BS: You and the stimulus plan

Subject: BS: You and the simulous plan
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 04:39 PM

Don's opinion piece:


What Republicans want are tax cuts that are issued as tax returns.

Democrats want the the stimulous package to get spending on large projects, programs and job creating.


What do Americans get if larger tax return checks ( "spending your own money plan" ) are sent out?
ans. People get another Bush stimulous check UNLESS...
they owe on a credit card or a bank loan of some kind...then the banks intercept the check for themselves.

You see back in 1994 the Republican Banking commitee revamped the law so that not only bankruptcy was overhauled in favor of the banks and at the total loss for consumers in both chapter 7 and 13.
ALSO laws that allow banks to put tax return leins on the American people became even stronger

So with the tax break scheme the money will really go directly to the banks - do not pass, go directly to Banks - IF YOU OWE MONEY.

So far I have not seen the ultra wealthy private sector or banks provide any meanigful relief, loans or gifts to anyone - including between themselves.


_________________________the partisan divide---------------------------



The Democratic scheme is a grand Cainsian experiment that - if implemented - would buy time for the economy to fall slower since less than half the maney required by the Cain's formula is being injected.

Even if the experiment works the country will continue to cannabalize itself with State goverments trying to eat anything the citizens have and the citizens trying to take anything they can get from the goverment.

Corporations aka the private sector, continue to lay off Americans and hire overseas. Shameful as it sounds, they could even use tax payer bail out TARP funds to do so. Buy American rhetoric is being suprressed in fear of a trade war so expect to see Chinese goods continue unabated.

Energy and energy saving companies along with construction and infrastructure projects will see a rise in domestic employment.

California goverment employees are now laid off every other friday.
IF someone has to get a goverment service on those days they will have to wait till monday or tuesday.







The next 5 years will be rougher and more contentious than even the most pessimistic of us expected. Yet a hopeful wisdom from the White House will make the bitter medicine go down easier.

Now that Wall street with all their ex Enron accountants have eaten the lion's share of the world wide economy, it is left to the rest of us to canabalize what's left.

The examples of the intelligent and generous act by either government or corporations during this "grand" recession will probably be few and far between.

So far I am proud of the president finally funding childrens health insurance (SCHIP) and end cruel and unusual treatment by the CIA and military. Any action in keeping with the spirit of our Constitution is a welcome relief.




In short the great debate continues with the Corporate Limbaugh machine calling for trickle down tax breaks and the economists calling for watering the roots of the economy directly.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the simulous plan
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 04:43 PM

You've been listening to NPR again, Don. :)

Subject: RE: BS: You and the simulous plan
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 04:52 PM

Not true lately.

Actually I spent the last 2 days listening only to Levin, Hannity and Limbaugh.


Instant gratification in fixing the state of our nation after 30 years of abuse, is too much to ask.

Take heart in any small act of kindness and savor it.
It will be the the greatest thing we can create orselves.


"The risk takers have run across the ice with heavy bags of gold that they robbed from all of us. Despite their crimes we have tried to rescue those that have fallen through the ice despite their great weight.
It is now time to start rescuing each other."

quote by DAH

Subject: RE: BS: You and the simulous plan
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 05:05 PM

Admin cold you please add a T to stimulous?




The whole country seems to be in some form of arrested development.

The obvious difference between npr and AM talk raidio is that npr guests often have degrees of higher education and have strong tools of research and history, while AM talk jocks spend most of their time making fun of people's genitals. (actual examples - Barney's Frank and Pelosi's pussy.)

Subject: RE: BS: You and the simulous plan
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 05:07 PM

Here is my stimulus plan.

And some things in economics are contrary to logic and common sense. And finally I have heard the phrase "the parodox of thrift." Good phrase. Explains a lot.

Anyway, I would start with two things...failsafe measures..three actually.

1. Keep the farms and food supply going. And sooner or later some unemployed people are going to have to work on farms or produce food some way.

2. Set up simple, safe, spartan shelters for single men and women, (separate shelters), where they can be sorted out into regular people down on their luck (probably separate shelters for different categories, as they need different levels of security, support etc.), mentally ill, violent (highest security and let them take on each other). There should be no victims in this process. This could provide jobs for plumbers, electricians etc. rehabbing unused properties.

3. Set up many many health clinics staffed by nurses, again employing nurses (hope we have enough..start right now with free tuition for public health nurses)...jobs for people rehabbing buildings etc., medical records people, janitors etc., nurses.

4. Look at food stamp programs. Lots of people need them for sure, but they should be primarily (90% or so) for healthy foods, like WIC says you can buy this but not that. Use agricultural surplus and actually grow surplus and pass it on. Look at agricultural subsidies being abused and get tobacco farmers to start growing other things right now.

5. Get going with windmills. Use them as they used them in Grayland, WA to subsidize heat and electricity for low-income people.

6. Set up shelters in advance for weather emergencies..too hot, too cold etc., especially for elderly.

7. Send the message out right now that there is not enough money for teenagers to get pregnant, so knock it off. Bully pulpit has not been used nearly enough and this would save a huge amount of money down the line.   mg

Subject: RE: BS: You and the simulous plan
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 05:12 PM

Agrarian shift
poor houses
population control


all good points

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulous plan
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:29 PM

but it sounds Chinese


MSNBC:

for every $1 of non refundable tax rebate money, a $1.02 is generated in economic activity.

for every $1 of infrastructure spending $1.59 is generated.

for every dollar in food stamps spending a $1.73 is generated in economic activity.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulous plan
From: GUEST,Susu
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:34 PM

You know...I'm not opposed to the fact that Obama got new airplanes and helicopters and cars. That's what presidents are afforded.

I've got no problem with the money, however much it was, for the first lady to re-decorate the White House. It will be their home for the next four years. They should decorate it however they want and it should be at taxpayers expense.

What I do have a problem with is the fact that there is an $800 BILLION package sitting before the senate that is trying to be sold as a stimulus bill when anyone with half a brain can read through the lines and see that's it's nothing more than construction paper smeared with fecal matter of the democrats that dream this crap up.

Someone explain to me, please, how giving $50,000,000 to the National Endowment for the Arts, $400,000,000 for global warming research will make life better on a day to day basis for a family of four in middle America with the parents out of work. At the same time, please tell me how giving the Smithsonian Institute $150,000,000 is going to help purchase clothes for the kids during the rest of the winter.

Please show me the genius in providing $650,000,000 on top of what's already been spent to help in the switch from analog to digital TV.

And certainly, last but not least, how is spending an additional $600,000,000 on top of the $3 BILLION that is currently being spent by our federal government on official vehicles going to help John and Jane pay for their home, while trying to put their 2 kids through college?

This is shaping up like a bad mastercard commercial.....

I can hear it now.....


.....and bankrupting America for the next 80 years......priceless.



Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulous plan
From: GUEST,Susu's Hubby
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:36 PM

The above is actually the same post from another topic but it's more appropriate for this one....sorry for the repost.

Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulous plan
From: Amos
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:20 PM

Susu's Hubby:

If you look into the facts you may find that (a) the vehicles were all ordered by Bush's team and delivered before the Inauguration and (b) your spitting generalized negativity somehow didn't make anything any better.

One per cent of the stimulus plan was slightly dubious---reseeding the Washington Mall for example.

A

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulous plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:37 PM

Frankly, I could never see how tax cuts would help the economy. They did with Kennedy, but it's kind of a one-off proposition. Under Reagan, tax cuts drove the economy into the ground.

               But if Donuel is right, and there's money in there to reduce population growth, that's probably the most constructive thing Congress could come up with.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulous plan
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 11:58 PM

"Someone explain to me, please, how giving $50,000,000 to the National Endowment for the Arts... will make life better... for a family of four in middle America...."

