What’s in this Stimulus Bill?

[JanS]

oh, my, what a discussion this could generate ( but not gonna hi-jack the thread – lol). The topic, which could better be discussed in person in a meeting of the minds, would be ” What Makes someone patriotic” Now, before you jump on me, I’m a vet, served during the Vietnam War era..’72-’75 – one of the last members of the Women’s Army Corps. Does that make me patriotic? I gave my uniforms away…does that make me unpatriotic? (yeah, I’m just kidding with that one). The three men from Ft. Lewis who were just arrested for some fairly nasty robberies and assaults in the U. Dist. wore our country’s uniform, had military ID cards…are they patriotic? I think it goes deeper than that(uniforms and ID’s, I mean), and I think you realize that, Barb. Because I don’t want to see this important discussion of ideas about the stimulus plan go awry, we should have a discussion some other place about it sometime. Maybe come to the meet-up on the 15th at Big Al’s. I know that I, for one, would love to meet you. We may have different ideas, beliefs, but we probably have more in common than not – people usually do…and, besides, it’d be fun.

Share This

[Anonymous]

Since 9/11 Republicans have defined patriotism. “You’re either with us or against us” Liberals have been outraged to have their concept of *love of country* questioned. Now that we’re in power, we’re going to turn around and define it for others? With absolutes, no less. That’s fairly rude and I hope not a widespread attitude. Certainly not one I want to be associated with.

BarbG should take offense. None of us has the right to judge what action is best for another household.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

Consumerism is one of the leading reasons we are in the recession we are in right now. B/c many consumers overspent. They spent on credit. Credit given to them from credit cards and home equity loans. Credit used to go to malls, buy new cars, home remodel projects and trips. People were dumb. People spending beyond their means and not saving the 10% of every paycheck that most financial advisors , CPA’s, and any other business leader would recommend. Consumers spending on credit and living beyond their means is one of the leading causes of this recession. In the long run, the recession, which is causing Americans to save more, is a good thing. People are learning to save and learning to live within their means. This has nothing to do with who is and who is not patriotic. Two years ago Americans had a negative spending rate of 2% (meaning they spent more than they earned.) In August of 2008 Americans were only saving .8% of their income. The savings rate increased to 3.6% in December! All of this saving is good! Putting your money in any savings vehicle is patriotic. In the long run the money (even in savings) will make it back to the market place. Hopefully everyone understands how banks and other money institutions work if not please feel free to P/M me and we can have a separate discussion there.

Not only are consumers saving more but also they are paying down their debts. This is also good. (Maybe our country should learn to do the same!) This will help to unfreeze the credit market.

In a perfect world the spending theory would work; however, in today’s world it would not. Everyone (not just every American) would have to jump on this spending frenzy. And that isn’t going to happen. It will not happen b/c people are getting smart & starting to save since they realize now that unemployment is real. Saving allows them to stay put where they call home. Saving would allow them to stay in the Pacific Northwest if that was what was important to them. And without credit spending isn’t going to happen b/c those that are some of our biggest spenders don’t have the funds to spend any more b/c we are in a credit crunch. For example, if you talk to someone @ a car dealership they will explain that the people that can afford a car (other than the rich) aren’t buying one b/c they realize that they need to be fiscally conservative and fiscally smart Their jobs, retirement funds, and housing markets are vulnerable too. Their net worth also has decreased. For people to spend they have to feel as if their net worth has increased or something similar. Then the people that are coming in have no savings, and no credit so they cant buy the car.

JanS there is no point to talk about stimulus checks b/c there is no plan to send us another check. Talking about the “American Recovery & Reinvestment Plan” is good and we should all partake. And we can do that right here on the forum.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

Also great post JT I was writing mine when you posted yours. You managed to take the idea I was thinking but could not find words for.

Share This

[JanS]

BDG…I don’t believe I ever brought up “stimulus checks”, just talked about the stimulus package in general. But I do believe that at some point there will be a “rebate”, or a give back by the gov’t. in maybe tax refunds, or something similar…to give something to the little people, if you will, and hope that some of those people spend their money, and maybe get something moving again. And, of course, you’re entitled to do whatever you want with the money that may or may notm come to you. :)

JT…I brought up the question as to what constitutes “patriotism”, because it goes (IMO) deeper than just flag waving, uniform wearing, etc. Those things can mean a lot, but, I think you remember how those who didn’t march in step to supporting the war were somehow less patriotic. What your last post says points that out. I think a good topic for a thread would be “What does patriotism mean to you”..would be a helluva discussion…and it could include discussion about what one considers to be unpatriotic.

I don’t believe things are “rude” and offensive”…just a difference of opinion…unless they’re said in a rude and offensive way.

