bad meal, and you don't need to be an economist to see that our economy is not heading in the right direction. Common sense observations are all it takes.
You need to be a virologist to know how to effectively develop vaccines for potent strains of disease.
You need to be an engineer to design a car that runs properly in the first place.
You need to be a trained chef with a refined palate to properly combine flavors for a new recipe.
You have to be an economist to understand the relationships and flow of economies.
It's not as simple as you try and make it and I think that by pretending we understand more than we do, we're doing a disservice to the people who really can help.
I wouldn't say pointless, Chris. Since all of us are going to have to pay for these stimulus programs, without having much of a say where it's going to be spent, we should all be able to clearly identify a benefit. To me it's indicative of the attitude of government these days, that they all know best and the rest of us are just uninformed peasants and ought to be happy we're not starving. Just my opinion.
Chris, you can take those analogies and send them to the 10% + unemployed Americans as a comfort that the economy is on an upswing. After that send them to the tens of millions of Americans whose investment and retirement accounts are a sad shadow of what they used to be. Then send them to China so that they can be assured that their owned American debt is still a safe investment.
I'll call it 'pointless' again and back it up with a 'counterproductive.'
Sure we're going to have to pay for it. That doesn't have anything to do with whether or not it's working.
We ARE uninformed. No one is an expert on everything and most of us aren't experts on anything. I'm happy that people who are miles smarter than I am are working on problems I know nothing about. I'm thankful that my doctor has the expertise to make medical decisions for me and my family, I'm grateful that my car was designed by someone who spent years in school learning how not to make internal combustion into external combustion, and I'm comfortable knowing that there are economists out there making informed decisions about how to direct our economy. I couldn't do any of those things and I wouldn't be so arrogant as to tell them how to do their jobs.
Hey Chris, this site was built on pointless conversation. :-)
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Bush and Obama were right and the bailouts saved our economy from complete collapse. I also believe that those bailouts broke our fiscal back as well. Our government needs to take drastic measures to cut spending or our economy will collapse anyway. We have spent so much in the last 10 years, that the shear weight of that debt is going to drive us into the ground.
Charlie you got that right about the debt going to drive us into the ground....Chris i agree that our opinion on this subject is just that,but our vote does mean something and just because someone gets elected to an office doesn't make him or her any smarter than anyone of us..So to turn a blind eye to all this spending because as you say the ones making all calls are smarter than us is wrong..The Iraq war is a good case in point,the experts told us there were so called WMD's over there and what a world threat Hussan was..Found out the experts were wrong..
Chris said "You need to be a virologist to know how to effectively develop vaccines for potent strains of disease.
You need to be an engineer to design a car that runs properly in the first place.
You need to be a trained chef with a refined palate to properly combine flavors for a new recipe.
You have to be an economist to understand the relationships and flow of economies"
How's this for a stupid observation...$780 billion stimulus spread out over the last 600 days equates to $1.3 BILLION A DAY, EVERYDAY, and I guarantee that it all can't be accounted for. So Chris, I may not be a rocket scientist, but I'm not dumb either. That's a whole lot of debt the Chinese have over our head, and one day they will expect repayment. Then what? Wait for some educated idiot to tell us whether or not it worked? We absolutely (IMHO) did not receive enough benefits as citizens to label the stimulus as successful.
Can I go on that limb, too, Charlie.
Everyone has the simple answer. Cut spending. Get the government out of our hair.
Years ago, I spent two days a week in DC, for an entire summer and fall, trying to cut through the red tape that surrounds the regulations the FDA had for pharmaceutical R&D. In the process, I learned that the strict regs weren't across the board for other industries, for example chemical or oil companies.
This current oil spill and lack of new technology to combat it reminded me of those hot days in DC.
This is a case of 'less government' and letting the industries police themselves. It doesn't work when a company's main interest is the bottom line. Cutting corners to give to stockholders may sound good if you hold stock, but what about population who suffers when something goes wrong?