Of course, some of the breadwinners for those middle-American families are people who make their livings in the arts. The arts have been severely affected by the economic mess. Orchestras, theaters, and museums that have been very dependent on corporate contributions for years are having to close their doors as those funding sources dry up. A violinist whose symphony has closed its doors is just as out of work as a car salesman whose dealership has gone out of business.

Some people say that the arts are a luxury, not a necessity, so people employed within the arts should just go out and find "real" work. Well, there's a helluva lot of jobs that fall into that "luxury, not necessity" category. Restaurants, sports, movies, television, computers, telephones, travel, tourism, new cars, boats, airplanes, and probably about half of what's sold in most retail stores are all things that we could live without. I suppose all the people involved in those industries should find "real" work digging ditches or something.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 01:09 AM

Bravo, BWL!!!

Lift up the Arts and the Culture and the Museums, etc. all of those things which lift the spirits and give life hope even in darkest days. Their effect is immeasurable and positive in so many ways, not the least of which is the employment of many as BWL pointed out.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Barry Finn
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 01:42 AM

Why is it that people always see arts & education as the 1st items to throw overboard when the cutting comes about. You can't really seperate the two, they're twins. How about drop the idea of building a fence/wall from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico. Arts & education can't afford the cuts after being surgically diced & sliced after the past 8 yrs.

The switch on the TV's has been delayed, for now.

The fed's switching to greener vechicals makes more sence in many ways. Just try ti give it soom deep thought or maybe if you heard what Obama had to say about that you' have figured it out, then again, maybe not.

The tax cut issue is not an issue it's a barginbasement chip.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: bald headed step child
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 02:08 AM

Riginslinger, if you look at what Kennedy did it was not really a tax cut, although that is what Reaganomics wants you to believe.

At the time Kennedy made those cuts the nominal rate was around 74%?, but through loopholes those people were only paying around 28-30%.

Kennedy dropped the nominal rate, but at the same time he closed the loopholes, so the net effect was actually a tax increase on the ultra rich. That is what is needed now to bring things back around.

Put simply, if you know the money in excess of say $3.5 million is going to be taxed at a rate of 74% would you take the money to buy a new car or boat, or would you invest it back into your company, maybe create a job or two, to avoid paying the heavier tax? That is how you build a sustainable economy, instead of a get rich quick, screw anyone who gets in your way economy.

BHSC

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 02:49 PM

"mentally ill, violent (highest security and let them take on each other). There should be no victims in this process." mg 05:07 PM


mg, I doubt that you mean it that way but that is one of the most noncomprehending, cynical, vicious statements I have ever seen. To follow it up with: There should be no victims in this process." is an amazing piece.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 03:47 PM

If the government could get the banks back in shape so that they can give loans again, the plans might have some value.
However, it seems to me that international cooperation on all these stimulus-bailout-support plans is necessary for them to have major effect.

All major countries are using the same stimulus plans, but nothing is coordinated.
All, especially the U. S., pay attention to local difficulties, but the problem and its resolution is global. No country can survive on its own (No major power ever did).

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: mg
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 05:30 PM

Well, what I was trying to say is that no one should be preyed upon in a shelter by a violent person. The violent ones should be segregated and have very high security. Fear of violence and theft is something that keeps people on the streets and out of shelters. mg

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 06:09 PM

The reason my button got pushed so violently is that I have known/loved mentally ill persons. Without exception, I believe, the thing they most fear is violence from others.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,Susu's Hubby
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 07:14 PM

"Why is it that people always see arts & education as the 1st items to throw overboard when the cutting comes about. You can't really seperate the two, they're twins. How about drop the idea of building a fence/wall from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico. Arts & education can't afford the cuts after being surgically diced & sliced after the past 8 yrs."

Barry,

Here is where your logic is way flawed.

1. The bill is to STIMULATE growth. Not put things back to where you think they need to be. Besides, how much growth can one really expect with the NEA?
2. There are no CUTS to anything here. It's only throwing additional money that could be better spent elsewhere at something that has no real hope of helping 300 million hurting Americans.

And on the education front, I'm for giving money to education. As long as it goes towards the students and not into the pockets of the Union thugs that think they need to be re-payed for getting dems elected this past November.

And while we're at it...let's give some of that education money to private schools as well. That's something else that is not in the education "stimulus" section. Do the research....not a penny is there for private education. Could it be because there is NO UNION REPRESENTATION in the private schools? There should be no "pick and choose" when it comes to education. It's our children that we're talking about here.

This bill was doomed from the start.

President Obama says that a stimulus bill is a spending bill. But not all the spending in this bill will create the stimulus needed to get people back to work. A lot of trimming is needed on this monster. And it's needed now, more than ever.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: DougR
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 07:20 PM

Riginslinger: I don't know where you are getting your information about the economy during the Reagan administration. What you have been posting are simply not facts. I think you must be getting your information from bloggers or maybe the New York Times.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 07:39 AM

No, Doug, I get my information from personal experience. Maybe you weren't around in the early 80's, but who ever was running Ronald Reagan introduced what they called "supply side economics," and the result of this was the most devastating economic collapse the country had seen since The Great Depression. It combind high interest rates with tax cuts for the very wealthy. It also imposed much higher employment taxes, that drove many small business--of which I was one--into the toilet.
          The real devastation of the Reagan folly didn't take full effect until the dumb bastard introduced his first budget to Congress. He campaigned on a promise to balance the budget, but it soon became clear that he intended to ignore that promise altogether for the purpose of rewarding his defense related buddies.

          He didn't bring you the "General Electric Theater" all those years ago for nothing.

             A little investigation into the current economic problems will show you that things have not yet sunk to the levels of the disaster of the Reagan Administration.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Louie Roy
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 11:13 AM

Did anyone ever wonder how much 850 billion dollars is. If it was possible for a person to be able to sit on a high enough cliff with 1 billion silver dollars and toss a silver dollar over the cliff every second how long it would take to throw away 1 billion dollars. It would take 31 plus years now multiply this by 850.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: bald headed step child
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 12:14 PM

Hubby, maybe the money isn't in there for private schools because they are PRIVATE schools.

If you want to send your children to a private school then you can pay for it.

The public education system has been systematically destroyed by the republican party for the last 30 years. Reagan started it in California when he was governor with the theory that educated people would not vote for him. I guess he had that part right.

All improvements to schools will stimulate the economy, whether it is building new schools or simply getting some new books, or hiring new teachers.

BHSC

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 01:56 PM

B. H. Step child, I agree wholeheartedly. The growth of private primary schools has become divisive, segregationist and certainly anti-democratic. The system of public schools should be supported in every possible way, and separate private schools discouraged.

The private school movement is strong in my city (Calgary) in western Canada, as it is in much of the U. S.

Kids whose families are well-to do are segregated from the unwashed who can only afford public schools.
Kids whose parents are members of the far right bigoted and ignorant religious sects have their own schools; they have no contact with other beliefs. So we have segregation by belief as well as financial status.
Some schools are exclusively for girls. Home schooling is also permitted in this province.

The disintegration here has two main causes.
1. The inclusion of mentally handicapped into the main public school stream, essentially giving teachers the parallel job of caring for two groups, to the detriment of those who are able to learn and advance.
2. The influx of immigrants (20% plus in Calgary's population), many of whom know little English. ESL (English as second language) teaching is strong in the public system, as it should be. Many parents who were born here, however, are wary of "foreign ways," and have elected private schools as a way of avoiding contact.

