Economic Stimulus

One of the things being tossed around in Washington to help the economy is another round of stimulus checks, similar to the ones we received this past spring. Another option also being mentioned in place of issuing checks would be to take that money and put it towards public works projects to improve this country's infrastructure ,(roads, bridges, other public projects.)
Some say that the infrastructure project would be better in the long run in improving the economy as it creates more jobs,and the need to produce more goods to meet the increase demands for products for the capital improvements.It would also have a longer term effect in improving the economy over just the issuance of checks to households in an attempt to spur spending on goods and services. The last round of checks issued earlier in the year seemed to "miss the mark" in improving the economy as hoped for. Many households used the money to pay existing credit card and other bills,(as I did), or to save the amount for a later need and not spend it right away.
The question is: "What form of economic stimulus would you like to see,( checks to families, or capital improvement projects? And what are some of the other pros and cons of each option that you see in implementing each one?

If you post issue(s) such as this at least post a link(s) so we can see what is being tossed around by the politicians. Here is one on the Pelosi plan.

Click here (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ad4sXj.zbqgE&refer=home)

Does anyone have any data claiming the previous one worked? Obviously not since the economy tanked. Where are they going to get the money for these programs? Rob the social security trust fund again. :rolleyes:

As far as dumping the money into public works, etc. we pay enough through federal tax, state tax, property tax and gasoline tax, etc. so that is a non starter. :shakehead

If you post issue(s) such as this at least post a link(s) so we can see what is being tossed around by the politicians. Here is one on the Pelosi plan.
I had to Google the issue to get a link for you as I based this thread on a bunch of different media outlets mention of the idea over the past few weeks. (When I posted this thread I had hoped respondents would already know of this without links as we seem to be a very educated, up-to-date group.) Here is a link that I found that sums most of it up:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27328484/



Does anyone have any data claiming the previous one worked? Obviously not since the economy tanked. Where are they going to get the money for these programs? Rob the social security trust fund again. :rolleyes:
If you're talking about the one that they just did back in the spring, it obviously didn't work or at least do it's intended purpose. It may have caused a small spike in sales or delayed some from losing their jobs, but in the end I believe it may have been a good idea that just failed in it's purpose. Perhaps those that proposed the idea at first thought we'd all (or at least most of us) run out and go on a buying spree, but many ended up using the money to pay our bills or to put into a savings account where it would have a lesser effect on stimulating the economy.

As far as dumping the money into public works, etc. we pay enough through federal tax, state tax, property tax and gasoline tax, etc. so that is a non starter. :shakehead
While I agree with that, I still think that since they want to go ahead and do something along these lines, ( you know they are and will get the monies from wherever they can :lol:) public works projects can be a good thing. If they were to base it on the program instituted during the Great Depression :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration then I am for it. I had uncles back then that were part of the program and it did a lot to get people to work , learn a new skill or skills, and communities benefited from the work that was done. Yeah we pay taxes to do such projects, but if they are going to go ahead and do something like this, then we can get more projects done than if we just relied on what monies were available from tax revenue.

Some of the problems I see in implementing such programs are an issue unions may have with using "non union" ,lesser skilled labor for these projects, and politicians fighting over available funds for projects in their districts, and cutting deals to get more funding similar to what goes on now in the House and Senate to pass a simple bill :shakehead:.

Where are they going to get the money for these programs? Rob the social security trust fund again. :rolleyes:


Bob, where have you been? They'll just print more or steal it from all the "rich" people.:headshake

One idea that I had thought of after posting this thread was a way for the government to get more people to use that stimulus money for it's original intent.
Instead of issuing paper checks or directly depositing the money into an account, they should issue a debit (or similar type ) card that can be only used to make purchases. The immediate effect would be that the money could not be saved or used to pay bills. People could buy their flat screen televisions, make a down payment on a car, or even buy groceries, as long as they are making purchases. I'm sure retailers would also come up with their own programs as they have in the past to entice those cardholders to use their card in their store, ( such as making the value of the card worth more, offer free financing on any left over balance, etc.)
This could work well as in our state those who get certain forms of public assistance,( food stamps, etc.) are issued a card for their purchases.
In order for this to work, certain restrictions would need to be enacted such as not allowing the card to access cash at an ATM, card must be used at a store that accepts credit/debit cards, or online to make purchases. I'm sure that there will be those that find a way around the system, such as making a purchase and then returning it for a cash refund. But overall, implementing a system of a pre-filled card for purchases is one other way to put money in the hands of individuals to stimulate the economy, ( and that of China's as well :lol:)

Bob, where have you been?

I've been LMAO the last week, working and paying my taxes. In my leisure time watching NCAA and NFL football and getting the cars ready for the winter. :tongue:

It is all "pie in the sky" for now. I smell a filibuster or lack of votes to bring these programs which amounts to nothing but more socialism into law after the inauguration.

As to any ridiculous social programs we can't even get our kids to attend school and get good grades let alone see them go happily into a something like the WPA, conservation corps, peace corps or even the military, etc. As to people already on welfare and government hand outs they are a lost cause. :shakehead

How about they just cut taxes in half for a month?