So, where exactly do we cut to save money and to get that pesky government out of our hair? Do we eliminate the departments that regulate big business?
What are the drastic measures that everyone alludes to but never mention?
This isn't being snarky, I'm truly interested in hearing more than just 'drastic measures' are needed. Many of you have the answers, why aren't you testifying in DC or offering your observations to the think tanks (both parties have them).
Posted by bud prevost on June 15, 2010 - 6:28pm
I may not be a rocket scientist, but I'm not dumb either. That's a whole lot of debt the Chinese have over our head, and one day they will expect repayment.
I kept saying that when Bush was borrowing for his wars. Did you?
I think Charlie hit the nail on the head, how long can we go with a government we don't trust. One of the points I took away from this conversation is our elected officials have lost touch with main street America. I don't need a degree to figure that out on my own. I also know when I spend money I don't have, the payback makes me wish I had not borrowed in the first place, so I don't. Running up huge debt is irresponsible, and one of the contributing factors for the mess this country now faces, and throwing more money at it won't help.
Bea, it doesn't matter what my ideas are for reductions. How does this go? I suggest something for a cut and someone representing a special interest tells us why its important to keep the program. I lack the energy to have that debate again.
I fully understand our economy is headed for a meltdown and it's too late to fix. The two party system and our own sence of entitlement will never allow the changes that are needed to take place. My suggestion is personal one, lower your own debt and pay off your own home as quick as possible. At least when the meltdown happens, you will have somewhere for your family to live.
Ok Bea, I'll bite. First, recall all military from foreign lands and close all bases, I don't care what happens to their government or who takes over, call me naive but if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone. Trade with other countries but no Empire building. Then eliminate the Dept of Education, that should be a local thing. Next, eliminate the IRS, stop taxing people's income, institute a flat tax for everyone. No more overseas tax shelters for US corporations, either pay the flat tax or duties. Cut the House of Representatives in half and put term limits on all elected officials. Get that done, then we can start finding others. Uninformed I may be, I don't have a law or Poli Sci degree either, but that's the Olsen plan.
Chris, I don't claim to be smarter than any of the economists, but that does not mean I cannot determine that they were wrong on the stimulus. I'm not trying to be snarky, but come on. Obama's so called experts advised him that the enactment of the first stimulus package would keep our unemployment rate from going above 8%. It is now 10%. It does not take an economist to decipher that hey were flat out wrong. If you want to stick to the "we are not the experts" line then you've rendered many of your own past posts moot.
You said " who's to say that those 10% of Americans wouldn't have been joined by another 5% if the TARP and ARRA hadn't gotten done? Not me and not you" Whose to say that the in the absense of TARP and ARRA that our historically resilient economy would not have righted itself. What is clear is that it did not do what we were told it would do.
Posted by Dave Olsen on June 15, 2010 - 7:14pm
Ok Bea, I'll bite. First, recall all military from foreign lands and close all bases, I don't care what happens to their government or who takes over, call me naive but if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone. Trade with other countries but no Empire building. Then eliminate the Dept of Education, that should be a local thing. Next, eliminate the IRS, stop taxing people's income, institute a flat tax for everyone. No more overseas tax shelters for US corporations, either pay the flat tax or duties. Cut the House of Representatives in half and put term limits on all elected officials. Get that done, then we can start finding others. Uninformed I may be, I don't have a law or Poli Sci degree either, but that's the Olsen plan.
Dave,
That is what I am hoping to read. A plan. Not just the rhetoric. You have solid ideas, some of which I totally agree with. Thanks for biting.
Dave, Congress can't even cut defense systems the military doesn't want.
As for the IRS, two of my Brother-in-Laws work for them. I don't need any more poor relatives. Thats my special interest, don't make me put a sign in my yard in support of the IRS... :-)
You know term limits will never get past the political parties, that's the key to their Intrenched power.
It's better to just plan for the meltdown. I suggest learning to speak Chinese.
You're welcome Bea. I have a favorite quote from James Madison that is so appropriate for our time, those crazy radical founding fathers were the smart ones, not the clowns of today.