Of course, the way towards privatization was paved by Canada's system of separate schools, Catholic and non-Catholic, both publicly funded. The beast had two heads from the time of Confederation.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 06:20 PM

Aside from the public school issue Hubby, which those above have explaned well, my only disagreement is that the package doesn't need trimming but I don't at all support any faith based supports, it's again to supporting priavet schooling.

Reagan economics = "trickle down". We got crumbs while the rich eat cake. Reagan sent us to the Guillotine. We bled for a long time & we are still bleeding due to his failures& many lost not only their heads.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Art Thieme
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 07:25 PM

I saw an ad recently for a stimulus package. It was made up of ten different kinds of vibrators!!!!!

Art

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 08:39 PM

Q - America's schools have the same problems you describe for Canada. It seems like once they determined what the probem(s) was, they'd try to do something about it.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 10:30 PM

Public schools operate under a set of rules established by law. Most private schools exist because they don't want to operate under one or more of those rules.

We don't let people who don't abide by the rules use our public parks and athletic fields. Why should we give public funds to schools that don't abide by the rules we've established for education?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 10:05 AM

bwl

States like Louisiana have been run by people who create a permanent underclass which does not fund schools like the rest of the nation. Specificlly The oil companies do not share any revenue with LA state citizens as does Wyoming, Alaska, Nevada etc.
Inequities are planned and deliberate.
Giving religious schools public money was a pet progect of Bush's faith based initiative.


also in answer to how a family of four could benefit from arts and humanity projects. Some family of four may have an electrician or a set builder or janitorial services etc. No one program will employ all families of four but enough different programs will reach more by doing somthing rather than nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 11:55 AM

The stimulus plan as now compromised will lower the unemployment rate by 1/2 to 1% by the fourth quarter of this year.
(8% unemployment instead of 9% ~ 1.5 million new jobs)

The worst numbers could be seen in 2010
An obvious turnaround will not emerge until 2011

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 12:12 PM

"Giving religious schools public money was a pet progect of Bush's faith based initiative."


                  So why is Obama continuing with it?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 12:19 PM

Listen to his address at the National Prayer breakfast and his version of faith based inititive.

Keeping the best ideas and discarding the bad under his new credo that religion shall not be used to divide us, makes sense to me.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Feb 09 - 11:44 AM

The worst idea is the concept of "Faith Based Initiative," to begin with...

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Feb 09 - 03:19 PM

Tired of the old singsong 8 years of failed policy that "got us into this mess"-Try 38 years

There is an article in the Jan 31 Time Magazine that explains how we "got into this mess" in easy to understand terms.

....Starting in the early 1970s, banks began funding less of their lending with old-fashioned deposits. Bank deposits backed 90% of all loans four decades ago; today they back 60%. Where does the rest of the loan money come from? From the bank's past earnings and the money given to it by its investors. Using the house's money has generated higher profits — with significantly higher risks.

Regulators have long had a lower capital requirement on loans that are not backed by deposits. But in 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) removed rules that capped leverage at 15 to 1 for investment-banking firms like Goldman Sachs. That allowed the firms to vastly expand their lending activities without raising a single new dollar of capital. One big backer of the rule change was reportedly former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who was then Goldman's CEO. By that time, the regulatory separation between investment banks and traditional banks had long since been removed, so traditional banks such as Citigroup and Bank of America shifted more and more of their lending operations to their investment-banking divisions, and leverage took off. By the end of 2007, many banks were lending $30 for every dollar they had in the vault. "Changing the net-capital rule was an unfortunate misjudgment by the SEC," says former SEC official Lee Pickard. "It's one of the leading contributors to the current financial crisis." (See who else is to blame.)

Another way banks sought to boost their profits — at least those available to shareholders — was through stock buybacks. Investors cheer buybacks, because they shrink the number of outstanding shares, boosting a company's profits per share and usually its stock price. But corporate stock purchases also decrease banks' capital, because their earnings are used to purchase shares rather than being retained as cash. Worse, sometimes banks borrow money in order to buy back shares, upping their leverage and lowering their capital at the same time. In the past four years alone, the nation's largest banks, as defined by Standard & Poor's, have spent $300 billion buying back stock.

TARP does nothing to patch the hole in the banking system. And it certainly doesn't do anything to encourage banks to make more loans. Yes, banks have gotten nearly $300 billion in money from the government, and that's a lot of dough. But it's not free dough. In return for federal cash, the government has taken preferred-stock shares as the firm's markers. Unlike common stock, which is the kind you or I would buy from a broker, preferreds have to eventually be paid back, so they are really loans, not additional capital. (See which country has the best bailout plans.)

Say a bank has $5 in capital and $100 in loans. Now the government gives the bank an additional $100 in preferred shares and says, "Go make more loans." Well, the bank might then have $200 in loans, but it still has only $5 in common shareholders' equity. The result: if just 2.5% of its loans go bad, the bank's shareholders are wiped out. Wisely, the largest banks in the nation lent less in the fourth quarter of 2008 than in the previous three months — a strategy that has drawn some complaints. But that hasn't removed the pressure on their shares. That's because the banks have had to continue to take loan losses. And banks don't have the option to pass those losses off on the new money they got from the government. They have to write down their common stockholders' equity first. And as that capital falls, so go the bank's shares. Some are alarmingly close to zero.

No bank's stock has fallen more in value during the past four months than Bank of America's. The combined value of its shares is now $37 billion. That's $123 billion less than they were worth at the end of September. In the third quarter, BofA was forced to write down $4.4 billion in loans, or about 1.8% of its loan portfolio. Compared with what some of its competitors wrote down, that wasn't a heck of a lot; Citigroup, for instance, had a $13.2 billion charge in the same quarter, primarily related to loan losses. But the relatively small loss took BofA's thin tangible equity, the type of capital that matters most to shareholders, down to a ratio of just 2.6% of loans, according to FBR. By that measure, Bofa was a weaker bank than any of its rivals, including Citigroup. But since the market was so focused on bad loans and the charge-offs banks had to take, no one seemed to notice BofA's faults.

That is, until the fourth quarter. In mid-September 2008, in a deal pushed by regulators, BofA agreed to buy Merrill Lynch. The acquisition actually boosted BofA's capital ratios, but it also added losses to an already fragile capital structure; Merrill Lynch lost $15 billion in the fourth quarter alone. Knowledge of the impending losses forced BofA CEO Ken Lewis to ask the government for an additional $20 billion in TARP funds — on top of the $25 billion it had already received — as well as about $100 billion in loan guarantees. Without the government assistance, BofA says, it couldn't have closed the merger.

The Merrill losses, which weren't publicly revealed until early January, have angered shareholders, some of whom have sued the company for not informing them sooner. And last week, the losses also led Lewis to ask Merrill's top executive, John Thain, to resign for failing to keep BofA officials apprised of his firm's bottom-line problems. Thain says Lewis knew all along. (See pictures of TIME's Wall Street covers.)
more Here

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Feb 09 - 03:26 PM

The popular Democratic refrain that "Bush-era deregulation" is to blame for our troubles is a little hard to square with the evidence. What is true is that most Bush-era financial regulators were less than enthusiastic about the very act of regulating, and that Bush's [Barney Franks & Clinton's] "ownership society" push, glossed over a lot of potential dangers. Bush didn't cause the financial regulatory breakdown, but he didn't jump in to fix it either.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Feb 09 - 04:09 PM

For the past 20 years, banks have been piling up risk, making more and more loans based on less and less capital. Years of economic growth, shallow recessions and record-low default rates lulled bankers into thinking that the future would resemble the immediate past, at least as far as risk went. Turns out it didn't. All it was going to take was a worse-than-average recession — and it looks as though we've got one — and many banks, including a number of the biggest ones, were bound to fail. The shockingly poor lending standards — housekeepers being approved for million-dollar mortgages — have only hastened their demise. "This crisis needs to be understood as something that has developed over the past decade," says Joseph Mason, a finance professor at Louisiana State University's E.J. Ourso College of Business.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Feb 09 - 04:17 PM

Sawz - I think by now pretty much everybody is aware that the financial disaster we find ourselves in now was started by Reagan--one of the many stupid things that he did--all George W. Bush did was to make the situation much, much worse.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 12:03 AM

Try Carter

The Carter-era Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to lend to uncreditworthy borrowers. Age-old standards of banking prudence got thrown out the window.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: DougR
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 12:30 AM

Riginslinger: It's difficult to define a current economic problem based on one person's experience at any particular time.

