Senate passes Obama's economic recovery plan

Congratulations, I guess. Let's hope this thing works.

now the real fun begins. watching pelosi and reid bicker about trying to keep this porkulus pacakge under a trillion dollars. Once this slimy legislation gets signed by Obama, he, Pelosi and Ried own the economy. May they live and die by it. Ried is almost as good as gone next time up to bat. You can count on that.

Main street will welcome any such plan but Wall street may not !

It's been pretty amazing watching the Republicans show us in their element - Deny, Delay, Destroy.

The hallmarks of the GOP.

inflation, inflation, inflation. -Now is the time to buy gold with the American dollar.

Badsey, the tough thing is that inflation will only make basic commodities more expensive, putting the squeeze on Americans even more.

I just wish the Republicans who gleefully supported bush's out-of-control spending over the last 8 years could have had the foresight to see this meltdown happening and the blowback for their actions.

sushi, i'm just curious. which economist are laying blame squarely on George Bush for this global meltdown. In case you haven't noticed this is a world wide economic downturn. The federal government with George Bush at the helm did not control spending as well as they should, overspending mind you for all sorts of programs both Democrat and Republican sponsored.

I am also wondering why you think more overspending by the Federal Government is okay now when you didn't like it the previous 8 years. That is a pretty sharp about face.

The fleecing of America continues with the Obama administration. Nothings changed.

VOR - "sushi, i'm just curious. which economist are laying blame squarely on George Bush for this global meltdown."

You tell me. I never laid complete blame - only most of the blame - at the foot of bush.

"In case you haven't noticed this is a world wide economic downturn. The federal government with George Bush at the helm did not control spending as well as they should,"

Understatement of the century.

"I am also wondering why you think more overspending by the Federal Government is okay now when you didn't like it the previous 8 years. That is a pretty sharp about face."

What, exactly, is the alternative? Do you think we should just take a leaf out of the Republican rule book and sit on our hands, deny there is a problem and do everything in our power to block the stimulus bill??

President Obama is right when he says the government HAS to act.

In fact, the mind-boggling size of the proposed rescue package goes to illustrate just how badly bush and co. screwed up. If they hadn't done such a bad job of managing the economy, do you think we would now be seeing huge bailout numbers like we are now?

I don't think so.

VOR, I get the impression you are a Republican (correct me if I am wrong).

To be completely honest, I think it is hypocritical of you to have supported bush and co's policies wild-eyed spending policies over the last 8 years (asssuming you did), and then turn around after your party gets caned in two straight elections and start talking about the need for fiscal discipline.

Care to comment?

The fleecing of America continues with the Obama administration. >Nothings changed.

Except your memory, which seems to have very quickly forgotton the $6-odd trillion your country has sunk into the red under bush.

sushisake wrote:

"It's been pretty amazing watching the Republicans show us in their element - Deny, Delay, Destroy. The hallmarks of the GOP."

"I just wish the Republicans who gleefully supported bush's out-of-control spending over the last 8 years could have had the foresight to see this meltdown happening and the blowback for their actions."

Again, I can't help but notice the curious lack of pro-porkulus sentiment in your posts, mate.

The above quotes - from your ninth year of obsessing about George W Bush - make us think that even you (never lived in the US or even visited) are skeptical about Obama's grasp of economics and seek to preemptively absolve Obama and the Dems of any malfeasance and irresponsibility, before the porkulus turns public opinion against them.

Why would you expect the opposition to endorse something even you don't ?

VOR - you made some good points there. Bush and Republican fiscal irresponsibility can be argued about all day, but despite what a lot of people seem to think, they are not the cause of the meltdown. It's all about the banks, and the fact they are insolvent and not lending. Simple economics, if banks can create money and wealth, then they can destroy it too. The stimulus is supposed to fill the hole, although the question is, is it a "black" hole. But it is a worldwide problem, and doesn't have much, if anything, to do with Bush or the US national debt.

wuzzademcrat, so what's your grand fix-it plan? You seem to have all the ideas.

What's your plan?

Lower taxes? :-)

As I said in my above post, the mind-boggling size of the proposed rescue package goes to illustrate just how badly bush and co. screwed up.

And they screwed up with YOUR support.

Let's not forget that in a hurry.

Let's also not forget that any Republican/Bush-supporter has about zero credibility speaking on the economy in the present climate.

So...what's your step-by-step plan to fix the economy?

I can't wait to read it :-)

wuzzademcrat - "Why would you expect the opposition to endorse something even you don't?"

Um....I do support the bailout package.

Yes, there is some pork in there (are you surprised?), but there are also a lot of elements that will create jobs, retrofitting government buildings to become mroe energy-efficient being one of many.

Why do you, on the other hand, so critical of anyone who has any semblance of a wish to boost the economy that your support helped destroy?

Oh sorry, I forgot, according to the GOP, the tanking economy is all Bill Clinton's fault, not bush's, sorry, my mistake. LOL :-)

GJDailleult - "you made some good points there. Bush and Republican fiscal irresponsibility can be argued about all day, but despite what a lot of people seem to think, they are not the cause of the meltdown."

That might be partly accurate if you completely ignore the fact the bush administration was in control of setting finance industry regulations for the last 8 years.

GJDailleult - "But it is a worldwide problem, and doesn't have much, if anything, to do with Bush or the US national debt."

It does, actually, have a direct connection because the huge amount of money required to fill that hole (black or otherwise) caused in no small part by lax oversight by the bush administration of finance industry regulations is going to add significantly to U.S. national debt.

sushisake:"As I said in my above post, the mind-boggling size of the proposed rescue package goes to illustrate just how badly bush and co. screwed up. And they screwed up with YOUR support."

Sorry sushi, I know you need someone to lash out at, something to help you end the continuing reign of Bush in your head, but I was in Japan throughout Bush's presidency. My "support" was/is limited to winding up America-obsessed Aussies like you.

This bill is political payoff, multi-generational theft. Obama is taking the corrupt Chicago model nationwide.

wuzzademcrat - "This bill is political payoff, multi-generational theft."

That's straight from the mouth of failed presidential candidate John McCain, a guy who supported the $2-3 trillion wasted on the Iraq war.

I was kind of expecting some of your own ideas/comments, not someone else's.

You oppose the Democrat's plan. So you must have a better idea.