"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few … No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare"
Charlie, please don't give my name to your brother-in-laws, I was just kidding...really..... Well, I like Chinese food..........
Here's a fact about TARP we can discuss. The banks took hundreds of billions of dollars from the Bush administration at no interest. Then they bought T-bills (Treasury Bonds) with it.
If you ever wanted a reason to poke your eyeballs out with a sharp stick, wrap your head around this one:
The government gave banks money for free. They bought 3% Treasury bonds with it. Now the government is paying out 3% to pay for its own money. That's like foreclosing on your house and taking out another mortgage to buy it back for more than you owed in the first place.
I'll have an opinion about TARP all day long because it was proven to be ridiculously under-thought. ARRA is another story entirely. We can't really gauge yet whether it's had a positive or negative affect. Many of the funded projects were long term and most haven't started yet. We are under-informed on the matter and so unable to form meaningful opinions on whether or not a second round of it will be beneficial.
Chris, you never have, nor will you ever hear me defend TARP. It was Bush's complete defection from the free market principles that built this country. In my opinion, the aspect of his administration that I disliked most and I said that as it was happening. Now, your analysis of TARP defies your own previuos logic that we cannot debate these topics since we are not experts. You say "Many of the funded projects were long term and most haven't started yet". Then how can it be even remotely called "stimulus", a stimulant is an immediate injection designed to accelerate something. And that is what our economy needed. You are correct in saying that most haven't started yet because they are slated to start right around the next election cycle...how convenient.
Bea,
You're right,I didn't offer any answers, probably because when I go to vote, there is usually flavor A, or flavor B,and in the end , they taste the same. I did offer one solution, stop spending what you don't have, it works for me.
As for the projects related to stimulus, we can't really expect all of them to be completed overnight can we? Speed was one of the reasons projects were required to be 'shovel-ready' to receive funding consideration.
Bea asked " I kept saying that when Bush was borrowing for his wars. Did you? "
Why, yes I did. As I've stated in the past, I am not bound by party boundaries. I admit voting Bush in 2000, but those "unjust" wars were the reason I voted 3rd party in 2004. The cost in dollars, and more importantly, lives, was too high (still is).
As far as TARP, no different than the ARRA. Lots of money to bail out banks that made poor(greedy) decisions, and not alot of accountability.
Dave, you are more libertarian than you may realize, which is a good thing. We need more of us dumb sheeple to stop following this 2 party system.
Mandarin is the most spoken language in the world.
Bud, I became a libertarian around the time Bush wanted to go after Saddam in 2003. I was pretty much of a liberal before that since the Jimmy Carter days. Go figure.
Chris; ARRA was supposed to pick up "Shovel ready" projects, here we are a year later and very few have started. The early money went to save local and state government jobs that the entities couldn't afford. In NY it was used to balance a budget last year that should have been cut then, we're seeing how well that worked now. I still think TARP was just helping Bush, Cheney and Paulsen's golf buds keep their mansions in the Hamptons and Palm Beach and their airplanes. In their defense, most of the TARP money is being paid back, I read somewhere over the weekend that more has been paid back than is currently out on loan. Please don't forget the GM and Chrysler bailouts either. I'll admit I'm no expert, I think the Government should've let the financial collapse happen and there should've been no ARRA that way they would have to adjust spending. Americans are resourceful and resilient, we'd have been OK, it may have been ugly but we would have come back. Now there is going to be a Dollar crash, Charlie is right. It's just a matter of how bad. Remember Charlie, Europe is going down with us the Chinese really need our economies to come back in order for them to recoup. We are not however going to set the terms any more.
Thanks for the link Chris; you can also check www.openbooknewyork.com to see where it is being spent in NY State. I am well aware of the difference between TARP and ARRA.
Can't the fed just print more
Can't the fed just print more money? How about they print 3 billion $100 bills, and give each and every citizen $1000 each? That's $308 billion! Then we could all go out and buy throw away crap from China and "stimulate" the economy.....the Chinese economy.