And, JT, thanks for the line “now that we’re in power” – lol..definitely relates to how some repubs are acting…we’ll let you be the prez, but we won’t let you make policy…not because they have a better idea, but because they have to have their own way. Most of the politicians on Cap. Hill can’t even hardly relate to the regular person on the street – to you and me – to how the economy is affecting us…so they don’t care how long their game plays out. I think Pres. Obama does know, and his sense of urgency needs to be listened to.

Share This

[Anonymous]

If someone states they need to preserve money, including a possible rebate, in order to care for their family, we need to respect that they know their own circumstances best. Instead, that behavior was labeled un-patriotic hoarding. I find that sentiment very rude. Especially coming from liberals who experienced the other side of that judgment (patriotism). Patriotism literally means *love of country*. Who are any of us to decide what manner in which that love must be implemented. JanS, you yourself must understand the many possibilities or you wouldn’t find a thread about what it means to others, interesting.

Share This

[BarbG]

JanS, you may not call something rude or offensive, but if the comment isn’t directed at you then you can’t really decide if something is rude or offensive to someone else, and to me JoB calling me unpatriotic was rude and offensive. I never once said she was unpatriotic, but she felt every need to say that I was unpatriotic, and I was just pointing out how I was patriotic even though my first impulse is not to spend the stimulus money but instead to save it. And I only brought up patriotism because JoB did.

Thanks JT and BDG.

Share This

[JoB]

Whoa…

i was very careful to define hoarders as upper middle class and wealthy Americans who were choosing not to spend stimulus refunds because spending them does not agree with their personal philosophy…

i said that my husband and i personally felt it was our patriotic duty to spend the stimulus check that was sent to us by President Bush even though we believed that his policies created the economic downturn….

because it was sent to us for that express purpose..

to stimulate our economy.

I said that patriotism is not defined by waving a flag…

but, I didn’t call any individual unpatriotic…

****

Patriotism is a love and devotion towards one’s country..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism

This country is in trouble right now because of poor fiscal policies… because our economy is based on consumerism.. the consuming of goods and services… not on production.. the production of goods and services.

It is so much easier to blame those who have been victimized by the system than to admit that the system needs to be fixed.. but the system needs to be fixed.

In the meantime, if we don’t contribute to this economy by consuming (the engine that feeds our current economy) job losses will continue and that has a cascading effect on our economy.

what is happening right now at Boeing is a good example of how escalating unemployment cascades. Boeing is currently laying off employees because they have had orders for airplanes canceled. Those orders were canceled because airlines can’t afford to buy new planes because people aren’t spending discretionary dollars flying and businesses are no longer upgrading employees to business class so the dollar per seat income is down. People aren’t flying because they can’t afford to fly either because they have been unemployed, they fear being unemployed, they have received pay cuts or are now working part time or because of their financial losses in the stock market. Businesses aren’t paying for business class because their revenues are down because people aren’t buying other goods and services for the same reason they aren’t flying. Boeing has no choice but to lay off workers…

which means that those workers won’t be consuming either and other businesses will fail as a result which will lead to even more layoffs and even more failure.

This is basic economics…

So, when CNN counsels Americans to put any money they receive from tax cuts or stimulus dollars or social security tax vacations or… into savings instead of using that money to stimulate the economy by consuming…

they are contributing to the problem… not only by taking the dollars released to stimulate the economy out of circulation thereby insuring they will have no benefit… but by creating the impression that it is unwise for those who have discretionary income to spend any of it.. thereby further decreasing economic stimulation.

what effect do you think that will have on our economy and on the ultimate safety of your jobs?

Is that advice really in your best interests?

CNN’s financial advisers are the ones who have been counseling you to invest in the stock market… who have been telling you the mortgage industry was solid… Who told us all that Enron was a great investment right up until the day they folded…

why would you continue to take financial advice from experts who have been so consistently wrong?

I am well aware that they have only told people what they wanted to hear.. no-one wants to believe that our economy could collapse so badly that it ruined them…

but it can… and it is on it’s way there… and unless we do something both as individuals and as a country to slow it down… we are on our way to the modern equivalent of the great depression.

If that happens, we won’t be debating the quality of our food, but wondering how we are going to find food to purchase.

Maybe it’s time to move beyond rhetoric.. to stop being personally insulted when someone challenges your thought process… and to start asking questions and demanding substance in reporting instead of entertainment and reassurance. Maybe it’s time to stop listening to the talking heads.

We need to start asking what we can do as individuals and as a country to keep those who still have jobs employed and to find jobs for those who aren’t.

It’s easy to sneer at spending money on national parks when we are in national crisis, but many of the resources we enjoy now were built by a national jobs programs …. and that is the key word here… jobs.

It’s easy to sneer at green programs, until you realize just how much energy could be saved if every home and building in America was properly weatherized and how many people could be employed to do the work.

