| RotoGuru Politics Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: Ecomomic Stimulus or Spending Bill? Posted by: Pancho Villa - [51546319] Thu, Jan 29, 2009, 20:19 We've been having discussions of this in various threads, so let's focus this issue here. I've already made my opinion known. A big part of what this bill promotes is, IMO, completely disconnected with stimulating the economy. At worst, it is social programs run amock, including medicare, food stamps, heat and air conditioning money for the poor and questionable educational programs. I'm not arguing the pros and cons of these programs; I'm questioning whether they belong in a stimulus package designed to uplift the economy out of this recession, or cease the slide into a full blown depression. Possibly the most egregious misuse of funds is the suggestion that 4.9 billion be set aside for "neighborhood stabilization activities." There are those who believe that's a synonym for ACORN. Again, without debating the pros and cons of ACORN, I want to know what "neighborhood stabilization activities" are, and how 4.9 billion dollars is going to be spent in this area. President Obama has been selling the stimulus package as an emergency measure to save jobs and create jobs - long term jobs through infrastructure projects and a commitment to a new era of alternative energy, including an almost entirely revamped power grid system. I support that kind of vision. I can not support the stimulus bill in its current form. | |||||||
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.] | ||||||||
| 596 | Mith ID: 58136177 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 09:08 | Re 592, I think the president mentions recovery.gov every time he talks about the stimulus. | ||||||
| 597 | Building 7 ID: 471052128 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 09:28 |
In FY 2009, the federal government reported the following: Revenues:...$2.1 Trillion Expenditures: ...$3.5 Trillion Defecit:....$1.4 Trillion They are projecting similar numbers for the next 10 years. Spending money you don't have (stimulus package) will make these numbers worse. One can read this or that report from an economist; they can listen to what big-spenders here tell them to think; or they can form their own opinion as to whether a stimulus package is a good idea when the federal government is spending 67% more than the revenue collected. The obvious solution IMO is to quit spending so much. But, they never do. It's always more and more and that is exactly what a stimulus package is. Spending more and more. | ||||||
| 598 | sarge33rd ID: 280311620 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 09:38 |
When the Fed Govt spends money...where does that money go? Oh yeah...into the hands of the private sector. Driving production of goods, driving transportation of those same goods, driving employment. Nope....wouldnt want any of THAT happening. | ||||||
| 599 | Razor ID: 57854118 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 09:54 |
Re: 597 - have you entertained the possibility that revenues would be down sharply for several years without the stimulus? The government needs people in jobs and companies posting profits to itself be profitable. Regardless, the majority of the budget is tied up in entitlement programs, which are much harder to change than discretionary spending. Luckily, the President is on top of this issue while Congress continues to avoid responsibility for fixing it. | ||||||
| 600 | Pancho Villa ID: 29118157 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 10:38 |
And yet, B7, when Obama proposes legislation aimed at addressing the deficit, Congress votes it down thanks to Republicans who were initially for it. Then yesterday, Obama signs an executive order creating a bipartisan commission to address the deficit. While it's easy to play the cynic card and simply say, "He doesn't mean it," that doesn't say much for our national psyche. There is a contingency in this country that will oppose anything this president proposes, even at the expense of our economic future, all for the sake of political expediency. Quit spending so much? Our defense budget is 5 times larger than the next country. Yet, any attempt to reign in spending there is met with howls of weakness from most of the same people who bitch and moan about spending and taxes. On top of that, we have an expensive Dept. of Homeland Security, but any guy with a beef with the IRS and enough money to own an airplane can fly it into a building if he so desires. Our entitlement programs, SS and Medicare, are unsustainable, yet Warren Buffet and George Soros qualify for both. We want every pregnancy brought to term, then complain when the state has to pick up the tab for medical, food and housing because Mom is broke and Dad is nowhere to be found. We've become a nation of whiners. The left whines about Fox News, the right whines about the MSM, obstinance is portrayed as courage, and entertainers are portrayed as politically saavy. And we're still the greatest country on the planet. | ||||||
| 601 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 11:08 |
MITH I am sure that author [who is an economist and is eminently qualified to comment on the CBO"s faulty methodology] as The Heritage Foundation's lead budget analyst, has read the CBO report and no one has reasonable cause to brush off what he has to say as you have done. | ||||||
| 602 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 11:09 | And that goes double for the flippant comments from bili. | ||||||
| 603 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 11:16 |
