2009 Obama Stimulus Bill - do you support it or not?

[Napoleon Ier]

If you eliminate the free market we will not be the same country. People would rather face depression than give control of private industry and private banking to the government. Or give away our money to the same people who set this up. You've gotta remember, they did this on purpose.

Who said anything about eliminating the free market?

You know, Brown, Sarkozy, Obama... these quacks that no rational electorate is ever going to vote in...

Oh. Wait.

[luns101]

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

I won't quote everything you wrote, Nobunaga, but this part was the most chilling in my opinion. I didn't even know this had been sneaked into the bill. Assuming Obama knew this was in there, the man is shameless.

[jay_a2j]

You've gotta remember, they did this on purpose.

Truer words were never said.

[Nobunaga]

... It's the end of America, or at least the America founded on the principles of freedom and, more importantly, liberty. It is also an attack against our children's future happiness, as they will be the ones who will bear the brunt of this burden in the next generation.

... After interest, over ten years, this bill comes to 3.7 TRILLION dollars. The Stimulus Package, a.k.a., the Screw Over Your Children Package

... This is the largest expenditure by a legislature in the history of the world... yet nobody voting on it has read it. The President's "New era of transparency and responsibility"? ! ... What could be more irresponsible??!! (It would require reading 2 pages a minute for two days non-stop to read the bill, btw, now into the thousand of pages).

... The complete socialization of the medical system is in this bill.

... The negation of wellfare reform is in this bill, financially rewarding states for increased numbers on the wellfare rolls.

... VERY little "Green" job type stuff is in there, as far as anybody knows. In fact very little job creation aside from the creation of federal employee positions is to be found.

... Let's see, ... 600 million (started at 300 mil) for golf carts for federal government use... A train from Vegas to Disney Land, .... A Gangster Museum .....

... Hope and Change, Baby! For a moment I actually started taking a liking to this guy. Stupid me.

... I'm going to throw up.

...

[PLAYER57832]

... It just passed in the Senate.

... Sorry, Grandma, you gotta' die now.

...

You obviously have no acquaintance with Blue Cross Insurance here in the U.S.

I don't like all the provisions, but the government is hardly the problem. Not sure it is providing the solution, but it is not the problem.

[PLAYER57832]

... It's the end of America, or at least the America founded on the principles of freedom and, more importantly, liberty. It is also an attack against our children's future happiness, as they will be the ones who will bear the brunt of this burden in the next generation.

I see, and Obama CREATED this situation?

I am not sure this bill will solve it .. not sure anything can, but let's put the blame where the blame lies. Banks were deregulated, rich were offered tax cut after tax cut. A perdium of greed without ANY responsibility (health care ... gee, can't afford it .. I gotta have my million dollar mansion, how DARE you suggest I pay $350,000 a year for retirees health care?), NO regard for limits of resources (just pump more .../cut more/etc.). Mortgages offered to people banks KNEW they could not afford at the lowest interest rate, never mind any increase when adjusted ... but those loans would only be sold .. and then GAURANTEED, so who cared? Blaming illegal aliens for taking jobs instead of blaming employers who OFFERED THEM, employers who then turned around and complained about increased health care and welfare costs without regard to their OWN responsibility (gee.. you mean if I don't hire as many people that might mean more have to go on welfare?... you mean these illegals I hire might once in a while get hurt or get sick enough that they HAVE to go to the hospital...).

Our grandkids and greatgrandkids WILL be paying ...but not because of Obama. I don't know if he will fix things, but he is SURE not to BLAME!

[GabonX]

Aside from the fact that Bill Clinton's economic policies created a financial bubble which Bush failed to recognize in time that is...

[GabonX]

I am not sure this bill will solve it .. not sure anything can, but let's put the blame where the blame lies.Banks were deregulated

Quite the oppisite, they were over regulated and were forced to make loans to people who would never be able to pay the money back.

Anyhow, this poll, in what is predominantly a liberal forum, speaks volumes.

[PLAYER57832]

Aside from the fact that Bill Clinton's economic policies created a financial bubble which Bush failed to recognize in time that is...

Which had nothing at all to do with policies left by George W. Bush and fully supported, nay demanded by the Republicans ... which had, in turn nothing at all to do with deregulations begun under Reagan.

Don't worry about cause .. yep, things go sour under a president, (even before the president takes office, in the case of Obama) but yep .. it is still that president's fault.

[PLAYER57832]

I am not sure this bill will solve it .. not sure anything can, but let's put the blame where the blame lies.Banks were deregulated

Quite the oppisite, they were over regulated and were forced to make loans to people who would never be able to pay the money back.