We need to start building the kinds of community resources that will allow us individually to weather this economic storm long enough to reform it.

And most of all, we need to stop focusing on finding excuses not to do act because the solutions offered won’t solve the entire problem… and start focusing on what we can do next to make a difference now…

for ourselves and for our country. That’s patriotism.

Share This

[Sky2625]

I’ll try to play moderator and re-focus the discussion.

Given some of the more astute posts above, it sounds like our country has several issues to face.

Short-term:

Credit Freeze/Mortgage Bomb

Unemployment

De-valuation of assets

Decrease of wages

Long-term:

Government Debt and Deficit

A Culture of Consumption/Over-spending

Decrease in size of manufacturing sector

The bank bailout bill was meant to handle the credit freeze…and banks did not do what the government wanted them to do, but did what a smart self-interested party would do: thy sat on the money to make sure they had enough money on hand.

The stimulus bill we’re discussing is supposed to tackle unemployment. I *feel* like a good-sized chunk of it is aid, and not necessarily stimulus. However, the Moody’s info that said food stamps provides $1.73 of economic activity for every dollar spent was a shocker to me. Does anyone know how that works? I’m at a loss. I retract my initial judgment pending more info…

But back to the discussion – My opinion is this: why do we have to pass this gargantuan spending bill and call it stimulus? Why not separate it into chunks, this one “construction sector stimulus”, that one “newly unemployed worker assistance”, this one over here “green power experimental improvements”? Why not find the segment of society that spends the most on portions of the economy that employs the most people, and cut their taxes? Somebody *must* have that info…

I firmly believe that Republicans would get behind some sort of targeted capital improvement package, and probably even some sort of unemployment assistance. Separate this stuff out so the merits of individual aspects and actions in it can be debated/affirmed/opposed. I’d like to believe that the GOP isn’t being obstructionary just for the fun of it or for petty political reasons; they smell a rat in this bill, and they’re not going for it.

This will be a contentious question: If the Democrats were truly interested in being bi-partisan, would they not cut all of the contraversial issues out of the stimulus bill?

Birth control and STD prevention…they know that’s going cause a debate with the GOP (right or wrong)! If they really believe that the country is in such dire need of assistance, and that they need to pass something now, why not limit it to plans they know the GOP will agree with?

Share This

[JoB]

sjy2625…

the only way for the democrats to cut the contentious parts of the stimulus bill out is to leave nothing but tax cuts…

because as the republicans in the House just demonstrated, even with more tax cuts they are not willing to vote for a stimulus bill.

Unfortunately tax cuts don’t work… as the past administration has proven beyond a doubt. If they had worked, we wouldn’t be in this mess now.

When those who receive the benefits of tax cuts are more interested in self interest and self interest is defined by short term profitability… tax cuts do not work to stimulate the economy.

the reason food stamps work as stimulus is that they are spent immediately.. and the dollar spent for food includes the cost of the food and the transportation to deliver the food.. profit for merchandisers and wages for the merchandiser, the transport and the farmer.. and the federal employees who process the food stamps… and each of them spends their wages on food and other consumer goods which in turn provides more jobs…. which starts the cycle all over again.

This works for other goods as well, but food stamps have such a high stimulus return because they must be spent for food… and those who receive food stamps don’t have resources that would allow them to save food stamps for later consumption.. so they are spent immediately.

The same job making and economy supporting action happens any time any of us spend money on goods and services.. the problem is that there is no way to guarantee that stimulus dollars will be spent.. so they provide a much smaller return.

Have you noticed that the unemployment rates have gone up with the savings rate?

There is a direct connection between the two.

While in the long term it will be better for Americans to buy less and save more… it is devastating in the short term.. and likely self defeating for both individuals and our nation.

Self defeating for the nation because as consumerism falls, the basis for about 70% of our economy falls…

self defeating for individuals because as the demand goes up and the supply goes down for consumer goods (including food) the prices go up and inflation rapidly passes the rate of return for any saving vehicle…

that is.. assuming the money is safely invested in a protected bank account…

that is protected by the American economy… FDIC is a federal program funded by our tax dollars.

That could be bad…

What we need to do long term is to invest in manufacturing jobs of all kinds in the United States so that the portion of our economy that is derived directly from consumerism is less than that derived from the indirect and direct manufacture of goods and ideas.

As production increases.. consumerism can decrease and an increase in savings would be healthy for both individuals and for the nation.

In the meantime, we need to keep as many jobs as we can so we can employ as many people as we can so they have wages to purchase goods so manufacturers will risk producing goods so there will be more jobs… oh.. and so they pay taxes so our government stays solvent so our bank accounts really are protected by the FDIC.

i know.. it’s a simplification.. but the basic principles are sound.

reality bites, doesn’t it.