So, bili, MITH, PD... Why is it responsible for you guys to wave around a Politifacts report, and somehow laughable that I should post a source that Politifacts used as their source? | ||||||
| 604 | Pancho Villa ID: 29118157 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 11:19 |
Flippant? Allow me to refer you to #587: When it finally dawns on you, that you are responsible for the worst and most regressive public policy ever... Just remember your little triumphalist dance ya'll been doin. The joke is on you, your economic future is in the crapper for good and the villain is in the mirror. | ||||||
| 605 | boikin ID: 532592112 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 11:28 |
And we're still the greatest country on the planet. well roman said that too... "He doesn't mean it," well he may not mean it but i think he believes it. Obama maybe a lot of things but an idiot, I think not. He knows the deficit is not good for the country. | ||||||
| 606 | Pancho Villa ID: 29118157 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 11:36 | Haven't you heard, boikin? Obama's goal is to destroy the United States. | ||||||
| 607 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 13:08 |
Dude has an MA in "public affairs". Wicked rigor that. I'll stick with the guys who actually have cracked on econ text, and you can hang with the squishy poli-sci majors that talk better than they think. Anti-intellectualism reaching new heights. | ||||||
| 608 | Tree ID: 23143812 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 13:40 |
now that i have a job again, and an english degree, i am qualified to say that the economy is 10,000 times better than it was a few months ago. why can i say this? well, i have a job now, and i didn't before. thusly, the economy is better. i'm qualified to make that statement. just saying. :oD | ||||||
| 610 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 14:56 |
At the risk of incurring the wrath of Palinati (-naughty? -noughti?) by dabbling with the results of that black majik of the "elite" (you know, those know-nothings with degrees in economics.), here are some estimates on the impact of the stimulus by the private sector, because that CBO is so corrupt.
| ||||||
| 611 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 14:58 |
I'll stick with the guys who actually have cracked on econ text The guy has a degree in economics. | ||||||
| 612 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 15:18 |
You may be right. I read it as a melange degree in "economics and political science", which sounds like econ without the numbers or chops, or perhaps poli sci with a money bent. I suppose he could hold two undergrad degrees, however. As far as I can tell, he hasn't published any real econ research other than commentaries. If you really want to hold him up as in the same universe as true economists, feel free. I'll find my true econ elsewhere, however. | ||||||
| 613 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 15:44 | His work doesn't spring from a vacuum. He works in a think tank with many prominent PHD's in Economics, and the Heritage Foundation work is published. | ||||||
| 614 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 15:46 | Soros is creating a think tank of 'experts' to disparage capitalism. I'll get a kick out of putting your reaction to their work up against this guy's. | ||||||
| 615 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 15:47 | There is this thing called co-authorship. You should let him know about it. He's a talking head, not a economic researcher. He should be treated as such. | ||||||
| 616 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 15:47 | This guy doesn't have any "work". He has soundbites. | ||||||
| 617 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 16:02 |
And you know this how? Anyway, I'll take the Heritage Foundation's work over the President's or any 'fact check' organization funded by Soros, or any CBO that keeps pulling their punches. The CBO keeps starting from assumptions that are entirely too generous to the point of being in Obama's pocket. | ||||||
| 618 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 16:04 |
How about the 3 organizations who's projections I linked to above? Also part of the conspiracy? I ran through his research links on the heritage site. All commentaries, or at least the 15 or so I clicked through on. | ||||||
| 619 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 37838313 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 16:12 |
How about we just look at the CBO report and see that it cites it's work as it goes therefore specifically did not do what Riedl claims, whatever his credentials might happen to be? | ||||||
| 620 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 16:16 | When you are doing that see if you can break out the amount those sources credit to the tax cuts, from those they credit to the pork. | ||||||
| 621 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 17:03 |
Get your Heritage "researcher" on it. Generally, the multipliers are much smaller for tax cuts over stimulus, but I'm not eager to pour through the CBO report for you. | ||||||
| 622 | Nuclear Gophers ID: 7115138 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 09:58 |
