Comments for Myths and falsehoods surrounding the economic recovery plan »
Posted By Radiofreeeuropa 11 months ago in Business & FinanceDuring 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 »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 133
-
93%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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.
Reply
This article lists a few of the bogus claims being made and where they originated.-
84%
Goppy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
RFE - this is a very good article. Thanks for posting it.
Reply
I hope I don't discourage your efforts to provide a rational voice for this effort ... however ... the Right Wing screamers on Propeller will continue to drown out reasoned debate on this issue.
The Right does not care about facts. They are managed by the leader of their party ... Rush Limbaugh.
If you've never noticed, the Right on Propeller invariably repeat Rush's 'Talking Points' immediately after he dispenses his "Dis-Information".
Look, this is what the Right Stands for in America today ... Obfuscation. And their is no one better at Obfuscation than Rush Limbaugh.
That is why the Right Idolizes Rush. That is why Rush Limbaugh has emerged as the 'defacto' leader of the Right.
It's a kind of sick, cynicism toward all things Federal Government.
.-
100%
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Goppy, I agree the right-wing screamers are shrill about this, but I haven't seen anything much good come from the left, either. They've been turning it into a Christmas tree with things I agree with, but that don't fit here.
Reply
I think congress is the problem, though, and not Obama. And obfuscation is a tool used on both sides of the aisle--just on different issues. I think we need to be a lot more diligent about watching both "sides" and not fool ourselves into thinking politicians have our best interests at heart, whether we voted for them or not.
That's not cynicism--that's rational, based on history. -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
89%
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Radio, sadly I fear we're going to see a continuation of the same thoroughly disgusting behavior we saw from certain right leaning posters throughout Obama's entire campaign. It's one thing to be poorly informed and quite another for someone to post something they know to be false, simply to get the lie out there in cyberspace. Thanks for posting this. I would have but I don't have your clout. Had I posted it and not simply referenced it in that other thread, it likely would have been kicked off the front page immediately by some foreclosure come on.;-P
Reply
-
-
73%
Endoscopy11 months 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.
Reply
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.-
88%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks Meso, I don't have any special clout though I assure you. I just was frustrated yeterday trying to confront the "liars" one at a time, and as you know even when presented with links that dispelled the lies, they continued repeating them. Thanks for originally putting this link in your comment as I am sure that's how I found it. It's hard enough dealing with the severity of this crisis without disinformation being given more "status" than truth.
Reply
The only thing I can say is that many of these people who perpetrate the fallacies did read them on some KKK blog or other out there site and do not understand the difference between the rant of a sociopath and the reality of a fact.
Since the list is right here, one would simply be placing their ignorance on display to repeat any of these lies. The fact that the actual document is referenced here should keep the discussion about reality ...but we shall see. -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
60%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey Endo It is called the Economic Recovery Act and part of it is stimulus.
Reply
It's also referred to as the first step, It is likely just that.
Let's get those presses rolling.
The sooner we get printing, the sooner the recovery.
I'm sure you won't cash your tax rebate though. (Assuming of course you pay taxes).-
100%
beavith111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you can't inflate your way out of deflation, any more than you can drive down the street with one foot on the gas and the other on the brake. .
Reply
i've said several times that i hope that Obama is successful, so don;t just lump me in with your rightard sceamers.
spending this money will do nothing. spreading it out over a couple years will do even less.
Obama's work on a bad bank resolution is our only way out.
what alarms me is the democratic mob marching in lockstep right off the cliff.-
Neutral
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"you can't inflate your way out of deflation, any more than you can drive down the street with one foot on the gas and the other on the brake. ."
Reply
--Why should anyone put any stock in what you say after the last 8 years of Republican non-leadership and fiscal irresponsibility?
-
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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
Reply
$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."-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Since the original post, our fellow propeller friend, Nostalgia, provided a link to the actual Stimulus Package (Thanks, your a gentleman and a scholar). It would be nice to comment on this actual document rather than some media nincompoop's comments about it.
Reply
Here is the document- Full Text (641 pages) http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/HR1.pdf
the summary-
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/appropssummar...-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now where is the pork? Where are the things that don't create jobs? In the medical part? Maybe...but I'm not against these.
Reply
I can't find them. One criticism I heard is that many of these items are not fully funded, this bill however says it is 1st in a series of steps, if the program is working it gets fully funded in the future, if it's not it gets cut. This seems like a good idea to me, not a negative factor.
Most of the wild claims I've been hearing (many dealt with in the article we are commenting on) I can find no evidence of in the bill.
It seems many naysayers of the bill just don't believe in government's ability or right to intervene and are latching on to falsehoods to attack it. It isn't their fault in a way, there are plenty of falsehoods being touted in the media and they are merely all too willing to believe these blunders, or intentional smears of the truth. But the actual bill seems like a much more valid attempt to do the right thing than one would gather from the hoopla. Is it perfect? I'll bet not. But it's as good a bill as I could imagine coming out of capital hill on any given day.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nostalgia, my sincere apologies...I shall not make that mistake in the future.
