Sign this petition

[Sinister Fiero]

Say no to the porkulus bill they are trying to ram thru congress. Hell, only 4% of this "stimulus" bill is set to be distributed within the next 2 years. What good is that going to do? We still have 1/2 of last year's TARP bill money sitting and doing nothing right now. 2 chimps and a trainee could run congress AND the white house better than this current bunch.

http://nostimulus.com/

[The Dark Side of Will]

Did you watch the Presidential news conference last night?

Can you put on paper a thoroughly reasoned argument against the stimulus bill?

I'm not sure if I'm for or against at this point; I just want to play devil's advocate a little bit and see what people are thinking.

[p8ntman442]

BOA got 40B in the last package.
They loaned out 19B to a big international company
The big company made a hugh merger with the money and is now cutting even more jobs.

[DiggityBiggity]

Stimulus = Hyper Inflation

These corporations who are being "bailed out" should just GO UNDER. This isn't free market economics, it's protectionism. The government, first of all, has no money to be giving these corporations. The jerk offs in congress are writing a 800 BILLION $ check on OUR FUTURE tax payments. Tell me... without manufacturing in this country, how will we ever pay that back? We won't...

Also, these fucking corporations who are getting the money aren't investing ANY of it into The United States, they're researching FOREIGN countries to put the money into. When is anyone going to realize that these multi-national corporations no longer have a care for our country, and only care about profits. They're going to continue to rape our country, since they've bought off the politicians (ex. Dick Cheney being VP of Halliburton before becoming VP of The United States)

The United States is only furthering the devaluation of it's currency should we pass this "stimulus" bill. If they want to "bail" anyone out, they should be bailing out the homeowners who were lent to in a predatory way, and let the banks who tried to take advantage of them go under. If anyone is worried about that meaning more job losses, that is only a temporary thing, until the next bank or loan company takes their place with more responsible fiscal leadership... or else, you know what... they go out of business too, until another company takes their place, it's called the free market.. let it function.

Stimulus = Death of The United States dollar... and riots in the street... no food on our shelves... and 1st worst to 3rd world Banana Republic...

Obama knows this, Bush and his cabinet knew this... Clinton, H.W., Ray-Gun, Carter... and so on... Ever since we went off the gold standard... ever since we allowed private banking institutions to take over the distribution of our currency (1913 and the Federal Reserve) This was inevitable.

If they pass this bill... and even if they don't... The United States is in for some really tough times... 9 - 12 months from now, your dollar bills will be useless, except to wipe your ass with them... period.

Buy silver... buy gold... buy water filters... buy food... and most importantly, buy guns and ammo to protect them all...

Hold on to your hats, this ride is about to get bumpy

[EBSB52]

Say no to the porkulus bill they are trying to ram thru congress. Hell, only 4% of this "stimulus" bill is set to be distributed within the next 2 years. What good is that going to do? We still have 1/2 of last year's TARP bill money sitting and doing nothing right now. 2 chimps and a trainee could run congress AND the white house better than this current bunch.

http://nostimulus.com/

Right, let's just let the market correct itself, buy a fleet of trucks to pick up the dead bodies from starvation ala the Great Depression and move on. You guys come off as bright as followers of Ralph Nader....get about the same votes too!!! You gotta have answers for issues, not just ignore and let em fix themselves. When your cars make noises, do you just let them fix themselves? Apparently...and what happens; a tiny chirping noise truns into a clunk, then a bang and you're walking. Show me once where lazze fare (sp?) economics have worked in a recession, let alone a serious and deep recession as now.

[DiggityBiggity]

I gave you a solution. If you're going to do a bailout, bailout the tax payers who will be paying for this in the future anyway. Give it to the people who NEED it, the people who are losing their houses, not the corporations and mortgage companies who took us here in the first place.

[Sinister Fiero]

Right, let's just let the market correct itself, buy a fleet of trucks to pick up the dead bodies from starvation ala the Great Depression and move on. You guys come off as bright as followers of Ralph Nader....get about the same votes too!!! You gotta have answers for issues, not just ignore and let em fix themselves. When your cars make noises, do you just let them fix themselves? Apparently...and what happens; a tiny chirping noise truns into a clunk, then a bang and you're walking. Show me once where lazze fare (sp?) economics have worked in a recession, let alone a serious and deep recession as now.