Look at what all those babies Stupak saved in the health care bill have to look forward to. This was written in the Washington Times Friday March 26, 2010. By David M. Dickson President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation's economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday. In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president's budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade. "An additional $1.2 trillion in debt dumped on [GDP] to our children makes a huge difference," said Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "That represents an additional debt of $10,000 per household above and beyond the federal debt they are already carrying." The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it's headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO's deficit estimates. That figure would equal 90 percent of the estimated gross domestic product in 2020, up from 40 percent at the end of fiscal 2008. By comparison, America's debt-to-GDP ratio peaked at 109 percent at the end of World War II, while the ratio for economically troubled Greece hit 115 percent last year. "That level of debt is extremely problematic, particularly given the upward debt path beyond the 10-year budget window," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. For countries with debt-to-GDP ratios "above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by 1 percent, and average growth falls considerably more," according to a recent research paper by economists Kenneth S. Rogoff of Harvard and Carmen M. Reinhart of the University of Maryland. CBO projected the 2011 deficit will be $1.34 trillion, not much different from the administration's estimate of $1.27 trillion. However, CBO's estimate of the 2020 deficit at $1.25 trillion significantly exceeds the administration's $1 trillion estimate. | ||||||
| 623 | Mith ID: 58136177 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 10:24 |
I imagine the budget extrapolations conducted at the end of WW2 yielded even gloomier forecasts. How'd the 1950s work out? | ||||||
| 624 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 11:38 |
Heh. When you have to pay for food but you don't have a job, a lecture on credit card debt isn't very useful (or timely) when you have to put groceries on the Visa for awhile. It says more about those giving the lecture, I think. | ||||||
| 625 | jedman Dude ID: 315192219 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 14:13 |
MITH and Perm Dude, Do those numbers bother you at all or are you so confident in the policies of this administration and administrations down the road that you think these huge deficits will work themselves out? I just have a hard time believing that we can go on spending like this without huge ramifications down the road. If the economy doesn't start growing at a faster than 3% rate, how are those deficits going to be erased? There was an article by the AP that basically said the growth rate of over 5% at the end of last year was bogus because so much of the manufacturing was done for cash strapped companies that had let their inventories run down to the point that they finally had to order. The Stock Market is saying things will be ok, at least at this point and for the most part, corporate earnings have been better than expected. So many questions we can't answer now, but those deficit projections just worry the heck out of me. | ||||||
| 626 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 14:33 |
I think that the numbers will, indeed, work themselves out, provided that several things happen that Democrats have been trying to do: -a re-introduction of PAYGO rules in Congress -tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans that Bush pushed through eliminated -a continued emphasis on small business tax cuts. I'm convinced that economic recovery will come from the bottom up rather than from the top down, so it will be small-business generated. This Administration has given huge amounts of tax breaks for small businesses to keep them in the mix and, once private credit markets ease up they will really drive things. I'm not at all concerned about the CBO score ten years out, mostly because budgets are done each and every year. Unlike CBO scores for single programs, for instance, in which effects can more easily be projected, the overall budget changes so much in a few years time that projections out ten years are useless. | ||||||
| 627 | Mith ID: 58136177 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 14:51 |
I just have a hard time believing that we can go on spending like this without huge ramifications down the road. We can't. But I don't expect the rest of Obama's presidency to look like the first two years. I'm not certain of anything, but I do know that we are not in uncharted territory as far as our deficits are concerned. | ||||||
| 628 | Boldwin ID: 362262121 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 15:19 | Wow. | ||||||
| 629 | jedman Dude ID: 315192219 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 18:54 |
I am a small business owner and so far I have not seen anything different in my taxes or in helping my business. Maybe there are benefits that are not applicable to the food distribution business. I agree that helping small business will help the economy, I guess i am just waiting to see where I am being helped. | ||||||
| 630 | Building 7 ID: 232122716 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 19:00 |
Buttinski Party Stimulus Haul Almost Double Republicans | ||||||
| 631 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Sat, Mar 27, 2010, 19:15 |