Reply
Rephrased-
Your a woman of great virtue and a scholar!
I should have known you were female as you discussed your point of view without resorting to disinformation, name calling or having a tantrum! -
0%
Endoscopy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is not pork only to liberals who love to spend other peoples money on a lot of things. Add up all of those billions you were throwing around and realize that Bush was not letting those things be spent and you libs still ranted at his deficit. This is deficit spending on a scale that makes Bush look like a penny pincher. Call it what it is. It is not a stimulus package.
Reply -
33%
Endoscopy11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And 85% of this being spent after 2009 according to the CBO estimate I referenced above. So why is this supposed to be an Immediately needed package to stimulate the economy this year. This is all pork that Democrats could not get passed under Bush. Obama let Pelosie have free reign and this boondoggle is the result. Republicans were locked out of any discussion on the package and not allowed to put forth any amendments. So much for the vaunted bipartisanship that Obama touted. That went up in flames. Obama lied. Why did Obama lie?
Reply-
-
Neutral
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Add up all of those billions you were throwing around and realize that Bush was not letting those things be spent and you libs still ranted at his deficit."
Reply
--Endo, no one cares that cons are whining about spending too much money when you gave Bush and the GOP a blank check for 8 years. Sorry but we're not persuaded that cons suddenly know what you're doing with America's money or that you will spend it wisely. We don't believe you one little bit. Keep crying but you lost in Nov. Your agenda is on the backburner for the foreseeable future. Get used to it. ;-P
-
-
-
-
Neutral
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Obama didn't lie--he just doesn't control congress."
Reply
--If only more of the electorate had come to this realization (that a President doesn't control Congress) in 2004, meme. If only. Chances are we wouldn't now be forced to debate a stimulus plan. ;-(
-
-
100%
Mdiar11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
54% of this will be spent by 2011. By the time the bill is passed, fiscal year 2009 will be half over (or so says the CBO). Time is needed to spend money and a lag almost always exist when you increase the funding for something, due to planning for that money.
Reply
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9975/01-29-Conr...
This provides details on the issue in question.
Speeding up the rate of spending would not be easy. In the very short run,
fiscal year 2009 will be nearly half over by the time stimulus legislation is
passed, so while federal agencies and state and local governments can begin
the process of obligating (committing) funds, there will be limited time for
spending this fiscal year.
Lags in spending stem in part from the need to draft plans, solicit bids,
enter into contracts, and conduct regulatory or environmental reviews.
Spending can be further delayed because some activities are by their nature
seasonal. For example, major school repairs are generally scheduled during
the summer to avoid disrupting classes, and construction and highway work
are difficult to carry out during the winter months in many parts of the
country.
This isn't meant to be here. I see Propeller is up to its usual tricks. -
-
Neutral
mesodude11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"And 85% of this being spent after 2009 according to the CBO estimate I referenced above."
Reply
LOL...Endo, you cons are hilarious crawling out of the woodwork and citing the CBO as an authority-when you were ignoring them for 8 years while Bush was "losing" billions of dollars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans. Yeah...We're compelled to listen to cons now. That'll reeeally happen...Keep believing that. ;-P
-
-
-
-
100%
tchef11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Republicans were not locked out of the process. President Obama went to them himself and asked for their support. They decided to leave the bill as is hoping that it would fail in it's mission so it could be counted as egg on the face of the Democrats.
Reply
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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:
Reply
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-
100%
quackpot11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spreading the spending over more than a 7-8 month period makes a great deal of sense.
Reply
Any kind of stimulus must have a long enough life to sustain job creation long enough for the economy to return to a functioning system. Since the FISCAL year 2009 ends in September, creating a HUGE number of jobs that would only last 7-8 months following the passage of the bill would be sure folly.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That is why it is manifold, some immediate stimulus, some longer term. You can not revamp the economy, retool and recreate an American industrial base, in short sited endgames, it takes a broad and multipronged approach, the real danger is not doing enough.
Reply-
0%
beavith111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i can't believe you think its going to do anything at all.
Reply
i'll say it again.
the US GDP is $13 T. CDO and CDS liability is $40-60T. the banks are broke. the federal gov't can't pour enough cash into those institutions to BECOME solvent. the money being used, now, to 'free' up the credit market is being used to pump up reserves in a futile attempt to bolster their balance sheets.
Obama can't fire up his bad bank fast enough... -
-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned1 Reply
-
100%
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I thought the anti-smoking program was pulled out...no? I read they did pull out the STD prevention. As long as they can show it helps U.S. taxpayers, I don't oppose it, but of course congress has to put in some pork--that's how they operate, irrespective of who holds the majority. They are a machine of sorts.
Reply-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I haven't seen any of the claims made yesterday in the document. I don't doubt this stuff was in there at one point but the published draft does not seem to have it.
