PAC, the rest of you traitors this last presidential election

[TripletDaddy]

Amen. This Keynesian crap only drags the pain out longer than needed.

It's clear to me that Obama and Congress have no intention of governing from the center. Not that I thought they would...

As Rahm Emmanuel has advocated, they are merely exploiting a crisis; in this case using the economic crisis to pass a massive liberal spending package under the guise of economic stimulus.

again, basically a similar package giver or take a few billion that the republican president was putting together already. Not to mention that stimulus packages that he already pushed through.

your partisan criticism rings fairly hollow. it isnt a liberal spending package when almost 40% of the price tag comes from the right.

good to see paranoid remnants of cougarboard here on CUF. the liberals are out to get us!

[il Padrino Ute]

again, basically a similar package giver or take a few billion that the republican president was putting together already. Not to mention that stimulus packages that he already pushed through.

your partisan criticism rings fairly hollow. it isnt a liberal spending package when almost 40% of the price tag comes from the right.

good to see paranoid remnants of cougarboard here on CUF. the liberals are out to get us!

It sounds like you're assuming that it's about party affiliation. I was against the first stimulous package that Bush got approved and against the one he was working on before he left office. But if you want to play that game, history will show that this was Obama's doing as he is POTUS now.

Now, tell me why allowing the market to fix itself is a bad idea, please. That was the question I asked.

[TripletDaddy]

It sounds like you're assuming that it's about party affiliation. I was against the first stimulous package that Bush got approved and against the one he was working on before he left office. But if you want to play that game, history will show that this was Obama's doing as he is POTUS now.

Now, tell me why allowing the market to fix itself is a bad idea, please. That was the question I asked.

in theory it is a great idea. however, technically, we have never had an economy sans government intervention. Never. there have always been taxes. So to suggest that we let the market work itself out is unprecendented. In essence, it is the absence of a plan. Unless I misread you, you are saying that the government should do nothing.

So The president calls a press confernce and says, "we realize there are mounting job losses, even this week.....tens of thousands of job losses. Q4 retail was one of the worst in history. Housing crunch. Global economy is also suffering and several countries are in recession. we have decided to do absolutely nothing. We will just let things work themselves out. have a nice day!"

that is why it a lousy plan. and why it is a meaningless platitude. when has the government ever let the market work itself out? when the government needs money, it taxes you. when enough people get sick of the taxes, the government issues cuts. But the government never ceases taxation altogether.

[venkman]

again, basically a similar package giver or take a few billion that the republican president was putting together already. Not to mention that stimulus packages that he already pushed through.

your partisan criticism rings fairly hollow. it isnt a liberal spending package when almost 40% of the price tag comes from the right.

good to see paranoid remnants of cougarboard here on CUF. the liberals are out to get us!

It's not partisan criticism. Like IlPad, I was against the first stimulus package. I'm no GOP lapdog and have been pretty disgusted with the Republicans for much of the last eight years.

And what's paranoid about criticizing a hard left agenda that the democrats seem to be pushing?

[il Padrino Ute]

If the government wants to do something, then rather than send a check to citizens in the hope of them spending money, it should cut taxes so citizens have more disposable income. That would be a better stimulous for the economy than this or any package.

[TripletDaddy]

It's not partisan criticism. Like IlPad, I was against the first stimulus package. I'm no GOP lapdog and have been pretty disgusted with the Republicans for much of the last eight years.

And what's paranoid about criticizing a hard left agenda that the democrats seem to be pushing?

criticism is fine. categorizing it as hard left is out of touch and partisan. like I said, this thing was born out of republican precendent (granted, you were opposed to the original packages) and is driven in very large part by republican interests (as well as dem interests).

I am having a hard time how someone can call this next wave of stimulus packages to be a liberal agenda in light of the aforementioned facts. I see it as a bipartisan effort, all the way...regardless of how the vote shook out.

Now whether it will work, that is a whole 'nuther issue.

ps venkman, you are correct about not being a lapdog. didnt mean to imply that you were a card carrier. apologies. i refuse to apologize to epu, though.

[TripletDaddy]

If the government wants to do something, then rather than send a check to citizens in the hope of them spending money, it should cut taxes so citizens have more disposable income. That would be a better stimulous for the economy than this or any package.

I know your aversion to social programs and I don't necessarily disagree. The increase in taxes right now isn't going to cover the cost for after school ghetto programs. It is going to help cover the costs of the war (a laragely republican social program), infrastructure (although as 8BR pointed out, not to satisfactory levels), etc..in other words, the federal government just needs to have some cushion back into its checking account. it needs money, big time. The deficit is too big now, so drastic measures make more sense.

I honestly think that the ending of the Iraq war is paramount to our economy....way more than giving people an extra $1000 to spend at the mall.

[il Padrino Ute]

ps venkman, you are correct about not being a lapdog. didnt mean to imply that you were a card carrier. apologies. i refuse to apologize to epu, though.

No apology necessary. I am a lapdog, though not of the GOP. I'm a proud, card carrying member of Tax Haters for No Taxes.

[TripletDaddy]

No apology necessary. I am a lapdog, though not of the GOP. I'm a proud, card carrying member of Tax Haters for No Taxes.

you should actually become an official tax protester. Start filing those zeroed-out 1040s and see how many years before they call you on it.

[il Padrino Ute]

I know your aversion to social programs and I don't necessarily disagree. The increase in taxes right now isn't going to cover the cost for after school ghetto programs. It is going to help cover the costs of the war (a laragely republican social program), infrastructure (although as 8BR pointed out, not to satisfactory levels), etc..in other words, the federal government just needs to have some cushion back into its checking account. it needs money, big time. The deficit is too big now, so drastic measures make more sense.

I honestly think that the ending of the Iraq war is paramount to our economy....way more than giving people an extra $1000 to spend at the mall.

I agree with you about ending the Iraq war. It's a huge expense and we need to get it under control.

Why do you assume I'm against "after school ghetto programs"? I'd rather see the Department of Education dissolved and turn that over to each individual state. Get rid of the Endowment of the Arts. Get rid of PBS. Show commercials during Sesame Street and the money would be huge.

[il Padrino Ute]

you should actually become an official tax protester. Start filing those zeroed-out 1040s and see how many years before they call you on it.

I'm against taxes, but I'm not willing to get myself in trouble for not paying them. I'd rather send them a check that bounces.

[TripletDaddy]

Why do you assume I'm against "after school ghetto programs"?

I just assumed so because you were wearing this t shirt when we ate lunch.

[il Padrino Ute]

I just assumed so because you were wearing this t shirt when we ate lunch.

Well, of course I did. But that doesn't mean I believe it. It's like the Quest for Perfection shirt you were wearing.

[venkman]

ps venkman, you are correct about not being a lapdog. didnt mean to imply that you were a card carrier. apologies. i refuse to apologize to epu, though.

No apology necessary, but thanks. We'll just have to disagree about whether this is a left-wing agenda thing. IMO the Republicans have abandoned their small government principles, so just because some of this "stimulus" bill comes from the GOP doesn't mean it's conservative. At least that's how I see it.

[il Padrino Ute]

No apology necessary. We'll just have to disagree about whether this is a left-wing agenda thing. IMO the Republicans have abandoned their small government principles, so just because some of this "stimulus" bill comes from the GOP doesn't mean it's conservative. At least that's how I see it.

Correct. Today's GOP is not conservative.