Well your almighty senate just passed their version of the porkulus bill. In it is a provision that establishes a NATIONAL HEALTH CARE COMMITEE. This commitee will be charged with reviewing all government-funded heath care cases. This will give the government the power to come in to your doctor's office and DECIDE FOR YOU whether or not you get the needed treatment. This means if you are 75 years old and need a liver transplant covered under gov't healthcare, YOU CAN BE DENIED TREATMENT due to any reason THEY come up with (age, need, etc).

EBS: be careful what you ask for. One morning you are going to wake up and have your freedoms stripped from you. I don't know how you can sit there and say this is a good thing. But keep in mind every time the government pays for something, they TAKE IT OVER. GM's bailout by the government has just forced them to layoff 10,000 white collar positions due to bailout terms. I'm sure you will think this if fine since they are white collar jobs....BUT WAIT UNTIL IT HAPPENS TO YOU.

Jesus people, have you no knowledge of history? This has been tried and failed back in 1930. The government spent, spent, and spent for nearly that entire decade and all that spending DID NOT pull our economy out of the depression. You know what did? WW2 and war production.



WILL: I don't want this stupid bill to pass because it will DO NOTHING to stimulate the economy. Only 4% of the spending it contains is due to be spent within the next 2 years. What F'ing good will that do? 4 some BILLION dollars in this bill is slated to go to A.C.O.R.N. How is that going to stimulate the economy? This is why I don't support this bill. And my point will be proven soon. After this bill gets signed into law by our fraud of a president, in a few months he is going to come back and say we need to spend more money because this was not enough. YOU WATCH.


I never thought I would live to see LIBERTY die. But that is what is happening in this country now.

[p8ntman442]

I never thought I would live to see LIBERTY die. But that is what is happening in this country now.

Grab some popcorn and buy up shares in winchester before tax returns come out.

[AkursedX]

Jesus people, have you no knowledge of history? This has been tried and failed back in 1930. The government spent, spent, and spent for nearly that entire decade and all that spending DID NOT pull our economy out of the depression. You know what did? WW2 and war production.

This is the scary part to me. Another world war would not pull us out like it did the great depression. We don't need mass-production of tanks and planes and guns and supplies like we did in WWII. The wars of today are not fought like that. So what is going to pull us out of this one?? I don't know.

[EBSB52]

I gave you a solution. If you're going to do a bailout, bailout the tax payers who will be paying for this in the future anyway. Give it to the people who NEED it, the people who are losing their houses, not the corporations and mortgage companies who took us here in the first place.

I'm totally in agreement. It seems that most people are still under the idea that supply side works or lazze fare works when history has clearly established they don't. BTW, taxpayers won't pay for this, thsi will never be paid for, it is just a running tally, but let's be human about this and let people have luxuries like houses, cars, food and heat.

[EBSB52]

Right, let's just let the market correct itself, buy a fleet of trucks to pick up the dead bodies from starvation ala the Great Depression and move on. You guys come off as bright as followers of Ralph Nader....get about the same votes too!!! You gotta have answers for issues, not just ignore and let em fix themselves. When your cars make noises, do you just let them fix themselves? Apparently...and what happens; a tiny chirping noise truns into a clunk, then a bang and you're walking. Show me once where lazze fare (sp?) economics have worked in a recession, let alone a serious and deep recession as now.

.

Well your almighty senate just passed their version of the porkulus bill. In it is a provision that establishes a NATIONAL HEALTH CARE COMMITEE. This commitee will be charged with reviewing all government-funded heath care cases. This will give the government the power to come in to your doctor's office and DECIDE FOR YOU whether or not you get the needed treatment. This means if you are 75 years old and need a liver transplant covered under gov't healthcare, YOU CAN BE DENIED TREATMENT due to any reason THEY come up with (age, need, etc).