Reply
And that should be what we discuss, the actual published bill.
There is a provision for paying for police. But that at least is employment, and related.-
Neutral
memestryker11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think they added a lot of pork in the first place to get their pet issues some media coverage, knowing they'd be cut during the negotiations, and making it look like they've given something up. That seems to be the norm for congress on such things.
Reply
I don't see them there, either, in the version posted from Huffington.
-
-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned4 Replies
-
100%
jimdoze11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To sum up...
Reply
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.-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The comments have been showing up and moving all over the place , it was driving me mad yesterday...I would spend time looking up the facts on someone's claim, respond as eloquently as I could...only to have the comment appear somewhere completely inappropriate .
Reply
What's up with this Propeller?
It's VERY frustrating. -
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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!).
Reply
Let's be honest about it.-
-
100%
beavith111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
honest? if one makes the assumption that Keynesian economics is the only solution.
Reply
i find myself looking for new answers to these new problems, rather than try and form 1930 answers to a wholely different solution.
i'm reminded of the old requirement to compare and CONTRAST, rather than just assume a tool from last century IS the answer.
except for spending the better part of $1T, i think Obama IS working for a solution. this pork stuff is just pork. its not priming anything.-
Neutral
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ok, we had this discussion before but what is your more modern solution?
Reply
I am of the mind that if the economy collapses (and it is ) that government should attempt to keep us employed if private industry can not.
That it should fund industry that will be viable in the future until private enterprise is healthy enough to take it over.
I'm not sure what the alternative might be.
Government do nothing?
Simply cease to exist?
Tax breaks won't do a thing for the 5oo,ooo who lost their jobs today alone.
The trade agreements we made set us up as the world's consumers and abandoned any ability to be self sufficient...that has to be built from scratch again.
It ain't gonna be cheap my friend.
I suppose we could go back to living in caves...frankly we'd probably be happier.
-
-
-
92%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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.
Reply
http://mediamatters.org/items/200901300002?f=h_top -
birdsaboundComment removed: Spam16 Replies
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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.
Reply-
100%
flyonthewallzz11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nostalgia:
Reply
The emergency appropriation thing is a total mess.
None of the spending is calculated when they come up with the deficit number.
As I have said before the numbers they give us for revenue are incorrect as well.
They use Gross collections and not Net somehow many of the tax refunds are left off the budget. The IRS does publish them but treasury and OMB seems to ignore them.
This makes me nuts!
I would have to agree with you if all of this spending is going to be tucked away and off the published budget. It is really hard to get the real numbers.
Would having this spending become part of the actual budget soften some of the blow for you? The items you are talking about definitely should be budget items.
It will take me a while to actually form an opinion here.-
-
100%
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Alice M. Rivlin, who was President Bill Clinton's budget director had a very common sense approach to what needs to be done when she testified before the House budget committee
Reply
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."-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What has happened is the stimulus bill has become an omnibus economic recovery bill. It refers to itself as such on the first page. This is a very clean bill considering it's scope and length and many of the complaints I heard yesterday are not even in the bill...perhaps they were before final publication...but they aren't in the bill. Acorn is not in the bill, that was nonsense. If they break it into 3 parts, well that's fine with me but do it fast.
Reply
This is already something that should have been passed months ago.
There isn't time to waste, even with passage now half the year will have gone by before it begins.
This is a do or die scenario.
Unless you think Hoover was right
and prosperity is "just around the corner"...all you have to do is trust in the wisdom of the corporate overlords....-
100%
Mdiar11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, I was thinking something more along the lines of the immediate stimulus aspects of it being put into a quickly passed bill. Infrastructure repair and the expanding of non-energy infrastructure (mass transit comes to mind), in addition to expanding things like food stamps. Then a second bill, that would be passed after greater discussion and evaluation, would be passed. The second bill would concentrate on things like education, alternative energy and just the general stuff that is needed for a functioning economy in the future. A long-term growth bill, in other words. I think this would pay higher dividends in the form of superior long-term growth legislation. It would also remove some confusion from the bill.
Reply-
Neutral
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"immediate stimulus"
Reply
The only immediate stimulus - tax cuts
Food stamps, expanded WIC , extended unemployment benefits etc aren't stimulative. They are needed to maintain people. Congress already has a vehicle for that type of spending - emergency appropriation bills. That could be passed in a matter of days and take effect quickly. Rolling that into the stimulus bill only delays getting the money to people who need it RIGHT NOW
Everything else will have an impact at a future time
Infrastructure or 'shovel ready" projects are at best intermediate. Don't forget that the states and local govts will need to put the contracts out for bidding, may face environmental challenges to the projects etc
One of my major objections to the "infrastructure" spending was the power grid. It was lumped in with several other projects but in one of the executive summaries there was a line item for $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. (later in the summary you will see that only $11 billion of the $32 billion is for the Reliable, Efficient Electricity Grid: $11 billion for research and development, pilot projects, and federal matching funds for the Smart Grid Investment Program.