Share This

[HMC Rich]

JoB, Respectfully, your reality is not everyone elses. Some items may overlap a little or a lot but ours do not match.

Tax Cuts: After WWI the US had a large War debt. Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon in a study by the Treasury department found that lowering taxes on the wealthy resulted in the upper classes paying more taxes. Whenever they raised tax rates the upper classes paid less to the government. In 1921 the tax rate was 73%. The common thought was to raise taxes to pay off the war debt but the upper classes invested elsewhere. From 1921 to 1926 congress lowered tax rates for the rich from 73% to 25% and the lowest taxpayers from 4% to 1.5%. Tax revenues tripled from the wealthy. The poorer classes also saw their share of taxation decrease, and the national debt fell almost 1/3rd. That set the table for amazing economic expansion in the 20’s.

John F. Kennedy’s tax cuts were not put in place to jump start the economy but to generate wealth that would create more tax revenues. He realized the government could grow with tax cuts. He dropped the upper rate from 91% to 70% and the bottom rate from 20% to 14%. Once instituted personal savings over the next 6 years rose from 2% annual growth to 9%. Business investment rose from 2% to 8%. GNP rose by 40% in two years! Job growth doubled and unemployment fell by 1/3rd.

Reagan tax cuts came through the Economic Recovery Act in a three year increment. Reagan wanted 30% across the board but congress did not want to appear to favor the rich. Capital gains taxes were cut also. Income Taxes were cut over a 3 year period. Growth was slow the first few years but by the time the tax cuts were in place the the economy started booming AND with Paul Volcker restricting the money supply to stop inflation, a massive downturn in inflation came about helping the recovery.

First Bush Tax Cut: JoB’s mantra of spend and invest and it worked.

Not all tax cuts work. Hoover lowered taxes for families but it did not spur economic growth due to no real incentives for business. Then he raised taxes which was the largest peace time increase which hurt the banks more. More decline came about from Hoovers Reconstruction Finance Corporation which amounted to 2 Billion in funds for struggling banks and businesses, which caused instability because federal rules dictated that the companies taking the financial help be listed publicly which caused customer confidence to massively drop. Additionally, protectionist trading policies from Smoot Hawley caused even less economic growth.

Just giving the middle class a tax cut is nice but may not help the country. The upper classes and business need the cuts or credits more to develop investment and build businesses. Last year’s stimulus checks were not really that effective. W’s tax cuts from early on in his administration caused tax revenues to grow. The “rich” paid more in revenues under Bush even though he lowered the top tax rate.

Jobs are good but career jobs are better. The government may “create” short-term jobs for public works projects and infrastructure but the money comes from everyone who pays taxes.

I disagree with Obama that tax cuts alone to the wealthy will hurt the country. History shows that it has helped when implemented quickly and to the right “classes”.

Now, there might be some programs that may help. The internet expansion with education help could benefit our country immensely in the future (or we could have a lot more fat kids who don’t get out of the house and play because they are online). That is not a “badly needed stimulus item” but is a long term investment. Private companies can become part of this with hopefully good oversite and responsibility from school districts. I also see the government taxing broadband companies and websites soon to help pay for this to …help our education system. My mother, when she worked for Big Blue, was involved with just this type of program.

Short term stimulus programs including basic necessity infrastructure programs and some other incentives I can go along with. Full-fledged rebuilding of infrastructure, new agencies etc will be needed in the future but are not really stimulus.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is huge. Consider this, under W federal spending increased by 70 percent. Couple TARP and the proposed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, government is growing almost exponentially. Can we afford it?

I found this article interesting.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1876535,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebar

Here is the CBO’s analysis

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9977/hr1senate.pdf

Government needs business and the working classes. The market needs some protection from corporate pirates and government can help. Consumers need to spend within limits. Tax policy should not be prohibitive. Banks and lending institutions need to have sound financial practices. Government agencies need to be more efficient and should not need to grow at the expense of future generations.

Although I like a lot of the programs I do not see the need for all of them.

Share This

[JoB]

HMC Rich…

comparing tax cuts after world war II to current tax cuts is not comparing apples to apples… first there is the disparity between the starting tax rates at that time and those now.

But far more important is that the US economy was based on production after world war II and tax cuts were fed into production because that was what was making money then.

This resulted in long term gains for both corporations and individuals.

But that isn’t what is happening now. Our economy is no longer a production economy… it’s short term profit centers built on short term profit centers built on more short term profit centers… and all of that is dependent upon the stock market which is only interested in short term profit.

We have a lot of words that make those profit centers sound legitimate.. but the truth is that our current economy is built on consumerism and short term speculation.

There is no incentive for the private sector to make long term investments… because there is little production to invest in. In fact, there is every incentive to generate short term profit and not invest in long term profit.