The first stimulus package was a clusterphuck, why in the world would we do it again?
Want to stimulate the economy? Cut taxes, downsize the federal government, stop allowing poison products from Asia, and go back to USA made products.
http://www.silverbearcafe.com
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/04.09/economics101.html
Dave, very enlightening.
Dave, very enlightening. Thanks for the post. I am sure that there are some morons out there that will view this as right wing propaganda, and dismiss it.
The federal government is too large, too complex, and worst of all, very inept. We need a change, a change that IS going to hurt, but it is necessary for the future of the US.
What is this economics you
What is this economics you speak of?
Great explanation. I woke up a long time ago to the loss of purchasing power of the Federal Reserve Note. Nickels are the only real money widely circulated anymore.
http://coinflation.com/
If a trillion dollar* stimulus didn't solve the problems then why throw away more money? Maybe the Feds should just pay off everybody's mortgage this time, think about how much liquidity that would put into the economy.
*A billion $ is 1000 million $ so a trillion would be 1000 billion $. Just chump change I know.
The first stimulus was a
The first stimulus was a colossal failure so why on earth would it be a good idea to do it again. Real stimulus comes in the form of jobs and consumer confidence. The few jobs created by the first stimulus were largely government jobs. Each time an uptick in the jobs forecast occurred, the administration claimed success. A closer look though revealed that employment surges were attributable to holiday hiring and census hiring. Sustained growth comes through long term jobs that inject overall confidence in the economy.
Just take the stimulus
Just take the stimulus amount, divide it by the number of taxpayers and send a rebate to everyone. Most of it will go into circulation and stimulate the economy. We all have to pay off the debt, why not get a little benefit?
Lets guess that those that
Lets guess that those that said YES were Democrats..and those the said NO were Republicians...
As long as we're all caught
As long as we're all caught up in the red vs blue game nothing will ever change and this is what the powers that be want. fed.gov should only be concerned with the ENUMERATED POWERS granted by the states via the Constitution. If the citizens of the individual states want to create various programs now run by fed.gov, than so be it. That is what federalism was supposed to be about. Its the same as me not being concerned with what my neighbor does as long as it doesn't infringe on my freedoms.
The problem with everyone being in the same boat, is that if the boat sinks what then?
Oh, that’s right Mark.
Oh, that’s right Mark. Republicans don’t spend money like drunken sailors on shore leave. Only Democrats are the problem. Don’t buy the Fox News propaganda, they all created the problem.
I agree with Charlie, I am a
I agree with Charlie, I am a Republican but when given the opportunity they don't reign in spending either. I don't see this as a Red/Blue, Dem/Rep problem. This is a politics as usual problem and if there is one positive coming out of it, it would appear more people are becoming aware of the both the Washington and Albany shenanigans and will hopefully vote accordingly next time they enter the voting booth.
While I agree with Charlie
While I agree with Charlie that it is not a one party thing, I have to agree with Mark as well.
The majority of the readers on this site lean to the right. It is not surprising that the vote would be weighed in that direction.
The survey could ask if you would vote for a cow with a big "R" painted on it's side and the results would be the same.
Bea, I don't agree. I think
Bea, I don't agree. I think the majority of readers are smart enough to recognize crap when they see it(we do live in the dairy belt). Bad policy is bad policy no matter who proposes it.
Charlie ..I agree Rep spent
Charlie ..I agree Rep spent just as much..My point was more about the survey,since Obama proposed it I figured the ones that were for it were Dems..He wants 50 billion more stimulus,were did all the other stimulus go..were is this money coming from..And so far in the last few years it seems to be Democrats who keep on voting to keep spending....
Mark, I have little use for
Mark, I have little use for either party. If you remember back, G.W. Bush was the first guy to start the bailout ball rolling. So, I’m not so sure if the Republicans were in power they wouldn’t be playing the bailout game as well. The fact is the Republicans see some political capital in blaming the other guys because; they don’t need to make the tough calls right now.
