|
||
CNN Political Ticker:
A leading congressional Democrat and Republican both expressed disappointment Sunday with the pace of the government's economic stimulus program, but offered differing views on whether it was a good idea.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
FLAT/FAIR tax if you want quick stimulus.
You can spend all that money and it won't help that much. FDR did pretty much the same and it had no effect. Obama and his admin have no clue on how to stimulate the economy. Government screws up everything it touches. The only way to get the economy running again, is to lower taxes across the board, put more money back in the hands of people and let millions of people spend and demand. Obamas plan will surely fail. But on the other hand. This great experiment will have one affect. it will finally prove once and for all, that government spending does not work and statists will not be able to use that argument in the future.
So they spend it faster and then someone finds that it has been spent on a swimming pool (even if building the pool put people to work). Then what?
The graft that will inevitably occur over partitioning up close to a trillion dollars, will make the "MP expenses" scandal look tame by comparison.
Maybe next time they get the urge to waste tax payer's money, they'll actually read the bill and understand it's impact before slapping their signature at the bottom?
hahaha, "The Audacity of Hope" eh?
I doubt it, I think there is only a few politicians that even protested the time between the introduction of the bill and the vote was insufficient to even read it. I think they will keep on pulling these storts of shenannigans until people get so fed up with their corruption, people will refuse to vote for most of the incumbents, and we could see the beginnings of a strong 3rd party/Independent movements to clean Congress.
OK, send me $147,395 and I will spend it as fast as I possibly can.
First the money has to pass through those companies selected for those "shovel-ready" projects; then profits has to be pocketed by the businesses and contractors involved, plus a good dose of graft in a few state legislatures, then you get what is left-over, provided you land a job with a connected company. Minus the costs of raw materials, overhead, etc. naturally.
Who can argue that this is the best thing for the economy & the taxpayer?
Maybe some Democrats are waking up to the fact that there is an election next year.
I think it is the primary reason the bulk of the spending was going to kick in right before the start of the 2010 campaigning season; its a very old electioneering trick.
Maybe it would have been spent faster if some you had gotten off you buts and pass it faster. The stimulus was passed in February I dont know what government you work for but the normal SOP of the government is to move slow. This stuff takes time and you know it. Some of you are just coming out and saying this and saying that to save your political skin. Things didnt even work that fast in Wallstreet since its now some of the banks are paying back the money and they've been getting it for over a year now.
I think the "delay" in spending is primarily caused by insisting that the money be filtered out through private companies rather than having the government directly spend it like the WPA did. I'm not saying this was good or bad, frankly I'm not qualified to judge, but it was a trade off not simply an error..
Too little, too late, not targeted in the areas that matter to the people:
-jobs
-housing
-education
-health care
The beleaguered American consumer has propped up the economy of the world, and the life-styles of the rich, for nearly three decades.
Now, their government can't even address the basics.
If they had chosen to bail out the American people with a supervised debt-pay down program, it would have been faster, cheaper, and better for the economy.
Instead, they bailed out the Haves at the expense of the Have-Nots, and wonder, like idiots, why it is not working.
A sixth grader could have come up with a better strategy, more effective tactics, more substantive results.
GREED MISMANAGEMENT & STUPIDITY rule this country, and are ruining it, from the TOP to the BOTTOM.
SINGLE PAYER NOW!
I'm no economist, but if we spend this "stimulus" money faster, won't that just devalue the dollar faster? I mean, this isn't real money with value that they're talking about spending, it's just going to be printed by the Fed and pumped into the system, thus devaluing everyone's savings (if they hold their savings in US$.)
Man, things could get really ugly.
Inflation is the most politically acceptable means of taxation, in that people often are confused about what inflation/deflation is. Inflation is an increase in the money supply, not neccessarily an increase in prices, though this is often a sympton. Likewise with regards to deflation.
¨
Previously, our foreign creditors were willing to tolerate holding our debt for a low yield, that kept pace with inflation, but consistently running $1,700,000,000,000.00+ deficits will soon sate their appetite, leaving us with the only the options of either monetizing the debt, which will precipitate inflation to the level where SIGNIFICANT price increases will occur, or to balance the budget through either tax increases or reducing spending or some combination of the two.