Every small business is different, of course, so some areas might not apply to you. For example, the National Weatherization Program (to weatherize a million homes per year) helps small handyman businesses but probably has little effect on your business (or mine for that matter). Obama has: -Expandeded the Small Business Administration's loan program (including microloans) -begun the Social Innovation Fund to help incubate ideas on the local level -raise the limit on small business investment expenses to $250,000 (for 2009) -proposed $33 billion in tax credits to encourage hiring by small businesses, which includes a $5000 tax credit for each new employee in 2010 The health care bill was crafted largely with small businesses in mind. Small businesses were bearing the brunt of rising premium costs, as they weren't large enough to negotiate for lower prices but needed to offer health care to attract and retain employees. Besides setting up exchanges where small businesses can pool together to choose from a number of different plans to help them save money, there are all sorts of direct tax breaks strictly for small businesses in the plan.: From 2010-2013, these businesses would be eligible for a credit of up to 35 percent of premiums. Starting in 2014, they could get a credit of up to 50 percent of the cost of buying insurance through a state exchange, as long as they pay at least half the premium. If you pay for health insurance now, this is a pretty sweet deal. And the tax breaks kick in now. Most of these are already law. Others are to come. In his SOTU he outlined a whole host of tax breaks for small businesses. [I won't bore you with the individual tax breaks which help all the dba and virtually all small businesses making under $200K/year] | ||||||
| 632 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Wed, May 26, 2010, 13:11 |
Stimulus bill continues to anger conservatives by working as projected. Or something like that. | ||||||
| 633 | biliruben ID: 358252515 Wed, May 26, 2010, 13:23 |
They jam another trillion through, and pay for it by a tea party, er.., 90% estate tax. This situation clearly calls for a big FU, we are going to help the unemployed with or without you. | ||||||
| 634 | boikin ID: 532592112 Wed, May 26, 2010, 13:46 | deja vu i swear this link was posted months ago and i wrote a response about how if you spend 787 billion these are results you would expect, no impact studies required and the real question is not is the program working but is it working better than just giving the money away? I looked for the response i wrote and link posted earlier but could not find it....creepy. | ||||||
| 635 | biliruben ID: 358252515 Wed, May 26, 2010, 13:59 |
Yes. Economists have developed estimates of multipliers for all sorts of fiscal stimulus, based on historical economic data. Iirc I linked to a standard set of multipliers when we first discussed this, but I guess you didn't bother reading it...disheartening. | ||||||
| 636 | boikin ID: 532592112 Wed, May 26, 2010, 14:09 | No I did read your links but there was another post almost identical to 632 and I remember doing the calculations. It must have been in another thread. | ||||||
| 637 | biliruben ID: 358252515 Wed, May 26, 2010, 14:15 |
Yeah, we had these sorts of discussions in a number of threads at the time. I have trouble keeping track. | ||||||
| 638 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 13:12 |
Bond King tells Congress: Get back to reality. Sadly, the last paragraph sums it up well: Unfortunately for Gross and those who share his concerns, the fight over the debt limit seems driven by Republicans hungry for long-standing ideological victories and Democrats cowed into an anti-stimulus fervor whipped up by the right. To many observers it appears that fixing the currently broken economy isn't really what this is about. | ||||||
| 639 | Boldwin ID: 8562116 Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 18:23 |
To many observers it appears Code for "this reporter's biased view is...". | ||||||
| 640 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 18:49 |
If you can't address the context then address the bias, it seems. Post 639 is content-free. | ||||||
| 641 | Boldwin ID: 8562116 Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 20:58 |
'Content free'? Oh come'on. That old chestnut, "some people say" is just transparent, cheap and hilarious coming from people making a pretense of objectivity and journ-o-listic superiority. The media is the message. Brush up on yer Marshall McLuhan. It also means they were too lazy to look up their liberal friend/amateur human press release they've quoted 40 times anonymously for a backup. | ||||||
| 642 | Perm Dude ID: 420241913 Tue, Oct 11, 2011, 11:26 |
Ezra Klein with an amazing column about the stimulus package, the politics surrounding it, and how everyone completely underestimated the strength and durability of the Great Recession. It is hard to read these kinds of things straight through, and not come away with the difficulty in crafting economic policy which is both timely and effective. But the "what happened" question is important. I know the far right will pick up some choice sentences as partisan fodder, but the whole thing is worth a read because there is something about reading all of it in context. | ||||||
| 643 | sarge33rd ID: 469511111 Tue, Oct 11, 2011, 12:51 |
outstanding article, referencing a book I was not aware of and have since ordered from Amazon. if you too are interested in the read | ||||||
| 644 | Perm Dude ID: 201027169 Tue, Apr 16, 2013, 21:53 | #622: Not so fast. Researchers Finally Replicated Reinhart-Rogoff, and There Are Serious Problems | ||||||
| 645 | biliruben ID: 41431323 Wed, Apr 17, 2013, 02:29 |
Contractionary policies causing contraction. Weird. And the one study that showed contractionary policies were possibly expansionary - discredited. Weirder. | ||||||
| 646 | Boldwin ID: 153271621 Wed, Apr 17, 2013, 06:16 |
Reinhart and Rogoff obviously felt the effects of world war swamp the effects of national indebtedness. Conversely those promoting unsustainable debt levels need a world war boost to resuscitate their hobbyhorse. | ||||||
| If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: Ecomomic Stimulus or Spending Bill? | ||||||||