Robert Kennedy Jr said just last week that it will take $150 billion to design and build the new grid
After all of this spending we still will not have an upgraded power grid
All of the money later that will be spent on developing alternative energy sources will be to no avail if we can't transmit the energy from large wind farms in the midwest or large solar generating plants in the southwest to the large cities where it is needed
-
-
100%
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Acorn is not mentioned by name but falls under this provision:
Reply
If you don't want to read the entire bill you can find it in the executive summary from the Committee on Appropriations:
"Neighborhood Stabilization: $4.2 billion to help communities purchase and rehabilitate foreclosed, vacant properties in order to create more affordable housing and reduce neighborhood blight"
That means ACORN and organizations like ACORN receive that funding
Remember the ACORN/Rezko rehab of housing in Chicago?
Do some reading about Grove Parc in Chicago
Grove Parc has become a symbol for some in Chicago of the broader failures of giving public subsidies to private companies to build and manage affordable housing
But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.
Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.
Some of the residents of Grove Parc say they are angry that Obama did not notice their plight. The development straddles the boundary of Obama's state Senate district. Many of the tenants have been his constituents for more than a decade.
Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to Obama's presidential campaign and a member of his finance committee. Jarrett is the chief executive of Habitat Co., which managed Grove Parc Plaza from 2001 until this winter and co-managed an even larger subsidized complex in Chicago that was seized by the federal government in 2006, after city inspectors found widespread problem
Rezko's company used subsidies to rehabilitate more than 1,000 apartments, mostly in and around Obama's district, then refused to manage the units, leaving the buildings to decay to the point where many no longer were habitable.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06...
What should we learn from all of this?
Federal money which has no Federal oversight is often wasted and leaves the very people it was supposed to help in worse shape than they were before being "helped"
ACORN is not just a Chicago group they are in many large cities all around the country so they will stand to get a large share of this funding
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
Beau789011 months 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.
Reply
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. -
100%
nostalgia11 months 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
Reply
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?-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is not unreasonable, I question why most bills are of the "omnibus" nature, but they are.
Reply
It is better to be able to discuss these things individually.
Though I would say too that (especially because my daughter is a researcher, I understand the employment aspect) that money spent on scientific research employs people and most definitely creates jobs. Being equipped to do the job is important, many government agencies are in fact given tools to work with that were appropriate in 1966 but are laughable in today's tech oriented world...I'm OK with this aspect ...updating the computer systems.
The bill is referred to as the first, rather than a do all end all fix everything solution. I would guess for political expedience they want to get some of these items that are "bones of contention" through now there is a call for immediate action, this is just how it's done.
They know the most popular parts would pass easily (roads). As I understand it, the idea is to get these things started, look at the progress and provide another layer of funding if they show results, cease funding if they do not. This seems reasonable to me.
And people are looking for different things here, I'm looking for enough stimulus, enough employment, enough commitment to have people feel secure enough that maybe they will go buy.. say, a new car, where they are not now because of uncertainty about having income to pay for it. I think it's got to be bold, and it's got to be big.
I have no objection to tweaking, and I hope the Senate does in fact tweak. But sadly they took the financial "bailout" bill and loaded it with junk...making a bad bill even worse. I don't have much faith in the Senate doing anything but adding junk to this. And generally speaking, it's not a bad bill, perfect? Of course not, but after reading the complaints in media about it, I find the truth is, considering the insane nonsense I'm used to seeing coming out of the legislature, this is a fairly honest attempt to do the right thing.
I appreciate your reasoned and honest commentary Nostalgia, I disagree, but respectfully.
(Your quite unusual, as most of the commenters who claim to speak for the right are remarkably uninformed and unknowledgeable. Merely repeating pop media or pasting diatribe from some loony blog. If more conservatives were concise and honest, like you have been, I believe there would be serious bipartisanship. Keep it up, hats off to you!
-
-
-
100%
nostalgia11 months 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
Reply
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-
100%
jimdoze11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Protectionism is a sweet, seductive siren-song which, ultimately, leads to doom. And, in the current worldwide economic environment, it can set off forces of economic nationalism so quickly, and so deeply, that it will make your head spin. There is only one other way to set this country more assuredly on the path to world war than by invoking protectionist measures as a short term, politically expedient palliative to rising unemployment.
Reply-
100%
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We are in a very dire situation
Reply
Might have been a very different story BEFORE the free trade agreements.
With the way the trade agreements are set up, we have become the consumers for the world
When we hit terrible economic times and stop buying the world goes into recession
This is a major reason why we have lost much of our manufacturing base
Time for re-evaluation and an honest assessment of the impact these trade deals have had
Steel and iron are a perfect place to start
Factories in some top steel-producing states -- including Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Alabama -- are running at 45 percent capacity, with 40 percent of their workforce on furlough, or about 25,000 people
What we're already seeing is that demand is going down, but imports of Chinese finished steel is going up because they are subsidizing it. Is this not a violation of the WTO provisions? China has already started a trade war but we are unwilling to acknowledge it
This stumulus package is to promote American jobs - not jobs in China or Canada (one article noted that ~40% of our steel and iron is imported from Canada)
This has been done before and in fact is still on the books:
Congress enacted the Buy American Act in 1933, establishing preferences for U.S.-made products in government contracts. In 1982, those preferences were made more strict for transportation and highway projects, although waivers have been granted.