Assuming you're right about this, I ahven't looked at the bill, then your assertion is that that's worse than the current system where corporations make those decisions? Watch teh Rainmaker. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119978/ Think that's Hollywood? That's reality. With corporatiosn having bilked the US, I would think people would realize fascist, corporatist ideals were defunct; the voters figured it out, at least most of them.

EBS: be careful what you ask for. One morning you are going to wake up and have your freedoms stripped from you. I don't know how you can sit there and say this is a good thing. But keep in mind every time the government pays for something, they TAKE IT OVER. GM's bailout by the government has just forced them to layoff 10,000 white collar positions due to bailout terms. I'm sure you will think this if fine since they are white collar jobs....BUT WAIT UNTIL IT HAPPENS TO YOU.

I'd like to read those terms rather than to take a reitteration several times over to fit teh needs of soemone's argument. As well, white collar folks, some of them, esp management types, do little for national GDP, time for some soft-handed pussies to get dirty and get callouses. I'd need to read more about what you refer. Furthermorte, if teh gov did nothing they would be out anyway.

Wait until what happens to me? Until my pay and beneifts are stripped? Happened when your boy fascist Ronnie took over; were you alive then? I was in the military, I enjoyed all of his shenanigans for the rich. How can you say gov intervention is bad, cite examples and I will counter with far more and far more damaging corporate examples. Someone has to regulate and lead, I'd rather it be an elected official than a corporate officer.

Jesus people, have you no knowledge of history? This has been tried and failed back in 1930. The government spent, spent, and spent for nearly that entire decade and all that spending DID NOT pull our economy out of the depression. You know what did? WW2 and war production.

Let's be comprehensive, 2 terms of Republican high-living for the rich led us into the GD, the third, Hoover, led us thru the intial stages where he continued his idiotic supply side policies. Hoover inherited 3.2% unemp, had the GD fall on him, kept his policies for the rich intact and left 24.9% unemployment for FDR in 1933. FDR took it down every year until 1938 when it jumped from 14.3 to 19%, then fell in 1939 again, essentially a hiccup in a great recovery. Then WWII occurred and government war spending pulled us the rest of the way out. To say FDR's spending and GD recovery did nothing is very neo-con of you, the facts don't support your ideas. http://www.friesian.com/stats.htm

WILL: I don't want this stupid bill to pass because it will DO NOTHING to stimulate the economy. Only 4% of the spending it contains is due to be spent within the next 2 years. What F'ing good will that do? 4 some BILLION dollars in this bill is slated to go to A.C.O.R.N. How is that going to stimulate the economy? This is why I don't support this bill. And my point will be proven soon. After this bill gets signed into law by our fraud of a president, in a few months he is going to come back and say we need to spend more money because this was not enough. YOU WATCH.

I'd like to see that evidence of only 4% spent in the next 2 years, pls post and not your nutty Libertarian site either. When you make wild assertions you need to support them.

I never thought I would live to see LIBERTY die. But that is what is happening in this country now

And the word, "Liberty" is subjecctive, I feel it pertains to criminal prosecutions and police right to search/sieze, etc. You claim it belongs to gov spending, I feel that liberty has been bestowed since the gov, for once, isn't falling all over themselves to onl;y benefit corps.

[EBSB52]

Jesus people, have you no knowledge of history? This has been tried and failed back in 1930. The government spent, spent, and spent for nearly that entire decade and all that spending DID NOT pull our economy out of the depression. You know what did? WW2 and war production.

This is the scary part to me. Another world war would not pull us out like it did the great depression. We don't need mass-production of tanks and planes and guns and supplies like we did in WWII. The wars of today are not fought like that. So what is going to pull us out of this one?? I don't know.

Remember, the production of roads was also part of the deal for FDR. The GD was being dealt with and recovery started before WWII, so to say that only WWII did the job is incorrect. I say production of goods and adaquate taxes for teh rich will keep the countyr moving, all others have tried and failed.

[EBSB52]

As well as the unemployment rate fell every year of FDR's terms but 1, the GDP fell all 4 years of Hoover's term and rose every year of FDR's presidency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp20-40.jpg This is long before WWII, so the assertion that FDR's actions were fruitless is incorrect. GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS THE ANSWER; THEN AND NOW.

