• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

First off I want to point out that adding new monies into an already deteriorating economy does nothing but drive inflation up causing the value of the American dollar to decrease. Instead of giving billions of dollars in bailout monies to the auto makers, who by the way are already filing for bankruptcy because of the apparent lack of money management skills shown by those companies' CEO's, why don't the government set up a new automobile purchase stimulus for every American of legal age? I'm not talking about the "Cash for Clunkers" and other "incentives" obama has set forth. I'm talking about a down-payment stimulus which would cover the first let's say $7,500 towards the purchase of a new American made automobile. By implementing a stimulus such as this you would accomplish 2 major things. First, the money would immediately go towards the automobile company's sales by allowing the purchase of thousands of new vehicles, instead of giving the money to the company to continue to pay $60+/hr for line workers and allow the CEO's to continue to give themselves millions of dollars in bonuses. Second, this would allow the American citizens the opportunity to purchase a new, reliable, American made automobile without having to worry about a 23-25% interest rate. Also this would allow the average American worker who isn't fortunate enough, even by working 60+ hours a week or having to work 2 jobs just to survive, to have $2,500 for a down payment and high monthly payments the opportunity to purchase a reliable vehicle to allow them to continue to show up at work every day.

I understand that would equate to a lot of money, even more-so than the $9 billion sent to GM, but why not use the "borrowed" money to actually help the American citizen instead of helping rich CEO's who can't manage a company's money properly??? Makes sense to me.

Another thing about this new $79.9 billion stimulus for war funding.....Didn't obama promise to bring our troops home saying that we are fighting a war that we shouldn't be involved in? Now he wants to continue to drive the already horrifying national debt up even more to support a war he opposed in the first place? I understand it takes time to get our troops home, however, if our "beloved" government is going to continue to borrow money for stimulus plans, let's use that money on something that will actually help our economy and stop trying to bully the rest of the world. $36.1 billion is being approved to help fight the flu, buy military cargo planes, and provide food and financial aid to poor countries. We have hundreds of thousands of homeless and starving American citizens here in the States, why not use that $36.1 billion to help our own citizens out? Maybe I should take my last $3.00 from my paycheck, and instead of buying a loaf of bread I should send it to a poor family over seas and let my family go hungry?

The average American is not as ignorant to our economic crisis as one may think, as stated in a previous post. Just because the percentage of Americans holding a college degree is relatively low, doesn't mean one is ignorant to what is going on. You don't have to be an intellectual genius to have common sense, which proves to be more of a factor than normal intelligence. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the American dollar is decreasing in value every time a new stimulus package is introduced into our economy, all you have to do is take a look at the increasing prices at the grocery store. Package of bologna in 2004 -$.50 , package of bologna in 2009 - $2.00 . We are helping our government make excuses for their actions, allowing 545 people with decision making powers to create a tyranny over the mind of our citizens, all the while putting millions in their pockets. As far as the "uneducated and uninformed" not always making the decisions with the best interest for our country goes, as we all can tell, the 545 "knowledgeable" people in control of making decisions for our country obviously haven't been making decisions with the best interest of our country in mind or we wouldn't be in this economical crisis...... In every election, there are 2 primary parties, one of which HAS to win the election, therefore you can't blame the American voters for our corrupt government that makes decisions based on pay-offs, look at the health-care system who paid off numerous government officials including the president when Hillary Clinton pressed for a reformed health plan. The majority of 300+ million, or the majority of 545, who do you think will make the better choices?
 
As far as cold hard facts go, our government tells the American people what they want us to know. We as American citizens are afraid of our government, that's why we do nothing about it. We can't stand up without the fear of being place in jail or being heavily fined.

"When the government fears the people, you have liberty. When the people fear the government, or irs for that matter, you have tyranny" (Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence of the United States)
 
I'm not sure that means much when you have a history of making up your own criteria.

