Myths and falsehoods surrounding the economic recovery plan »

Posted By Radiofreeeuropa 9 months, 1 week ago in Business & Finance

During their coverage and discussion of the economic recovery
bill supported by President Obama, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act , media figures have advanced several myths and falsehoods relating to the details and effects of the plan.
These myths and falsehoods include: the assertion that a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) "study" found that the majority of the money in the bill will notbe spent for a year and a half; that provisions in the bill to extend food stamps and unemployment insurance payments are "not stimulus"; that President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal policies failed to reduce unemployment during the Great Depression; that Japan's fiscal stimulus policy during the "lost decade" of the
1990s failed to help it recover from
recession; that the bill would spend at least $217,000
for every job created; that the Association of Community Organizations for
Reform Now (ACORN) would receive $4.19 billion from the bill; and that former Labor Secretary and Obama adviser Robert Reich
proposed white males should be excluded from jobs created by the bill. These are all falsehoods. But no wonder those inclined to question the new administration are raising a ruckus, their being fed falsehood after falsehood. It's not really their fault, but an irresponsible or misogynous media whose lies are echoed over and over again through blogs and social sites until the truth is obscured completely.

Read Full Story at mediamatters.org »

1410 Views Share Story 133 Comments Report

Submitted By:
Radiofreeeuropa

All progress comes from unreasonable people.
Rats live on no evil star!
Wasilla: All I saw...
Sorry, just palindroming around with terrorists.
Are you still ...

Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:

RSS Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 133 (view all)
- Display
  • 93%
    Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    This is important! I have not been able to find an actual factual site that posts the stimulus bill. I asked if anyone had a link and there were no responses. Yet many are claiming to be privy to it's inner wordings (through opinion sites and news blips). A member had copied and pasted a National Review opinion as his own in which claims that the New York Times editors declared the stimulus package "12% stimulus and the rest pork" - except this was an op-ed from republican Peggy Noonan - not the New York Times editors. There are few facts and no shortage of "opinions" yet until we actually know what's in this bill how can there be any reasonable discussion of it's merits? Most of the Senators pay someone else to read these bills and give them the scoop, so many of their opinions are questionable as well. Again I have heard all kinds of claims, yet when I do the research none of them seems to be supported by anything more than error or 4th person hearsay.
    This article lists a few of the bogus claims being made and where they originated.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    9 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 73%
    Endoscopy9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    Stupid is as stupid does. Go to the CBO web site and download the document talking about how to speed up the package. It is dated Jan. 29, 2009.

    http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/collec...

    Click on the line:

    An Assessment of How Spending from the Economic Stimulus Proposals Currently Before the Congress Could Be Accelerated

    A great total of 15% in the year 2009. A previous study said a lesser % in the fiscal year ending in September.

    This package is supposed to be an immediate stimulus for the economy. That is what Obama said and it was supposed to be passed quickly so that could happen. 15% in this fiscal year means that the rest will have NO EFFECT on the immediate economy. That means that only $123 billion will have to do the immediate rescue of the economy. If this the only stimulus then why does this package have $825 billion and climbing.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    8 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 100%
    Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    $79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cutbacks to key services, including $39 billion to local school districts and public colleges and universities distributed through existing state and federal formulas
    $15 billion to states as bonus grants as a reward for meeting key performance measures, and $25 billion to states for other high priority needs such as public safety and other critical services, which may include education.
    $15.6 billion to increase the Pell grant by $500.
    $6 billion for higher education modernization.

    Tax Cuts to Make Work Pay and Create Jobs: We will provide direct tax relief to 95 percent of American workers, and spur investment and job growth for American Businesses.

    Lower Healthcare Costs: To save not only jobs, but money and lives, we will update and computerize our
    healthcare system to cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help reduce healthcare costs by billions of
    dollars each year.
    ! $20 billion for health information technology to prevent medical mistakes, provide better care to patients
    and introduce cost-saving efficiencies.
    ! $4.1 billion to provide for preventative care and to evaluate the most effective healthcare treatments.
    Help Workers Hurt by the Economy: High unemployment and rising costs have outpaced Americans’ paychecks. We will help workers train and find jobs, and help struggling families make ends meet.
    $43 billion for increased unemployment benefits and job training.
    $39 billion to support those who lose their jobs by helping them to pay the cost of keeping their employer provided healthcare under COBRA and providing short-term options to be covered by Medicaid.
    $20 billion to increase the food stamp benefit by over 13% in order to help defray rising food costs.
    Save Public Sector Jobs and Protect Vital Services: We will provide relief to states, so they can continue to
    employ teachers, firefighters and police officers and provide vital services without having to unnecessarily raise
    middle class taxes.
    $87 billion for a temporary increase in the Medicaid matching rate.
    $4 billion for state and local law enforcement funding."

