Well, they are calling it a "stimulus" plan or an "economic recovery" plan. We don't know much about what is in the bill, but from what we do know, there are many things that aren't essential for an economic recovery. Family planning and community activist groups aren't going to revive the economy.

I favor the do nothing approch. If you have to do something, cut taxes so that people can keep their money. Just for a while. Times are lean, so there shouldn't be any new spending at the moment. Letting people keep more of thier own money, I believe, is far less risky than banking on a bunch of "could be" and should be's".

How many people in this country are surviving? Is it half? Three quarters? Is it most? If most of us are surviving, why is it necessary to turn this country on it's head, and down a path that we will not be able to return from, to help out a reletively small percentage? Why would the government believe that getting a cash advance on Americas credit card, and then handing out amounts that they deem appropriate to entities that they choose is a way to prosperity? Why would the government believe that enacting tighter restriction on several aspects of our lives, that require us to dole out more and more of our hard earned money, is going to help anyone prosper?

Don't the liberals remember the bail out bill? Don't they remember being pissed off that the house repulicans rejected the bill? Don't they remember that the democrats pushed hard on this bill, even though they called it Bush's bill, that we needed to get it passed lickity split or else there would be catastrophic results? Don't they remember all the pork that was added to the bill. Don't they remember how the democrats promised transparency, oversite and accountability? It's failed. It's been a complete failure. There weren't clear objectives. There hasn't been transparency. There hasn't been proper oversite. There isn't one bit of accountability. Why is this "stimulus" bill any different? They are pushing hard to jam this one down our throats, lickity split, just like the last one.

It's funny. All of the complaints about Bush. Then this messianic guy hypnotizes a majority of the voting public into believing that he can change something. Now it's the same old "screw the American people" that it's been for decades. I guess there are a lot of voters hoping that Obama will change. Actually there isn't, because there are a lot of Obama voters who are hypocrites. I've been hearing a complete one eighty from liberals. A complete and utter one eighty.

 

Here's a run down of the new stimulus package in part...

$44 million for repairs at the Agriculture Department headquarters in Washington.

$360 million for new child care centers at military bases.

$1.8 billion to repair National Park Service facilities.

$276 million to update technology at the State Department.

$500 million for the Transportation Security Administration to install bomb detectors at airports.

$600 million for General Services Administration to replace older vehicles with alternative fuel vehicles.

$2.5 billion to upgrade low-income housing.

$400 million for NASA scientists to conduct climate change research.

$426 million to construct facilities at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

$800 million to clean up Superfund sites.

$150 million for the Coast Guard to repair or remove bridges deemed a hazard to navigation.

$6.7 billion to renovate and improve energy efficiency at federal buildings.

$400 million to replace the Social Security Administration's 30-year-old National Computer Center.

The Democratic plan took a hit when the Congressional Budget Office estimated that only 7 percent of infrastructure money would make its way into the economy by the end of the year, and only 38 percent would be spent by the end of the 2010 fiscal year.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNU515G2DD.DTL

Please tell me how this crap will help with our current situation. Most of that has no business being in a STIMULUS package. Though some are worthy causes, none should be shoved down our throats right now.

My personal favorite is 1.8 BILLION to National Parks... Their entire budget for the whole year is less than that. It's like a lobbyists dream. I'm totally against this plan, but for those that are for it at least the money be spent NOW. Most of the money won't be spent until AFTER 2010. That should tell you our Politicians know this is nothing about saving our economy.

 

We also can't forget the 300+ BILLION dollars in interest this is going to cost us. As Glenn Beck so eloquently stated if we pay it back by 2020; but we're good for it right?

 

You can't cut taxes for people that aren't working. It's real simple, you need to put people to work.

An Economics 101 student can tell you 7.2% is not a small number when it comes to unemployment. Conservatives didn't mind cash in advance for Iraq.


Yeah, it's only Obama voters that are hypocrites.

 

You have to put people to work by relying on the government to create jobs with our tax dollars? Wouldn't it make more sense to cut out the middle man, the government, and allow us, the population, to keep our money so we can drive the engine that jobs come from?



I understand what the unemployment numbers mean. 7.2 percent means that there is 92.8% employment? Remember when unemployment was at the statistical low point? Not long ago. We're supposed to expect that unemployment numbers can be low all of the time? We ride a wave. It's up sometimes. It's down sometimes.

I know that you're going to use this Iraq argument for some time now. Answer me one thing. If you believe that Iraq was a big waste of our money, how does that make this current proposed "stimulus" plan right? I don't know about you, but when I was a young kid I was told that two wrongs don't make a right. In this case, I guess two wrongs make a lefty. If the money spent on Iraq was wrong then the money that they want to spend for a "recovery", which is considerably more, is totaly wrong.




Who said that it was only Obama voters? Again, hypocrates on both sides doesn't justify plundering our tax dollars. If you believe that the money spent in Iraq is wrong, then you should also see that spending money on this recovery plan is wrong, ten fold.


p.s. I know that you've been busy, but could you take a look at this thread: Bullseye? I'd really like to come to a conclusion and could use your opinion.

 

I never said the money spent on Iraq was wrong, I think the premise of going into Iraq was wrong. If we had to spend that money in Afghanistan, that would be fine. Money is not the issue with regards to Iraq.


I'm not really sure what else you want here as I've already commented. Obama said "You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done". He didn't say "You just can’t listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done". There is a big difference. I think the comment has been taken way out of context and is quite accurate. You can't JUST listen to one side of any debate and expect to have any sort of accuracy. I really don't care for any commentators, left or right. As for Obama "attacking" a private citizen, not a member of government, if Rush thinks he has all the answers, why doesn't he run? Rush gets himself involved in politics, don't cry when someone calls him on it.

 

You guys have got to remember, the actual unemployment rate is 17.4%, not 7.2%. The Reagan and Clinton administrations 'watered-down' the figures. We have got to have business taxes cut drastically to be the impetus for expansion. Government cannot help this situation. It can only waste money. Tax cuts help everyone, even people that are not currently employed.

Remember, the government programs of the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations didnt stop the Great Depression, war did.