As for the prosperity the tax cuts of the Reagan years and the early Bush tax cuts generated … tax cuts based on the economics of an economy based on production… they didn’t pan out for anyone other than the top 1%. the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the uber wealthy has been unprecedented… even in light of the great looting prior to the great depression.

I’m just guessing that’s not us…. and without a wealthy middle class you can’t fuel an economy based on consumerism.

That’s just plain common sense.

The term “career” employment just doesn’t have the same meaning in our current corporate culture…

and doesn’t have much meaning at all if the unemployment rate climbs at the rate currently projected… any job is better than no job.

and that’s unemployment rates.. they don’t take into account underemployment.. working part time or for less money to retain any job.

but even that begs the question… career jobs instead of make work jobs…

the pilot that safely landed his plane in the river and safely offloaded his passengers did so because of the accumulated expertise and skill of his crew…

yet his career position will be rewarded with an early retirement and uncertainty about the pension he earned.

Those people were lucky to be flying that airline instead of one of the many who have decided that the automatic pilot and a cheaper younger inexperienced pilot trumps a career pilot..

and i am not just talking about smaller upstart airlines but some of the biggies like United.

Career positions only exist when companies value their investment in their employees…

and in the case of airlines.. consider safety in terms other than economic risk assessment..

“Government needs business and the working classes. The market needs some protection from corporate pirates and government can help. Consumers need to spend within limits. Tax policy should not be prohibitive. Banks and lending institutions need to have sound financial practices. Government agencies need to be more efficient and should not need to grow at the expense of future generations.”

I agree with everything you just stated … but the problem there is the word should.

We have been listening to what should have been for too long now without paying attention to what is.

What should be is an economy based on production… in that economy experienced and well trained employees (career positions) are a valued asset.

What we have is an economy based on consumerism and short term profit taking. Neither long term investment in infrastructure not employees contribute to the short term bottom line.

What we should have is a tax policy that is not prohibitive. Our current tax policy favors large corporations that base their production overseas over smaller start-ups and manufacturing concerns that base their production in the United States. If we want to stimulate our economy that should be reversed… And Warren Buffet.. who ought to know.. says that our current tax policy favors the wealthy without any public gain.

We can actually craft a tax policy that rewards investment in infrastructure and domestic production… why don’t we?

Banks and lending institutions should have sound financial practices.. and they did until we legislated away the wall between personal and commercial banking and allowed banks to package and sell our mortgages as commodities… removing the risk of bad mortgage decisions from the banks that provided them. Had they taken their risk into account, they would have insisted that those who qualified for prime mortgages be given prime mortgages.. instead of sub-prime with the resulting economic meltdown when those rates adjusted.

We can regulate lending institutions so that they assume the risk for their investments. Why don’t we?

We don’t in both cases because the talking heads convince us that those tax policies would be prohibitive…

I have to ask. prohibitive to what or whom?

as a taxpayer, i happen to think that bailing out our institutions and rewarding the management that made such poor short term decisions is prohibitive…

Yes! Government agencies need to be more efficient and should not grow at the expense of future generations. We should actually get value from our governmental agencies.. especially those we fund to mitigate crisis.. like FEMA.

But that isn’t what has happened in the last 8 years, is it?

Isn’t it time we redefined what those “shoulds” actually mean in light of our current circumstances and created solutions that fit the actual crisis we face.. not models based on past situations that are not comparable?

We do not have a comparable economic model for our current economy because this nation’s economy has traditionally been based on production… even the speculation that resulted in the great depression was based on production…

and that is not our current situation.

Share This

[cruiser]

JoB,

Hope you get paid by the word:)

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

So, sky2625 the stimulus package. I kind of liked your previous posts about separating out the categories of each part of the bill etc. It sure seems like a great way to control or reduce the number of earmarks that can be hidden in a bill.

Share This

[JoB]

cruiser..

sadly i don’t get paid at all:(

and i confess, i have always had difficulty editing myself to a few pithy comments…

i just edited a comment on another site.. totally not West Seattle related… from 4500 words to their required limit of 3000.. 2997 to be exact:)

no kidding ;~>

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

I loved this quote in response to the current recession from Steve Santani(A market analyst CNBC)when he compared the current recession to a baby with colic: “No matter what you do to make him feel better, the baby keeps crying, and he just has to cry for awhile,”

Personally, I think he is onto something. There is no immediate fix. Stimulus checks will not be an immediate fix. We need time to fix what the housing market and credit crunch did to our economy.

