Obama, Senate reach deal on economic stimulus package

[81artmonk]

Laugh if you must but he's still wrong, because its not so much about deficit spending as it is jobs creation and putting people to work, which Bush failed to do.

So sodding the memorial lawn, and building shelters for hookers and making money availible for alternative fuel cars, and money for preventing STD's is going to create jobs?? :doh:

Here's the problem. Some of it will create jobs........temporary ones. Not long term job creation. So for the short term, people will be working, but by the time Obama is out of office or maybe even sooner, those jobs will be gone.

It's like putting a band-aid over your wound from having your leg amputated. It may do some good....may, but in the long term, it only delays the inevitable!

[AsburySkinsFan]

Oh I completely agree. Bush spent the money on the war, while Obama wants to give money to people who got us into this mess to begin with.

However, my point was, when Bush spent, it was bad, now that it's Obama it's alright. just trying to point out the double standard.

Umm, you apparently aren't paying attention, because no where did I say that spending was a bad thing, my complaint especially regarding my Senator Mitch McConnell is that he thinks just like you are claiming that I think only opposite; i.e. When Bush spent it was OK, but now that Obama is spending its all bad and he fakes his outrage by trying to explain just how much a trillion dollars is when it was his party's president that ran up a trillion dollar deficit in one year, and yet now all the sudden he's an economic hawk...please.

I don't have a problem with gov't spending, remember I'm not a Conservative, and my issue was never that Bush spent, but what he spent it on. Oh, and BTW, it was Bush who handed over $350 billion to the bankers who got us into this trouble not Obama. Just so you get the facts right.

[AsburySkinsFan]

So sodding the memorial lawn, and building shelters for hookers and making money availible for alternative fuel cars, and money for preventing STD's is going to create jobs?? :doh:

So you don't think that resodding the memorial lawn and building shelters will put people to work? You don't think money should be spent to create jobs that will make cars that help reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Oh and we shouldn't be trying to prevent STDs? All of these things put money into people's pockets and employ people, who then...and here's where it gets important...they spend it.

Here's the problem. Some of it will create jobs........temporary ones. Not long term job creation. So for the short term, people will be working, but by the time Obama is out of office or maybe even sooner, those jobs will be gone.

Yeah, I heard the GOP chairman talk about this same thing this morning, and here's where I don't get the GOPers, first on the Hill they scream that this is a new spending bill designed for long term spending and now the GOP chair says that it doesn't create long term jobs; i.e. its a stimulus bill. So what do you want to be angry about? Do you want it to be a spending bill or a stimulus package...keep in mind that a stimulus package is just that, a package meant to stimulate the economy not sustain it. The GOP really needs to re-evaluate their attack because they are sounding a bit bi-polar...but I surely do commend you on running their talking points for them.

It's like putting a band-aid over your wound from having your leg amputated. It may do some good....may, but in the long term, it only delays the inevitable!

Stimulus package...just keep repeating it.

[81artmonk]

Umm, you apparently aren't paying attention, because no where did I say that spending was a bad thing, my complaint especially regarding my Senator Mitch McConnell is that he thinks just like you are claiming that I think only opposite; i.e. When Bush spent it was OK, but now that Obama is spending its all bad and he fakes his outrage by trying to explain just how much a trillion dollars is when it was his party's president that ran up a trillion dollar deficit in one year, and yet now all the sudden he's an economic hawk...please.

I don't have a problem with gov't spending, remember I'm not a Conservative, and my issue was never that Bush spent, but what he spent it on. Oh, and BTW, it was Bush who handed over $350 billion to the bankers who got us into this trouble not Obama. Just so you get the facts right.

I agree with the Bush comment. I didn't like it either. I think it's wrong than and I think it's wrong now. bad idea. let the market correct itself. To through this kind of money at a problem that most experts say will not work is foolish.

not to say dangerous

[81artmonk]

So you don't think that resodding the memorial lawn and building shelters will put people to work? You don't think money should be spent to create jobs that will make cars that help reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Oh and we shouldn't be trying to prevent STDs? All of these things put money into people's pockets and employ people, who then...and here's where it gets important...they spend it.

Yeah, I heard the GOP chairman talk about this same thing this morning, and here's where I don't get the GOPers, first on the Hill they scream that this is a new spending bill designed for long term spending and now the GOP chair says that it doesn't create long term jobs; i.e. its a stimulus bill. So what do you want to be angry about? Do you want it to be a spending bill or a stimulus package...keep in mind that a stimulus package is just that, a package meant to stimulate the economy not sustain it. The GOP really needs to re-evaluate their attack because they are sounding a bit bi-polar...but I surely do commend you on running their talking points for them.

Stimulus package...just keep repeating it.

Don't misunderstand me. I don't want either. Paying someone for a few months to re-sod the lawn isn't helping the problem. It's like throwing rocks at godzilla, it's distracting him but isn't stopping him.

I think IMO this whole package is worthless and won't do anything to correct the problem. They need to just let it alone and let the whole thing correct itself.

[GibbsFactor]

Anyone thinking our national debt won't approach $10 trillion by the end of this current Presidential term is not living in reality.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Don't misunderstand me. I don't want either. Paying someone for a few months to re-sod the lawn isn't helping the problem. It's like throwing rocks at godzilla, it's distracting him but isn't stopping him.

I think IMO this whole package is worthless and won't do anything to correct the problem. They need to just let it alone and let the whole thing correct itself.

The problem is that this isn't a "market problem" I posted an article earlier about what the real problem is, and it is much larger than just a market downturn because there are external factors that are pushing this, and those factors are the derivatives that are being paid out in the tens of billions to hedge fund investors who were betting that the mortgage securities would fail, and when they did these investors just had to wait for their insurance policy to pay out, this is why companies like AIG got nailed and why there are so many banks that are getting killed, until something is done with these derivative payments then this problem is not going to go away because the banks and corporations are all turtling up while there are still trillions of dollars of derivative policies that are just waiting for more people to default on their loans thereby busting up another mortgage security. The only way to keep this from happening is to stop the derivative payments or keep the mortgages from defaulting which means making sure that people stay working.