Here is a proposal that makes sense to me. Supposedly one of the reasons why the majority elected Obama into office is because he was touted as the one to better handle the economy and made specific campaign promises. We all know what his tax and economic plans are since it has been discussed over and over, especially his redistribution of wealth tax plan. :thumbsdow

Let him put his money where his mouth is and get his proposal(s) into law. Then see if it works. :uhoh:.......:lol:

I want "Ice Cream" not a "pie in the sky" :lol2:

A teacher friend sent this:

They want ice cream;

The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade in 2000. The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote. To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot. The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother. The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best. Every one applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise. She said, 'If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream.' She sat down. The class went wild. 'Yes! Yes! We want ice cream. ' She surely would say more. She did not have to. A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it. She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream. Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a land slide.
Every time Barack Obama opens his mouth he offers ice cream, and 60% percent of America reacts like nine year olds. They want ice cream. The other 40% percent know they're going to have to feed the cow.

I've been LMAO the last week, working and paying my taxes. In my leisure time watching NCAA and NFL football and getting the cars ready for the winter. :tongue:

It is all "pie in the sky" for now. I smell a filibuster or lack of votes to bring these programs which amounts to nothing but more socialism into law after the inauguration.

As to any ridiculous social programs we can't even get our kids to attend school and get good grades let alone see them go happily into a something like the WPA, conservation corps, peace corps or even the military, etc. As to people already on welfare and government hand outs they are a lost cause. :shakehead

Hey Bob, what do you call it when the government buys public debt?

ZOMGWTFBBQ socialism :shakehead

Hey Bob, what do you call it when the government buys public debt? ZOMGWTFBBQ socialism :shakehead



Hey Tim. :wave:

:confused:

Does the government really buy public debt? What specifically are you referring to?

If you are referring to the 700 billion dollar bailout it sounds more like a "get out of jail free card" to me or state capitalism. IMO obviously not socialism based on redistribution of wealth or socialism in the political sense of the word. :grinno:

If you are referring to the 700 billion dollar bailout it sounds more like a "get out of jail free card" to me or state capitalism. IMO obviously not socialism based on redistribution of wealth or socialism in the political sense of the word. :grinno:

Looks more like an outright gift to the banks, with no way to tell where it all goes/went.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470824,00.html


Where'd the Bailout Money Go? Shhhh, It's a Secret

Monday, December 22, 2008

WASHINGTON — It's something any bank would demand to know before handing out a loan: Where's the money going?

But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they either can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it.

"We've lent some of it. We've not lent some of it. We've not given any accounting of, 'Here's how we're doing it,"' said Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money. "We have not disclosed that to the public. We're declining to."

The Associated Press contacted 21 banks that received at least $1 billion in government money and asked four questions: How much has been spent? What was it spent on? How much is being held in savings, and what's the plan for the rest?

None of the banks provided specific answers.

"We're not providing dollar-in, dollar-out tracking," said Barry Koling, a spokesman for Atlanta, Georgia-based SunTrust Banks Inc., which got $3.5 billion in taxpayer dollars.

Some banks said they simply didn't know where the money was going.

"We manage our capital in its aggregate," said Regions Financial Corp. spokesman Tim Deighton, who said the Birmingham, Alabama-based company is not tracking how it is spending the $3.5 billion it received as part of the financial bailout.

The answers highlight the secrecy surrounding the Troubled Assets Relief Program, which earmarked $700 billion — about the size of the Netherlands' economy — to help rescue the financial industry. The Treasury Department has been using the money to buy stock in U.S. banks, hoping that the sudden inflow of cash will get banks to start lending money.

There has been no accounting of how banks spend that money. Lawmakers summoned bank executives to Capitol Hill last month and implored them to lend the money — not to hoard it or spend it on corporate bonuses, junkets or to buy other banks. But there is no process in place to make sure that's happening and there are no consequences for banks who don't comply.

"It is entirely appropriate for the American people to know how their taxpayer dollars are being spent in private industry," said Elizabeth Warren, the top congressional watchdog overseeing the financial bailout.

But, at least for now, there's no way for taxpayers to find that out.
..................................


I'd call it unbelievable, but it's consistent with clueless congress and an even more clueless populace.

Damn it, we're gonna crash, and we're gonna crash hard, and it's all about greed. The hell with it, those guys need to be in jail. Congress needs to be thrown out on its ass for abject irresponsibility in giving away that money.

And they wonder why we've all simply stopped spending money? It's going to take a lot more than cheap gas to save this economy. :banghead:

Merry Christmas.

The best way to insure the success of a capitalistic system is to let bad businesses fail and good ones succeed.

The bailouts as I see them are short term solutions... terms like "infusions of cash", "emergency measures", etc have been used ad nauseum; these helping hands won't, by themselves, make long term improvements.

I'm in no way close to being an economist but I'd think that allowing businesses to fail when they've shown they can't operate responsibly will, in the long term, make for a better overall picture. {However I agree that the long term would be pretty far out, and those of us over, say, 40 might not be able to retire as planned}

I'm not saying that letting Chrysler, Ford and GM fail won't have repercussions throughout the economy; it will. I'm simply saying that if you operate irresponsibly and run your business into the ground, Unca Sam shouldn't be paying you money.