As for the bailouts, who knows if they worked or they were a scam to suck money from the system. After brushing up on my history and learning about some of the missteps that were made during the Great Depression, maybe Bush and Obama are right to go with a government bailout after all. The problem is we will never know because, the lack of trust most of us feel with our national government, its hard to believe anyone.
I voted no, and I am neither
I voted no, and I am neither a Repub. or Demo. (not a liberal or conservative either) like Charlie I don't have much use for either. I'd guess the lopsided voting reflects that most people here don't feel as though the stimulus has benefited us much. Former Speaker of The House, Tip O'Neil said "All politics is local".
It's hard to believe them, Charlie because we know they lie.
No one here has the knowledge
No one here has the knowledge or background to say whether the first two stimulus packages worked or not. Nor do we have the ability to predict if a third would be beneficial.
Chris, what else do we need
Chris, what else do we need to see to determine whether the stimuli worked? Looks pretty clear to me.
Oh, I don't know, we could
Oh, I don't know, we could start with raw data and the means to analyze it.
This is the sort of thing that people with economics degrees publish papers about for their doctorate.
We're not equipped to debate this. Anything we say is pure conjecture and opinion.
You don't need to be a
You don't need to be a physician to know when you are sick, you don't need to be a mechanic to know when your car needs fixing, you don't need to be a chef to know that you've had a bad meal, and you don't need to be an economist to see that our economy is not heading in the right direction. Common sense observations are all it takes.
Here's some better analogies
Here's some better analogies for you Jeff:
You need to be a virologist to know how to effectively develop vaccines for potent strains of disease.
You need to be an engineer to design a car that runs properly in the first place.
You need to be a trained chef with a refined palate to properly combine flavors for a new recipe.
You have to be an economist to understand the relationships and flow of economies.
It's not as simple as you try and make it and I think that by pretending we understand more than we do, we're doing a disservice to the people who really can help.
Actually, I thought this
Actually, I thought this website was a place to air our opinions not prove or disprove doctoral thesis.
Sure Dave, I'm just saying
Sure Dave, I'm just saying that any opinions we would have on this matter are uninformed and pretty pointless.
I wouldn't say pointless,
I wouldn't say pointless, Chris. Since all of us are going to have to pay for these stimulus programs, without having much of a say where it's going to be spent, we should all be able to clearly identify a benefit. To me it's indicative of the attitude of government these days, that they all know best and the rest of us are just uninformed peasants and ought to be happy we're not starving. Just my opinion.
Chris, you can take those
Chris, you can take those analogies and send them to the 10% + unemployed Americans as a comfort that the economy is on an upswing. After that send them to the tens of millions of Americans whose investment and retirement accounts are a sad shadow of what they used to be. Then send them to China so that they can be assured that their owned American debt is still a safe investment.
I'll call it 'pointless'
I'll call it 'pointless' again and back it up with a 'counterproductive.'
Sure we're going to have to pay for it. That doesn't have anything to do with whether or not it's working.
We ARE uninformed. No one is an expert on everything and most of us aren't experts on anything. I'm happy that people who are miles smarter than I am are working on problems I know nothing about. I'm thankful that my doctor has the expertise to make medical decisions for me and my family, I'm grateful that my car was designed by someone who spent years in school learning how not to make internal combustion into external combustion, and I'm comfortable knowing that there are economists out there making informed decisions about how to direct our economy. I couldn't do any of those things and I wouldn't be so arrogant as to tell them how to do their jobs.
Jeff, who's to say that those
Jeff, who's to say that those 10% of Americans wouldn't have been joined by another 5% if the TARP and ARRA hadn't gotten done? Not me and not you.
Your opinion about global economics doesn't become more relevant in proportion to your snarkiness.
This is a trend that has been bugging me about our culture. We can't seem to fathom that someone would know more than we do about any given subject.