So instead of engaging me you make up things and expect it as a good rebuttal. Most economists didn't see this coming, and their solution is what caused the problem. It doesn't take much to see that if most economists agree on a solution that is no different from what we've been doing that it's probably wrong.

Their solution? Really? This mess's severity was caused principally by leverage purchases of securitized mortgages. If financials had merely done equity purchases, we would not be in this mess. And don't even bother with CRA loans. Materiality alone negates their impact.

But why were those done? Could it be inflation and artificially low interest rates? No wayyyyyyyyyyyyy.
 
The average American knows nothing about economics, so that 45% doesn't mean much.
You go ahead and keep worshiping and polishing that turd. We know it's crap, and I hope Obama's policies fail.
 
So instead of engaging me you make up things and expect it as a good rebuttal.

Doesn't that make you a hypocrite? Especially in the thread about Chaebols, Ziabatsus and the German Railroad, where you defines evidence to mean whatever you wanted it to be and that specific circumstances on the ground are irrelevant to a discussion about highly specific historical events? :rofl

Most economists didn't see this coming, and their solution is what caused the problem. It doesn't take much to see that if most economists agree on a solution that is no different from what we've been doing that it's probably wrong.

Solution? You do know that many of the economists haven't given an solution? Just reading the data as to when the recession has ended?

But why were those done? Could it be inflation and artificially low interest rates? No wayyyyyyyyyyyyy.

I wasn't aware that the government forced them to engage in those behaviors. Remember, it was the management of companies who made bad decisions. Why aren't you blaming them?
 
Only net tax-payers and veterans should be allowed to vote. Net tax-consumers get to vote when they stop leaching off the system.

Works for me.

It makes no sense that people that don't pay taxes are allowed to vote themselves money from the treasury.
 
An incredibly elitist sentiment. For one thing, most Americans are educated and only need to be minimally informed to make a decision.

Yeah, we noticed. The Messiah got elected on the basis of the least informed most educated populace the world has ever seen.
 
As far as cold hard facts go, our government tells the American people what they want us to know. We as American citizens are afraid of our government, that's why we do nothing about it. We can't stand up without the fear of being place in jail or being heavily fined.

"When the government fears the people, you have liberty. When the people fear the government, or irs for that matter, you have tyranny" (Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence of the United States)

Did Thomas Jefferson really single out the IRS?

That's pretty amazing.
 
We've noticed. The Messiah got elected, remember?

Indeed. More telling is the incumbency rate in America. We keep electing crooks and people who give us the shaft. Congress rarely sees major shifts, especially now that we have a defacto one party system. Does the mass of voters realize this? I'm betting not. The last election's third party aggregate vote was negligible.
 
The average American knows nothing about economics, so that 45% doesn't mean much.

Your average Democrat politician is clueless about economics which is why they cannot balance a budget; so I guess their opinions don't mean much either?
 
And this is why democracy sucks. The uninformed, uneducated will make decisions that are not always in the best interests of the country. Remember that that hard, necessary decisions are rarely the popular ones. Thus, the uneducated, uninformed who perceive such decisions to be bad will vote against them in election and we'd be worse off in the long run. While I disagree that we should just outright ignore the population, others have made convincing arguments that letting the masses decide policy by electing candidates who disagree will likely lead to poor outcomes, hence why democracy sucks, at least in America.

There you have it folks, Democracy sucks, well at least in America, so this begs the question from our forum Economic and Political “wiz” kid; where does Democracy NOT suck as much?

If Democracy is such a bad idea, what should we replace it with; a despotic regime? How about a dictatorship or a theocracy? Maybe Communism would work better; anything is better that doesn’t require all those dumb people to vote right OC?

:rofl
 
Your average Democrat politician is clueless about economics which is why they cannot balance a budget; so I guess their opinions don't mean much either?

Let's not forget about Bush and the other Republicans during his term who also voted to expand the budget. Those politicians don't know much about economics either.
 