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    17 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 100%
    Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    It will take a while to digest the details but according to the document itself:
    the breakdown is-
    "$32 billion to transform the nation’s energy transmission, distribution, and production systems by allowing for a smarter and better grid and focusing investment in renewable technology.
    $16 billion to repair public housing and make key energy efficiency retrofits.
    $6 billion to weatherize modest-income homes.

    Transform our Economy with Science and Technology: We need to put scientists to work looking for the next great discovery, creating jobs in cutting-edge-technologies, and making smart investments that will help businesses in every community succeed in a global economy. For every dollar invested in broadband the
    economy sees a ten-fold return on that investment.
    $10 billion for science facilities, research, and instrumentation.
    $6 billion to expand broadband internet access so businesses in rural and other underserved areas can link up to the global economy.

    $30 billion for highway construction;
    $31 billion to modernize federal and other public infrastructure with investments that lead to long term
    energy cost savings;
    $19 billion for clean water, flood control, and environmental restoration investments;
    $10 billion for transit and rail to reduce traffic congestion and gas consumption.

    To enable more children to learn in 21st century classrooms, labs, and libraries
    to help our kids compete with any worker in the world, this package provides:
    $41 billion to local school districts through Title I ($13 billion),
    IDEA a new School Modernization and Repair Program ($14 billion), and the Education Technology program ($1 billion).

    continued

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    10 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 100%
    jimdoze9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    To sum up...
    Hydrogen fuel cells are extraordinarily clean at the point where they are applied to do work. However, the whole cycle still requires about 2 to 3 times the energy to do the same amount of work that a gasoline or diesel engine will now do. Passing current through salt water to obtain free hydrogen is extraordinarily inefficient. The current must come from somewhere and it certainly is not a breakeven proposition. The best, most economical source of hydrogen is from knocking a hydrogen atom off of methane (natural gas). This is still very expensive in terms of the ratio of energy used to work performed.
    Controlled Nuclear Fusion remains the great hope for humanity. However, it involves controlling a process with temperatures and pressures found only at the center of the sun. This, as you might imagine, is no small thing. The U.S. government devotes roughly $1 Billion per year to research and development of this technology. While it is promising and sustained fusion reaction generators may someday be developed, they are not now. It could easily take another half century or more to achieve this technology.
    In the meantime, there is wind and solar, which can help a little at the margins. However, that is only at the margins. Industrial economies require industrial sources of energy production. There are only two general categories of sources presently. Those are fossil fuel and nuclear fission. If the U.S. wishes to seriously reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, the only other choice is nuclear fission power generation for at least the next half century.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    3 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 100%
    Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    Once you remove the myths, this becomes simply about those who believe Government should act in the classic Keynesian way to restore normality and those who think it should act in the Herbert Hoover fashion...(prosperity is just around the corner!).

    Let's be honest about it.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    4 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 92%
    Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    On Fox News, Carl Cameron and Laura Ingraham reported the false Republican claim that, in Cameron's words, the economic stimulus bill would allow "illegal aliens" to claim "tax credits of $500 per person or 1,000 per couple." Cameron and Ingraham advanced the falsehood even after it was made clear that the bill excludes undocumented immigrants.
    http://mediamatters.org/items/200901300002?f=h_top

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    5 Replies

    loading loading ...
    • 100%
      Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      Gasoline explodes too. I do think people are generally unaware that nuclear reactors can be built relatively safely now and without much of a disposal issue. Thanks for the comment that was absolutely factual birdsabound! A breath of fresh air so to speak.

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply

      10 Replies

      loading loading ...
    • 100%
      Beau78909 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      Thanks for posting an article with actual facts and links to the bill, Radio.

      I'm continually surprised at how many distortions are repeated as fact by ostensibly legitimate journalists--people with experience reporting the news and who are supposed to have an understanding of how to check facts--like Chris Wallace and Brit Hume, as opposed to Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin (who at least have the excuse that they're not trained to know truth from fiction, though one would think they'd be able to do so anyway).