What is it?

wuzzademcrat, please don't tell me you don't have any ideas (besides "Cut Taxes." :-)

Here's a couple of interesting articles about this issue-

Democrats are playing Monopoly -- and winning

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/10/castellanos.monopoly/index.html?iref=newssearch

Republican strategy of deny, delay and do nothing

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/10/begala.gop/index.html

What is it about tax cuts that so bothers Lefties? Do you enjoy the government taking your money ?

Reagan inherited an economy as bad and probably worse than what we see now.We didn't need a stimulus package to rebound.

The current one is loaded with provisions which also threaten to undo all the work done on welfare reform - much of that accomplished by the Clinton admin.

("The Return of Welfare As We Knew It" WSJ Feb 10)

This is shameless vote-buying, even by Dem standards.

Dems have also blocked legislation that stipulated recipients of aid in this monstrosity had to prove citizenship. This is madness.

"On Feb. 9, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) attempted to offer his E-Verify amendment (SA 239) to the economic stimulus package, but Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) prevented him from doing so. SA 239 would have required all businesses and localities that receive stimulus money to use the E-Verify employment verification system. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who had earlier supported Sen. Sessions' efforts to mandate E-Verify for stimulus recipients, did not support Sen. Sessions' attempt to force the Senate to vote on SA 239. In fact, Sen. Nelson moved to end all debate on the economic stimulus package."

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/february-9-2009/sens-nelson-and-baucus-block-e-verify-amendment.html

The US needs energy independence. Hundreds of thousands of jobs could be created by developing a domestic energy industry, and in the long run we'd save hundreds of billions we are currently paying to regimes unfriendly to us and opposed to democracy

What does Obama do? - he goes back on his campaign promises and quietly closes this avenue out of the mess we are in :

"President Obama is shelving a plan announced in the final days of the Bush administration to open much of the U.S. coast to oil drilling, including 130 million acres off California's coast from Mendocino to San Diego." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/10/MNB015R7TQ.DTL

OK, so it's clear wuzzademcrat doesn't have a plan, despite his willingness to criticize others who back the stimulus plan.

Do any other Republicans/conservatives out there have a better plan than the one being offered?

If so, let's put it up for debate.

What is it about tax cuts that so bothers Lefties? Do you enjoy the government taking your money ?

Maybe lefties just feel a need to pay their bills? Also, perhaps the lefties are keen to make the rich pay their own bills?

Hundreds of thousands of jobs could be created by developing a domestic energy industry, and in the long run we'd save hundreds of billions we are currently paying to regimes unfriendly to us and opposed to democracy

We don't have a domestic energy industry?

And I don't think you realize who the top importers and exporters are at all, or how much is going where.

What America needs to do is STOP USING SO DAMNED MUCH OIL, not suck more out of the ground.

SushiSake3 - I wasn't saying Bush is blameless, just that he is pretty far down the blame list. Sure, he was in charge for 8 years of deregulation / lax regulation, but that also started long before he showed up. Phil Gramm was busy planting financial WMD's all through the 90's, and Wall Street also had no shortage of friends in the Democratic party either. And of course the debt makes the current situation much more difficult to deal with, but it is still not the cause of the situation.

sushi, the fleecing of America continues is as it is written. It pertains to both political parties and until people on both sides of aisle wake up, the fleecing will continue and only make things worse . Somehow I only think that concerns you when the other party is in office. Your position makes me believe you are one of many with your hands out. one trillion gone today, another trillion gone tomorrow and probably a few more trillion after that, whatever it takes right? Bush was a fraud and Obama ain't no better. In fact given enough time, he'll be worse. Will you still be critical of deficit spending then. I highly doubt it.

I wasn't saying Bush is blameless, just that he is pretty far down the blame list.

For specific problems, such as the mortage and loan problems, I have to agree.

Sure, he was in charge for 8 years of deregulation / lax regulation

I do not know the effect of lax regulation on all this exactly, but if the President is not high on the list of those to blame for it, then who is? The president's job is to appoint people to notice and do something about things like that.

As for deregulation, criticizing it is the same as saying that businesses cannot take care of themselves, AT ALL. Its not like ALL the stops were pulled out. There was still regulation, its just that businesses abused their freedom. I can't criticize the government much for that. All I can say is, I wish they they had realized just how stupid and greedy our businessmen would become with a longer chain. Anything else would be a demand that they become Nostradamus. I sure did not think businesses would be that stupid at the time.

Republican Talking Points Regarding Obama's Oconomic Recovery Plan -

1/ "We need more Tax Cuts." (Be careful not to mention the rich 5% (that's most of us) benefitted most from the last round.)

2/ The economic recovery plan is "too expensive." For good meansure, when you are talking to the press or posting on forum/blog sites, also mention "We cannot afford it," and use Sen. McCain's excellent phrase - "multi-generational theft."

Please do NOT mention that under our watch, U.S. national debt rose from $4 to $10+ trillion.

3/ As often as possible, repeat the phrase "This is Democratic pork-barrelling at its worst." Our run-of-the-mill followers lap that one up and will repeat it on command.

wuzzademcrat's quote - "President Obama is shelving a plan announced in the final days of the Bush administration to open much of the U.S. coast to oil drilling, including 130 million acres off California's coast from Mendocino to San Diego."

Great! It's about time America showed some leadership in the environmental area and started weaning itself off oil. The Chinese and Germans are already WAY ahead in solar tech.

Do Republicans want their countrymen to have to buy solar tech from abroad instead of paying Americans to build it at home?

wuzzademcrat, we are still waiting to hear your alternative to the Democrat's stimulus package that you love to criticize despite apparently having no better ideas besides "raising taxes." :-)

VOR - "Your position makes me believe you are one of many with your hands out. one trillion gone today, another trillion gone tomorrow and probably a few more trillion after that, whatever it takes right?"

No, this must be done in a measured way, obviously.

What irks me is that the Republicans, the party that burnt through more than $6 trillion in just 8 years and who just last December, GAVE away $270 billion to the banking/finance sector with absolutely no checks and balances, are attacking the Democrat's stimulus package without offering any credible alternative.

It's clear they are attacking the Deomcrat's package pretty much purely to gain a politcal advantage. Meanwhile, I read this morning something like 11,000 Americans are losing their jobs each day on average.

American burns while the GOP fiddles. Yes, it sounds all too familiar.

The GOP needs to get out of the way and let the Democrat's - who I admit do not have a perfect plan - take action.

Bush was a fraud and Obama ain't no better. In fact given enough time, he'll be worse. Will you still be critical of deficit spending then. I highly doubt it.