The tax forgiveness legislation during John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and GWB's times brought us out of recessions. That's fact, not opinion.

I think the terminology you use to describe the Reagan economic policies is "trickle down" not "supply side" economics, though I admittedly may be wrong.

Anyway, I think we are in deep shit, and I don't think it's going to get better with the "so called" stimulus legislation.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 02:14 AM

It's the banking system itself which has created this catastrophe, not the government. The government merely aided and abetted the banks by not more stringently regulating their irresponsible lending policies (and their creation of vast amounts of fictional money through the process of lending). It's been happening for several hundred years. It began long before the USA even existed as a political entity. It began as soon as banks started lending out more money than they had in real deposits...and the governments let them do it. Why? Well, because the governments themselves were usually deeply in debt to those same bankers, that's why.

You thought the government made the money we use? Ha! Sure, they make the physical bills and coins that are in circulation, yes...but that's only a very small amount of all the supposed money that is in play in the economy. Most of it exists only on a computer screen or a balance sheet, and it was never minted or printed by the government. It was created by a bank making a loan...it appeared out of thin air...and then went straight back into the banking system...and even drew interest charges, creating even more money from nowhere....all of which greatly enlarged the national money supply with money that was never real, made bankers rich, and it all came from nowhere.

The government didn't create that money. The banks created it out of thin air every time they made a new loan to somebody.

That's a gigantic pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes always work for awhile, but in the end they collapse, because they are based on a fiction.

We are now seeing such a collapse, and it's occurring on a worldwide basis.

Yes, as Doug said, we are in deep shit.

Gold is real. Food is real. Oil is real. A printed bill is real (albeit merely symbolic of value). A minted coin is real. Most of the money that the banks supposedly have on deposit isn't real.

This would very quickly become evident if the general public all panicked at the same time and tried to withdraw their money from the banks and get hard cash. It ain't there. The entire system would then collapse, and you'd have something bordering on anarchy.

I'm sure the government is quite concerned about avoiding such a possibility. I'd be concerned if I were them.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 07:52 AM

"...the Reagan economic policies is "trickle down" not "supply side" economics,..."

                Art Laffer and the people who set it up called it "supply side" economics, because the monitary policy was determined by what they calle "the M-1 money supply," (liquid capital on hand in banks).
                Reagan himself called it "trickle down," because he was too stupid the understand the theory behind it.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 08:25 AM

OK Riginslinger,


We understand that you believe Reagan to be the spawn of Satan. You've made yourself more than clear on the subject.

But why are you still living in the past?

Can't you grow up and start living in the now?

Much like Pres. Obama said he is going to do?

But since you're there, here's a tidbit for you. Supply side or trickle down or whatever you want to call it didn't do near as much as you think to get the economy in the shape it's in today. That was done by your boy, Clinton, in ordering Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae to loosen their standards in order to let "all" Americans have some home ownership. It all started there.

Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 08:36 AM

I will admit, Hubby, that ACORN and the push to finance unworthy buyers played a large part in what is happening now, but I don't think any of this could have gotten as bad as it is if it hadn't been for the failed policies of Reagan.

                And living in the "now" has nothing to do with growing up. If we don't understand the mistakes that were made prior, how you one expect things to improve?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 01:19 PM

Why can't they just give me my (approx.) $2,500 and let me stimulate the economy in my own way?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 01:25 PM

As long as you promise not to spend the money on substances that are not taxed.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 02:46 PM

How aboutcommunity type jobs in nursing homes, parks, schools, libraries...

How about rebuilding some of these hurricane places and New Orleans with sensible building materials and stringent guidelines, at least against the most likely natural disasters, fire, flood, hurricane. Lots and lots of cement or stone or ceramic or something...and it can be made to withstand earthquakes with proper design...mg

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 05:07 PM

"And living in the "now" has nothing to do with growing up. If we don't understand the mistakes that were made prior, how you one expect things to improve?"


My point exactly!

But that's not what Pres. Obama is doing now is it?

At least that's not what he is saying.

He jumps back and forth at the very least. Saying things such as "We can't keep looking back to the past. We need to look forward to the future."


So how can he fix it when he's not doing the very thing that you say must be done?

At the very least.......naivety.

And at most.......just plain untruthfulness.


Sad in either case.


Hubby
Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 05:39 PM

They don't give it to you, Rapaire, because you don't move in the right circles. You need to already be very, very, VERY wealthy. Then you would get the help you are seeking.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 06:03 PM

If I send them $2,500 can I buy my way out of my share of the debt?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 06:11 PM

The problem is world-wide. Don't give the American banks and politicians sole credit for the breakdown. Now China, Japan, the EU countries France, UK, Germany, etc., are all doling out money in their own stimulus plans.

In some ways, Little Hawk is correct about a giant pyramid scheme. That is the way the capitalist system has grown, by creating money and credit, and is responsible for the increase in population and goods ever since the Venetians (or push it back as far as you want), the Industrial Revolution movers and shakers, and all who created businesses and hired people, got the ball rolling.
(I think the grammar is lousy in the above paragraph, but understandable).

Whichever politician is blamed for contributing to the current situation, each of them only caused a local blip. The failing is universal.

Reform of the system is needed, but that will take several years, and cooperation on a global basis. The bailouts are beginning to look like band-aid solutions to a massive global collapse.
Tighten your belts!

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 06:14 PM

Supply side or trickle down or whatever you want to call it didn't do near as much as you think to get the economy in the shape it's in today. That was done by your boy, Clinton...

Here's a perfect example of NeoCon brain death & wishful thinking. No facts need apply.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 06:18 PM

"Trickle Down Economics" always seemed to me to be what happens to a blind man trying to understand an elephant with diarrhea.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Feb 09 - 09:09 PM

Yeah, Rap, I think you've got it!

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 02:22 PM

Chuck Schumer "Why quibble over $200 million?"

Sounds to me like trickle down economics when you say any spending is stimulus.

All of the damnble pork of earlier years when Repubs were in control is now declared beneficial by the democrats because it stimulates the economy.


$1.5 million to get the whores off the streets of Dayton?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 02:26 PM

Obama's tax cuts made it into the "stimulus!" As a result, you get a $13 a week tax credit. Next year it drops to $8.


Were rich now!!!

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 02:50 PM

$2 million for neon signs for Las Vegas?

Won't that burn more energy?

Who has more money than the casinos in Vegas to buy neon signs?

  Top Contributors to Harry Reid during the 2006 Election Cycle
  Rank        Donor                     Amount (US Dollars)
  1        MGM Mirage                    $ 98,200
  2        Harrah's Entertainment        $ 78,600
  3        Simmons Cooper LLC            $ 73,400
  4        Mandalay Resort Group         $ 62,350
  5        Station Casinos               $ 38,000
  

Remenber Harry Reid's bridge earmark?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,jts
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 02:53 PM

To those who may get their economic information from talking heads.... Not that there is anything wrong with that other than the possibility of mishearing.

Keynes
John Maynard Keynes
Keynesian

One of
A singe one
not One-off
as in take one off.