      While it can be argued how some of the items in the bill might stimulate the economy, it's helpful to have a clear recounting of what's actually included in the stimulus package.

      As for pork--well, that's an ambiguous term--it's true as you told me that one man's job is another man's pork...or as I like to say, one man's fish is another man's poisson. But with the facts out here, we can debate this legitimately. Personally, I'd argue that any package allocating money for specific purposes, but not giving it to specifically named organizations, is a legitimate non-pork use of money. In the case of this stimulus package, almost everything that's not a tax cut can directly create jobs. And the tax cuts and measures to protect homeowners against foreclosures in this package certainly help those struggling with the sluggish economy in the short-term, until longer-range effects of the bill are felt.

      About your other difficulty in finding the text of this bill, anyone who ever wants to look up any piece of legislation being debated, voted on, or passed can see all drafts of any bill in either the U.S. House or Senate, including the original and modified versions, at this website maintained by the Library of Congress:

      http://thomas.loc.gov

      It's an excellent resource.

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply

      1 Reply

      loading loading ...
    • 100%
      nostalgia9 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      No one is saying that many of the provisions are not worthwhile BUT the bill lacks focus
      Go through the provisions again and ask "Will this create a job?"

      Too many of the provisions are increasing govt programs which will not create a single new job. Increase spending on food stamps, the WIC program and unemployment benefits to name 3. Needed you bet BUT in a stimulus bill? Those need to be in a regular appropriations bill

      Did you hear Alice M. Rivlin, who was President Bill Clinton's budget director, testify before the House budget committee?

      She had the most common sense approach I have seen

      Rivlin suggested splitting the plan, implementing its immediate stimulus components now and taking more time to plan the longer-term transformative spending to make sure it is done right.

      "Such a long-term investment program should not be put together hastily and lumped in with the anti-recession package. The elements of the investment program must be carefully planned and will not create many jobs right away," said Rivlin, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. The risk, she said, is that "money will be wasted because the investment elements were not carefully crafted."

      The bill to be voted on today includes $30 billion for roads and bridges, $9 billion for public transit and $1 billion for inter-city rail -- less than 5 percent of the package's total spending. Administration officials have said they did not push for more infrastructure spending because of concerns about how many projects are "shovel ready" -- a view that House members say is held most strongly by Lawrence H. Summers, Obama's chief economic adviser.

      Even though most House Democrats say they will back the plan, many reject the administration's argument, saying that infrastructure projects could easily be expedited, that the economy will need additional infusions for years to come and that the real reason for shunning infrastructure was to make room for tax cuts. Obama, with a public mandate to do something big, is missing a rare opportunity to rebuild the country, they say.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

      Infrastructure priorities, focus and jobs should be the main concern of any stimulus bill

      Research on the flu?
      Money for climate modeling?
      New computers for the Ag Dept?

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply

      1 Reply

      loading loading ...
    • 100%
      nostalgia9 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      We all need to keep a close eye on the "Made in America" provision in the bill

      Western Europe, China and now Canada are all threatening to file a complaint with the WTO if that provision remains in the final version
      Canada also says it is a violation of NAFTA

      Lobbyists are already descending upon Washington in an attempt to get the provision removed

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply

      11 Replies

      loading loading ...
    • 100%
      canadianrancher579 months, 1 week ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      In regards to the section about the bailout in Japan I am forces to sort of go with those who say that it has not worked. Japan started their bailouts in about 92 and after a certain point one has to realize that the monies that are going into support programs must be repaid, the situation in Japan quit declining because of the bailout but has failed to get it back into a growth cycle.
      I have noticed that there is much importance being placed on the word jobs but if this plan is just one big make work project it is a waste of money.
      One thing I will agree with though is if people continue to politicize every action that the government attempts then alot of these ideas will not happen and there are some of them that do have merit and would benefit the US economy long term. To me the energy sector is one that is one of the most important,regardless of whether a country is in a recession or booming the cost of energy is always a major facrot and sending billions of dollars out of your country will never help.

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply
      loading loading ...
      • 43%
        Bucotch9 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        Pork, pork, pork. More government jobs and pork that don't generate anything for middle class. A cop or any other state job doesn't actually pay taxes. All they do is funnel back (rebate)some of the real tax payer money that is wasted on the multitudes of excess we already have. Might as well cut their wages in half and not have them pay any so called taxes at all.
        This cycle of more government doesn't add up. It's all spending. I'm sick of working till June to pay taxes. And I'm sick of seeing it take 10 cops, with a half million worth of vehicles, to make a traffic stop. Then all sit at the doughnut shop. Pathetic.