Sorry, the last sentence in my above post:

"Bush was a fraud and Obama ain't no better. In fact given enough time, he'll be worse. Will you still be critical of deficit spending then. I highly doubt it."

was VOR's comment, not mine.

Lol, tax cuts for the rich never created a job. On the other hand, a government program to build a road subcontracts construction companies, who hire workers, who get paid, who spend that money at the grocery store and paying off their debts (et cetera et cetera), and those businesses take the money to the bank which lends it out to other businesses to buy supplies.. not to mention the positive societal effects of more people working. Yeah, let's give the wealthy more tax cuts. LOL.

likeitis - "All I can say is, I wish they they had realized just how stupid and greedy our businessmen would become with a longer chain."

Which is precisely why President Obama wants to introduce more finance sector regulation to try to tame the actions of the cowboys who helped create this mess.

But I bet the GOP will try to block that move, too.

I'm still wondering...who - exactly - does the GOP work for (besides themselves)?

"Maybe lefties just feel a need to pay their bills?"

Just not their taxes or their mortgage payments, eh?

"What America needs to do is STOP USING SO DAMNED MUCH OIL, not suck more out of the ground."

Sounds good, as the oil is indeed finite, unfortunately alternative sources of power will not be in sufficient quantities for the foreseeable future.

"Bush was a fraud.."

He isn't a fraud, heck, the one thing about Bush is, agree or diasagree with him, at least you know where he stands. He simply isn't a true conservative.

"...Obama ain't no better. In fact given enough time, he'll be worse."

No doubt. We're gonna see deficits that make the Bush deficits look like surpluses.

wuzzademcrat, we are still waiting to hear your alternative to the Democrat's stimulus package that you love to criticize despite apparently having no better ideas besides "raising taxes." :-)

wuzza, just be a man and eat the humble pie. I am sick of reading Sushi's demand for the non-existant alternative. If it makes you feel better, NOBODY has a better alternative at this time anyway. I sure don't.

But I don't think that destroys anyone's right to criticism. You can criticise a plan without having an alternative. But it sure does help your case A BUNCH to have that alternative, that is for sure.

I often criticize a plan because sometimes I think its better to do nothing.

i've yet to see any democrat provide a strong argument how the massive debt is going to fix the economy. sheez, every time obama speaks he prefaces every thing with "if we do this right". He doesn't even pretend its going to work. If they need to spend a trillion, fix the infrastructure of the country like he said he would during the campaign not some damn STD program or a hundred other Democratic pet projects and causes. Fix the roads, fix the bridges, fix the power grid, build more nuclear plants for starters. Obama, Pelosi and Reid are three peas in a pod. Some adult supervision is needed in the worst way.

Do any other Republicans/conservatives out there have a better plan than the one being offered?

Spending Freeze across the board with the exception of Social Security and Veterans benefits.

Abolish the Capital Gains tax completely. Allow investors to put money into companies that actually make stuff and create jobs and not be penalized for it anymore.

Cut the corporate tax rate from 39.8 percent to 12.9 percent to match Irelands (A country that since she did that has experienced the highest level of prosperity in her long history now).

Do that and Sit back and let Americans do what they do best, make stuff the world wants and can't seem to live without (windows, McDonalds, Coca-Cola) all brought to you by private investment capital.

Free it up again and tell Government to get the heck out of the way with the exception of tight regulation to ensure that law-breakers and ponzi type schemes are punished to the full extant of the law.

Free the capital to work again in the private sector and enforce the rules.........Two step solution that works, not this pork party, that unfortunately is going to pass and be signed so my plan is moot anyway.

Hopefully after this boondoogle failure my plan will start to get real traction again, that is if there is any capital left in the private sector to actually invest again after this nothing but Bush 2 economic plan shows that tax cuts, borrow and spend, spend, spend didn't work the first time.

Sarge - "We're gonna see deficits that make the Bush deficits look like surpluses."

Mate, you tried that line a few days ago and no one took you seriously then, either. :-)

Just not their taxes or their mortgage payments, eh?

Those ARE bills. And lefties are hardly the only ones not paying for reason of not having the money.

I think what lefties are sick of is the rich getting the bigger breaks on paying our collective bills, which is part of the reason their own bills are so high.

unfortunately alternative sources of power will not be in sufficient quantities for the foreseeable future.

You missed the point. America uses TOO MUCH ENERGY. Using less won't necessarily help the economy, sure. But some things are more important than the quick and easy path.

We're gonna see deficits that make the Bush deficits look like surpluses.

That comment is ignorant beyond words. Red or Blue, donkey or elephant, it will be a lucky SOB that can pull us out of the death spiral 8 years of Bush has locked us into. We are at a record deficit. These are uncharted waters.

Sail, you seriously need to address how the government is supposed to function with that dramatic loss of income you propose.

sailwind - thanks for putting up an alternative. Much appreciated, and far better than some of the empty rantings of certain other posters.

I read all your points, however I stumbled on the first one -

"Spending Freeze across the board with the exception of Social Security and Veterans benefits."

Can you explain how an accross-the-board spending freeze is going to stimulate and encourage people to open up their wallets?

And why should Veterans (like yourself) not be subject to a spending freeze?

Do veterans somehow contribute more to the economy than workers?

I'm curious.

Can you explain how an accross-the-board spending freeze is going to stimulate and encourage people to open up their wallets?

Government needs to set the example. It can't expect the people to go through hard times if it isn't willing to do itself.

The rest of the points Sush, I'll have to address a little later I promise. I have to go to work right and make some of that money and stash it before Obama and the Government starts looking at my direction to get it's mitts on to pay for this bill.

Sushi - You seem to think President Obama's massive deficit spending is going to magically propel the U.S. economy into a roaring tiger which would increase tax revenues and wipe out the deficit. That ain't gonna happen. President Obama says "the federal goverment is the only entity left with the resources to jolt the economy back to life." He thinks the government is the answer to all our problems. Well, no he doesn't really think that, because he's not dumb, and anyone with any brains knows the government is not the answer to our economic problems - in fact the government is a big part of the problem, he says that because he and the liberals want to control the economy.

And Sail, governments all around the world from Australia to Ireland, Spain to America, are implementing stimulus - ie: SPENDING - packages of their own.

And you are saying a spending freeze should be implemented???

Do you know something the world's top financiers don't?

Again, just curious.

Sail, personally I believe that most people cannot be trusted to make sensible decisions, especially with money, hence I feel there is a general need for greater government control and regulation, not less.

I am not by any stretch of the imagination talking about a nanny state. I am saying that if you give most people $100, they will blow it rather than invest or save it.