Share This

[JoB]

A link to the amended 680 page House version of the Stimulus bill that passed the House

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/24/house-stimulus-bill-full_n_160569.html

you will find a link to the PDF in the first few paragraphs

A link to the 778 page Senate Stimulus Bill that passed the Senate on Monday

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/senate-stimulus-bill-full_n_163144.html

you will find a link to the PDF in the first few paragraphs…

And now.. announcement of a compromise…

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/11/stimulus.plan/

what they cut won’t make some of us so happy…

as usual kid’s nutrition programs and head start got the ax…

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/07/stimulus.cuts/index.html

but tax cuts were held to 35%.. we’ll have to see what those are.

i am looking forward to seeing the final bill. I am not one of those who believes that any bill is better than no bill…

but i do agree that we needed to take some action quickly…

even those who think there is no need for a bill should be convinced by it’s swift passage that nobody believes this economic “downturn” will correct itself…

By the way.. our state legislators were waiting to see what the feds will do for us before passing any jobs bill locally…

maybe a bill can get past them now.

A link to the

Share This

[JoB]

so what did your party really want in that final negotiation?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gdDrWnoMueqVFI-Uo1ClxVZur22AD96A92LO1

i don’t know that this account makes me proud of either party.

Share This

[Sky2625]

BD Girl-

Thanks for the compliment on the split-it-up idea, though I take offense at your Wazzu icon :) As I mentioned before, I think we’d see a lot more bi-partisanship if the GOP had a “line-item veto” of the contents in the spending bill.

Fixing the housing crunch and credit crunch: Is there a way to do so without $789 billion in new spending?

JoB-

Something you and I have in common: can NOT be brief in explanations :)

You made an interesting observation: our state reps have been waiting to see what the Feds would do. It makes sense, but it feels backwards to me. I *wish* they’d take action on their own, rather than relying on DC to lead the way. Act locally…

Another observation of my own: the compromise reached on the bill appears only to be a compromise between Democrats and three liberal Republicans. Bipartisan this is not, meaning that this is Obama’s bill now.

If it kick starts the economy, he wins big. If not, the GOP will be crowing about it for decades, but those cut and dry outcomes are probably unlikely. What will really happen? The economy will eventually recover. Democrats will say it was *because* of the spending bill. Republicans will say it was *in spite of* the spending bill. How do we ever know the Truth?

And because it’s not bi-partisan, I disgree with your notion that swift passage demonstrates a universal lack of faith that the economy will recover on its own. The economy *will* begin a phase of new growth again at some point, after it finishes:

a) re-allocating labor and materials to fit the new reality

b) deflating previously over-inflated assets and wages, and

c) readjusting to produce goods and services for (hopefully) a newly thrifty, quality-concerned, and debt-fearing populace.

And government should be working to expedite these actions, not prevent them. That was Hoover’s mistake, and FDR compounded it in ways.

But are we really spending near a trillion dollars to encourage a “recovery” to where the economy was in, say, spring of 2007? That was an unhealthy economy destined to crash. And it’s a cliche to say it, but we simply haven’t got the money. And China’s not buying our T-bills anymore. We have to *print* this money in order to add liquidity to the economy.

And if people and businesses continue to save, all of that liquidity will be pulled back out of the economy and into savings (which we cannot do, as you’ve argued correctly before).

However, at some point in the future when confidence in the economy returns, all that extra money is going to come pouring out of its hidey-holes and create *another* bubble-collapse couplet. Just like the tech collapse, whose accompanying recession was staved off by government incentives that shepherded capital into hard property assets.

We all are seeing the effects of those incentives now. Diverting money into real estate reduces the amount of wealth that can be dumped into the entrepreneurial economy…and that’s where we need to foster growth, because it creates jobs, products, and services for the consumer.

Encouraging property ownership is a good thing, yes, but encouraging full capital flight into real estate created a false sense of wealth in a fake bull market economy…which you explained as “short-term gains based on short-term gains based on short-term gains”. It was all paper wealth, and when one firm began to question the value of it’s paper, the whole she-bang had a reality check, and now we’re returning to where a majority consumptive economy should be. Sadly.

However, foreclosures were down in January, retail spending was up. The media should be flogging that news like a donkey to build confidence in a recovery. Or is it not a real recovery, just one of the occasional upticks on our gradual slide to the bottom, wherever that may be? (Even the Great Depression had “up” years, but those gains were lost by..well, it depends on who you ask.)

An overarching question I earnestly want to pick your brain on: How do you think we can turn America back into a manufacturing/production economy?

Share This

[JoB]

sky2625..

first i have to say something about those wage adjustments…

they need to come from the top not from union busting… the average american worker’s inflation adjusted salary is not out of line… especially when you realize that you can employ 40 to 400 workers for one executive.

Considering the kind of decision the executives at many companies have been making… you have to wonder if they are worth it.

Contrary to the bill of goods we have been sold.. most American workers aren’t lazy overpaid employees without incentive. The productivity of the American worker has risen steadily while real wages for workers declined steadily.