It's like the child that runs up the credit cards to some huge amount. Parents bail them out, saying "never again" but 5 years later they're paying it again, because of irresponsibility.

Maybe the Big 3's head honchos should voluntarily reduce their salaries to the level of Toyota's, and take a class on how to NOT waste money.

Corollary: The US National Debt, this week, exceeded the value of everything IN the US. Who's going to bail us out? I mean if the US Gov can bail out the automakers, then some other entity can bail out the US Gov.





/rant.

Who's going to bail us out? I mean if the US Gov can bail out the automakers, then some other entity can bail out the US Gov.


Before recent economic events, I would have answered "China", but I'm not so sure they'll be of much help now that we've all dialed back on our widget purchases.

I think the only people doing well right now are the bank execs who got their bonuses after the bailout money hit their coffers.

(I'm only half joking here) :(

I'm not saying that letting Chrysler, Ford and GM fail won't have repercussions throughout the economy; it will. I'm simply saying that if you operate irresponsibly and run your business into the ground, Unca Sam shouldn't be paying you money.

Technically "We The People" are paying the bill. The taxpayer. If the U.S. big three automakers don't make it after this first freebee then I say let them sink. The problem I see is it doesn't make sense throwing good money into what amounts to bad companies and delaying what is inevitable. And the Unions can get screwed.

Technically "We The People" are paying the bill. The taxpayer. If the U.S. big three automakers don't make it after this first freebee then I say let them sink. The problem I see is it doesn't make sense throwing good money into what amounts to bad companies and delaying what is inevitable. And the Unions can get screwed.
I'm all for unions protecting their people, but I think you'll agree that for an 8th grade educated person to make in excess of 100000 a year to install rivets (or some other assembly job) it's great for them but way out of line.

I'm all for unions protecting their people, but I think you'll agree that for an 8th grade educated person to make in excess of 100000 a year to install rivets (or some other assembly job) it's great for them but way out of line.

No UAW worker makes $100,000 a year. Their contract is for $28 an hour . Toyota of America paid it's non union workers over $30 an hour last year including bonuses. The $70+ per hour figure at GM includes retiree's pensions and medical costs. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=gm's%20labor%20cost&st=cse and I wouldn't ask anyone making under $55k a year to take a pay cut when the top 5 guys at GM take home over $31 million. http://www.thekarmareport.com/auto-crisis/gm-executive-compensation/

The best bailout for American business would be a national health care plan, none of the manufacturers in the industrialized countries we compete against have health cost included. That would take a big load of their retiree costs.
http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/2262/hereswhatcx3.jpg

Technically "We The People" are paying the bill. The taxpayer.
Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.8 puts the total "loans and leases in bank credit" as of September 24, 2008 at $7,049 billion. Ten percent of that is $700 billion. That means we the taxpayers will be paying interest to the banks on at least $700 billion annually – this so that the banks can retain the reserves to accumulate interest on ten times that sum in loans.
Who Owns The Federal Reserve?
The Fed is privately owned. Its shareholders are private banks
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10489


Now this is really scary, ever wonder who owns our treasury securities? Pay particular attention to #1 (the Wal Mart main supplier) and notice how much it has grown in the past year! This is only one of the many reasons, I do not shop @ Wal Mart anymore! :screwy:

MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
http://www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt

Now this is really scary, ever wonder who owns our treasury securities? Pay particular attention to #1 (the Wal Mart main supplier) and notice how much it has grown in the past year! This is only one of the many reasons, I do not shop @ Wal Mart anymore! :screwy:

MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
http://www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt

China is the "main supplier" for EVERY major department store in the U.S., not just Wal-Mart.
Have you stopped shopping at Target and K-mart also?

Have you stopped shopping at Target and K-mart also? Yes, I have not set foot in either of those two in the past 5-years! Last week I went to CVS Pharmacy to get some Christmas cards. When I looked at the back of the cards to see where they were made, low & behold it said: "Made in China - for CVS"! I put them back on the rack and walked out of the store. I went to another store and found American Greeting cards made by: American Greetings Corporation, 1 American Rd. Cleveland, Ohio 44144.

I may be a fanatic when it comes to keeping American people working, but that is just the pride in my heritage. I had a lot of respect for my friend Sam Walton, but not his greedy offspring! May Sam RIP. :smooch:

I may be a fanatic when it comes to keeping American people working, but that is just the pride in my heritage. I had a lot of respect for my friend Sam Walton, but not his greedy offspring! May Sam RIP. :smooch:

Sam would be proud of you, remember back when Wal-Mart was proud to display and advertise the “made in America” logo? Sam's probably rolling over in his grave now.

Yes, I have not set foot in either of those two in the past 5-years! Last week I went to CVS Pharmacy to get some Christmas cards. When I looked at the back of the cards to see where they were made, low & behold it said: "Made in China - for CVS"! I put them back on the rack and walked out of the store. I went to another store and found American Greeting cards made by: American Greetings Corporation, 1 American Rd. Cleveland, Ohio 44144.