Take your nation's average savings rate of 0.2% as a case in point.

Sarge - "he says that because he and the liberals want to control the economy."

Sarge, your economy NEEDS to be controlled. This should be blindingly obvious by now to most of us who are not still in denial about the problems facing our economies.

The mess your country's economy is in is due to lack of control and oversight.

At least admit to that.

"Sarge, your economy NEEDS to be controlled"

Not by President Obama and the Democrats. By the private sector. History is on the side of the private sector and capitalism, Sushi. Check it out.

"The mess your country's economy is in is due to lack of control and oversight"

The mess my country's economy is in is due to liberal policies leading to the credit-driven economy and the sub-prime mortgage crisis. People buying stuff they can't afford. I don't do that.

Sarge - "Not by President Obama and the Democrats. By the private sector. History is on the side of the private sector and capitalism, Sushi. Check it out."

I just did and all I saw as a result of the private sector controlling itself was the biggest global recession in 70 years.

That's why we need more government oversight, not less.

Check it out. It's right in front of you but you still can't seem to see it. :-)

Sarge - "The mess my country's economy is in is due to liberal policies leading to the credit-driven economy and the sub-prime mortgage crisis. People buying stuff they can't afford. I don't do that."

I see you conveniently forgot to mention the $2-3-odd trillion that was wasted as a result of your and others support of a pointless war in Iraq.

You will never see that money again.

Check it out! :-)

i got a question for the central planners.

If this trillion doesn't jump start the economy (obama's words not mine)then what, another trillion or two? and after that another trillion or three?

in vegas its called rolling the dice and those that roll the dice on credit end up in a not so nice place. democrats are at the table and rolling the die using the next generations money, best we can hope for is a little lady luck because this spending package is being used as an excuse to pay back political friends and supporters.

remember when the FY10 budget it crafted and they keep putting us further and further into debt.

The fleecing of America continues. No change here.

OR, yes, Obama is rolling the dice here, but what other option did bush leave him?

Clinton left bush with a massive surplus, which bush promptly didn't just blow, but he went so far into the red that we've now got a global economic collapse on our hands.

"If this trillion doesn't jump start the economy (obama's words not mine)then what, another trillion or two? and after that another trillion or three?"

And the alternative is.......?

"democrats are at the table and rolling the die using the next generations money"

You have a lot of gall to say that after the previous administration blew $6 trillion of the next generation's money. I don't recall you rallying against that. Maybe you did and I missed it.

"The fleecing of America continues. No change here."

VOR, face it - this just doesn't fly and doesn't do anything for your credibility. Obama wouldn't be in this position if the previous administration had not been so incredibly incompetant.

,

"The mess my country's economy is in is due to liberal policies leading to the credit-driven economy and the sub-prime mortgage crisis. People buying stuff they can't afford. I don't do that."

Sarge, liberal policies did not hold a gun to anybody's head and make them do anything. Those people buying stuff they could not afford were facilitated by other people selling them stuff just as recklessly. In fact, I would say it was seller rather than buyer who was chiefly to blame, as buyer always had the right to buy themselves into a pickle. Its the sellers who took new found freedom and turned it into freedumb.

Sushi is right. The market needs SOME controlling, and the primary control is on the businesses, not the little guy. We cannot regulate the little guy in any way meaningful to this topic.

wuzzademcrat

Reagan inherited an economy as bad and probably worse than what we see now.We didn't need a stimulus package to rebound.

That's why George Bush the daddy signed the largest tax increase in years. Remember?, "Read my lips, no new taxes." Wrong, he had to sign the biggest tax incraeses in decades. That's what Ronald Reagan left him. < :-)

The mess your country's economy is in is due to lack of control and oversight. At least admit to that.

Finally. So,it's all about lack of control or oversight.

Here is the big, big chance for sushi to tell Americans just whose economy we should model our apparently flawed one on.

And here is my prediction - sushi will sputter, change the subject, talk about Bush or 'the GOP'.

What country is doing it right, sushi? Who should America look to? We are a fairly pragmatic bunch. Your suggestion, should you be man enough to venture one, will at least have the careful consideration of your fellow "progressives" - like yabits or likeitis.

If you are too timid or too embarrassed or too clueless maybe you can just come with the economic thinkers whose writings inform your boring, repetitive posts.

Man up, Aussie.

Sarge

Not by President Obama and the Democrats. By the private sector. History is on the side of the private sector and capitalism, Sushi. Check it out.

Sarge I just did and after the last 8 years I see that the private sector screwed things up. Now it's Barack Obama's chance to change things where the private sector failed. < :-)

Here is the big, big chance for sushi to tell Americans just whose economy we should model our apparently flawed one on. And here is my prediction - sushi will sputter, change the subject, talk about Bush or 'the GOP'.

As for myself, I have no idea how he will react to your crappy strawman. Sushi has been talking about specific points, not modeling the U.S. economy after that of another country. I think your paranoia has gotten the better of you again.

There are lots of schools of thoughts when it comes to economics. However the most prevelant ones are Keynsian, and Supply Side. Keynsians are the ones who think that government is the solution to the problem. That by massive government injections of capital, it will spur the economy back into the black. Supply siders like myself, believe that the most effective thing the government can do, is to get out of the way. They do this by cutting taxes and reducing regulations that bog down private companies.

Sushi - Your control economy is a nightmare. It has been proven repeatedly that it is inefficient, and failure driven. You who don't trust people to control the economy, want to put a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats in charge of the economy, rather then allow people who get paid based on their performance, to run it. Allow me to simply disagree. I think we're better off letting the private sector keep things going. Despite its many flaws, Capitalism, is still the best economic engine we have.

"Now it's Barack Obama's chance to change things where the private sector failed. < :-)"

You are an absolute riot, a real hoot, daydream. How can Obama, who has worked for all of about 1 year in the private sector (and that was 20 years ago) understand, let alone "cure" its ills? In his pathetic, ghost-written autobiography he revealed he was basically opposed to the capitalist model (he describes working on Wall St as being 'behind enemy lines'), we got the same thing on the campaign trail from his bitter, privileged wife, who admonished young people for going into business instead of "community service."

FDR prolonged the Depression with his misguided intervention. Obama looks like he wants to repeat those mistakes.

likeitis: "As for myself, I have no idea how he will react to your crappy strawman."

And you also clearly have no idea what a straw man is.

Laters.

Sarge, please decide if the government should control the private sector some or not. You cannot have it both ways. Either the government loosened up too much then or they need to take the reins up this time. Which is it?