Washington Post:
It's not protectionism, Senator Dorgan said. Citing the massive U.S. trade deficit, he added, "and it's pretty hard for anyone to look at our trade situation and suggest that we are being unfair."
We can't be consumers for the world any longer
This recession is going to be a life changing event for many people
I don't think you are going to see people buying every new gadget and going into debt because they want to go on a spending spree
And I would ask, why should US taxpayers for generations to come be strapped with debt that is used to stimulate the economies in other countries and create jobs in those countries
Perfect time to really look at whether the free trade agreements have helped us or hurt us-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hear Hear! You are dead right! It's just like any bargain you make, for instance you agree to marry someone for life, but if they beat you do you stay in the marraige to avoid upsetting them?...I should hope not.
Reply
Something critical changed...you have to deal with the new reality.-
Neutral
beavith111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
two words:
Reply
Smoot Hawley.
then go back and see the devastation that bill caused. some say it was the pistol shot behind the ear that pushed us (and the industrial world) into the great depression.
world trade is already off 20%, thanks to reduced world consumption.
a trade war is insane. i don't care what that boob Dorgan says.
siren song of protectionism? how true.... remember in the illiad, the sirens called the sailors to their doom?-
Neutral
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then explain to me why the rest of the world is always willing to run to the WTO to file complaints against the US but we turn a blind eye to unfair trade practices which negatively impact our companies?
Reply
The Chinese govt subsidizes their steel and iron industries - isn't that a violation of the WTO agreements?
That allows their companies to undercut the price for steel and iron
Or as reported on Jan 29
France has denied it is giving state aid to Airbus after ordering its banks to lend €5bn (£4.7bn) to help airlines buy European-built planes as a condition for taking an extra €10bn of government capital.
An official quoted in France's financial daily Les Echos said: "This will permit us to respond to the difficulties of plane manufacturers' clients who can't find the financing."
France has already told its banks they must set aside €7bn to support French exports. The €5bn aviation package is expected to be drawn from that sum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
Or Jan 30
UK Auto Bailout - includes ‘buy national’ provisions and government subsidies to domestic industries
Or Jan 27
State aid to steel is illegal under EU rules - a legacy of the big restructuring efforts of the 1980s when Europe agreed to stop the race to the bottom with tit-for-tat subsidies for national steel companies. But governments in France, Germany and the Netherlands are getting round the ban
It won't cost a huge amount to pay half the wage of 1,000 Corus workers sweeping the floor of a silent mill for six months, if that is what it takes. The worry is that governments will embark on a new round of tit-for-tat subsidies and bungs for favoured industries and, with Britain's huge exposure to the banks, its funds are constrained.
We are already in a trade war but we didn't start it
Do you really support your tax money going to buy foreign material from funds in the stimulus bill? So what you suggest - support employment in other countries and simply extend unemployment benefits and food stamps here?
As I said - I don't care where private industry gets their material but when my tax dollars are being used to fund projects the material better be purchased here
As I noted above:
Congress enacted the Buy American Act in 1933, establishing preferences for U.S.-made products in government contracts. In 1982, those preferences were made more strict for transportation and highway projects, although waivers have been granted.
Take it off the books if the govt isn't going to follow the law
-
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Jimdoze, the other side of that coin is it has to be FAIR trade. The people whose pets were poisoned with pet food with ingredients they didn't realize had come from China would likely gladly have paid a little more for a domestically produced product. The infants poisoned with melamine in baby formula gave their lives for globalism, cheap goods are not always the holy grail! sometimes they are just cheap. Every nation needs a degree of economic protection from unfair trade. Look at this economy, all supply and no consumers. How did that happen? The buying power of consumers was eroded by decreasing their meaningful employment possibilities, doesn't matter how cheap a product you manufacture, if the buyer has no job, or is afraid of losing it shortly you won't make a sale. Much of the Global Economy was a masquerade for merely exploiting cheap if not slave labor. That isn't fair trade.
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
SEC. 1110. USE OF AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL.
Reply
"(a) In General- None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for a project for the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of a public building or public work unless all of the iron and steel used in the project is produced in the United States.
(b) Exceptions- Subsection (a) shall not apply in any case in which the head of the Federal department or agency involved finds that--
(1) applying subsection (a) would be inconsistent with the public interest;
(2) iron and steel are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory quality; or
(3) inclusion of iron and steel produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25 percent.