Hey Chris, this site was
Hey Chris, this site was built on pointless conversation. :-)
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Bush and Obama were right and the bailouts saved our economy from complete collapse. I also believe that those bailouts broke our fiscal back as well. Our government needs to take drastic measures to cut spending or our economy will collapse anyway. We have spent so much in the last 10 years, that the shear weight of that debt is going to drive us into the ground.
"Sure we're going to have to
"Sure we're going to have to pay for it. That doesn't have anything to do with whether or not it's working."
well, It oughta.
Charlie you got that right
Charlie you got that right about the debt going to drive us into the ground....Chris i agree that our opinion on this subject is just that,but our vote does mean something and just because someone gets elected to an office doesn't make him or her any smarter than anyone of us..So to turn a blind eye to all this spending because as you say the ones making all calls are smarter than us is wrong..The Iraq war is a good case in point,the experts told us there were so called WMD's over there and what a world threat Hussan was..Found out the experts were wrong..
Chris said "You need to be a
Chris said "You need to be a virologist to know how to effectively develop vaccines for potent strains of disease.
You need to be an engineer to design a car that runs properly in the first place.
You need to be a trained chef with a refined palate to properly combine flavors for a new recipe.
You have to be an economist to understand the relationships and flow of economies"
How's this for a stupid observation...$780 billion stimulus spread out over the last 600 days equates to $1.3 BILLION A DAY, EVERYDAY, and I guarantee that it all can't be accounted for. So Chris, I may not be a rocket scientist, but I'm not dumb either. That's a whole lot of debt the Chinese have over our head, and one day they will expect repayment. Then what? Wait for some educated idiot to tell us whether or not it worked? We absolutely (IMHO) did not receive enough benefits as citizens to label the stimulus as successful.
Can I go on that limb, too,
Can I go on that limb, too, Charlie.
Everyone has the simple answer. Cut spending. Get the government out of our hair.
Years ago, I spent two days a week in DC, for an entire summer and fall, trying to cut through the red tape that surrounds the regulations the FDA had for pharmaceutical R&D. In the process, I learned that the strict regs weren't across the board for other industries, for example chemical or oil companies.
This current oil spill and lack of new technology to combat it reminded me of those hot days in DC.
This is a case of 'less government' and letting the industries police themselves. It doesn't work when a company's main interest is the bottom line. Cutting corners to give to stockholders may sound good if you hold stock, but what about population who suffers when something goes wrong?
So, where exactly do we cut to save money and to get that pesky government out of our hair? Do we eliminate the departments that regulate big business?
What are the drastic measures that everyone alludes to but never mention?
This isn't being snarky, I'm truly interested in hearing more than just 'drastic measures' are needed. Many of you have the answers, why aren't you testifying in DC or offering your observations to the think tanks (both parties have them).
Posted by bud prevost on June
Posted by bud prevost on June 15, 2010 - 6:28pm
I may not be a rocket scientist, but I'm not dumb either. That's a whole lot of debt the Chinese have over our head, and one day they will expect repayment.
I kept saying that when Bush was borrowing for his wars. Did you?
I think Charlie hit the nail
I think Charlie hit the nail on the head, how long can we go with a government we don't trust. One of the points I took away from this conversation is our elected officials have lost touch with main street America. I don't need a degree to figure that out on my own. I also know when I spend money I don't have, the payback makes me wish I had not borrowed in the first place, so I don't. Running up huge debt is irresponsible, and one of the contributing factors for the mess this country now faces, and throwing more money at it won't help.
Posted by Frank Bartholomew
Posted by Frank Bartholomew on June 15, 2010 - 6:37pm
I think Charlie hit the nail on the head, how long can we go with a government we don't trust.
That's the rhetoric, Frank. What are the concrete solutions?
Bea, it doesn't matter what
Bea, it doesn't matter what my ideas are for reductions. How does this go? I suggest something for a cut and someone representing a special interest tells us why its important to keep the program. I lack the energy to have that debate again.
I fully understand our economy is headed for a meltdown and it's too late to fix. The two party system and our own sence of entitlement will never allow the changes that are needed to take place. My suggestion is personal one, lower your own debt and pay off your own home as quick as possible. At least when the meltdown happens, you will have somewhere for your family to live.