Sawzaw said
>>>Sounds to me like trickle down economics when you say any spending is stimulus.

If that is the case then you have no idea what "trickle down" economics is. It is the idea of putting money in the hands of the wealthy "elites" because they know how to most efficiently invest it. Obviously in the spending bill the government is deciding what the best investments are.

If you are unsure of the meaning of the phrases you plan to use, you could, once in a while, at least look them up.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 03:00 PM

A few people call him "Dirty Harry" Reid. More should.

He and his wife, four sons and his daughter's husband have a law firm together. One bill that was presented to a "client" for whom Harry and family had paved the way politically simply read "$450,000 for services rendered".

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 04:31 PM

pdq- source?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 04:58 PM

They took the E-Verify provision out, when completely screws the American worker.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 12 Feb 09 - 08:18 PM

Here's transparency for ya......


and you guys said Bush was a brown shirt.



Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:53 AM

Right you are. "Humanevents.com" - a right-wing, BuShite, neocon blog. What's next, Hub? Quotes from The Protocols Of The Elders of Zion?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:55 AM

And your complaints about anti-Bush messages in the NYT???

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 08:19 PM

Instead of all the hissing and spitting by the usual suspects, can someone explain way we are about to spend $800 billion dollars on pork barrel projects without eveng thinking things through? Call it what you want, it looks like irresponsible excess spending and little else.

This is said to be so urgent that the public may not even get to read it before it is passed and signed. We should, at the very least, get to look at the final text for the 48 hours that Harry Reid and friends promised. Can you say "railroaded"?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:04 PM

Congressmen are complaining that they don't have time to read and comprehend either. But it's only money! Over 500 pp. the last I heard.

(Hope no one sees the line inserted by a printer friend of mine that gives me a million- a very tiny morsel of pork).

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:18 PM

Not to worry, my Nevada Senator "Dirty Harry" Reid has inserted an $8 billion provision to build a train from Los Angeles to Los Vegas. Bring them gamblers in.

The train may be a good idea, maybe not, but Reid should be honest enough to bring it up in a separate bill and have a sane debate. This is high-handed and shows why a poll earlier this showed the Senate's approval at 7%...and the same people are still there after the election.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:30 PM

I want money for cancer research! Not a problem you got it.

I like solar energy! Me too yeah everybody does. Check.

Wind energy too! Absolutely. Check. What else?

I hate the minimum tax! Oh year fer sure. The masses hat it too. That's in.

How about making cars go farther on a gallon of gas and shit? Good. All right.

Way less taxes! Wait come on work with us here, we need social benefit.

. . . .

Shit that's $860,000,000,000

Knock it down to seven-something.

Yeah good. That's better.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:34 PM

Several bus lines run non-stop buses for gamblers from LA and SF. They will have to lay off drivers.
Someone mentioned the bill had $3 billion for first nations. I would like to know the provisions.

I guess the content will trickle down to us in the weeks and months to come. One could buy a copy from the GPO, but at over 500 pages, it won't be cheap.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Peter T.
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:42 PM

Perhaps the best thing about the stimulus plan is the deep conservatism of it. For the first time there is real money going towards energy efficiency and conservation all across America.      Huge amounts of energy will be conserved.

I have yet to hear one conservative praise this conservatism.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:44 PM

Real money or money printed by the U.S. Treasury?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:53 PM

When Reagan gave money to employers to hire new people, it was called "trickle-down economics" and the news media people called it bad.

When Harry Reid and friends give money to employers to hire people for his pet projects, they call it an "investment in your future".

When Reagan increased the National Debt $1.6 trillion in eight years, it was called "wreckless deficit spending".

When Reid, Pelosi and Obama demand we pass an instant deficit-raising package that increases the deficit by $0.82 trillion in Obama's first three weeks in office, it is called a "stimulus package".

Perhaps we need to define terms before a dabate.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Feb 09 - 09:53 PM

"Huge amounts of energy will be conserved"

The best joke since the Marx brothers.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 11:35 AM

Gregg said the Obama administration made a "tactical mistake" on the stimulus bill by allowing it to be written by "House appropriators, and if it were written by Senate appropriators, the same problem would have occurred.''

"It should have been drafted, or at least the philosophy that drove it should have been drafted, by people who were thinking about the larger picture of how you get the economy going." . . .

Appropriators, as Gregg called them, "by definition don't have focus and are only interested usually in the accounts they have jurisdiction over. They all have their small arena of responsibility.

"They don't come from a philosophical standpoint," he said. "They come from a standpoint of 'plussing up' whatever accounts they are responsible for."

Gregg said the result is "an unfocused product where we're spending a lot of money on initiatives which really aren't going to be all that much of a stimulus or are outside of the two-year window or are basically just social spending for the sake of constituency support." . . .

Gregg said he was not opposed to the bill simply because of its huge bottom line.

"The policy drives the number," he said, "and if you could put good policy in place, I would have no problem with the number."

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 12:07 PM

Here you go Q, the entire thing online .

Apparently there is even a line that says "None if this money can go to Blago."

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 12:38 PM

Not the final, Heric- only 647 pages, and the final passed bill is over 1000 pages.

A peculiar clause authorizes payment of state and local taxes on new vehicles (including recreational, SUV and light trucks).
This can be used by the states to fiddle more tax money. New Mexico Legislature is moving to increase taxes on vehicles. Other states will probably follow.
Some measures like this one do not seem to have limits that confine them to the operational time of the bill.

Much will go towards highways and bridges. This will help contractors (who already have crews). Doubtful that any real increase in employment wil result and most of that will be temporary.

The health portion provides some relief, but no universal health care on the horizon.

I was wrong, even the Marx Brothers couldn't have conceived of such wacky legislation.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 12:58 PM

I could read the text of the entire stimulus bill and attempt to understand it......(and probably fail utterly in that attempt)....and then opinionate forcefully here about it for days and days!

Or I could do something that actually is useful in my real life...like shovel off the front walk, or get the books up to date in my business.

See ya later, I guess. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 01:01 PM

Oh, crap. I'm about a third of the way through it, this one (there's nothing about a Vegas train in it):

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/hr1_engrossed.pdf

which is 680 pages. (It's not as bad as it sounds - there are only 25 lines per page.)

Can't opine yet of course, but I am liking it a lot more than what is described in newspapers. (The first nations stuff I've seen is all about direct spending on infrastucture, housing, education and health care.)


Guess I had better wait for the one with the 400 pages of extra crap.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 01:03 PM

Later, Hawk.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 01:14 PM

"New Mexico Legislature is moving to increase taxes on vehicles. Other states will probably follow."

Oh, wonderful. An increase in sales tax supresses car sales. It has been demonstrated many times. After all, a $30,000 vehicle will cost the buyer between $2000 and $3000 in sales tax depending on the state where sold.

States like California extract an annual registration fee that is huge, seeming punative.

In Nevada, I just re-registered my old car for "$33.00 REG FEE and $11.00 BASIC GOV SVCS TAX", unquote. Quite resonable.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 01:18 PM

$14 billion for special ed!

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 02:42 PM

Well, I really can't find anything on line or in the news about an increase in vehicle sales taxes in New Mexico, and I live there.   Of course, the legislature is now in session, and lots of things get proposed that never see the light of day. I'd personally think that a regressive tax based upon weight and horsepower would be a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 03:06 PM

The article is in the online Santa Fe New Mexican, Feb. 14. I looked at the headline and didn't read it so I was partly wrong- they are considering increasing the excise tax from 3% to 4% of the value of new cars.
"Two Proposals would tax car owners," Kate Nash, The New Mexican, 2/13/2009.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Local%20News/Two-proposals-would-tax-car-owners

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Feb 09 - 03:10 PM

OK, thanks...very unlikely to get out of committee.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 01:40 PM

You are right JTS. It does not fit the definiton of tricledown economics.