No one "forced" banks to make loans. They changed the laws so that banks could ... and banks took advantage ...and were allowed to sell of those loans in bundled and guaranteed securities so that they never had to take responsibility (in most cases) for the loans they originated. It even worked for a while ... at least as long as the the housing market kept going up.

Oh, and did I mention that we already went through this in the S & L crash ... and laws were put on the books then that were considered "too inconvenient".

You cannot have it both ways ... you either have deregulation and abuse OR you have regulation and at least some limits to abuses.

But the BIGGEST problem was this whole new market of "financial products" ... bundled securities and "insurance" that even issuing entities did not fully understand and that had NO regulation.

[Nobunaga]

... Hey, Player, how you doing? Long time.

... Am I blaming Obama for the crisis? ... If I am, show me where. I AM blaming him for a complete lack of transparency (he promised us this) and responsibility (NOBODY HAS READ THE THING!!)

... Am I the only sane one here who believes we should proceed with at least so much caution as to read the document and have the public informed as to its content before it's voted on? (keep in mind, the largest expenditure anywhere since mankind's ancestors first crawled out of the mud eons ago). Or does this attitude make me mad? (as in crazy).

... With the Dem majority it will pass regardless, but your government does not want you to know what is actually in that bill. It is now posted for all to see (24 hours too late, in violation of the bill's own provision), but posted as a PDF, to remove searchability functions (normally they're put up as "Read-Only" Word docs.)

... I wish I had the faith you guys have in government, but I cannot for the life of me recall a single large government project or expenditure that was ever managed frugally and efficiently. Can anybody? Our kids are totally screwed.

... btw, Clinton's good economy was, if you believe economists in general, the result of Reaganomics. But no doubt Bush wreaked havoc on it.

...

[GabonX]

Reagonomics and the dot com boom, so unless you believe that Al Gore actually did invent the internet you can't credit the prosperity of the 90's to anything Clinton did.

Like Nobunaga said, nobody is blaming Obama for the crisis. We are blaming him for pushing legislation through Congress (which really isn't supposed to be a President's job anyway) against the will of most people in this country which will in all likeliness make the crisis a catastrophe.

[PLAYER57832]

... Hey, Player, how you doing? Long time.

good to see you,too.

I think we all agree that this bill is far from perfect. As for the transparency and such ... this is why we have a representative government. As much as I dislike having to rely upon legislators (and I do!), there just was not/is not time to really do a thorough analysis on this and get it out in a timely manner. I hear complaints, but the overriding voices I hear from business, state governments, etc is "do SOMETHING".

... I wish I had the faith you guys have in government, but I cannot for the life of me recall a single large government project or expenditure that was ever managed frugally and efficiently. Can anybody? Our kids are totally screwed.

Actually, yes. This is one of the biggest misconceptions there is, that somehow government is always far more inefficient than private entities.

First, it just isn't. NPR did a story on this not so long ago (sorry, could nor find link ). A study came out looking at whether it is more efficient to do things privately, to hire contractors or to have jobs done directly in the government. Everything from IRS type jobs to inspections to prisons, etc. The result? Direct hired workers were FAR more efficent AND produced better quality work.

The plain fact is that government jobs are not comparable to private industry jobs. Some jobs absolutely and completely NEED to be private. But, there is a whole other set that cannot. Collecting taxes, some types of research (that don't result in direct products for sale, particulaly), and much of managing natural resources is far more efficient when done by the government directly.

Also, remember this. What is considered "inefficient" in government often translates into "more people hired" instead of "a few guys getting pretty rich" (not always, but many times). Government is not always supposed to be "efficient" in the same way a private company desires. The old WPA was a prime example. "Efficient"? Depends. If you mean that we have thousands of trails, places to camp and stay, art, recordings of interviews and music from all over the country, writings and poetry we never would have had otherwise, then "yes". If you mean was government made smaller and profits made? No.
But that is a differance between government and private sector work, not a measure of efficiency or lack thereof.

Anyway, this could be a whole other subject, so I will stop there lest I be accused of thread jacking.

... btw, Clinton's good economy was, if you believe economists in general, the result of Reaganomics. But no doubt Bush wreaked havoc on it....

I would attribute technological advances, plus increased oil availability as much as anything. However, my point is that the effects of a president's work is rarely seen until after he leaves office. George W. Bush, ironically, is a very notable exception. However, he was also in office for 8 years. (and no, not all of this is his fault, either).

[Night Strike]

Anyhow, this poll, in what is predominantly a liberal forum, speaks volumes.