And you also clearly have no idea what a straw man is.

I could be wrong, but I was thinking it was accusing someone of saying or thinking something they did not, something negative, in order to get them to address it in a manner that made them look like they did or agree. Its a method of making someone look bad, and win an argument not by merit or presentation of facts or facing arguments, but on trickery.

It might not be a strawman, but its what you are doing.

wuzzademcrat how did the people on Wall Street and mortage brokers who have been doing this stuff for decades blow it? They have more experience in one finger than Barack Obama has, period and they blew it.

Tell me wuzzademcrat, how did your private sector blow it.

What just scares you to death is that Obama might succeed. < :-)

Supply siders like myself, believe that the most effective thing the government can do, is to get out of the way.

What does "get out of the way" mean to you exactly? Is it more of a "stay the course" or is it a further letting go of the reins?

I did not support the first bailout, nor the second. I lean toward not supporting this stimulous package either, but not quite decided yet.

I think the longer we prevent the phoenix from approaching the flames, the longer we will have to wait for the phoenix to rise again. We might even mess up the cycle so much that he doesn't.

Sarge I just did and after the last 8 years I see that the private sector screwed things up."

really, who forced banks to provide loans to people who couldn't pay for them? Who incites young students to take out student loans?

If you think Bush, who was very much hands off wall street and let many Clinton appointees oversee Wall street, is the entire culprit to this economic mess and if too many are like you, the US is in great trouble.

YOu have constantly bought up Bush as your only defense to your points yet you have let off Dodd, Frank and a Schumer, in fact you have praised them in more words than less.

If you look at this package, you will noticed that so much of it has nothing to do with helping the economy at all, not even a fraction. Knowing that this bill won't help is one of the reasons they want the repubs to sign it because when it fails, they get to pay the repubs back for having so many dems to sign onto the war!

really, who forced banks to provide loans to people who couldn't pay for them?

Banks were forced to make loans? Can you prove that statement?

wuzzademcrat - "You are an absolute riot, a real hoot, daydream. How can Obama, who has worked for all of about 1 year in the private sector (and that was 20 years ago) understand, let alone "cure" its ills?"

The previous guy had a "business degree" and look what happened.

Anyway wuzza, you still haven't revealed your alternative to the Democrat's stimulus package which you don't have. :-)

Likitis, wuzzademcrat's strawman setup isn't worth replying to.

And like I said, I'm STILL waiting for his alternative strategy. :-)

Absent any voluntary provision by wuzzademcrat of an alternative to the Democrat's strategy, I'd just have to say I think it is "lower taxes!"

Soundbites like that rock when you don't have a clue what you are talking about. :-)

Just as I predicted. Another jelly-kneed dodge from sushi.

wuzzademcrat - "Just as I predicted. Another jelly-kneed dodge from sushi."

says wuzzademcrat, who after being asked, what is it now - 10 times? - about his alternative strategy to the Democrat's stimulus plan, still cannot provide one.

I'd call that The King of Dodge if it didn't sound so corny. :-)

For the last time: wuzzademcrat, what's your alternative strategy?

Providing, of course, you have one.

I'd call that The King of Dodge

LOL! I was about to type the same thing!

Sushi - I was basically OK with what I understand was the Republican plan:

Spend between 4 and 5 hundred billion dollars now (the majority of the porkulus kicks in years from now, its a long term wedge aimed at fundamentally restructuring the economy and maybe even an attempt at eliminating political opposition altogether). I also like the Republican provision that spending be cut as soon as a recovery begins. Yes, provide more tax relief, it's a time-tested measure, one that even JFK and Clinton acknowledged works. We also need to lower corporate tax rates (US has world's second highest), even if it means using experimental models at state levels first - for example, let states that the Dems have basically destroyed (like Cal and Mich) try these in order to lure back the businesses that have left these criminally mismanaged states. Those are a few points.

But before I go any further I'd like your answer to my question. You strike me as obsessed with America, in a way that seems to me to say you strongly believe you know of a better model. But you never disclose what it is. I can only imagine your intense frustration, but frankly, it is tiresome seeing you (as superlib pointed out) bringing up Bush/the GOP something like 70 times in a matter of 48 hours.

So again, here is sushi's big, big chance -

What country is doing things right? Who should the US look to? In lieu of a direct answer to that maybe you can provide some names - economists whose work you believe would help elucidate the position you yourself are unable to.

Easy questions.

Be a man.

Step up.

200 Economists - Nobel Prize Winners included - oppose Obama's plan.

http://politics.nashvillepost.com/2009/01/28/200-economists-against-stimulus/

"Easy questions.

Be a man.

Step up."

Heh, like you did when asked what the republican alternative was?

The 200 economists being against Obama's plan, sponsored by the libertarian Cato Institue, was interesting. Are Republicans trying to argue that the US economy doesn't need stimulus?

The disastrous part of Obama's plan is the part that the Republicans have largely compelled the Democrats to include: the roughly 40% of the plan devoted to tax cuts. In an environment where people and businesses are hoarding money, giving tax cuts will do very little to stimulate the economy, unless they are given as tax credits to offset private spending on things like capital improvements, retraining, and other investments.

Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, who estimated from the outset that the total cost of the Iraq War would exceed two trillion dollars, has a very thought-provoking, 13-minute interview with Financial Times. He has foreseen what we are now going through for years now, and makes some very good points. Well worth a look at the link below.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a78e69a4-e30d-11dd-a5cf-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1

What country is doing things right? Who should the US look to?

If you like fishing, why not just actually GO fishing? The point of the question is to change the subject. Just argue the points. Enough fishing, stalling, smokescreening and strawman building.

What country is doing things right? Who should the US look to?

In terms of providing for an extremely high quality of life, a European nation like Switzerland might be one of several models worth looking at. The American model being driven since WWII is one of ever more mindless consumption as the engine of growth and status. President Obama is nibbling around the edges of this, but if "dusting ourselves off" means preparing to get back on the consumption binge, he is off target.

In other words: If we could turn back the clock, what part of the self-destructive and unsustainable cycle of the US economic bubble-making machine would we like to return to?

I have to say it - debating with Republicans is like debating with a bunch of 2-year olds, except the latter is far more educational.

"Given the GOP's combination of flat-earth economics and scorched-earth politics, it should come as no surprise that it looks like 98.6 percent of Washington Republicans oppose President Obama's economic recovery package. They either do not understand the depth of the recession or they do not realize the results of the recent election.