Bea, Nice try. Change the
Bea,
Nice try. Change the subject from the stimulus bill to the oil spill. Sort of lame.
If there is no new stimulus bill, government will not be any smaller, but it will not get bigger.
Ok Bea, I'll bite. First,
Ok Bea, I'll bite. First, recall all military from foreign lands and close all bases, I don't care what happens to their government or who takes over, call me naive but if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone. Trade with other countries but no Empire building. Then eliminate the Dept of Education, that should be a local thing. Next, eliminate the IRS, stop taxing people's income, institute a flat tax for everyone. No more overseas tax shelters for US corporations, either pay the flat tax or duties. Cut the House of Representatives in half and put term limits on all elected officials. Get that done, then we can start finding others. Uninformed I may be, I don't have a law or Poli Sci degree either, but that's the Olsen plan.
Chris, I don't claim to be
Chris, I don't claim to be smarter than any of the economists, but that does not mean I cannot determine that they were wrong on the stimulus. I'm not trying to be snarky, but come on. Obama's so called experts advised him that the enactment of the first stimulus package would keep our unemployment rate from going above 8%. It is now 10%. It does not take an economist to decipher that hey were flat out wrong. If you want to stick to the "we are not the experts" line then you've rendered many of your own past posts moot.
You said " who's to say that those 10% of Americans wouldn't have been joined by another 5% if the TARP and ARRA hadn't gotten done? Not me and not you" Whose to say that the in the absense of TARP and ARRA that our historically resilient economy would not have righted itself. What is clear is that it did not do what we were told it would do.
Chris, You base your
Chris,
You base your assumption on the people in DC who came up with the stimulus idea being smarter than you. You just might be wrong.
Posted by Dave Olsen on June
Posted by Dave Olsen on June 15, 2010 - 7:14pm
Ok Bea, I'll bite. First, recall all military from foreign lands and close all bases, I don't care what happens to their government or who takes over, call me naive but if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone. Trade with other countries but no Empire building. Then eliminate the Dept of Education, that should be a local thing. Next, eliminate the IRS, stop taxing people's income, institute a flat tax for everyone. No more overseas tax shelters for US corporations, either pay the flat tax or duties. Cut the House of Representatives in half and put term limits on all elected officials. Get that done, then we can start finding others. Uninformed I may be, I don't have a law or Poli Sci degree either, but that's the Olsen plan.
Dave,
That is what I am hoping to read. A plan. Not just the rhetoric. You have solid ideas, some of which I totally agree with. Thanks for biting.
Dave, Congress can't even cut
Dave, Congress can't even cut defense systems the military doesn't want.
As for the IRS, two of my Brother-in-Laws work for them. I don't need any more poor relatives. Thats my special interest, don't make me put a sign in my yard in support of the IRS... :-)
You know term limits will never get past the political parties, that's the key to their Intrenched power.
It's better to just plan for the meltdown. I suggest learning to speak Chinese.
You're welcome Bea. I have a
You're welcome Bea. I have a favorite quote from James Madison that is so appropriate for our time, those crazy radical founding fathers were the smart ones, not the clowns of today.
"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few … No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare"
Charlie, please don't give my name to your brother-in-laws, I was just kidding...really..... Well, I like Chinese food..........
Here's a fact about TARP we
Here's a fact about TARP we can discuss. The banks took hundreds of billions of dollars from the Bush administration at no interest. Then they bought T-bills (Treasury Bonds) with it.
If you ever wanted a reason to poke your eyeballs out with a sharp stick, wrap your head around this one:
The government gave banks money for free. They bought 3% Treasury bonds with it. Now the government is paying out 3% to pay for its own money. That's like foreclosing on your house and taking out another mortgage to buy it back for more than you owed in the first place.