I had the same thought yesterday.

[Napoleon Ier]

... It's the end of America, or at least the America founded on the principles of freedom and, more importantly, liberty. It is also an attack against our children's future happiness, as they will be the ones who will bear the brunt of this burden in the next generation.

I see, and Obama CREATED this situation?

I am not sure this bill will solve it .. not sure anything can, but let's put the blame where the blame lies. Banks were deregulated, rich were offered tax cut after tax cut. A perdium of greed without ANY responsibility (health care ... gee, can't afford it .. I gotta have my million dollar mansion, how DARE you suggest I pay $350,000 a year for retirees health care?), NO regard for limits of resources (just pump more .../cut more/etc.). Mortgages offered to people banks KNEW they could not afford at the lowest interest rate, never mind any increase when adjusted ... but those loans would only be sold .. and then GAURANTEED, so who cared? Blaming illegal aliens for taking jobs instead of blaming employers who OFFERED THEM, employers who then turned around and complained about increased health care and welfare costs without regard to their OWN responsibility (gee.. you mean if I don't hire as many people that might mean more have to go on welfare?... you mean these illegals I hire might once in a while get hurt or get sick enough that they HAVE to go to the hospital...).

Oh. Yeah. Because any rational businessman is happy to offer a loan he knows will never be repaid.

Especially when Bill Clinton's HUD forces him to using Community Re-investment Acts...

As for the idea that Health Care and the causes of the Credit Crunch are related... well. Let's just say I do put some of the blame on rampant economic illiteracy in the US population.


Our grandkids and greatgrandkids WILL be paying ...but not because of Obama. I don't know if he will fix things, but he is SURE not to BLAME!

[Fireside Poet]

[Rocketry]

You can trust Obama, trust me.

[Fireside Poet]

You can trust Obama, trust me.

Just based on your word and ... what else?

[luns101]

... It's the end of America, or at least the America founded on the principles of freedom and, more importantly, liberty. It is also an attack against our children's future happiness, as they will be the ones who will bear the brunt of this burden in the next generation.

I agree in a general sense, but at the same time I can remember many people saying this back during the Carter years. We came back from that as there was a tremendous backlash against his policies and Reagan crushed him and then later Mondale in the 80's. There's always hope, and it's almost necessary for the country to go through something like this in order to be re-awakened to the principles of freedom & liberty that you mentioned. There's a few people in my family who voted for Obama, not so much to support him but instead out of anger at George W. Bush. Now that they've seen what Obama is actually about they are infuriated. Anyway, 2010 is right around the corner.

[GabonX]

What am I supposed to do in 2010? Arlen Specter is my Senator up for re-election! Unless somebody else gets the Republican nomination I don't see much point in voting.

[luns101]

What am I supposed to do in 2010? Arlen Specter is my Senator up for re-election! Unless somebody else gets the Republican nomination I don't see much point in voting.

There is the primary. I suspect with Bush out of the way, a more conservative candidate will have a chance against Specter in that contest. Even in 2004, Specter was barely able to defeat Toomey.

[Neoteny]

What am I supposed to do in 2010? Arlen Specter is my Senator up for re-election! Unless somebody else gets the Republican nomination I don't see much point in voting.

There's always the bitching and moaning option. We had to do it for eight years, and those were very obviously bad. These policies haven't even been implemented yet, but you are, as always, more than welcome to complain about how things aren't going your way.

[GabonX]

What am I supposed to do in 2010? Arlen Specter is my Senator up for re-election! Unless somebody else gets the Republican nomination I don't see much point in voting.

There is the primary. I suspect with Bush out of the way, a more conservative candidate will have a chance against Specter in that contest. Even in 2004, Specter was barely able to defeat Toomey.

I guess...

I'm registered as an independent. Joining a party is somewhat of a betrayel of my principles and my state doesn't have open primaries.

[PLAYER57832]

What am I supposed to do in 2010? Arlen Specter is my Senator up for re-election! Unless somebody else gets the Republican nomination I don't see much point in voting.

There is the primary. I suspect with Bush out of the way, a more conservative candidate will have a chance against Specter in that contest. Even in 2004, Specter was barely able to defeat Toomey.

I guess...

I'm registered as an independent. Joining a party is somewhat of a betrayel of my principles and my state doesn't have open primaries.

Mr Specter doesn't seem to think his election is a lock, so maybe you should vote ...
(oops .. scratch that ... don't vote, stay home! ... don't negate my vote!)

[GabonX]

You're going to vote for Specter in the Republican primary?