I don't know what more President Obama can do. He has named three prominent Republicans to his Cabinet (Robert Gates at Defense, Ray LaHood at Transportation and Judd Gregg at Commerce). He has helped persuade New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch to replace Sen. Gregg with a Republican.

He has met behind closed doors with the entire House and Senate Republican conferences. He has hosted bipartisan cocktail parties, a Super Bowl party and -- what's left, a slumber party? He has agreed to ditch progressive provisions from the stimulus bill, like support for family planning (earning him a rebuke from Planned Parenthood) and accepted more tax cuts than many Democrats would like.

Still, there's bipartisanship and there's bipartisanship. Real-world Republicans support President Obama's recovery plan. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist is a supporter, and as the ubiquitous John King has reported, the very Republican mayor of the very Republican town of Carmel, Indiana, supports Obama's plan as well. "Government should be investing in infrastructure," Mayor James Brainard told King. "That is what government is meant to do. It creates long-term value. I think the stimulus plan is a good one."

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/10/begala.gop/index.html

wuzzademcrat - "But before I go any further I'd like your answer to my question. You strike me as obsessed with America, in a way that seems to me to say you strongly believe you know of a better model."

Not particularly, but I would point to one or two of the Scandinvian countries, perhaps Sweden. Norway next door has one of the highest tax rates in the world but an absolutely stunning cradle-to-grave welfare systtem (new dads get something like 3 months minimum paid parental leave). Not Norway.

Re: Yabits choice of Switzerland, I would need to look into that.

Wazzademcrat - "in a way that seems to me to say you strongly believe you know of a better model."

That sounds like an obsession to me. Perhaps you should seek some kind of help, or something.

wuzzademcrat - "I can only imagine your intense frustration, but frankly, it is tiresome seeing you (as superlib pointed out) bringing up Bush/the GOP something like 70 times in a matter of 48 hours."

superlib hasn't posted on this thread.

By the way, thank you for answering my question. It only took you all day, but it wasn't too difficult, was it? :-)

wuzzademcrat - "But before I go any further I'd like your answer to my question. You strike me as obsessed with America."

Again, way off the mark, but a humorous attempt at best.

You have clearly mixed up 'obsession' with the frustration of many Americans and non-Americans at the complete inability of Republicans and their supporters to grasp some pretty basic fundamental economic and human principles, namely:

1/ If you spend more than you have you are going to get into trouble at some stage.

2/ No, money does NOT grow on trees.

3/ If you continue to give money to the rich, the poor and middle classes are going to start hating you.

5/ No, money does NOT grow on trees, so don't spend like it does.

6/ No matter how many times you repeat a mistruth, on a fundamental level, PEOPLE DO NOT BEING LIED TO.

7/ Actually, money does NOT grow on trees.

8/ An idiot cannot sound smart if he continues to speak like an idiot.

9/ Only idiots follow other idiots.

10/ Did you know money doesn't grow on trees?

Sushi: "Norway next door has one of the highest tax rates in the world but an absolutely stunning cradle-to-grave welfare system"

LOL, and we should follow that model?!

Sarge, you missed the 'Not Norway.' bit. :-)

I'm afraid the U.S. is in for a long recession and most likely the worst inflation in decades, thanks to President Obama and the Democrats' wild spending over the next few years.

Sarge, just think, if enough people like you hadn't blindly supported the Iraq war, at an average cash burn rate of $15 billion a month, your government would have been $720 BILLION better off today.

That's 1 decent-sized bailout!

But thanks to people like you, President Obama is now having to borrow more than that amount from future generations of Americans from the Chinese and Japanese governments.

And only last week I read your government is now paying north of $400 BILLION per annum in interest on loans. That's half a bailout, Sarge, half a bailout.

Happy? :-)

PS: There is probably a connection between your support for the Iraq war and the fact the GOP got depth charged in the last 2 straight elections.

And now you have the gall to say America is spending too much? Sarge, it is primarily due to people like you that President Obama has no choice but to spend these massive amounts.

Sarge, you are a corrupt bankers dream...! :-)

Sarge - "I'm afraid the U.S. is in for a long recession and most likely the worst inflation in decades."

You mean the Bush-GOP-Sarge-Recession? Yeah, that'd be about right.

Sushi, nah, they would have just spent it on other fiascos.

One thing President Obama won't have to worry about is dealing with a dictator in Iraq seeking to resurrect his WMD and driving the country into the ground, thanks to his predecessor.

Sarge - "One thing President Obama won't have to worry about is dealing with a dictator in Iraq seeking to resurrect his WMD and driving the country into the ground, thanks to his predecessor."

You mean the dictator that was trying his darndest to resurrect the US-made and supplied out-dated WMD that at their worst, would have created some pretty troublesome rust stains on the windswept desert floor?

You mean those WMD?

Sarge - "and driving the country into the ground"

No, that's what bush did to America thanks to your support. You must be a proud. :-)

Uhm, heh...wuzzy,

C'mon my boy - let's hear the republican answer to the economic problem.

Easy question.

Be a man.

Step up.

Heck, debating with Republicans is like shooting fish in a fish tank.

With ICBMs.

Thank God America now has a president who speaks English as a first language and who can think AND speak at the same time.

It is truly refreshing. :-)

Madverts, perhaps not surprisingly, wuzza's alternative strategy is the Republican plan. You know, the one that has so successfully caused the worst fiscal crisis in 70 years.

Yeah, that strategy. :-)

Honestly, I'm beginning to think one of the biggest problems with the GOP and their supporters is that they do not actually know what the problem is.

It's pretty disturbing when you think about it.

"let's hear the republican answer to the economic problem"

Republicans, like Democrats, are politicians. They all spend too much of the taxpayers' money. But Republicans are generally more conservative than Democrats, and therefore are wary of this Democrat porkulus boondoggle.

What's your brilliant answer to the economic problems of the U.S., Adverts?

C'mon my boy - let's hear the republican answer to the economic problem.

Umm, read back. Its there, you and Sushi must have missed it.

Sarge - "But Republicans are generally more conservative than Democrats"

Sarge, that must be why spending and debt always goes up under Republican presidents.

Check it out - you know it's true. There are at least 2 charts showing this, but they have been posted on JT so many times, I don't see the point posting them again.

Sarge - "What's your brilliant answer to the economic problems of the U.S., Adverts?"

