Who supports the Stimulus Package?

[Malice]

I know its a tough one to ask...
Because of all the parts that are IN and then OUT...etc...

So its a general question

 

[SuBe]

I absolutely do not support this Stimulus, any previous Stimulus and Bailout. Government needs to get out of the way and let the Businesses do it's job!

 

[Malice]

Not in any form...

 

[Paradoxium]

I don't see the big difference in the No Choices

I'd do it this way:

Yes in its current form
Yes, with minor changes
Yes, with major changes
No

No is a pretty... succinct answer if you ask me t:

Or just a straight yes or no..

 

[chaseter]

I like pork but not government raised Smells like butt.

 

[The Senator]

I support the stimulus, and don't understand why others do not considering spending in a recession is beneficial to the economy as long as it is done during a condensed window of time . If you spend money in a recession, you increase the inflation rate; if inflation increases, then unemployment will decrease because companies will have more money and the means to hire more people; if more people are employed, then they will be able to input more of their money into the economy. Essentially, what you want here is an expansionary fiscal policy, where you cut taxes while increasing spending-- which is exactly what President Obama has proposed, and was done during the Clinton administration after he was elected president.

 

[Addendum]

I support flat feet

 

[The Senator]

And, even if there is "pork" contained within the bill, I see no reason to object to it. Most appropriations requests contain projects which require a work force to establish these projects. So what are you getting out of it? More employment opportunities for blue-collar workers who have been laid off during this economic crisis.

 

[StorminNorman]

I think a Stimulus Package is needed, but I do not support the one currently imposed. Filled with needless spending - and that is not limited to construction projects.

 

[SuBe]

I support the stimulus, and don't understand why others do not considering spending in a recession is beneficial to the economy as long as it is done during a condensed window of time . If you spend money in a recession, you increase the inflation rate; if inflation increases, then unemployment will decrease because companies will have more money and the means to hire more people; if more people are employed, then they will be able to input more of their money into the economy. Essentially, what you want here is an expansionary fiscal policy, where you cut taxes while increasing spending-- which is exactly what President Obama has proposed, and was done during the Clinton administration after he was elected president.

Because for Government to SPEND the money, it has to TAKE the money out of the Economy. Maybe?

 

[souloffire]

Don't you mean the Spending Package?

 

[The Senator]

Don't you mean the Spending Package?

Spending? You mean like the $500 billion we poured into Iraq last year, while we continued to cut taxes?

 

[The Senator]

Because for Government to SPEND the money, it has to TAKE the money out of the Economy. Maybe?

We had a deficit when Clinton spent money we didn't have, and our economy ended up just fine during his presidency.

 

[souvlaki]

Speaking of the stimulus package, it looks like the Senate has reached a tentative deal. Final package will be $780 billion.

 

[chaseter]

We had a deficit when Clinton spent money we didn't have, and our economy ended up just fine during his presidency.

Clinton balanced the budget

 

[bunk]

I'm not going to pretend like I've read the thing and really know what's in it, but It appears as though it's full of a bunch of unnecessary crap. I support the idea though. It's just annoying how irrelevant things always get tacked on. Not only is it a waste of money, but it just slows the whole process down.

 

[souvlaki]

I'm not going to pretend like I've read the thing and really know what's in it, but It appears as though it's full of a bunch of unnecessary crap. I support the idea though. It's just annoying how irrelevant things always get tacked on. Not only is it a waste of money, but it just slows the whole process down.

That's the problem. Not many people have, but everyone has an opinion. There is a lot of misinformation out there about it. Hell, there are still people that believe ACORN gets money from the stimulus package.

 

[Paradoxium]

If you spend money in a recession, you increase the inflation rate;

Wrong, we are deflating right now despite a doubling in the money supply. Even Ron Paul who has been screaming inflation for years, admits we are deflating (for now at least). How long is another question. Inflation and deflation is the net value of money supply and credit. There was enormous credit destruction by the defaults, this is why we are deflating.

All you've done is have the government spend money which people will pocket... But that does not guarantee the velocity of money increases, and the politicians want this.

then unemployment will decrease because companies will have more money and the means to hire more people; if more people are employed, then they will be able to input more of their money into the economy.

Wrong on two accounts.

Most of the money are borrowed, the taxes you are paying only pays a part of it. By taking credits out of the global banking system - especially when there is a shortage - you've just prevented a number of private companies from around the world from being able to borrow more money and fund ventures much more sustainable and self sufficient than any government program. Companies are now less able to hire and retain people, and even less in the long term, because of the deferred taxation schema.

If there was deflation, purchase value of your immediate savings increases. That is, you get more for less. Business can invest more cheaply. By inflating as you advocate, you destroy store value of savings, so business has less value to invest in comparison to a deflation. Value is more important than the quantitative unit on a piece of paper.

Essentially, what you want here is an expansionary fiscal policy, where you cut taxes while increasing spending-- which is exactly what President Obama has proposed

Wrong.

Cutting taxes and increasing spending is an oxymoron. All you've done is increased taxes at a higher rate down the line. We call this deferred taxes. This is the same fail that Bush did.

Also, you can't increase spending if you don't have many willing creditors, you are making a large assumption China, Japan and the Saudis will perpetually feed America forever. Last Thursday's treasury auction had one of the lowest cover to bid ratios in months (since September, when creditors were extremely uptight). The Chinese won't have much more money to buy t-bills because of their own little stimulus and economic problems. Other countries have solvency issues (i.e. Britain). The Saudi and Russian have a lot less revenue from oil prices. The American banks? Hahaha. Of course the alternative is to suck out the remaining trust funds from Social Security, but they did that with the bailout. Even if you do a complete pullout from Iraq tomorrow, you only save around 100 billion per year. Obama plans to do 1 trillion deficits per year in his term. Unlike FDR, America nowadays is relies on foreign creditors, in the Great Depression the majority of the creditors were American and there was a lot saved still.... all the money Obama is talking about is BORROWED. Big difference.

You can't borrow **** if no one is willing to lend out much now can we? If you can't payback your old debts, guess what? Say hello to Iceland.

This economic policy is precisely what the Japanese did, from the bailout of banks to stimulus. It wasn't even all borrowed money (much worse) and they still failed. This whole thing is absolutely wrong, but the good news is, despite the epic fail, you will get what you want anyways. So it works out for you I guess.

 

[Paradoxium]

A few months ago I was saying hyperinflation - inflation will be an inevitability if things start going back to normal and velocity increases, but that will be a long while. But right now for the foreseeable 2009, we are looking at deflation. Can't ignore data. I was absolutely wrong before to say and think it would be as soon as it is.

Gold is still good, some gold mining stocks been up 3-5 times. Amazing profits.

 

[StorminNorman]

I wish I knew nearly as much as Paradoxium.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I support the need for a stimulus, but not the one that is out. We need one that focuses on job creation and stimulating the economy. Not the crap that's in it.

 

[Sebastos]

I don't know at the moment.

 

[danielisthor]

I want to see how much of the pork has been cut out. I voted the last option. I don't agree with some of the spending i've heard such as replacing gov. vehicles with hybrids.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I'm in the "do nothing" crowd. Let the market fix itself.

 

[The Senator]

I'm in the "do nothing" crowd. Let the market fix itself.

That strategy worked swimmingly when Herbert Hoover was president...