[The Dark Side of Will]

As well as the unemployment rate fell every year of FDR's terms but 1, the GDP fell all 4 years of Hoover's term and rose every year of FDR's presidency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp20-40.jpg This is long before WWII, so the assertion that FDR's actions were fruitless is incorrect. GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS THE ANSWER; THEN AND NOW.

You don't know that. You're citing correlation and calling it causation.

The TRUTH of the matter is that WE DON'T KNOW and WE CAN'T KNOW because we don't have any control groups in this social experiment.

If there were a solid body of knowledge for running countries, we wouldn't have failed states like Sudan.

I'm currently building up my own wealth and paying down debt. I'm NOT SPENDING except to pay down debt. Why is the government different?

I know that if no one spent and everyone saved then the depression would get worse and last longer. My take on this economic situation is that this is not a depression. It is a CORRECTION to properly value our economy. Our entire economy is grossly over-valued due to a pervading lack of monetary reserves (savings). The best way out, in this case, is the one that's hardest. That involves a recalibration of our ENTIRE way of thinking about wealth and debt.

The Treasury could very easily perform the function of the Fed in terms of expanding and contracting the money supply, except that to do so the Treasury would be required to keep a huge positive balance. Congress has repeatedly showed that they hate positive balances and will do everyhing in their power to eradicate them.

[DiggityBiggity]

I'm currently building up my own wealth and paying down debt. I'm NOT SPENDING except to pay down debt. Why is the government different?

I know that if no one spent and everyone saved then the depression would get worse and last longer. My take on this economic situation is that this is not a depression. It is a CORRECTION to properly value our economy. Our entire economy is grossly over-valued due to a pervading lack of monetary reserves (savings). The best way out, in this case, is the one that's hardest. That involves a recalibration of our ENTIRE way of thinking about wealth and debt.

The Treasury could very easily perform the function of the Fed in terms of expanding and contracting the money supply, except that to do so the Treasury would be required to keep a huge positive balance. Congress has repeatedly showed that they hate positive balances and will do everyhing in their power to eradicate them.

AMEN!!!

[The Dark Side of Will]

Albert Einstein: "He who understands interest earns it. He who does not, pays it."

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/76863

[EBSB52]

As well as the unemployment rate fell every year of FDR's terms but 1, the GDP fell all 4 years of Hoover's term and rose every year of FDR's presidency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp20-40.jpg This is long before WWII, so the assertion that FDR's actions were fruitless is incorrect. GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS THE ANSWER; THEN AND NOW.

I know that if no one spent and everyone saved then the depression would get worse and last longer. My take on this economic situation is that this is not a depression. It is a CORRECTION to properly value our economy. Our entire economy is grossly over-valued due to a pervading lack of monetary reserves (savings). The best way out, in this case, is the one that's hardest. That involves a recalibration of our ENTIRE way of thinking about wealth and debt.

The Treasury could very easily perform the function of the Fed in terms of expanding and contracting the money supply, except that to do so the Treasury would be required to keep a huge positive balance. Congress has repeatedly showed that they hate positive balances and will do everyhing in their power to eradicate them.

You don't know that. You're citing correlation and calling it causation.

And political science works that way exactly, every time, unlike natural or biological sciences where you can set up an experiment with controls and isolate 1 independent variable. Furthermore in real scince you need for the subjects to be random, in politics this is not possible. Don't posture for the uneducated here, you realize that poilitical science is an after-the-fact assessment unlike other sciences that can tested and retested 1000's of times. All we can do is see which parties and which policies/political philosophies yield which outcome and it seems that those who support losing philosophies claim this, "you can never really tell why that happened" bullshit. Look sicne Reagan, that's when the greatest recent economic changes took place and we had 3 presidents who served 5 of 7 terms, with 1 president serving 2 consecutive terms in the latter middle part of that time who had opposing philosophies. Now, 28 years is a fair sample size, 2 basic opposing principles and let's read the outcome. 5 Republican terms = high and increasing debt, high unemployment, market making moderate gains at best. 2 Dem terms = inherited 7% unemp, left 4% / inherited 290B/yr annual deficit, left 236B surplus / inherited 12 years of 250B/yr debt increase, left 33B his last year. We can go to social benefits of Clinton as well, but you guys seem to have a lack of concern for that so I'll stick to hard numbers. So, carry on your bullshit and correlation and causation and the coherent population will keep voting the delusionals out as we just did.