I may be a fanatic when it comes to keeping American people working, but that is just the pride in my heritage. I had a lot of respect for my friend Sam Walton, but not his greedy offspring! May Sam RIP. :smooch:

I actually feel the same way,
but I found where ever I go, the basic necessities always seem to be made in China EVERYWHERE.
I don't know how to get around it. :disappoin

I actually feel the same way,
but I found where ever I go, the basic necessities always seem to be made in China EVERYWHERE.
I don't know how to get around it. :disappoin It’s called “selective shopping”. Last month I had to buy a new refrigerator, so I went to Sears to look for one. The first thing I ask the salesperson was; “show me all the refrigerators you have that are made in the USA”. With a stunned look on his face, he said “ I don’t think any of them are made here anymore”. I ask him if he carried Amana, Whirlpool, or KitchenAid! He said; “we have a few, but we don’t sell many”. I said that is unfortunate, however if it is not made in America, I am not interested. He then walked me down the isle pass many “imports” to the back of the storewhere we found the Amana Brand! The sales person said that he could sell me one of the other brands for less money, since they were on sale. I told him that I was not price shopping, I was shopping for a refrigerator made in America, not an imported sale item! The only way to curb America's $72 Billion monthly trade deficit is for Americans to voluntarily purchase American made goods. http://www.americansworking.com/index.html

Now this is really scary, ever wonder who owns our treasury securities? Pay particular attention to #1 (the Wal Mart main supplier) and notice how much it has grown in the past year! This is only one of the many reasons, I do not shop @ Wal Mart anymore! :screwy:

Personally Bo I really see no problems with shopping at Walmart and getting good deals which equates to savings. The key is just don't buy anything made in China. I buy auto related stuff like consumables such as motor oil, etc. and certain foodstuff items.


No UAW worker makes $100,000 a year. Their contract is for $28 an hour . Toyota of America paid it's non union workers over $30 an hour last year including bonuses. The $70+ per hour figure at GM includes retiree's pensions and medical costs.

If you look into the issue of Toyota paying higher wages carefully there are some underlying reasons for that and that only took effect a few years ago. As far as pension and medical costs for one GM adds approximately $1500 to the cost of each car sold meaning that the charge is passed on to the consumer so it is not an unrecoverable expense.

While true Toyota does pay their workers more the real reason is to prevent the Unions like the UAW from getting a foothold or ward off the "Union Threat Effect". However, on the flipside it goes to show the Unions are becoming irrelevant relative to the car manufacturers so as far as I am concerned they can take a hike.


Source: Detroit Free Press
The 'union threat effect'

Harley Shaiken, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who specializes in labor issues, said Toyota's high wages are somewhat expected.

"Toyota pays high wages in part to avoid the UAW," Shaiken said, adding that economists would refer to Toyota's high wages as the "union threat effect," meaning companies pay union-comparable wages to fend off organizing efforts and the risk of a strike.

"But what Toyota inadvertently shows," he added, "is that you can compete paying higher wages

Link to Article (http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_foreign_automakers_bonuses_boo st_wages_in_us_plants_as_detroit_car_companies_str uggle.aspx)



The best bailout for American business would be a national health care plan, none of the manufacturers in the industrialized countries we compete against have health cost included. That would take a big load of their retiree costs.


Maybe yes or maybe no. Where are the funds to support national health care going to come from? Slippery slope. :rolleyes:

Actually GM took advantage of that scenario a long time ago by assembling many GM cars in Canadian GM plants but with mismanagement and sales slumps over the past several years you hit the point of diminishing returns. Both of my Buick Regals were assembled in Oshawa, Canada. Even Toyota is following suit. They just opened up a few plants for the RAV4 and other models may follow.

Personally Bo I really see no problems with shopping at Walmart and getting good deals which equates to savings. The key is just don't buy anything made in China. I buy auto related stuff like consumables such as motor oil, etc. and certain foodstuff items. Bob, you are right and fortunately, Wal Mart still has a few items left that are made in the USA; however, if you will notice; I said that China products were only one of the many reasons, I choose not to shop at Wal Mart.

I apologize if this get’s long-winded and I know it has nothing to do with another “Econimic Stimulus” but it is necessary to explain my position! In the past, even though it was difficult, I tried to maintain a positive attitude when going to Wal Mart! Regardless, it always seemed impossible to leave, without being pissed off. :crying:

It all starts when you pull into the 10-acre parking lot. They have at least 50 prime parking places (near the front of the store) all assigned for the use of “handicapped” people. Usually, only 1/3 of those places are used, mostly by people ½ my age, whose only disability is obesity! (400-lbs of lard-ass) :sly: I usually park far away, near the end of the parking lot, to prevent the inconsiderate bastards, who enjoy slinging their car doors against other cars, from using my car as a door-stop! :grinyes:

Anyway, after I walk 1/8 mile to get to the front door, usually some nice elderly person offers me a shopping cart, (I generate a smile) and that is the end of the customer service during the rest of my shopping experience. If you are lucky enough to find and an associate to ask about where something is located, if it is not in their department, they have no clue.

Last year, I decided to go to Wal Mart to get a copy of Turbo Tax software. Fortunately, I found an associate who appeared assigned to the electronics area and ask him where I could find Turbo Tax. He said; “oh, that would be in the hardware department”! Well, I overlooked that part, because obviously the poor associate was autistic and had now idea of his surroundings.

