• 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!

GOP leaders doubt stimulus bill will pass Senate

I don't blame Obama, I don't blame the GOP, I blame the House Dems. There is a LOT of unnecessary spending on this bill.

One of the few things I agree with McCain on is what he said to CNN's John King on King's program "State of the Union."

McCain stated "Many of the policy changes they put in have nothing to do with stimulating the economy and everything to do with their agenda which they're unable to get through." Maybe, maybe not. But what he said next was real genius:

"But, at times, you put things together because of the efficiency of getting something done."

The official article:

McConnell says GOP trying to 'reform' bill, not block it - CNN.com

Wow, I completely agree with that. Dems are not thinking straight. Honestly if the bill passes as it is, I won't have a huge problem with it, but I still think it needs revising.

And I side with the Dems most of the time, goes to show Nancy that many American liberals don't appreciate "money-throwing."
 
This bill is the Democrats' Patriot Act -- ushered in during a time of crisis while they demand it be passed quickly and with little to no debate, pushing things unrelated to the crisis at hand while vastly expanding the authority of government.

The difference, of course, is that the Patriot Act can be repealed tomorrow (why isn't that on the agenda?) and its ill effects will be alleviated immediately. If this monstrosity passes and the money is borrowed and spent, we'll be living with it for decades.
 
This bill is the Democrats' Patriot Act -- ushered in during a time of crisis while they demand it be passed quickly and with little to no debate, pushing things unrelated to the crisis at hand while vastly expanding the authority of government.
Which is exactly why there is nothing wrong with hoping it, and then, by extension, Obama, will fail -- the long-term damage from this package is far greater than doing nothing.
 
Could you tell me what I highlighted in red has anything to do with "stimulous"?

Originally Posted by WillRockwell

1 - $38 billion to reduce States' share of Medicaid costs
2 - $25 billion in loans to the auto industry
3 - tax deductions on new car purchases retroactive to November 2008
4 - $22 billion in loans for small businesses
5 - 10% increase in food stamp benefits
6 - $13.5 billion for highways, bridges, mass transit, airports and AMTRAK
7 - $2.5 billion for school repairs
8 - $1billion for border security
9 - 500 million to hire new police nationwide
10 - community disaster loans for 50% of pre-storm revenue

The things you highlited in red all represent works programs which require the hiring of personel...people being put to work. Why is this not obvious?
 
Well that is the question. After all the "depression" started during a Republican president. In fact there is growing evidence that the downturn started already in middle of 2007 but if you remember the Republicans at the time and far far into the presidential election, claimed the economy was great. Does not exactly show a great sense of reality or the situation at hand.

The question is how long a memory the American people have and how good the Dems are in remind the American people on who got them into this mess.

All I see now is the Republican's playing the classic game of being against everything and not willing to actually come up with a plan to save the US economy from the mess they (and others of course) created. The only thing they are willing to come up with is "tax cuts".. which is insane unless there are deep deep cuts in spending, including military, but no Republican will go that far, and any cuts in Government spending will not help the economic situation.
That's a classic Democrat plan we saw all through the last 8 years. I guess that's the way it works, eh?
 
Besides, the Republicans HAVE proposed plans.
 
:lol: how many "personel"?


Please do tell.

Are you lol'ing my spelling? I never knew how to spell that word. People will be hired, ok? That constitutes, as you would say, "stimulous"
 
Last edited:
Are you lol'ing my spelling? I never knew how to spell that word. People will be hired, ok?

By what mechanism, in which of the items you quoted?
 
Are you lol'ing my spelling? I never knew how to spell that word. People will be hired, ok? That constitutes, as you would say, "stimulous"




No I am worse.... My spelling sucks... .


I am laughing at how many jobs you think my highligts would create.


How many was that again?
 
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
do me a BIG favor; show me with credible evidence where a Nation's Government has borrowed and spent it's way out of a recession.

Okay, here you are in a nutshell. America bailed out Mexico in 1995, another Democratic move that transpired despite warnings of failure from Republicans. It worked, and it only cost $52 billion.

"By most criteria Mr. Clinton's decision to act as lender of last resort has apparently paid off. While Mexico's recession has been deeper than expected and unemployment remains punishingly high, exports have surged. And in spite of pessimistic predictions from critics of the bailout, Mexico has managed to refinance the short-term debts that led it to the brink of default without exhausting its line of credit with the United States Treasury."
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS;A Payoff for Clinton's Helping Hand to Mexico - New York Times

My comment was on a nation’s economy and its internal printing of money and internal borrowing to spend its way out of a recession. Citing Mexico and the loan America made to them as an example is quite humorous actually.

I guess you missed this part:

"While Mexico's recession has been deeper than expected and unemployment remains punishingly high...."

Under-employment in Mexico is pegged at 25% while their official unemployment rates have been rising steadily since 2000.

Unemployment rate: 3.7% plus underemployment of perhaps 25% (2007 est.)

Mexico Unemployment rate - Economy
Mexico - Unemployment rate - Historical Data Graphs per Year

And you missed this part:

Mexico Annual Inflation Rate Rises to Seven-Year High
Mexico’s annual inflation rate last month rose to the highest level in more than seven years as costs rose for electricity, tomatoes and beef.