The TRUTH of the matter is that WE DON'T KNOW and WE CAN'T KNOW because we don't have any control groups in this social experiment.

Yes, that's what I say when the numbers for 28+ years establish my side sucks too. COurt of common sense.

If there were a solid body of knowledge for running countries, we wouldn't have failed states like Sudan.

No one has the golden answer, but supporting garbage like, "Tax cuts, my friends" is idiocy. It's largely what put us here.

I'm currently building up my own wealth and paying down debt. I'm NOT SPENDING except to pay down debt. Why is the government different?

Because you're not responsible for the kid with CF, Cerebral Paulsy or all the other diseases. And if you become ill with those diseases you'll be thankful that you have a gov that cares for you, even tho you despise that aspect now. It's called hypocrisy.


I've gotta go watch the rest of the murder trial, I'll get to the reat later on.

[The Dark Side of Will]

And political science works that way exactly, every time, unlike natural or biological sciences where you can set up an experiment with controls and isolate 1 independent variable. Furthermore in real scince you need for the subjects to be random, in politics this is not possible.

Which is why it's NOT science. All factors can neither be accounted nor modelled.

You want to look at people and put on labels. I think that Abraham Lincoln was a fantastic leader who happened to belong to some political party. From the way you talk, you seem to think that Lincoln was a product of his party and was his party to a higher degree than he was Lincoln. Get over yourself. Congress if full of short sighted fools on both sides of the fence. I'm not saying that one is preferrable to the other. I'm saying that you're wrong when you say that one side is preferrable.

[EBSB52]

And political science works that way exactly, every time, unlike natural or biological sciences where you can set up an experiment with controls and isolate 1 independent variable. Furthermore in real scince you need for the subjects to be random, in politics this is not possible.

.

Which is why it's NOT science. All factors can neither be accounted nor modelled.

Again, just as you don't like the dictionary definition of Imperialism, as it brings your beloved country under a claim that they're less than perfect, political science is termed in such a way as it is a study of politics. If you don't like it, ok, but the masses realize it as a science, not a conventional science, but one that gets studied after the fact a lot. In fact, your hero, GWB said that his presidency will be evaluated 50 years later, or I guess he hopes so. Clinton didn't have to make that assertion, as his presidency was filled with positive economic and social accomplishments.

Political science is a science, kind of a bastardized one, but none the less, a science. If my party ran this fucker into the garbage like yours did, perhaps we would have opposite opinions. So your attempt to say, "hey, it could happen to either party, no way to know how we got here" is ridiculous and you know it. Your party's claim of tax-n-spend is tired and void, the new saying is cut-tax-n-spend, as per the Republicans. Insteacd of trying to demonize the left or deny the ill-doings of the right, redesign your party and try to get back to prominence.

You want to look at people and put on labels.

No I don't, I want to examine the evidence and analyze it for its true merit. Explain how my analysis is incorrect.

I think that Abraham Lincoln was a fantastic leader who happened to belong to some political party. From the way you talk, you seem to think that Lincoln was a product of his party and was his party to a higher degree than he was Lincoln.

Considering he was the first elected representative of his party as a president, I think he exemplified the Republican Party in 1861, not the other way around. Remember, he was a liberal back then, perhaps the most liberal president of all time. But as parties do, they corrupt and over time they became the GOP greedy pigs and threw us into the Great Depression. They were unable to bring us out and fucked away 4 years of teh same shit that got us into the GD, as they just didn't know what else to do. This was the real changing of the guard back then. We had 5 consecutive terms of Dems, the party that saved the country from itself at that time, then entered Eisenhower, the last true Republican conservative, ever since we've had garbage representing the right. And that's not even getting into the yellow-dog Dems of teh south and their transformation. But I do see as how you have to go back a way to find a descent Republican.