As it is easier to inflate the currency, they will probably go with the inflation option, especially as the wave of Baby Boomers starts wiping out Social Security and Medicare. I am suprised at how little attention people are paying to the BRIC's concerns about the USD as a reserve currency.
More of the stimulus money needs to be allocated to the American people, rather than America's financial institutions.
"The stimulus failed"
The money has been allocated but not spent, Of course we are not going to see it effect the economy if it just sits there.
The problem is the Red States that want the economy to fail.
The problem more originates from the laws of economics and human nature than any sort of political or ideological affiliations.
Are wespending money we do not have? Yes, we are investing that money, (although from the article; it appears in a horribly inefficient manner) but every dollar we invest we have to remove from the economy prior to reinjecting it; or we have to borrow it.
It is more difficult to raise taxes than it is to approve spending, thus spending will continue to grow faster than tax receipts, with the difference being backed either by bonds, or when the Chinese stops buying them direct injection of fiat money into the economy, causing inflation; essentially a hidden tax.
The M1 money supply has been increased by 80% in the last year alone; once the destruction of the M2 and M3 money supplies stops, we will be poised for substantial and rapid inflation. Once foreign governments stop buying our debt, we will have truly crossed the Rubicon.
What are you morons talking about....... I am a NYC school teacher that got a layoff notice but was saved by the stimulus aid to the states portion. So i am right now typing from the condado beach resort in San Juan puerto rico spending my money from the job i still have thanks to the stimulus.
You're right, bronx. Three members of my extended family have either saved their jobs or gotten new jobs through the stimulus already. And the stimulus takes time. You can't just push a button. It will take a full 18 months or so to be going at full pace.
I'm so tired of GOP wingnuts trying to undercut everything the government is trying to do. Government may be a slow ship to turn around, as Obama said in one of his speeches, but at least the job situation isn't nearly as catastrophic as it would have been without the recovery act and stimulus.
I wish the Republicans would go to Recovery.gov and look at how the money is being used in each state, county by county. And then get out of the way and quit the attempts to ruin the reputations of those who are trying to change the mess they made.
Maybe it's the DLC philosophy of favoring certain big states with large numbers of electoral votes because where I live in Central Oregon unemployment is in the mid twenties. Who cares about Oregon's 13 electoral votes if you can get New York's? Better watch out with California though. BTW, I am still a registered Democrat.
We need to spend our borrowed money faster?? Jesus Christ, when did the same rules of economics that apply to individuals no longer apply to entire economies? If I spend money, while borrowing heavily to finance this spending without raising my income, I will 9 times out of 10 be in a worse economic situation.
I wouldn't be so thoroughly opposed to the stimulus, TARP,etc., if we either had the tax receipts to pay for this increase in spending or if we decided to reduce spending somewhere else. We are indebting future generations that haven't even been born yet, and it will only get worse when we start having to make additional outlays for Social Security and Medicare as the Baby Boomers begin retiring.This administration is continuing the fiscal policies of the previous administration that landed us in the poorhouse, and will only exacerbate the situation in the long-term
The stimulus idea is a good one, as long as it is used for infrastructure, and it doesn't go to bailout Wall St.
I agree with Prof. Krugman, the stimulus is too small.
This is laughable to me how do you know its too small if its not being spent fast enough. Those two issues are not the same. Either its spent and its not working because its too small or its NOT spent how can you conclude its too small.
You know what the biggest threat to this country is. Its ideology from both sides and unfortunately many dont even see that. Some folks are so into ideology they can't see beyond it and thats going to be our downfall. Anything to think that our way is the right way without looking at facts and figures.
Way too small and structured poorly so it didn't even achieve what it could have.
People who disagree with Krugman on economics don't have a good long term track record.
Peter Schiff, for example?
I would agree that most of the Chicago School economists are coming out of this crisis with eggs on their faces, but considering Krugman's comments in 2002 in the NYT where he advocates inflating a housing bubble to replace the tech bubble, his advice should be just as suspect.
Almost none of the mainstream economists understand monetary policy as they adhere to either the Keynes or Chicago School, both of which advocate a central bank controlling monetary policy which is the root of the situation we find ourselves entrapped in.
|
||
Loading comments…
First Posted: 07- 5-09 05:17 PM | Updated: 07- 5-09 05:22 PM