It's clear you are asking this because neither you nor your beloved GOP have any ideas at all how to clean up the Bush-Republican-Sarge Recession. :-)

Sarge, thanks to people like you, the GOP is going to be stumbling around in the political wilderness (just south of Colorado, apparently) for a very long, long time. :-)

Sushi, as we are clueless about fixing the economy, what's your brilliant answer? We are humbly awaiting your wise advice.

One thing President Obama won't have to worry about is dealing with a dictator in Iraq seeking to resurrect his WMD and driving the country into the ground, thanks to his predecessor.

Yes, Bush certainly applied a $2+ trillion-dollar "solution" to a $10 billion dollar problem. Thanks, Bush, for nothing.

molenir,

I asked the question to the boy. Once again, heh, he declined.

And besides, I see nothing coherent from the GOP, especially taking into account that they've presided over the last 8 year catastrophe that ran the US, along with the rest of us, onto the rocks.

Wuzzademcrat don't dodge my quiestion from last night.

adaydream at 02:35 PM JST - 11th February wuzzademcrat how did the people on Wall Street and mortage brokers who have been doing this stuff for decades blow it? They have more experience in one finger than Barack Obama has, period and they blew it. Tell me wuzzademcrat, how did your private sector blow it. What just scares you to death is that Obama might succeed. < :-)

You're good with Obama trash. Why didn't george bush with all his business experience. < :-)

Its so funny seeing all the instant expert economists on JT mouth off about the cause of this economic downturn; George Bush.

Pat yourselves on the backs for doing what real economists haven't been able to do, dumbing it down so only morons can understand, or think they understand anyway.

This is a worldwide economic problem. The same problems that exists in the United States, exists all throughout Europe and Asia. Blaming George Bush is just more guttersniping. Not understanding the underlying problems and supporting more debt on a hope and prayer that this will "jump start" the economy is completely moronic.

If debt got us to this place, additional debt to the tune of 1 trillion (probably going to go a lot higher as Democrats keep throwing money at their political supporters) only compounds the problem. This is now Obama's and the Democrats economy. Maybe they inhereted a run away train but why in gods name are they putting more coal in the fire? This train only has so much track to run on. The fleecing of America continues. This isn't change.

It's not alright, but it'll be fixed.

VOR gets frustrated that we're dissing george bush, but I remember george bush stating that the economy was strong, up until it crashed right before the eyes of America.

And VOR's not supportive of Obama's efforts.

John McCain didn't win VOR, Barack Obama did. The majority of the nation said, 'We want Barack Obama to fix it.' I'm with the majority of the nation. < :-)

sushi, i can speak for myself thank you. you can diss george bush all you like, but i'll call you out when you are inaccurate.

i am not supportive of Obama's effort when he is doing the country harm.

i didn't even vote for McCain so there you go again. going off half cocked as usual. I can tell you I am part of the 58 million voters that did not vote for Obama.

maybe the majority of the nation had hope that Obama really would bring change. his first three weeks so far has been politics as usual.

The fleecing of America continues. This isn't change.

If debt got us to this place, additional debt to the tune of 1 trillion (probably going to go a lot higher as Democrats keep throwing money at their political supporters) only compounds the problem.

Right there is your fallacy. It will take money and resources to turn the thing around. Putting a tax cut in someone's pocket is not going to do it. Not in this climate where people and businesses are hoarding money. Any tax cuts have to be given as tax credits to companies that agree to use it for investment and not for consumption, and especially not to shove it down a rathole by overpaying executives. So I strongly disagree with the part of the Obama plan that awards unconditional tax cuts -- those will only make the deficits worse, while doing little or nothing to help.

The massive mis-allocation of capital by the banking and finance industries is going to have to replaced by those who know how to manage and direct the capital to better purposes. Hoarding it to cover up losses on a balance sheet only adds to the problems. This has been the extent of the Bush-Paulson bailout to the banks to this point.

The problem I see with so many conservative critics is that they don't seem to be able to distinguish between a dollar spent on something as wasteful and senseless as a discretionary war or on bonuses to Wall Street execs, and a dollar spend to build up infrastructure, make buildings more energy efficient, or some other purpose which will save or return future dollars.

Liberals may well say to conservatives, "Hey, you were given your $2+ TRILLION for the boondoggle in Iraq. Don't complain if the government has to spend nearly as much or more to dig the country out of the mess that so much mismanagement has led it into."

There were only two viable choices for president. John McCain and Barack Obama. So America had two choices at how to fix the country. They voted for Barack Obama. Not John McCain or one of the fringe political candidates.

We all know John McCain had no ideas about the economy. He proved that when he had to suspend his campaign to run to Washington to help fix the problem. He sat in those meetings mute. Never a word.

So the country voted between the inept one or Barack Obama. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing your vote if you voted for someone else, your choice, but Obama won.

Now the republicans are just up in arms that we're not doing the tax break thing. Everytime something happens, tax break. Republicans get elected president, tax break. Go to war, tax break. Republicans are celebrating anything, tax break. We've been down the tax break road before and it's failed at fixing the country, it just gave the republicans more money.

So Barack Obama has a direction that he wants to try to fix the economy. His package, not the way he desired it to be, was passed by the house and senate with mostly democratic support. Very little republican support because they want more tax breaks.

I'm glad Barack Obama won. < :-)

vor, nobody is laying everything at the feet of W. Suffice to say his disasterous presidency hasn't helped the job along too much...

Back to the question of which country is doing it right, why not look at Canada? That nation has not faced a single bank failure, no calls for bailouts or any government intervention in the financial or mortgage sectors. (According to Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek.)

Why? Over the past 15 years, as the US and Europe loosened regulations on the financial industries, the Canadians refused to follow suit.

Canada is extremely well poised to take advantage of the opportunities that the economic crisis presents to it. Another big contrast between Canada and the US regards how skilled immigrants looking for work are treated. (Canada welcomes them!)

The republican plan is the only plan worth considering. rebluicans are the goverment and will return to power after this 4 year interlude.

TokyoHustla what particular republican plan are you speaking of? < :-)

I would say the republican plan that cuts taxes and allows for more spending. The Republican plan that puts America first and does away with the "blame America first" mentality that seems so prevalent amongst flag-burning liberals and haters overseas.

adaydream: Mrs. Bush's literacy campaign.

yabits: at the end of the Bush administration, America had its highest literacy rate ever. Love or hate Bush, facts are facts.