I'll have an opinion about TARP all day long because it was proven to be ridiculously under-thought. ARRA is another story entirely. We can't really gauge yet whether it's had a positive or negative affect. Many of the funded projects were long term and most haven't started yet. We are under-informed on the matter and so unable to form meaningful opinions on whether or not a second round of it will be beneficial.
Chris, you never have, nor
Chris, you never have, nor will you ever hear me defend TARP. It was Bush's complete defection from the free market principles that built this country. In my opinion, the aspect of his administration that I disliked most and I said that as it was happening. Now, your analysis of TARP defies your own previuos logic that we cannot debate these topics since we are not experts. You say "Many of the funded projects were long term and most haven't started yet". Then how can it be even remotely called "stimulus", a stimulant is an immediate injection designed to accelerate something. And that is what our economy needed. You are correct in saying that most haven't started yet because they are slated to start right around the next election cycle...how convenient.
Bea, You're right,I didn't
Bea,
You're right,I didn't offer any answers, probably because when I go to vote, there is usually flavor A, or flavor B,and in the end , they taste the same. I did offer one solution, stop spending what you don't have, it works for me.
Chris wrote, "I'm just saying
Chris wrote, "I'm just saying that any opinions we would have on this matter are uninformed and pretty pointless."
If we relied on informed opinions and points that weren't pointless, there would be no politicians.
Also, Chris, you REALLY should read Walter Lippmann's "Public Opinion." Totally supports your "we're uninformed" thesis and explains how it works.
Dave, we're on the same page on how to reduce government and cut spending.
Jeff, high-five on TARP. As
Jeff, high-five on TARP.
As for the projects related to stimulus, we can't really expect all of them to be completed overnight can we? Speed was one of the reasons projects were required to be 'shovel-ready' to receive funding consideration.
Chris, I'll take the
Chris, I'll take the high-five on TARP, it still makes my blood boil.
Bea asked " I kept saying
Bea asked " I kept saying that when Bush was borrowing for his wars. Did you? "
Why, yes I did. As I've stated in the past, I am not bound by party boundaries. I admit voting Bush in 2000, but those "unjust" wars were the reason I voted 3rd party in 2004. The cost in dollars, and more importantly, lives, was too high (still is).
As far as TARP, no different than the ARRA. Lots of money to bail out banks that made poor(greedy) decisions, and not alot of accountability.
Dave, you are more libertarian than you may realize, which is a good thing. We need more of us dumb sheeple to stop following this 2 party system.
Mandarin is the most spoken language in the world.
Bud, I became a libertarian
Bud, I became a libertarian around the time Bush wanted to go after Saddam in 2003. I was pretty much of a liberal before that since the Jimmy Carter days. Go figure.
Chris; ARRA was supposed to pick up "Shovel ready" projects, here we are a year later and very few have started. The early money went to save local and state government jobs that the entities couldn't afford. In NY it was used to balance a budget last year that should have been cut then, we're seeing how well that worked now. I still think TARP was just helping Bush, Cheney and Paulsen's golf buds keep their mansions in the Hamptons and Palm Beach and their airplanes. In their defense, most of the TARP money is being paid back, I read somewhere over the weekend that more has been paid back than is currently out on loan. Please don't forget the GM and Chrysler bailouts either. I'll admit I'm no expert, I think the Government should've let the financial collapse happen and there should've been no ARRA that way they would have to adjust spending. Americans are resourceful and resilient, we'd have been OK, it may have been ugly but we would have come back. Now there is going to be a Dollar crash, Charlie is right. It's just a matter of how bad. Remember Charlie, Europe is going down with us the Chinese really need our economies to come back in order for them to recoup. We are not however going to set the terms any more.
I have more chins than a Chinese phonebook
Dave, http://www.recovery.go
Dave,
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx
There's where you can see where the ARRA funds are going. TARP was the bank bailout, it shouldn't be confused with Obama's first stimulus.
Thanks for the link Chris;
Thanks for the link Chris; you can also check www.openbooknewyork.com to see where it is being spent in NY State. I am well aware of the difference between TARP and ARRA.