(c) Written Justification for Waiver- If the head of a Federal department or agency determines that it is necessary to waive the application of subsection (a) based on a finding under subsection (b), the head of the department or agency shall publish in the Federal Register a detailed written justification as to why the provision is being waived."
Would some adjustment of the "25% of overall project cost" make it more palatable for you?
I am of 2 minds here: I think the 25% tariff on light trucks is one of the things that got us into this mess, but I also wonder about us competing with a nationalized foreign industry.
I think a nudge towards more domestic manufacturing is appropriate.-
100%
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Fly
Reply
Frankly when I look at the stats on employment on the steel and iron industry in this country I don't care about the 25% - I don't care about any increase in cost in this case
ALL material used in govt projects needs to be made here
I'm not asking for tariffs just a flat out ban on imported material used in projects paid for by the US taxpayer
I don't care where private industry buys the material they need but with taxpayer dollars it is different
Of course I'm one of those people who refuse to buy anything made in China and send emails to corporate offices telling them why I wouldn't buy their product
If we are ever going to improve the standard of living again 2 things need to be done
Severely restrict illegal immigration - they have driven down wages in construction jobs to what they were 10 years ago. The prevailing wage provision is not as meaningful as it used to be
Increase domestic manufacturing jobs by reducing business taxes on companies that manufacture here
We can't survive and have an economy based ypon service jobs-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am in agreement 100%. China and other nations are looking out for China and other nations, the US government has every right to insist US tax money purchase US made goods, as you said this is not private industry. NAFTA and other trade agreements should be looked at, this is an entirely different arena than when they were quickly negotiated with very little public support or scrutiny.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
canadianrancher5711 months 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.
Reply
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. -
43%
Bucotch11 months 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.
Reply
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.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So cops are a waste of money and you don't like paying taxes....
Reply
Does anyone like it?
Obama may be wise to let people opt out if they want to.
Since the red states are by far the greatest recipients of tax dollars, you could refuse to take them...after all that IS socialism isn't it.
-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
4thchance11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
About a week ago, Obama told us the web address of his new web site dedicated to this recovery plan.
Reply
Go here
http://www.recovery.gov
But there's nothing there now? Just a note saying to check back after the big vote....-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, this is the site that will track and report on how the money is spent.
Reply
Even hardcore rightwingers who don't like him, c'mon you have to admit Obama is trying to do things right.
What president has ever allowed this kind of access?
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Slate- As you may have noticed the comments are spread willy nilly by propeller's growing wierdness , the second half which included the rest of the bill is probably on some post about squirrels. Why do you insist on continuing the lie about acorn?
Reply
At least read the article your commenting on.
This is a fact check site.
It says it is a lie.
I used to respect you but the unwillingness to admit your source is wrong in light of a fact check is not honorable.
I read the oped piece you referred me to, and commented with factual comments yesterday but I guess you missed those. You claim that this slush fund money
given to local governments will go to Acorn. (or your oped source did- you made the leap) Why? Because some local governments have hired the organization in the past.. It's a very far stretch that you for some reason refuse to let go of. This article you comment on is calling it a lie.
It is a fact check site.
Please give it up slate, your better than this.
I mistook you as a legit conservative who stuck with honesty. Always kind of liked you for that.
Now it seems you've joined the mindless spite crowd.
Too bad as it completely cheapens the legit stuff you might have to offer. -
-
-
100%
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Boston Globe has an interesting story on the House bill
Reply
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...-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Early childhood education employs lots of people as well, it may not be as glamorous but it employs people. Many of these programs have been hot potatoes in terms of funding the last number of years, some stability would be a welcome change.
Reply-
Neutral
nostalgia11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
But that is why I keep saying that Congress did not set priorities and the bill lacks focus
Reply
There are many worthwhile projects but in a stimulus bill should be just that and you need to ask "How quickly can it be started"
Frankly I think there should be 3 bills
An emergency appropriations bill for food stamps, extended unemployment, expanded WIC etc. This could be passed in a matter of days. I doubt that you would see many members of Congress voting against it
An infrastructure bill - here is where they need priorities and focus
A catch-all bill for the rest including early childhood eduction programs. This is where you need extended debate. Of course many of the programs that would fall under this bill could simply be considered in the regular appropriations process
-
-
-
25%
slate11 months 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.
Reply
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.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Which part is pork Slate?
Reply
The stuff you claimed yesterday isn't even in the bill.
In normal times this spending would be excessive of course, these are no longer normal times, if you personally haven't been devastated by this crisis well good for you.
America's economy needs complete retooling and in many cases re building to work in not just the here and now but the future.
It ain't gonna be done on the cheap.
So which part isn't worth doing here Slate?
"$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.
Or 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).
Which is the evil pork?-
-
-
100%
slate11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The stuff you claimed yesterday isn't even in the bill.
Reply
Heck I did see you missed the part about Orgs like LARAZA and ACORN and the 4.1 billion,,,,,, yeah I know they didn't mention the names in the bill but you know those are tow of the orgs that will take s slice of that pie,,,,, quit playing word games. who here was in need of a community organization to help you figure out not only how to register, but to cast your vote and whom to cast it for?