And while we are at it, we need to take the burden of health care off American companies drastically reducing their per employee costs.

that alone will go a long way towards making American workers a competitive choice for manufacturing companies…

so consider that a start to your bigger question.. how to stimulate recovery and readjust the balance of the american economy from consumerism to production…

let’s give money to citizens to buy food… that’s stimulus money that will get spent. if you don’t need food dollars.. you can buy gourmet local meats and cheeses and other luxury foods.

Those dollars have an incredible ripple out effect on our economy.

and how about Washington State tax incentive to retailers who sell food/goods produced locally.

we have to put people back to work now to create a demand for goods…

if our local, state and national governments have to employ them to do so long enough for retail and other service jobs to return.. then we have to employ them…

with an emphasis on jobs that produce infrastructure.. funding the backolog of approved mass transit projects alone would make a huge dent in unemployment and reduce our dependency on foreign oil and make our transportation system cheaper and more efficicent for workers…

we need to invest in human infrastructure too… (education and training at all levels.. preventative medical care.. nutrition programs.. etc…).

that includes some way of removing health care costs from business and into mega insurance pools…

instead of giving tax breaks to companies that lost money… they already got a tax break because they lost money… many of them will pay no taxes at all due to their losses…

let’s give tax breaks to companies that employ US taxpayers… and somehow tie that to a per employee incentive… perhaps moderated by the size of the business.

let’s adjust the tax structure to reward those who produce in the United States.. and to reward those even more who produce with US made parts and raw materials.

lets invest heavily in green technology.. both in r&D and retrofitting…

retrofitting will increase jobs and decrease energy consumption speeding the change towards greener energy and rapidly lessen our dependence on foreign oil. I keep seeing Putin rubbing his itchy fingers in glee at our national predicament.

putting a bank of computers in every classroom would increase US production.. we are quite good at microchips and software and tax breaks might even induce US companies to produce more american computers… and it would raise the educational level of our national workforce exponentially in less than a decade.

let’s invest heavily in science… because that is where we are going to create new products that can spur US production and put us back in the lead in regards to technology.

Yup.. most of those moves cost money.. but most of them also begin generating tax revenue nearly immediately…

and all of those would have long term positive effects.

Unfortunately, they are also part of what has been removed from the stimulus bill in the name of bi-partisan support.

My opinion is that the reason we can only find 3 republican senators liberal enough to work on this in anything approaching a bi-partisan manner is that they have bought the Rush Limbaugh strategy and are gambling for a big win.

oh… and to give them some credit… they still believe their own rhetoric.. that this is just a small bump on the road to recovery…

the problem with that is this nation does not have the resources to weather an economic storm the likes of the great depression… too many people and not enough land for us all to survive on victory gardens:(

it’s a mighty big gamble they are taking… but then, they stand to win pretty big.

i am too tired to proof this again.. so i hope i made sense.

Share This

[HeavyMetalConservative]

I wish I had the time to research and post like some of you. Whew.

JoB, that is quite a list. How much of that is in the stimulus, spendulus, porkzilla bill?

Friday the 13th will now be a day that I will remember forever.

I hear today they NEEDED to get it passed because. . .

1. Obama wanted it passed today. It wasn’t posted on the web for 5 days for the public to see which he promised for legislation. Another promise broken (ethical administration?, no lobbyists?)

2. Pelosi is leaving town so it needed to be passed today and 1,071 pages in pdf form cannot be read quickly or word searched at all.

3. No debate wanted by Democrats from Republicans.

3. Lobbyists were sent the bill before legislators to read it.

4. Republicans were not involved in writing the original legislation, they could only read it then hopefully get items changed. Funny thing, my guys used to give Democrats the courtesy and the time.

5. Reid gets 8 Billion for the Disney Train from LA to Las Vegas, plus there is still money for a Mob Museum! What, Las Vegas can’t put up a museum there privately? Last time I checked the Strip was mostly inhabited by Private companies. I guess a bigger Mob is going to start dictating terms.

6. Universal Healthcare backbone infrastructure was “hidden” in the bill (right out of Daschle’s book from last year). No debate? For Christ’s sake, quit trying to back door this stuff! Have an honest debate! I want better healthcare but what has been presented isn’t an honest debate!!!

7 It rolls back the Clinton Welfare reforms.

8 The CBO says it will hurt the country more than help.

9. $2 billion for impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s pet FutureGen near-zero emissions power plant project.