I finally found Turbo Tax on my own, and put it in my basket with some other products and started toward the front of the store to pay for the items. About that time, an alarm went off! I was immediately surrounded by three associates who simultaneously yelled - 'STOP'! I was totally flabbergasted, when one of them reached in my cart and grabbed my Turbo Tax box and ask me where I was going with that. Of course I said, I was going to pay for all my items up front. One of them said; you cannot do that, you have to get in line and pay for that in the electronics department! I said; um-ok -- do you mind if I have it back so I can get in line to pay for it. When I made it to the cashier, of course there were ten people waiting in front of me. Fifteen minutes later, I had my copy of Turbo Tax and was on my way to the front to pay for the rest of the items. (Still trying to maintain a smile) :grinyes:

Once I made it to the checkout lanes, of course there were 25 lanes available and only two lanes open, with 20-people in each lane! Each person had carts full of groceries hanging over the top. I had only three other items to pay for, so I proceeded to the self-service lane. Only one, of the 8 self-service lanes were working and 10-people were waiting in that lane! :uhoh: I endured the pain & frustration for another 15-min to pay for my three items and finally thought I was on my way.

When I started out the door, another damm alarm went off! This time two associates stopped me and started going through my bags and looking at my receipt. One of them found the Turbo Tax box security sensor was not demagnetized. He said, I would have to take it back to the electronics section and have them scan it. (About this time, if I had a baseball bat, I think I would have used it on him). I bit my tongue and then told him that I waited in line for 15-min to pay for that item and it was clearly shown on the receipt that it was paid for. He said that does not matter, it has to be cleared so the scanner will let me pass. Very frustrated, I looked at the scanner and told him, I did not think the scanner could stop me! :cwm27: I then proceeded toward the door, he then presses a button on his belt and 5-seconds later, four other associates were blocking my exit. I again explained that the items I bought were clearly marked on the receipt and I was not going to take the Turbo Tax box back to electronics to have it demagnetized.

Now the “manager” appeared and ask me what the problem was. I told him that I came to Wal Mart to buy four items, (that I found entirely on my own within 5-min) and that it took me over 40-min to pay for them in two different departments, but I had receipts showing all the items were paid for.

The manager then looked at the other associates and ask what the problem was. One of the four, reached in my cart and grabbed the Turbo Tax box & said; “he did not demagnetized this box”! I told the manager that I left my demagnetizer in my car, so obviously “I” could not demagnetize the box. The manager said, I would have to take it back to electronics and get them to do it. I refused, & I told him I was tired and frustrated with my shopping experience @ Wal Mart and I was not about to go back to the rear of the store again to have something scanned, that should have been scanned in the first place. The manager then handed the box to another associate and told him to take it back for me. I told him; “you better make it quick”; I have already wasted 1-hour of my time here, for what should have been no more than a 15-min purchase. Five minutes later, the associate returns with my box and said you are “free to go”! I then said; thank all of you for convincing me to NEVER shop at Wal Mart again!!

Maybe yes or maybe no. Where are the funds to support national health care going to come from? Slippery slope. :rolleyes:

The savings in overhead and profit will more than pay for it according to a study by The Harvard Medical School. They Used Texas as one of their examples.

Texas, with 4.96 million uninsured (nearly one in four Texans), could save a total of $19.5 billion a year on administration under NHI

That was in 2004 and with double digit inflation in health care the total wasted in Texas alone is approaching $1 trillion since that study was done.

National health will also move the Vets into full coverage under the same plan the President and Congress will have.

Last year, I decided to go to Wal Mart to get a copy of Turbo Tax software. Fortunately, I found an associate who appeared assigned to the electronics area and ask him where I could find Turbo Tax. He said; “oh, that would be in the hardware department”! Well, I overlooked that part, because obviously the poor associate was autistic and had now idea of his surroundings.


What a coincidence. I got my TurboTax from Walmart least year too. But I found it sitting on a POS display in the computer/electronics section myself. Excellent program and I have been using it since 1992. :thumbsup:

And sorry Bo I just had to shop at Walmart today. Dog food and their price on Prestone EL 50/50 mix anti-freeze was $9.36 per gallon versus Az's $10.99. :uhoh:......:lol:



National health will also move the Vets into full coverage under the same plan the President and Congress will have.

A.k.a. Universal Healthcare? Are you referring to HR 676, United States National Health Insurance Act (Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act)?

This year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format:
Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgen.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?
A. Shut up.

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by
spending your stimulus check wisely:

If you spend that money at Wal-Mart, all the money will go to China.
If you spend it on gasoline it will go to the Arabs.
If you purchase a computer it will go to India.
If you purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala (unless you buy organic).
If you buy a car it will go to Japan.
If you purchase useless crap it will go to Taiwan.
And none of it will help the American economy.

We need to keep that money here in America. You can keep the money in America by spending it at yard sales, going to a baseball game, or spend it on prostitutes, beer (domestic ONLY), or tattoos, since those are the only businesses still in the US.