Let's not forget about Bush and the other Republicans during his term who also voted to expand the budget. Those politicians don't know much about economics either.

WRONG; you forgot why they spent the money. Let’s remember why: they voted to spend money to deal with devastation of post 9-11, they voted to spend money fighting two wars in the ME and they voted to spend money to help the Democrat controlled city of New Orleans after their Democrat politicians failed their citizens after it was devastated by hurricane Katrina.

That stated, also while Republicans were in charge the deficit was decreasing but then expanded greatly after Democrats once more took control.

Let's also remember that the ONLY congress to balance a budget in the last FIVE decades was a REPUBLICAN controlled congress.

:2wave:
 
^^No Child Left Behind? The new medicare spending bill? Faith-based initiatives? Come on, Bush was not a small-government proponent in the slightest.
 
^^No Child Left Behind? The new medicare spending bill? Faith-based initiatives? Come on, Bush was not a small-government proponent in the slightest.

What did No Child Left Behind or Faith Based initiatives cost?

New Medicare drug reform act? Yes that was one with which I didn't agree; but let's recap, $200 billion deficit versus over $1.8 TRILLION.....what were you saying about Bush and BIG Government? :doh
 
^^I'm not defending Obama even slightly, but we can't say that the Republicans were perfect either.
 
^^I'm not defending Obama even slightly, but we can't say that the Republicans were perfect either.

I don't think you would ever, nor will you ever, see me claim that Republicans are perfect. NO one is perfect; unless of course you are God.

So what does all this have to do with me pointing out the FACTS regarding Bush's spending that I illustrated?
 
There you have it folks, Democracy sucks, well at least in America, so this begs the question from our forum Economic and Political “wiz” kid; where does Democracy NOT suck as much?

If Democracy is such a bad idea, what should we replace it with; a despotic regime? How about a dictatorship or a theocracy? Maybe Communism would work better; anything is better that doesn’t require all those dumb people to vote right OC?

:rofl

One must wonder if you can read properly.

Notice why I said democracy in America sucks. Keywords: uneducated, uninformed. Furthermore, in the thread I also stated mitigation to alleviate these two.

I can provide a dictionary if you need it. History clearly shows you do need a dictionary on a regular basis to help you understand words such as "loan" and "bad" and "once."
 
One must wonder if you can read properly.

Notice why I said democracy in America sucks. Keywords: uneducated, uninformed. Furthermore, in the thread I also stated mitigation to alleviate these two.

I can provide a dictionary if you need it. History clearly shows you do need a dictionary on a regular basis to help you understand words such as "loan" and "bad" and "once."

What irony coming from someone who can't answer even the most simplistic questions...your inability to comprehend exceeds your blatant and uninformed arrogance.....here let me try again:

Where does Democracy NOT suck as much?

So it begs another question; let's test you to see how informed you are; did you vote in the last election? If so, who did you vote for and why did you vote for them?
 
I don't think you would ever, nor will you ever, see me claim that Republicans are perfect. NO one is perfect; unless of course you are God.

So what does all this have to do with me pointing out the FACTS regarding Bush's spending that I illustrated?

Let's not forget about Bush and the other Republicans during his term who also voted to expand the budget. Those politicians don't know much about economics either.

Because you only pointed out Democrat politicians when it's both that know nothing about economics.
 
What irony coming from someone who can't answer even the most simplistic questions...your inability to comprehend exceeds your blatant and uninformed arrogance.....here let me try again:

Where does Democracy NOT suck as much?

And you'd have your answer if you actually read what I wrote. But I fully realize that's too damn hard for you.

Hint: it has to do with the two terms I posted.

So it begs another question; let's test you to see how informed you are; did you vote in the last election? If so, who did you vote for and why did you vote for them?

Barr. Because I agree with more of his positions than Obama/McCain. Furthermore, a third party, or more accurately, a second party as the GOP/Dems are fundamentally the same thing, is the only real way we can get decent leadership.
 
Back
Top Bottom