So you haven't seen a plan that interest you, you just claim that any republican plan...again, any republican plan would be better. Uh-huh. Yeah. Okay, your entitled. < :-)

adaydream: America has always (100%) experienced growth under Republican administrations, and has only declined when Democrats have held the Presidency or a majority in Congress. This is fact. The Democrats came in during 2006 and what did we see follow? A complete meltdown, due to their policies. It is time the American people realize who is on their side - the Republicans, who want a free and fair market, and are willing to support and help all Americans, not just the donors to Obama.

A complete meltdown, due to their policies.

It would be lot easier to prove that price of oil has caused all of the recent recessions (which it has).

America has always (100%) experienced growth under Republican administrations...

This will come as surprising news to Herbert Hoover fans.

TokyoHustla I hear you.

Now explain why George Bush, the daddy, had to sign the biggest tax increases ever when he took over after the Ronald Reagan administration? If your were even believeable, why need a tax increase after a republican president?

Republican presidents have had to be bailed out in recent history, after their administration ran the U. S. economy into the dirt.

The damage was done during the first 6 years. $4Trillion were given away, tax cuts that we couldn't afford were signed after that. Tax cuts are given while we're involved in a war (an unpresidented action).

Tell me more about how republican presidents have been such great leaders. < :-)

Oh, please. We all know we're in this mess because of (insert whatever you personally don't like here).

Madverts: nobody is laying everything at the feet of W.

Well, I wouldn't say nobody, ne? heh There is a very small group on the fringe who are doing just that. But I'll admit they are small and don't reflect what a vast majority of educated people are saying about the situation. But they sure do talk a lot.... ;)

No not everything. But most things on him or his republican congress, the first six years. < :-)

Yeah, daydream is one of those that has nothing good to say about W. Myself, I blame a lot of the problems of the economy on Bush. And even more of the problems of Republicans on him. His father, despite the 91 tax increase, was a much better President.

Now explain why George Bush, the daddy, had to sign the biggest tax increases ever when he took over after the Ronald Reagan administration?

In saying this, you show you don't really understand what happened during the Reagan years, nor what was happening under Bush. First thing you need to understand, is that Reagan was laboring with a Democratic congress. He was the first person to actively preach conservatism and limited government on a national stage. And yet the times called for him to compromise on this issue. He could fight the Soviets, or he could fight Congress. He chose to fight the Soviets, creating the largest peacetime buildup of military forces ever. Forcing the Soviets to respond and driving them into bankruptcy. Democrats made Reagan pay however, requiring increases in spending on social programs along with the military programs.

The price came due during Bush's term, when the deficit spending collided with a recession, and Bush was forced by the Democratic leaders to choose to either massively cut the budget, including the Armed Forces, or to raise taxes. He famously chose the latter. A choice he later said he regretted. It was used by the media and the Clintons as a hammer against him in the 92 election, and along with Perot, cost him the Presidency.

Getting back to the topic at hand however. It wasn't long ago that the US was having sticker shock over the cost of the Bailout. 80 Billion Dollars? Then 150, then 200, now 837 Billion, of which all of about 120 Billion is actual stimulus, the rest just pork filled spending.

The sad fact is, that this "Porkulus" bill is going to do hardly anything to stimulate the economy in the short term, while actually dragging down the GDP over the long term. To put it more simply, it would be better for the government to do nothing, then for it to pass this bill. Even the Congressional Budget office, and the Presidents own advisors agree on this point.

Who cares, just leave the boat and jump to another ship that isn't sinking. Believe me you won't be the only one and the first one nor the last one!!

No Molenir, you can't have it both ways.

The republicans taut Ronald Reagon as the greatest icon to conservativism and how his economy was so great. Oh how I remember how the trickle down effect will make things so much better and everyone will benefit.

It didn't happen. There was no trickle down effect. There was no great benefit for the masses.

I remember it too.

In 18 months we'll start seeing the economy turn around. < :-)

It didn't happen. There was no trickle down effect. There was no great benefit for the masses.

Oh? No great boom period of growth happened during the 80s. I see. You've just proven beyond a doubt that you're either a partisan hack, or an idiot. At this point I don't care which.

Having said this though, I sincerely hope you're right about the 18 month recovery prediction. Though I suspect it will take a follow up bill to fix the disaster Obama is going to implement before the economy to starts to recover.

Super,

I fail to see how Bush's 8 years in office shouldn't bear its' fair share of the blame for at least failing to act and spending chronic amounts of tax-payer money on it's wars, however.

"No great boom period of growth happened during the 80s. I see. You've just proven beyond a doubt that you're either a partisan hack, or an idiot. At this point I don't care which."

Well said.

In the past, my family and I have done well during Republican adminstrations. I do not know why but it is true. We had a very diffult time during the Clinton administration so we are preparing for the worst case scenario during the current administration. We are hoping for the best.

So let me get this straight: The Republicans don't like the plan because they think it's too much to spend and they'd rather see tax cuts that will benefit their wealthiest donors. This is because you have to actually make money in order to see any tax cuts; the more you make, the more "benefit" you'll see. And this, when they've wasted so much in Iraq.

However, something MUST be done to stimulate the economy and since the general public supports this bill, the GOP can't be seen as standing in the way. So they designate a few Republican votes, just barely enough to pass the bill, so that they can protect their asses and claim that it wasn't their fault if it doesn't work out.

It's sad, the greedy selfishness that exists within the US government.

obama is borrowing money from China,and he will have to beg China

The Republicans is right,at least tax cuts will not borrow any money from any country,some people just cant be fulfilled .

"obama is borrowing money from China"

No, no, President Obama is investing in our future. Bush borrowed from China.

"The Republicans don't like the plan because they think it's too much to spend and they'd rather see tax cuts that will benefit their wealthiest donors."

Almost forty percent of the people in America pay no taxes at all.

As wage earners, they are at the bottom.

Yet they get a vote in deciding how much the rest of us get stiffed by the government.

IOW - That means they get representation, but no taxation.

Obama flat out lied when he promised the public would get to view the stimulus bill online.

We got taxation, without representation...

President Obama is investing in our future?Time will prove that you are wrong.

globleone - Sorry, I didn't realize you've been posting here only since today and are therefore unfamiliar with my posts! I was being sarcastic. I agree with you.

"Economic recovery plan" ---- hahahaha, what a great euphemism for "government spending".

If government spending was the key to economic success, the Soviet Union would be be alive and flourishing, and so would Venezuela and Cuba for that matter. France would be too, while Hong Kong would be a basket case.

The democrat party in the US has dusted off all their spending and entitlement plans, re-labelled them as "stimulus". This would be hilarious, if the rest of us were not affected by it.