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply

        1 Reply

        loading loading ...
      • 50%
        4thchance9 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        Obama set up a website just for this plan, so we can see what's up with it..but I have forgotten the web address for it???

        it's something .gov

        If I find it I will post the link...

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply

        4 Replies

        loading loading ...
      • 100%
        nostalgia9 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        The Boston Globe has an interesting story on the House bill

        Only 5 percent of $819b plan would go toward infrastructure
        Critics say transportation is shortchanged

        Representative Michael Capuano, a Somerville Democrat on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said he has watched with frustration as spending for rapid transit and rail dropped during negotiations over the bill. For example, after an initial burst of enthusiasm for inter-city rail projects, the amount was reduced to $5 billion and then to $1.1 billion, he said.

        The bill has $30 billion for roads and bridges and $12 billion for rapid transit, with decisions on specific projects to be made by state and local officials. But that's far less than originally sought by some Democrats, and could make it more difficult to fund some Massachusetts projects, such as work on roads, bridges, and the MBTA system, or a proposed extension of the commuter rail line from Lowell to Manchester, N.H.

        "Priorities changed," Capuano said. "Someone says, 'How about food stamps, how about early childhood education?' "

        The chairman of the transportation panel's subcommittee on highways and transit, Peter DeFazio of Oregon, became so angry about the reduction in transportation spending that he recently accused Obama's top economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, of arguing against such funds because he "hates infrastructure."

        http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/artic...

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply

        2 Replies

        loading loading ...
      • 25%
        slate9 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        I've been told that since Bush spent money on a war I/we shouldn't dare say a word about this pork laden bill.

        The dems have spent in one week twice the amount that war has cost to date.

        To date, over $500 billion of U.S. taxpayer money that has been spent on the war in Iraq.

        if you take the 120 billion dollars in stimulus checks that will come out of the almost 900 billion dollar 'bill' the pork alone far exceeds 5 years of war.

        This is something you are proud of and have no problem saying Yeah but Bush spent money on a war?

        You guys won, now it's time to hold your own to the standards you claim you wanted the Rs to have.

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply

        12 Replies

        loading loading ...
      • 100%
        frctm59 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        I think we can safely dismiss most of the Republican's claims as well as Rush Limbaugh's, regarding the cost, need, or effectiveness of the stimulus. They are pathological liars who preach to their choirs of ditto heads. One criticism I have heard, however, is that the stimulus tries to do too much in one package. That is, that it is overly broad in its aims but not sufficiently funded to be effective in achieving the stated goals. I think it would be better to pass stimulus packages on a yearly basis and measure the results as we go rather than pushing for the whole enchilada at one time. This way there will be more opportunities to make changes and adjustments to continue with those things that are working and changing those that aren't.

        But we definitely need to fix our infrastructure and stimulate our economy. Our infrastructure is pathetic given the size of our economy. You go to Europe or Japan and even China and you will see countries that take some pride in their national infrastructure and have a vision of the future. In America, we are resting on our laurels. We are still a great nation, but the Republicans are content to let it go to seed in the name of small government. Its a stupid and short sighted approach that will cause our nation to back slide. The projects of the WPA are still yielding dividends to this day. The problem is that most of our big public works projects, other than freeways, were built in the thirties and they are getting old. The information economy has created new needs as well and these have not kept pace with the changing economy.

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply

        3 Replies

        loading loading ...
      • 100%
        Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        I think republicans are merely hedging their bets. If the stimulus works well they think Obama will get the credit but if it doesn't work, and they opposed it they can claim a sad victory of sorts..."Hey all you destitute starving people we told you it wouldn't work!" "If you had only listened to us...well you'd still be destitute and starving."

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply

        2 Replies

        loading loading ...
      • 100%
        mmrhe9 months, 1 week ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        Thanks for the post Radio!
        You're right...The stimulus package has been getting hammered on MSM and I've been waiting to hear the facts come out instead of the spin.
        One thing for sure. The Repubs are seizing on this as their big chance to 'make a stand'
        People need to get the facts and make up their own minds and Obama needs to get out this weekend and sell this thing or it will be in trouble

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply
        loading loading ...
        • 33%
          Klarissa9 months, 1 week ago

          This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

          What is the difference between a stimulus bill and a pork barrel bill?
          How many of these programs would do anything for the economy? Would they help YOUR pocketbook?