^:lol: :lol:

(except I don't mind helping out India, Japan, Honduras or Guatemala so much)

We need to keep that money here in America. You can keep the money in America by spending it at yard sales, going to a baseball game, or spend it on prostitutes, beer (domestic ONLY), or tattoos, since those are the only businesses still in the US.
You can count out Budweiser now as they are owned by InBev a company based in Belgium.http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1337955120080714

Good ole Dave Barry jokes speaking of which what ever happened to him?

Wasn't the real Budweiser originally brewed in Czechoslovakia?

He said domestic. So how about Shiner Bock beer. :grinyes:....:cheers:

:iagree: Shiner Bock beer, one of my favorites while in San Antonio! :cheers:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/01/stimulus-heavy-spending-say-growing-number-senators/



Stimulus is Too Heavy on Spending, Say Growing Number of Senators
Some Senate Democrats are joining the Republican chorus in opposition to the $900 billion economic stimulus package.

Sunday, February 01, 2009

President Obama is stressing bipartisanship when it comes to the $900 billion economic stimulus plan being considered in the Senate, and he may get it -- in unity of opposition.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he "can't believe that the president isn't embarrassed about" the stimulus packages that have passed the House and the Senate appropriations and finance committees.

The Senate is set to take up debate on the plan Monday afternoon. Republicans insist it won't go through in its current form.

"It'll need to change if it'll do any good. I mean, things like $150 million honey bee insurance and $650 million to buy government employees cars is not what the American public had in mind," McConnell said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Republicans appear to have the support of some Democrats, including North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad, head of the Budget Committee, and Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson.

......................................

"I think you have to start from scratch and reconstruct this to start with the problem that created the entire cascade of events that have occurred here, the housing collapse," said Sen. Jon Kyl, the Republican whip.

Conrad agreed.

"Too little is being done about housing, which is central to the crisis," he said.

.................................................. ..............

While Obama has stressed bipartisanship in the process, all House Republicans were joined by 11 Democrats in opposing the House package.

If it's going to get bipartisan support in the Senate, "you have to change some of the provisions that are in there," said Nelson, who noted he has spoken with colleagues on both sides of the aisle who are concerned with several of the spending provisions. He said many of the spending programs are valuable, "they just don't belong in the stimulus package."

The stimulus package may also run into problems being implemented. A Congressional Budget Office analysis says some agencies may not be equipped to handle that flood of money and will have to put off spending it for a year or two.

That's a problem because the key to a stimulus package is to pump it into the system as quickly as possible.

...............................................

It got past the House, but the Senate might actually exercise some judgment and take a harder look at it. This isn't some BS partisan handball match. This country is in grave, serious trouble, and the last package only made it worse, IMO. All it did was reward the banks for malpractice and line the pockets of the offenders. Heck, they can't even tell where it all went.

They need to scrub out all the pork and make darn sure the money goes where it will do the most good. Save the pet projects and pork for later, IF there's any money left after this next fiasco.

All it is stimulating is more corruption and irresponsibility!:shakehead

Instead of giving $25 billion to the car companies, how about giving it to us, with the provision that it can only be used to buy a new Corvette? They get the money; everybody gets back to work; and we all get a new car.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fingers/fing10.gif

Instead of giving $25 billion to the car companies, how about giving it to us, with the provision that it can only be used to buy a new Corvette? They get the money; everybody gets back to work; and we all get a new car.



http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fingers/fing10.gif


That Sounds like a better idea to me.
I would rather earn the money myself for a new vehicle.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/02/republicans-stimulus-address-housing-crisis/


McConnell Proposes Cheap, Government-Backed Mortgages to Stimulate Economy
For all its promise, President Obama's $900 billion stimulus plan does little to address the underlying cause of the nation's economic crisis: the housing collapse.

FOXNews.com

Monday, February 02, 2009

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on Monday demanded an amendment to the mammoth economic stimulus package to give government-backed, low-interest loans to homeowners -- a revision that he says will both increase the demand for houses and boost the average household income.

"We believe that a stimulus bill must fix the main problem first and that's housing," McConnell told reporters Monday in introducing a plan to offer fixed mortgages of 4 percent to "any credit-worthy borrower."

Under the "Fix Housing First Act" -- an amendment spearheaded by both McConnell and Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee -- new and refinanced mortgages would be available to homeowners for 4 to 4.5 percent.

The amendment will require banks to issue these lower fixed-rate mortgages on primary residences, "both for new homes purchases and for refinances mortgages for responsible homeowners."

And to encourage banks to issue these mortgages, the government will direct Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase these newly originated loans. Homeowners already holding loans from Fannie and Freddie would also qualify, according to the proposal.

In a radio address Saturday, McConnell said his plan would allow the average family to see its monthly mortgage payment drop by $466 a month, or $5,600 a year. He said that over the life of a 30-year loan, that's a savings of $167,760.

The House passed an $819 billion version of Obama's stimulus proposal last week and the Senate version being debated this week is even larger -- $900 billion. But most troubling to Republicans -- and even some Democrats -- is that no money is allocated in the proposal to go directly toward foreclosure relief and the housing crisis, aside from a $7,500 tax credit for first-time home buyers.

.....................................

"It's a terrible idea," added John Tamney, a senior economist at H.C. Waintright Economics in Washington.

"I've always voted Republican, but Republicans have lost their mind on this. It would put more money into the debt economy. The more money that goes there, the less money there is for the entrepreneurial economy," Tamney said.
.................................................