All the things you talk about come to a total of 291 Billion
Let's see, all those things don't sound that much like pork and may help.
Let's have a look see and ponder these tidbits,,,,
working on the electrical system,,, fair enough
Broad band,,,,, yeah let's get with the new technology
30 billion in highways,,,,,,, hmmmmmmm since just one freeway expansion in Houston cost almost a billion,,,,, that seems way too low don't you think?
31 billion to Modernize federal infrastructure? It sounds oxy-moronic but hey even Unk Sam needs to get on the program
19 Billion for clean water? Who can argue against clean water and claim sanity?
10 billion for rail and transit,,,,,, once again way too low and it takes decades to build enough rail and like here in Houston no one rides them, though they may work in towns that aren't 60 miles across like here.
41 to schools,,,,,, I suppose a few more billion spent on the failed school system seems paltry after the trillions so far for something that obviously hasn't worked, but that's what it's all about right?
I can buy into those things, since I'm not the crazed liar I've been called by those on the left about this bill.
Though the tactic to pull these lil cherries in an attempt to paint me as uncaring about all the good deeds posed for the children, and the good of the people by the left to show those on the right don't care about children, a clean earth and thus ( a tactic which is a well practiced but overly dramatized, overused and archaic technique )
The pork you ask about would most likely be in the other 560 Billion dollars in the bill you happen to have missed.-
Neutral
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Zeus knows where these comments are going.
Reply
I read the oped you referred to as your source for the Acorn connection and it assumes that local governments will use the money allocated for their slush funds to hire Acorn. Now ,theoretically they could. They could buy coffee and donuts or a new net for the dog catcher too. The assumption is a fallacy.
What idiot city council would spend the money for that when their revenues are dropping like plague victims? I didn't call you a liar yesterday, but today after numerous attempts to enlighten, you choose to continue spreading a fallacy
(see this article your commenting on please).
The point I take issue with today as yesterday is the acorn fallacy.
I and probably no one over there on the left have no right to criticize your opinion about the bill, but we have a right to point out a fallacy.
A reasonable man usually admits if he was wrong.
There is no Acorn money in this bill end of story!-
Neutral
slate11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
End of story huh? We'll see Radio.
Reply
Anyone can criticize anything I post here, it's an open forum and I can also post what I think and from the 'sources' I choose (as you have used your pro bill source to start this thread to spin the bill in a positive light), which happens to be the people that know the bill's implications far more than someone on a blog site.
We'll see if this is the end of the
-
-
-
-
100%
MRCOFFEECAKE11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Which would you rather spend?
Reply
$500 on hookers and drugs, or $900 on a new driveway?
Sure, the hookers or the drug dealers may feel good and may come back some day and become law abiding taxpayers, but not as likely to pay off as the money spent rebuilding those dangerous potholes in our own front yard....-
-
-
Neutral
MRCOFFEECAKE11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You can say I'm on the left, but I:
Reply
Believe that parents should be able to use corporal punishment
Support the death penalty
oppose affirmative action
think that most "political correctness" is ridiculous
support border patrol
believe in a balanced budget
and oppose rampant abortion...
Oh yeah, for the record, I'm not thrilled with Obama's recovery plan.
I'm still ticked off that Bush and Paulson expected QUOTE: a blank check with
"No strings attached"..
I would have hoped that the greatest economic minds in the modern world could have come up with a risky short term 6-8 month (pre-Christmas boost) coupled with a less risky economy solidifying plan that would take time but be measurable in progress, not measured only by how many more quarter trillions we need to cough up...
Now that their priorities are no longer supposed to protect the selfish and powerful it
should be much more clearly understood where the "recovery" is going to begin... -
-
-
-
-
100%
frctm511 months 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.
Reply
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.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree, but this is meant precisely as a "first step" with the intent being to track and fully fund aspects that are working and delete those that aren't. The biggest mistake that could be made is to do too little according to the vast majority of economists.
Reply-
Neutral
frctm511 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This bill definitely has my support. We can't afford to wait around for too long. We must mitigate the suffering as quickly as possible. Aggressive action will restore confidence in the economy and the long term improvements will boost our efficiency, competitiveness and open up new venues for commerce as well.
Reply
I think the green technology industry has tremendous potential and many long term benefits many of which are unforseen. If Obama does well at turning around the economy and putting America back on track for long term success, he will truly earn his place in the history books. I like the fact that they already passed the s chip program and the equal pay initiative. What a breath of fresh air. I like the fact that he is reaching out to the Arab world as well. Osama Bin Laden will have a much harder time selling the idea that America is the great satan with Obama as president. This isn't because Obama is a terrorist lover, but because he doesn't have a condescending attitude towards the Muslim world. This will do more to defuse anger and reduce the danger of terrorism than all the money squandered in the war on terror. Diplomacy has been neglected for too long and is far more cost effective than war. It doesn't appeal to Republicans who like to endlessly recycle the Hitler analogy, but they will squawk no matter what Obama does. -
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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."