          $650 million for digital TV coupons;
          $600 million for new cars for the federal government;
          $6 billion for colleges/universities – many which have billion dollar endowments;
          $50 million in funding for the National Endowment of the Arts;
          $44 million for repairs to U.S. Department of Agriculture headquarters;
          $200 million for the National Mall, including $21 million for sod;
          32 new government programs at a cost of over $136 billion;
          $18.5 billion expenditure on “energy efficiency” and “renewable energy programs;
          $1 billion for Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) – a program that already has $16 billion on hand;
          Funding for Contraceptives;
          Government run new health care information technology system;
          $87 billion for Medicaid,
          $50 million for the arts;
          $3 billion for American Indians;
          $75 million for programs to help people quit smoking;
          $1 billion for Amtrak;
          $2 billion to help subsidize child care;
          $400 million to research global warming;
          $2.4 billion for projects to demonstrate removing carbon gas from the atmosphere;
          $600 million for new green cares for government employees;
          $2.25 billion for national parks;
          $335 million to treat sexually transmitted diseases;
          $44 million to renovate headquarters of the Agriculture Department;
          $32 billion for a smart electricity grid to minimize waste;
          $10.3 billion tax credits to defray college tuition costs.
          The Congressional Budget Office calculates that the interest on the debt of this bill would cost $347.1 billion.

          The majority of the money would be spent over a three year period, so why is this called "crisis" money?
          And how many of these programs would do anything for the economy?
          All members of the "Accountability and Transparency Board" would be appointed by the President. Congress has to approve the monies, but will have no oversight.

          (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
          Reply

          3 Replies

          loading loading ...
        • 100%
          fjgalt9 months, 1 week ago

          This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

          Printing a trillion dollars doesn't mean that a trillion dollars worth of actual goods and services are created. If the money is borrowed, it will have to be paid back with interest. If it's just printed, then the extra currency is added to the claims on actual goods and services, devaluing the dollars in circulation by that amount.

          If we assume that 850 billion (or about 1.2 trillion with interest) will create 4 million jobs, that comes to between $200,000 and $300,000 per job. A small business owner could create 5 or more times that.

          What this bill amounts to is another BIG spending bill. To be paid for by whom? By the people who actually create the wealth -- from day laborers to business owners and those in between -- and give value to those printed pieces of paper we call currency, now and in the future.

          This spending bill is another burden to be repaid by our children and grandchildren. When they grow up and damn our generation, we will deserve their condemnation.

          (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
          Reply

          5 Replies

          loading loading ...
        • 100%
          Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago

          This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

          I don't remember hearing anyone cursing those civil war guys when it was paid off in the 80s. the Civil War—it was just $65 million dollars in 1860, but passed $1 billion in 1863 and ended up at $2.7 billion following the war. Still by the time it was paid off it was chump change. No one really even noticed.
          Now our children's children's children's children's children's children likely would curse us for allowing our once great civilization to collapse. They may stumble on some picture of people eating in a restaurant and wonder what the heck is going on from their campfire in some abandoned building while avoiding the cannibals who banded together in the building down the road. In fact if it gets bad enough many of them will never be born anyway.

          (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
          Reply
          loading loading ...
          • Neutral
            TiaSmith6 months, 3 weeks ago

            This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

            I like the approche which is being arosed .Miami Beach homes are considered hot properties in any given time. The beautiful beach setting coupled with a tropical weather for most parts of the year is very appealing to everyone.
            Tia smith
            Miami real estate

            (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
            Reply
            loading loading ...
            View All 133 Comments

            Add a Comment

            Sign In With Your Propeller Account

            Forgot your password?

            Please keep your comments relevant to this story.

            To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.

            Submit a Story

            Advertisement

            Story Tags ?

            business lies politics economy fallacies finance stimulus truth media

            Hey! If you Sign In, you can add tags to this story!

            Real Estate Info

            Get the Latest Market Info for Your Area



            Foreclosures | Short Sale

            Luxury Homes | Homes for Sale

            First Time Home Buyer Advice



            Also Dropping This Article

            view all »

            Also Submitted By

            No one else has submitted this story.