10. $300 million for souped-up “green” golf carts for government workers

11. $30 million for “smart appliances,

12. $65 million for digital TV coupons

13 Money for basic highways and bridges was cut by $1 billion from the House-passed level, but:

14. $9 billion for school construction was added back in (originally cut by the Nelson-Collins “compromise”);

15. $5 billion was added to the state fiscal stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 billion;

16. $1 billion was added back for Prevention & Wellness Programs, including STD education; and

17. $2 billion for neighborhood stabilization program. AKA Acorn. What a bunch of nuts (sorry but I couldn’t help myself) I wonder when those ethical convicted ACORN employees get out of jail in Tacoma? Hmmmmm

18. $2 billion for the National Parks Service championed by House Democrat conferee and Appropriations Chairman Rep. David Obey. A report by the GOP minority on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee revealed that Obey’s son, Craig, lobbied the panel and advocated for the stimulus plan on behalf of the National Parks Conservations Association.

19. Now they are going to strong arm Governor’s who might decide their state doesn’t need the help….Read it:

SEC. 1607. (a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR — Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall certify that: 1) the State request and use funds provided by this Act , and; 2) funds be used to create jobs and promote economic growth.

(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE — If funds provided to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such State.

(This information has been added with the help of Michelle Malkin, Glen Beck, and the AP.)

Business as usual from the left. The Democrats are in power and their true colors are showing. That is why I quit being a democrat. This is one huge Luau and if you want some of it you’re going to have to pay for it. Eat well tonight my friends because there will be less later.

I flippin’ hope I’m wrong. One thing I know for certain. Once signed into law the country will be different. Change.. I might have a few cents left when I’m old.

Share This

[JoB]

HMC rich…

thanks for alerting me to the fact that the bill passed…

i find it amusing to link you to The Jerusalem Post for an AP article:)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304777041&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

and this is the best link i could find for the text of the bill..

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=1694

I am too tired tonight to look further or to respond to HMC Rich’s post…

but i think those who want to know what is in this bill should look for themselves and not just quote the pundits…

but i will say this.. if this is a luau… and i think it is a best a pot luck…. at least the American people have been invited this time.

Share This

[HMC Rich]

Everyone except the Republicans! :)

Share This

[JanS]

I just find it hugely ironic that the repubs who screwed us over for the last 8 years now are trying to present themselves as fiscally responsible. Our national debt skyrocketed under them, and they are trying to tell me they know better? BS, I say.

This stimulus package…admit it, none of us knows exactly what will happen under it in the next couple of years…and if you think you do, then perhaps you should volunteer to help the prez get it right – there must be a job in there for you.

I’m sorry the Repubs feel that they have been left out. If they were in the power seat, they would most definitely be doing the same to the dems…oh, that’s right…they already DID that the last eight years…partisan politics will never, ever die.

Share This

[HMC Rich]

JanS, you are correct, partisan politics will never die and thank goodness. Your guys won. They hold power. My guys handed the election to them. I just find the rhetoric versus actions taken by Democrats does not match what was said concerning bi-partisanship.

I have to thank Pelosi, Reid and somewhat the President for rejuvenating the opposition party. Our parties play rough. Sometimes we will agree but often we don’t. All voices have equal opportunity to yell. (Until your guys want to pass the Fairness Doctrine).

Yes, my party the last few years spent way, way too much. Candidate Obama lambasted them for that on the campaign trail. Now he has changed his mind. Imagine that! I have said repeatedly that the Republicans lost their way and because of their actions we have different people in power now.

I differ with you on how we got screwed over the past few years. Some of it was bi-partisan but you guys won’t admit it. What do you take issue with?

From my point of view the government grew during the Bush years due to TARP, Homeland Security, War, Some new Federal Programs, and wasteful earmarks. Guilty! Guilty!

Geez, I wanted him and them to cut the Federal Government down.

At least Homeland Security is mostly constitutional due to the fact that the government is required to try to keep us safe.

So, while the Democrats were rightfully criticizing the Republicans for wasteful spending on earmarks and other programs the reality is it was just politics being played by the left and “bi-partisan spirit” was and is now mostly just lip service. My side is guilty too. I will not deny that.

I give Nancy Pelosi credit for actually saying recently that she was not there to be bi-partisan. Finally something she and I agree on.

Since the Republicans have to rebuild, they do not have a ton of clout with the public right now. But they are smart enough to know when something is a pig. This one is huge and stinks. Please do not lecture me about fiscal responsibility from your party.

I know Mr. McCain would have crossed the aisle more because that is why so many Conservative Republicans “My Friends” were not thrilled about him being the Republican Nominee.

I think I will be telling Mr. Obama what I think he should do but I doubt if he will agree with it. But they didn’t want it for the Stimulus Bill, did they?

PS, On a non-partisan note. . . I was riding the Ferry to Bainbridge Island and an announcement was made that the Government needs census workers. They were handing out materials for application. It is only part time but if some of you need some extra work, give it a try. http://2010.census.gov/2010censusjobs/index.php

Share This

[Author]

Posts