Reply -
100%
mmrhe11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the post Radio!
Reply
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 -
33%
Klarissa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What is the difference between a stimulus bill and a pork barrel bill?
Reply
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.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How you have erred K, let me count the ways.
Reply
!st copied and pasted from some loony site, with many of the same nonsensical lies posted as such in the story you have commented on.
2nd.
You won't actually find that crap in the bill, your "sources" have lied to you.
http://www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr1_tex...
Where is that in the document?
Where are the condoms?
You poor gullible child. There are no condoms in this bill.
You have done exactly what this article is warning you against.
Posted a lie.
I hope you don't want to remain a liar and are not doing it because you approve of lieing but rather are just dupped easily my the unreliable sources you read.
3rd- read the piece you comment on, in this case it is about YOU.
(Or at least your irresponsible typing)
4th
Any program that creates jobs or sustains them is good for the economy.
So yes every one of the ones that are real stimulate the economy.
Amtrak will be involved in mass transit infrastructure improvement no surprise.
Modernizing the computer systems to current (or at least not 1980) standards isn't what most would call renovation...
The smoking thing has been claimed on this website and KKK blogs but I can't find it in the bill can you? What page? I didn't see 10 cents mentioned "for american indians"- what page is that on?
Get back to me when you find those STDs in the Recovery Act.
And wherever you get your disinformation, the site should be banned for being unhealthy.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is no game to play. The "usual suspects" who relish posting unsubstantiated loathsome lies don't understand the dire straits this nation has come to as a result of their unknowing, unseeing, and foolish ideology. Look around yourself, take your head out of the sand and stop the lies on behalf of a failed kleptocracy.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
fjgalt11 months 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.
Reply
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.-
100%
Mdiar11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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.
Reply
Not entirely accurate.
If we assume that the stimulus will work as planned, then it will boost GDP by approximately 1.5 times the amount of spending or $620 billion a year. If GDP rises by this amount, then it will translate into roughly $155 billion a year in higher taxes/lower spending than if we didn't do the stimulus. This is money that should be subtracted from the cost to the taxpayers.
So, if net out the increased revenue from the growth generated by the stimulus we end up with a 2-year cost of $515 billion which will generate roughly 8 million job-years. That comes to about $65k per job year
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_...-
Neutral
fjgalt11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wish I had your optimism. Except for a few years at the end of Clinton's second term and perhaps a few other years decades ago, the government has run deficits. It never pays off the debt. It spends more than it takes in, otherwise, we wouldn't have inflation (which means our money buys less goods and services).
Reply
Even if some good came from the bill, it still means taking the money from current or futureearners who would spend it as they saw fit. It's like buying a car (and creating an auto worker's job) and telling the salesman someone else will pay for it, probably the children of today when they reach adulthood.
It's simply theft. Both political parties try to outdo each other in how much they can steal.-
100%
Mdiar11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Many of the things that this bill will be paying for will be contributing greatly to your children and grandchildren's future. Research of alternative energy, roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, broadband internet in rural areas. These things will still be used when they are older. How much from FDR's New Deal do we still use? Quite a bit. A lot of what is in this bill are things that needed to be done anyway. These things actually help set the stage for long-term economic growth that will benefit Generation Y and younger.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
People are always trying to explain government economics in terms of personal economics.
Reply
It just isn't the same. Your life is finite, you must repay your debts before you die, yet a government lives "forever" relatively speaking. If you don't make enough to pay for your needs you can not simply print more (at least legally). Economies tend to grow (that is the point of stimulus) as they do, by the time, many generations in the future, the bill comes due (so to speak) the capital spent caused more growth than cost. The civil war for instance was a huge burden financially on the budget in it's day, but when it was actually paid off (I believe in the 1980s) the cost was chump change. Even the difference between WWII dollars and 2008 dollars (based on GNP) make the entire price tag of WWII According to my Oxford Companion to WWII in strictly monetary terms to the U.S. was $288,000,000,000.
Now it is estimated that in 1990 dollars that cost would be $2091.3 billion dollars.
I apologize for not having 2009 figures but you get the idea. What seemed like an unimaginable fortune in the 1940s became a very manageable if not inexpensive (relatively speaking) expenditure because the GNP grew that much. It's a bet on the future growth.
The vast majority of economists agree that what is called Keynesian economics is the way to deal with serious downturns. The problem is that politicians have been running deficits in times of prosperity (insanity). In times of trouble it is a very useful tool in other times it's a suicidal weapon.
The more invested, the more the growth, if private industry won't or can't do it then government can and should.
More on John Maynard Keynes:
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/Economists/keynes.html
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months 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.
Reply
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. -
Neutral
TiaSmith8 months, 2 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.
Reply
Tia smith
Miami real estate
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
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.