What I meant to imply, rather abstractly is that this stimulus plan sounds as workable to me as trickledown economics.

If any of this money is ever regained by the government, whatever reduction in the national debt it by cause, it will have cost a lot in interest and eventually it will cause inflation down the road that will more that offset any gains it affords to the poor and middle class.

Only the wealthy will not be harmed by the future inflation it will cause.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:06 PM

Recovery Bill Gets Final Approval

By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: February 13, 2009

WASHINGTON — Congress on Friday approved a $787 billion economic stimulus measure, meeting the crushing mid-February deadline that Democrats had set for adopting the centerpiece of President Obama's early agenda but without quelling partisan divisions in Washington. Not a single House Republican voted for the bill.

The House vote was 246 to 183, with just 7 Democrats joining all 176 Republicans in opposition. In the Senate, the vote, 60 to 38, was similarly partisan. Only 3 centrist Republicans joined 55 Democrats and 2 independents in favor.

The Senate finally adopted the bill at 10:47 p.m. after what appeared to be the longest Congressional vote in history. The peculiar 5-hour 17-minute process was required because Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio, had to return to Washington from his home state after attending a funeral home visitation for his mother, who died Feb. 2.

Under a procedural deal between the parties, the bill needed 60 votes to pass. The vote began at 5:30 p.m., but from 7:07 p.m., when Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, cast his "aye," the tally hung at 59 to 38, until Mr. Brown arrived.

Mr. Obama is expected to sign the bill on Monday.

Among the senators voting against it was Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, who withdrew this week as the president's nominee for commerce secretary.

Despite the bill's promise of increased unemployment benefits and new health care subsidies, as well as more than $100 billion in aid for states, House Republicans did not break rank. Even those from states hit hardest by the recession opposed the bill, in a rebuke of the new president.

During the debate, the Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, angrily dropped the 1,073-page bill text to the floor with a thump, as he accused Democrats of failing to read the legislation.

"The president made clear when we started this process that this was about jobs," Mr. Boehner said after the vote. "Jobs. Jobs. Jobs. And what it's turned into is nothing more than spending, spending and more spending."

The $787 billion plan — a combination of fast-acting tax cuts and longer-term government spending on public works projects, education, health care, energy and technology — was smaller than Democrats first proposed. But, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, more than 74 percent of the money will be spent within the next 18 months, a relatively rapid pace that could determine whether the plan succeeds.

The House voted in the afternoon, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi and fellow Democrats cheered on the floor. Ms. Pelosi handed out chocolate bars to her committee chairmen. The label showed a picture of the Capitol and read, "A stimulus package we can all sink our teeth into."

At a news conference, Ms. Pelosi and her top lieutenants praised Mr. Obama for completing the legislation so quickly.

"The president requested swift, bold action," Ms. Pelosi said. "The American people are feeling a great deal of pain. They have uncertainty about their jobs, about health care, about the ability to pay for the education of their children, and sad to say in our great country, even to put food on the table. And today we have passed legislation that does take that swift, bold action on their behalf."

Just four weeks into Mr. Obama's presidency, the Democrats boasted that they had already approved three major bills: a measure to curb pay-discrimination against women in the workplace, a broad expansion of the state children's health insurance program and the stimulus.

"We have yet to pass the 30th day of this administration," said the House majority leader, Steny H. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland. "And we have passed historic legislation."

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 03:50 PM

DEBT LIMIT INCREASE
The bill increases the statutory limit on the national debt by $789 billion, to $12.1 trillion.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,Susu's Hubby
Date: 15 Feb 09 - 09:05 PM

Let's get it done now.....wait, it's done?.....I'll sign when vacation's over!


You gotta laugh at stuff like this!

Yeah...he's concerned.

Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 12:54 AM

July 09, 2008 NBC

PONTIAC, Mich -- In response to a question about the economic stimulus checks administered by the U.S. government earlier this year, Michelle Obama said her husband believes that short-term fixes don't solve economic problems.

"You're getting $600," she told an audience of mostly African-American women here. "What can you do with that? Not to be ungrateful or anything. But maybe it pays down a bill, but it doesn't pay down every bill every month."

"Barack's approach is that the short-term quick fix kinda stuff sounds good," she continued. "And it may even feel good that first month when you get that check. And then you go out and you buy a pair of earrings,"

$13 x 52 weeks= $676

Change we can believe in?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 01:13 AM

Exactly. A 'feel good' proposal.

A bill composed of many 'feel good' proposals.

I'm waiting for my little bit to buy a few bottles of single malt- and I'll feel even gooder!

(hic..)

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 03:23 AM

The closest I've been able to find for a "final" bill is the bill sent back to both houses by the Conference Committee. That should be close to what at least the first round of votes was on. There generally aren't amendments to the committe haggle. It's either accepted or rejected. That it passed probably means very few changes, if any were made.

The Committee version is at Huffington now -- dated 12 FEb, not the same thing linked up above.

To get the full "Committee version" you have to download 4 pdf files, total about 52 MB, so it might be as well to wait until the gpo gets the whole-and-really-final-version online. The Committee version is a markup, with a few "graphics" showing where the red-pencil marks were embedded, so a plain text version could be a little smaller but probably not much.

Reports are that Obama will arrive in Denver on Tuesday, and will sign it "in Denver;" but the reports I've seen don't indicate just how long he'll be in Denver, so it's not necessarily a done deal on Tuesday, but that would be a good place to put your money in the pool at the office.

John

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 08:44 AM

Now that the stimulus package has been enacted by Congress, the question remains, who was it designed to help? The House mandated that projects using stimulus money would have to use the E-Verify system for the purpose of ensuring that people employed under the program were legal to live and work in the country. The Senate version took E-Verify out and efforts by the joint conference committee to put it back in were unsuccessful. Meanwhile, the Obama Administration has delayed implementation of a rule that would have required federal contractors to use E-Verify, and the president further indicates he will happily sign the stimulus bill as is.
        What this tells those of us who follow such things is, both Congress and the new administration intend for the stimulus money to go to people who are not legally here and who will gleefully send 80% of their earnings out of the country. Now, if we only knew where all of that money will end up, American taxpayers could go there and be stimulated.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 09:56 AM

Since it is my wife's job to approve or remove goverment medical research programs, you can imagine the increased work load that the stimulus bill is causing. After 2 attempts to structure the most most rapid and efficient way to get the money into the system the OMB has defied any quick means of getting the money into programs and has ruled that all stimulus money will be structured under standard procurement practices. That means it will take a year or more to fund new and and approved research.
However certain institutions that already have a relationship with goverment funding will get to the trough first. Kinda reminds me of the rationale for Halliburton.

In the general society the stimulus for people to buy a new car will be about $150. The stimulus to insulate your home will be a tax credit come 2010.

We will need new laws to assist home owners with solar tech.

In short the stimulus is years away for everyone except the very well connected.

With only a quarter of the stimulus going toward Main street thus far we can expect another 2 or three attempts to avert a 15 to 20 year slump in all economies.


It looks like there is a run on citi group and Bank of America today.


btw many of our goverment agencies are still working under a cotinuing resolution.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 10:23 AM

http://www.stimuluswatch.org/project/by_state

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 10:31 AM

It looks like the senators from Maine sold out pretty cheap!

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 10:39 AM

In general I have found that what Republicans are saying is in the stimulus bill and what actually is in the bill are invariably one step beyond ingenuous.

There is a mass transit stimulus but no Vegas train.