Consumer prices rose 6.23 percent in November from a year earlier, the most since June 2001, the central bank said on its Web site. Costs increased 1.14 percent in November from a month earlier, the highest one-month increase since January 2000. Core prices climbed 0.5 percent from October.

The inflation results were in line with the median estimates compiled by Bloomberg in surveys of economists, who forecast monthly inflation of 1.12 percent and an annual rate of 6.22 percent.

The peso fell 0.49 percent to 13.4995 per dollar at 10:35 a.m. New York time from 13.4337 late yesterday. The Mexican currency has fallen 19 percent since Oct. 1.

Mexico Annual Inflation Rate Rises to Seven-Year High

Now with that stated, please tell me how the Government spending us into a two trillion deficit with NO way or plan to pay for it with higher taxes is a “good” thing and will lead to economic prosperity and where similar attempts have led to success?
 
By: David A. Patten


Article Font Size








Having trouble putting down that cigarette? The stimulus bill has $75 million for programs to help people quit smoking. Only 42 percent of Americans now think the bill is a good idea, according to Rasmussen Reports, which had found 45 percent approval last week. (AP Photo)

The $1.17 trillion stimulus bill passed by House Democrats on Wednesday bears little resemblance to the bill originally proposed by President Obama, with less than 5 percent of the funds now going to repair America’s deteriorating infrastructure.

GOP critics point out the bill is loaded with tens of billions for items ranging from Amtrak subsidies to sexually transmitted diseases to the National Endowment for the Arts -- much of which won’t actually flow into the economy until long after economists expect the current economic crisis to subside.

In late November, Obama promised: “It will be a two-year, nationwide effort to jumpstart job creation in America, and lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy. We’ll put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges,” modernizing schools and stimulating development of alternative forms of energy.

Even some Democrats are now objecting that the measure contains too few highway and mass transit projects. Moreover Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Economy.com, says most of the infrastructure spending in the plan won’t occur until 2010 or later.

Provisions of the bill that many legislators are questioning:

· $1 billion for Amtrak, which hasn’t earned a profit in four decades.

· $2 billion to help subsidize child care.

· $400 million for research into global warming.

· $2.4 billion for projects to demonstrate how carbon greenhouse gas can be safely removed from the atmosphere.

· $650 million for coupons to help consumers convert their TV sets from analog to digital, part of the digital TV conversion.

· $600 million to buy a new fleet of cars for federal employees and government departments.

· $75 million to fund programs to help people quit smoking.

· $21 million to re-sod the National Mall, which suffered heavy use during the Inauguration.

· $2.25 billion for national parks. This item has sparked calls for an investigation, because the chief lobbyist of the National Parks Association is the son of Rep. David R. Obey, D-Wisc. The $2,25 billion is about equal to the National Park Service’s entire annual budget. The Washington Times reports it is a threefold increase over what was originally proposed for parks in the stimulus bill. Obey is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.

· $335 million for treatment and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases.

· $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts. $4.19 billion to stave off foreclosures via the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. The bill allows nonprofits to compete with cities and states for $3.44 billion of the money, which means a substantial amount of it will be captured by ACORN, the controversial activist group currently under federal investigation for vote fraud. Another $750 million would be exclusively reserved for nonprofits such as ACORN – meaning cities and states are barred from receiving that money. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., charges the money could appear to be a “payoff” for the partisan political activities community groups in the last election cycle.

· $44 million to renovate the headquarters building of the Agriculture Department.

· $32 billion for a “smart electricity grid to minimize waste.

· $87 billion of Medicaid funds, to aid states.

· $53.4 billion for science facilities, high speed Internet, and miscellaneous energy and environmental programs.

· $13 billion to repair and weatherize public housing, help the homeless, repair foreclosed homes.

· $20 billion for quicker depreciation and write-offs for equipment.

· $10.3 billion for tax credits to help families defray the cost of college tuition.

· $20 billion over five years for an expanded food stamp program.

Republican leaders say the stimulus package will add 32 new government programs at a cost of $136 billion. They object that many of the programs, once established, are likely to continue indefinitely.

Most media outlets are reporting the cost of the package at $819 billion. As Newsmax revealed yesterday, however, the Congressional Budget Office calculates that the interest on the debt generated by the bill’s spending will cost another $347.1 billion, making the total cost approximately $1.17 trillion.

Of course, the measure contains hundreds of billions in tax cuts and infrastructure projects that conservatives will find palatable. But as House Minority whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., told the media Wednesday, “This was not a stimulus bill. It was a spending bill.”
 
Of course, the measure contains hundreds of billions in tax cuts and infrastructure projects that conservatives will find palatable. But as House Minority whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., told the media Wednesday, “This was not a stimulus bill. It was a spending bill.”

Great post, but I want to address this part in particular; no Conservative supports these tax giveaways. They are hardly as much a tax cut as they are a re-distribution of wealth.

Most of these tax rebates are non-refundable tax credits to people who pay NO taxes and have zero tax liabilities.

Tax cuts are one thing, but just cutting people a check because they meet some arbitrary Government income threshold is wrong.

The final analysis, many will get what amounts to less than $100 dollars a month. Is there anyone here who thinks this will spur economic recovery, spending or job growth?
 
Back
Top Bottom