Get over yourself. Congress if full of short sighted fools on both sides of the fence. I'm not saying that one is preferrable to the other. I'm saying that you're wrong when you say that one side is preferrable

Get over your revisionism, there are fools on both sides, just that right now most reside on the right. Don't worry, give the left 2 decades, they will switch sides and the right will stop making excuses and start to serve the people once again, instead of getting lost in themselves and their rich electorate. If you want to assert that this mess isn't attributable to the right, for the most part, I would love to read a constructive assessment with supporting facts/data.

[EBSB52]

As well as the unemployment rate fell every year of FDR's terms but 1, the GDP fell all 4 years of Hoover's term and rose every year of FDR's presidency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp20-40.jpg This is long before WWII, so the assertion that FDR's actions were fruitless is incorrect. GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS THE ANSWER; THEN AND NOW.

You don't know that. You're citing correlation and calling it causation.

The TRUTH of the matter is that WE DON'T KNOW and WE CAN'T KNOW because we don't have any control groups in this social experiment.

If there were a solid body of knowledge for running countries, we wouldn't have failed states like Sudan.

I'm currently building up my own wealth and paying down debt. I'm NOT SPENDING except to pay down debt. Why is the government different?

.

I know that if no one spent and everyone saved then the depression would get worse and last longer. My take on this economic situation is that this is not a depression. It is a CORRECTION to properly value our economy.

Well, let's be scientific here, or at least grammatically/definition correct, this is certainly a recession, as we have had 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth, economists defintion of a recession, and a depression as I understand it is a continuation and deepening/lengthening of a recession. We will certainly see 2 or more additional consecutive quarters of negative growth, giving us at least 4 consecutive quarters, probably 6 or more. Just as quacks that say we were in a recession at the end of the Clinton era are wrong. I've read it in slang that we were, but by economists defintion we were not as we didn't have 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth. As well, using your definition, when you have a slow-down, recession or whatever you want to call it, when that is preseeded by shifting wealth to the rich, it will be much worse, when preceeded by shifting it more to the people, the pain will be mitigated and recovery quicker. So is this a corrrection, as you say? I think it's a reaction to low interest rates that caused corruption on the part of mortgage brokers, realtors, etc. It was opportunism on teh part of homeowners and buyers. I don't see this as a correction, the house price adjustments are correcting, but the damage done to the financial infrastructure is not an adjustment, it is a massive retooling and recovery. Look at the long-lived companies that are going under, that is not a correction, but I do appreciate you defending your guy, GWB and his apathy, incompetence, and/or corruption.

Our entire economy is grossly over-valued due to a pervading lack of monetary reserves (savings). The best way out, in this case, is the one that's hardest. That involves a recalibration of our ENTIRE way of thinking about wealth and debt.

I think our economy is over-valued in large part due to a shrinking manufacturing base, overspending on the military is also one of the biggest ills of our nation, it produces nothing and consumes insane amounts of capital that we don't have. Esp sinc ethere isn't and hasn't been a need to have that potent a military since at least the last 20 years probably further back. I think the problem is more dynamic than just we have not enough savings, esp when we opperating so far in the red for so long, we need to look at our expenditures.

The Treasury could very easily perform the function of the Fed in terms of expanding and contracting the money supply, except that to do so the Treasury would be required to keep a huge positive balance. Congress has repeatedly showed that they hate positive balances and will do everyhing in their power to eradicate them.

Contracting teh money supply would deepen the recession/depression, your boy Reagan tried that. I love you neo-cons, you think these issues can be just worked out with some administrative function, while the little people starve and you live on your corporate welfare dime, or should I say probably 125k/yr. If we had a president with enough balls to immediately cut the military in half, chop a lot of military manufacturing programs and restore a little common sense to our nation in those lines, you would be singing some of the same tunes I am. Then I can say, "Will, it's just a correction from decades of military overspending, relax, it will work itself out."