Wait a minute. The mortgage industry is what flushed us down the toilet in the first place. Home ownership is not a right, nor is it guaranteed to every single citizen.

Let's encourage more debt.

Yeah, like I trust Fannie and Freddie to oversee anything any more. :headshake


http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/03/real_estate/foreclosures_dominate_housing_market/index.htm

Distress sales dominate many housing markets
Repossessed homes and short sales make up a large percentage of sales in many real estate markets.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Real estate values around the nation have collapsed, and sales of foreclosed and "underwater" homes now dominate many housing markets, according to a report released Tuesday.

The report, from Zillow.com, a real estate Web site, revealed that with foreclosures soaring, nearly 20% of the nation's home sales in 2008 were of bank-repossessed properties. Another 11% were short sales, in which homeowners owed more in mortgage debt than their homes were worth.
.................................

Because so many homes are worth less than their mortgage balances, an increasing number have to be sold short. But short sale transactions can take a long time to complete, because lenders have been having trouble keeping up with the flood of requests.
.............................................

I know it sounds unkind, but the housing market is finding its own level, where it should have been all along. Housing prices could not continue to rise forever. It's just not possible.

We need to stop rewarding bad decisions. If you're over-mortgaged, how is that my fault? Why do I have to pay for it?

Ok, if you disagree, at least keep it civil.

We need to stop rewarding bad decisions. If you're over-mortgaged, how is that my fault? Why do I have to pay for it?
Evidently you are not culturally diverse enough to understand the issues. The fact is, some cultures prefer big wheels on their Escalades and big screen TV’s in their over-mortgaged homes! You have to understand this mentality before you can understand, debt is not an issue with these folks, they prefer to live every day like it is going to be their last. Most of these people have been brainwashed into believing that the Government will take care of all their problems, no matter how bad they get. A good example of this “reckless free spending” is happening in Washington right now!

Evidently you are not culturally diverse enough to understand the issues.


My bad. I'm one of those dinosaurs that still believes in personal responsibility and accountability. Good thing they have a few of us left. Who else would they rape for tax money?

Crap. What was I thinking? :twak:

My bad. I'm one of those dinosaurs that still believes in personal responsibility and accountability. Good thing they have a few of us left. Who else would they rape for tax money?

Crap. What was I thinking? :twak:

I called both my senators this week to tell them to vote AGAINST the stimulus package. One office was pretty friendly, the other one said "OK we'll tell him, clik. Both my senators are democrat.

I called both my senators this week to tell them to vote AGAINST the stimulus package. One office was pretty friendly, the other one said "OK we'll tell him, clik. Both my senators are democrat.
In my market, the local NBC affiliate reruns Jay Leno shows from the previous week at 3 am. Just as I was reading this, Jay was doing his monologue. He said the following, ( in his Rodney Dangerfield impression)," Yeah, the economy is so bad, I saw my Senator 'stimulating' his own package!":eek: :lol: :uhoh:

I called both my senators this week to tell them to vote AGAINST the stimulus package. One office was pretty friendly, the other one said "OK we'll tell him, clik. Both my senators are democrat.

I contacted all my reps as well. We all need to do that and keep doing it until they get some faint glimmer of understanding that we don't like what's going on in DC.

The proposed economic stimulus package is not a stimulus package by any stretch of the imagination. :grinno:

I received the email below from Senator McCain's PAC. If anyone would like the link to sign the petition to vote NO!!! send me a PM message.


Dear Robert,

Yesterday, the Senate began debate on an economic stimulus package that is intended to get our economy back on track and help Americans who are suffering through these difficult times. Unfortunately, the proposal on the table is big on the giveaways for the special interests and corporate high rollers, yet short on help for ordinary working Americans. I cannot and do not support the package on the table from the Democrats and the Obama Administration. Our country does not need just another spending bill, particularly not one that will load future generations with the burden of massive debt. We need a short term stimulus bill that will directly help people, create jobs, and provide a jolt to our economy.

I believe we need to evaluate every bit of spending in this stimulus proposal with one important criteria - does it really stimulate the economy and help create jobs - if the answer is no, it does not belong in a so-called stimulus package. Furthermore, the stimulus must include significant direct relief to American workers in the form of payroll tax cuts and programs to help homeowners keep their homes. Finally, we need an end game to this stimulus so that when our economy recovers, these spending programs do not remain permanent and saddle our children with a skyrocketing national debt.

I appreciate the discussions President Obama is having with my Republican colleagues, but the time for talking has come to an end and we must now begin some serious negotiation. But as of yet, Republicans have not been given the opportunity to be involved. The House of Representatives passed a stimulus bill without a single Republican supporting it. In the Senate, the Democrat leadership is trying to jam the existing proposal through regardless of reservations from a number of members. With so much at stake, the last thing we need is partisanship driving our attempts to turn the economy around.

I have long been a fighter against wasteful spending in Washington and long an advocate for a balanced budget -- that will never change. I realize we face extraordinary challenges with our economy today, but that is not an excuse for more irresponsibly from Washington. I hope you will join me in saying no to this stimulus package as it currently exists by signing this petition.