When Lady bird Johnson tried to spruce up DC it was called a beauftification project. Today something similar is called a waste of millions on grass seed.

When Republican Committee chairman says " Lets get this straight once and for all, the goverment has never in the history of mankind ever... ever... created jobs!"

Are there really people who overlook his job or the millions of other goverment jobs, or even the invention of the computer by the US dept of Standards   and believe one word of thier empty meaningless lies?


Sometimes I am tempted to help clean up the gene pool myself, but that is exactly how "real Americans" feel everytime a new war is rolled out to bless and salute.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 11:12 AM

SRS, that's the mayors' wish list and doesn't appear to have much to do with the president's plan.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 12:26 PM

"There is a mass transit stimulus but no Vegas train."


                  Donuel - Is it true there is no Vegas train. I listened to Sean Hannity a few days ago and it seemed like he mentioned that train every 15 seconds or so.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 12:38 PM

But they almost tripled the allocation for high speed and inter-city rail to around 8 billion, I think. Nevada/Vegas will need to persuade the DOT, competing with other proposals.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 12:52 PM

In order to do what Harry Reid wants, it would have to run from LA to Vegas. Does that qualify?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 01:05 PM

"this train is bound for glory, this train...", er, well, maybe not...

Harry Reid's high-speed gambling train

Just two days after President Obama told the American people the economic stimulus bill will have "no earmarks", the Associated Press reports that Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nevada) is telling his constituents in Nevada that he has personally worked out a deal as part of the House-Senate conference committee to get them money for a high-speed gambling train.

In late-stage talks, Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., pressed for $8 billion to construct high-speed rail lines, quadrupling the amount in the bill that passed the Senate on Tuesday. Reid's office issued a statement noting that a proposed Los Angeles-to-Las Vegas rail might get a big chunk of the money.

This of course exposes the little game the President is playing with the public. He tells everyone there are no earmarks in the bill but then turns around and either (a) gives the money to the states, which he knows will fund the earmarks, or (b) instructs his agencies to fund the earmarks directly. It's all very clever, if not deceptive.

Reid's high-speed gambling train not only violates the President's guiding principles for this bill, it also violates American taxpayers.
This so-called MagLev train (magnetic levitation) is estimated to cost $12 billion. Reid earmarked $45 million last year for the public transportation project from California to Las Vegas, which is in direct competition with a private high-speed train company, DesertXpress, which is building a train on a similar route with all private funding. It's not just an earmark, it's a job killing earmark.

Even a train that ran between L.A. and Vegas wouldn't guarantee financial success. Amtrak's Desert Wind between the two cities was canceled in 1997 because of low ridership. "I remain skeptical that there's sufficient demand to make it appear it could be a market success," said Martin Wachs at the Rand Corp. think tank. "And it would depend ultimately on the willingness of taxpayers to subsidize to some extent that service."

If it is not bad enough that this project represent a backdoor earmark as well as a complete boondoggle, it also runs contrary to the President's stated goal of preventing taxpayer money from being used for personal travel. Yesterday, the President blasted Wall Street executives for using TARP money to travel to …. where?  … wait for it … LAS VEGAS!

Obama, who has been mustering public support for economic stimulus legislation, said during a town hall meeting this week in Indiana that companies shouldn't hold such events at taxpayers' expense.

"You can't get corporate jets, you can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayer's dime," Obama said.

The President has a point that taxpayer money should not be used to pay for Wall Street fat cats to fly to Las Vegas but why is okay for taxpayer money to be used to help pay for Hollywood elites get there on a fancy gambling train? And why are we subsidizing leisure in a stimulus bill rather than encouraging work and greater productivity?

It is outrageous that the President and Reid have cut this backroom deal. Apparently they believe the motto "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" also applies to House-Senate conference committees.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 02:08 PM

Forget high-speed rail. The bill will improve some roadbeds and signal operations in areas across the country, but high-speed rail lines in North America (China, Japan, France and Germany have at least one line operational) are many years in the future.

When the money is divided up among the regions (see map in NY Times today), it will lead to improvements on some major corridors but not one 'bullet' train is envisioned.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/us/20rail.html?th&emc=th

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 03:42 PM

Good cut-n-paste, PDQ, but quotation marks are also a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 06:31 PM

Obama's Choice: FDR or Reagan

By Patrick Buchanan

Barack Obama, it is said, will inherit the worst times since the Great Depression. Not to minimize the crisis we are in, but we need a little perspective here.

The Great Depression began with the Great Crash of 1929. By 1931, unemployment had reached 16 percent.

By 1933, 89 percent of stock value had been wiped out, the economy had shrunk by one-third, thousands of banks had closed, a third of the money supply had vanished, and unemployment had reached 25 percent -- among heads of households. And in those days, there was no unemployment insurance, no Medicare, no Medicaid, no Social Security, no welfare.


FDR's answer: vast federal spending, tough new regulations on business and higher taxes -- like Herbert Hoover before him, only more so.

The Depression lasted until war orders from the Allies brought U.S. industry back to life. Before 1940, not once did unemployment fall below 14 percent. In May 1939, Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau testified:

"We are spending more money than we have ever spent before, and it does not work. ... I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. ... I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started ... and an enormous debt, to boot."

Politically, the New Deal was a smashing success, with FDR's landslides in 1932, 1934 and 1936 virtually wiping out the GOP.

Yet, economically, the New Deal was a bust, failing utterly to restore prosperity. Despite the indoctrination of generations of schoolchildren in New Deal propaganda, that is the hard truth.

Consider, now, how Ronald Reagan responded to the economic crisis of 1980, the worst since the Depression. In the "stagflation" of that Jimmy Carter era, interest rates had reached 21 percent and inflation 13 percent.

Reagan's answer was the tight money policy of Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and across-the-board tax cuts of 25 percent, while slashing the highest rates from 70 percent to 28 percent.

While unemployment hit 10 percent in 1982 and Reagan lost 26 House seats, in 1983 the tax cuts kicked in.

From there on out, it was boom times until Reagan rode off into the sunset, having created 20 million new jobs. "The Seven Fat Years," author Robert Bartley called them.

Reagan had followed the lead of Warren Harding and Cal Coolidge, who had cut Woodrow Wilson's wartime tax rates of near 70 percent to 25 percent, resulting in "The Roaring '20s," a time of unrivaled prosperity.

The JFK tax cuts of the 1960s, also a Reagan model, were equally successful.

Harding, Coolidge, JFK and Reagan all bet on the private sector as the engine of prosperity. All succeeded. Franklin Roosevelt bet on government. And the New Deal failed. It was World War II that pulled the United States out of the Depression ditch of the 1930s.

Comes now the financial collapse and economic crisis of 2008, inherited by Obama, with 40 percent of all stock values wiped out in a year, foreclosures pandemic, and unemployment near 7 percent and surging.

In crafting his solutions, Obama seems to be brushing aside the Reagan, JFK and Harding-Coolidge models, and channeling FDR and the New Deal Democrats.

Already staring at a $1.2 trillion dollar deficit for the year ending Sept. 30, about 8 percent of the entire U.S. economy, Obama intends to add a stimulus package of $700 billion to $1 trillion, yet another 5 percent to 7 percent of gross domestic product. The resulting deficit would be twice as large as Reagan's largest, 6 percent of GDP, which was the largest since World War II.

And how is this Niagara of money to be spent?

Hundreds of billions will go out in checks of $500 to $1,000 to wage-earners and individuals who do not even pay taxes. This is much like the George McGovern "demogrant" program of 1972, where every man, woman and child, if memory serves, was to get a $1,000 check from the U.S. government.

Other hundreds of billions will go to shore up state and municipal spending. Other hundreds of billions will go for "infrastructure" projects, another name for earmarks, which is a synonym for pork.

Now, as Obama does not intend to raise taxes, at least now, he is going to have to borrow this near $2 trillion from foreigners or U.S. taxpayers, or the Fed will have to create the money. Undeniably, this will have an impact upon the economy. But what will that impact be?

Where in history, other than World War II, is there evidence that such a mass infusion of spending restored prosperity?

Obama and the Democrats are taking a historic gamble, not only with their careers but with the country. If this monstrous stimulus package, plus the trillions in hot money, do not work; if the two ignite rampant inflation, rather than real growth, we are all out of options. The toolbox is empty.

And what will follow may truly resemble the 1930s.

    {Copyright 2009, Creators Syndicate Inc.}

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 07:04 PM

Ronald Reagan caused the triple dipper recession of the 1980's. There was no recovery until that foolish fossil was long out of office!

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 08:33 PM

Much of what Buchanan says is true.

Harding and Coolidge built on strengths- industry and capital. Much denigrated by the Left, they were true capitalists. Hoover lost perspective, proposing plans implemented unsuccessfully by Roosevelt.

Roosevelt put people to work, but not on jobs that would build the economy, hence stagnation until the war required industrial growth.

Reagan cut taxes, but he also was a big spender. His legacy is mixed.

It would take a few years to return to a reasonable level of prosperity if industry and capital were encouraged in the major countries of the world (The U. S. cannot cure itself by itself), but the current tendency to throw money into a bottomless pit seems to be worldwide.

Unfortunately, the Obama Democrats are headed in the wrong direction.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 09:16 PM

Please explain what the "triple dipper recession" was.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: pdq
Date: 20 Feb 09 - 09:47 PM

Perhaps he meant "trip the Gipper recession"?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 03:39 PM

Why didn't anyone tell us about the Chery when we were passing out tens of billions to the carmakers, to like, uh, go green or whatever they plan to do?

Does Obama want me to pay five figures for a Ford piece of crap, out of loyalty to the financial sector, or an RV in support of the stimulus, or does he want me to pay to pay four figures to get a cute little car that gets 95 miles per gallon out of loyalty to the planet? Oh what a dilemma. Check it out: Chery

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 03:45 PM

?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 03:54 PM

Oh you mean the link doesn't work?
Try this:
http://www.channel4.com/4car/gl/gallery/gallery/10379/10

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 04:17 PM

They're coming to America via a contract with Chrysler, which can buy them from the Chinese and sell them to us.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 04:50 PM

Oh, apparently they called it off in late November, 2008. (By coincidence, Chrysler had to present its bailout business plan to Congress on December 4, 2008.)

Fact of the matter is, though, that those cars are out there, going (almost) all over the world. Except here, I guess. For now.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 05:06 PM

Our world class journalists made sure we were all well informed that the automakers have corporate jets goodness gracious what an outrage, but I'll be hornswaggled if any of them told us that Chrysler was going to use bailout money to buy Chinese cars and then sell them to us, and were still contracted to do this until AFTER they were instructed by Congress to submit specific business plans for public perusal.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 08:13 PM

The possibility of Chrysler selling the Chery in the U. S. has been booted about in the news since 2007. Nothing new here.
Forbes reports that the deal is now dead. Both Chery and Chrysler are in dire straits. Chrysler and Chery cannot afford to engineer the car for the American market or to set up financing for marketing, quality control, dealerships, polution controls, etc.

Chery has a loan from a Chinese bank and will concentrate on building its home market. At one time, it considered buying a stake in Daimler-Chrysler but can't afford to.
See Forbes report, "Chrysler Squashes Chery Deal," Tim Wang, 12.09.08.

www.forbes.com/2008/12/09/chrysler-chery-ford-markets-equity-cx_twdd_1209markets4.html

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 08:24 PM

Cancellation of the deal less than a month before production of the specific business plans to Congress is not new here?

I wish you or someone had told us at the time, so that the "selling" of the bailout could be made on relevant information, instead of bullshit like "We made them drive instead of fly to the hearing."

We give them billions to learn how to make "green" cars while not mentioning that we are depriving oursleves of 4 figure cars that go nearly 100 mpg. Sure maybe we love our autoworkers and all that, and want to make the decision that way, but the show is a sham.

The Chinese cars, now being sold all over the world, but not to us, are not good enough maybe, but they were planning to sell them to us?

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 09:33 PM

None of this has anything to do with the stimulus plan, except possibly China's, but a few words about Chery.
Chery already is a partner with Daimler-Chrysler in China. They have decided selling the Chery models in the U. S. is not economically feasible at this time.
Chery 'being sold all over the world' is misleading. Chery produced some 100,000 engines for use in Fiat cars, for models sold mostly in China, but some sold elsewhere.
Chery sold 50,000 cars abroad in 2006, but this has dropped with the recession. They will concentrate on their home market and on Brazil, where they have a factory (another factory planned for Argentina if they can get financing). Their other overseas markets are small. They are only the 4th largest auto producer in China.

Chery's new A3 model sedan, PinnFarina designed, is the first to receive 5-star auto safety standard and the first ESP-equipped. It would have been the first planned for North America. Their small SUV will be sold in Australia next year. None of their models gets anywhere near 100 mpg- 40 plus for their smaller ones. They plan an electric model, about 88mpg, a short range vehicle, but it has not been put on the market.

A couple of years ago, Bricklin tried to get financing for a joint project with Chery, but the project got nowhere. He talked of a 100mpg car, but that was just talk.

No sales yet in Europe or North America, but they are reported to be in talks with Ford, possibly about acquiring Saab.

Most of this is available from Automotive websites, Forbes.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 22 Feb 09 - 10:00 PM

If the Chery A3 hybrid, the one I linked to, doesn't get 94 mpg as they say it does, then they shouldn't say it does.

Okay, I'm the only one outraged by this kind of bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Feb 09 - 12:49 AM

Only the Chery 1.6 and 1.8 l. models are available at this time. Also remember that when emission controls and safety equipment are installed for North American sales, the fuel economy will be cut.
The Chery Cowin, their biggest seller, gets 37mpg with their diesel 2.4l. and manual transmission. The car at the auto show in Shanghai (1.3l. diesel-electric) was for show only. It might make a good golf cart.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 09 - 09:51 AM

A Federal beaurocrat's look behind the scenes of getting out the stimulus plan;



A call comes in at 2PM Tue. The agency staff are notified at 4 PM that 80 million dollars is to be disseminated. All proposals are to include an 11 point ten page explanation of the merits of the research and prevention education types of grants.

The proposals are due at 9 AM Wed. so that Obama can mention specific programs of stimulus at the Thursday budget speech.

Due to the dedication of the staff 2 proposals made it in on time.
HSS, CDC, NIH, OSH proposals will be decided upon by noon today.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 09 - 10:24 AM

Stimulus can come in many forms other than money.

Ethical stimulus can come in the form of executing Wall Street CEO's for ruining the world's economy.
Not all bankers should be killed, just two the way China executed the CEOs who put melamine in milk to pass a protein test on thier inferior products.

Hang one banker from the big board at the NYSE and blow another one up at next years super bowl at half time.

They would die in the name of change as heros.

It would be a bargain, and we all love bargains.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Feb 09 - 02:29 PM

"Please explain what the "triple dipper recession" was."

             The one that lasted from 1981 through 1985.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 09 - 04:21 PM

The triple dipper era was the Reagan years

All I know is that he villified welfare for the poor and popularized welfare for corporations, then out deficit spent the USSR into a financial hole.


Now it is our turn to climb out of that hole.

Subject: RE: BS: You and the stimulus plan
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Feb 09 - 06:19 PM

Yes, we are paying for Ronald Reagan now!