Sincerely,

John McCain
Chair, Country First PAC

If anyone would like the link to sign the petition to vote NO!!!
Thanks Bob, I got it, did that and hope it does some good, especially with the 5-billion allocated for the use of ACORN!!

I called my Senators' local AND D.C. phone numbers, as well as Harry Reids(Senate leader) D.C. number and two other Senators not from my state.
If enough of them hear from enough of us, maybe they will get the message the stimulus is NOT a good idea.

Today, the U.S. House of Representatives approved another $787 billion dollar "drunken sailor" spending spree by a vote of 246-183; however, no Republicans voted for it. Barack Obama and his team of self interest democrats, made a mad dash to cram this political payoff called a "stimulus bill" through, in an effort to prevent opposition from organizing and responding to this shameful waste of taxpayer money. Most of them did nothing more than glance at the 1000 page package! :sly: Welcome to the "Change you can't believe in!" :shakehead

Eh, I never had my hopes up to begin with. Even from the start it never really was a stimulus plan. Things like 300,000 + going towards STD prevention as a stimulus package? I'm sure it will lift us right out of this slump. :rolleyes:

Things like 300,000 + going towards STD prevention as a stimulus package? I'm sure it will lift us right out of this slump. :rolleyes: Yeah, the entire stimulus I expect to see from STD prevention monies, will probably be no more than a quick link to this site; Click Here (http://www.undercovercondoms.com/bulk_pricing.asp)

Notice the “bulk discount” to non-profit organizations! I really hope that would apply to Rev. Wright’s "God damn America" church, as well as the members of ACORN! :naughty:

Today, the U.S. House of Representatives approved another $787 billion dollar "drunken sailor" spending spree by a vote of 246-183; however, no Republicans voted for it. Barack Obama and his team of self interest democrats, made a mad dash to cram this political payoff called a "stimulus bill" through, in an effort to prevent opposition from organizing and responding to this shameful waste of taxpayer money. Most of them did nothing more than glance at the 1000 page package! :sly: Welcome to the "Change you can't believe in!" :shakehead

:shakehead

Regardless, the burden is now on the Democrats because the trillion dollar question is Will It Work? :sly: At least the members of Congress with the (R) after their names can sleep peacefully ay night and did the will of their constituents which was to vote NO!

I'm looking forward to seeing people that voted for Obama and the Demo Congress in the soup lines in the near future. Then who are they going to blame. :screwy:

Then who are they going to blame.Well, when they see that their Messiah did not allocate enough money for them to buy a "big screen" then of course, who else can they blame but BUSH!

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3813/obamamoneyzg7.jpg

I called all 7 Democrats who voted AGAINST the bill, and left them a message of thanks for voting against it.

How about calling the corporate offices of those companies taking the stimulus money (like GM and Ford among others) and telling them you won't buy any of their products because they took money stolen from the taxpayers??!!:sly:

How about calling the corporate offices of those companies taking the stimulus money (like GM and Ford among others) and telling them you won't buy any of their products because they took money stolen from the taxpayers??!!:sly:

I would like to be able to do that, but the only two vehicles I own are Ford and Chevy.:biggrin: I don't want them to go under but, on the other hand, the manner of staying afloat is, as you have stated, stolen from the taxpayers. Now if there was a way I could buy parts that weren't funded by this circuis of a political party called 'The Change We Can Belive In', I would buy them. The problem is, I'm to lazy to find that crap.

Now we see which political party has the grapes to keep this country going.:tongue: Yes a Republican was in office when that day happened, but honestly, Bush was a dang good president, especially considering the times. Now if it had been a Democrat in office when 9/11 happened, there would be a sour taste towards Dems. That's all it is. It's hard to prove that one wrong. That's my opinion and I will stand by it. I do like a good argument.:naughty: I DO NOT agree with any of this 'stimulus' bullcrap but I will do what my Commander-In-Chief tells me to. I may not like it but what he says goes.
~JD~

I'm looking forward to seeing people that voted for Obama and the Demo Congress in the soup lines in the near future. Then who are they going to blame. :screwy:

No offense, Bob, but we can't afford that thought process. I don't like BO and I don't trust the Democratics at the helm, but I'd really hate to see soup lines and hardship for anybody. We can't afford to have this government fail.

That being said, I let my Senators (Casey and Specter) know what I thought of their votes.

For anyone who only wants to blame Bush for all this, I say you will have to blame Reagan, Clinton, and Obama as well. You cannot have it both ways. You cry about blaming Clinton, but now the Bush camp can say the same thing. If Clinton couldn't be blamed when Bush was in office, then neither can Bush now that BO is the big cheese. There's no difference in my opinion.

Credit or blame can be attributed to the guy in charge. Hazards of command and all that. BO's supporters had him walking on water. Let's see how well he swims now with Pelosi and Reid for ballast. To be perfectly honest, those 2 concern me far more than Obama does, but we're stuck with all 3 at the moment.

No offense, Bob, but we can't afford that thought process. I don't like BO and I don't trust the Democratics at the helm, but I'd really hate to see soup lines and hardship for anybody. We can't afford to have this government fail.

You're probably right Doug but I really don't care about my fellow Americans anymore. Lets face it this country is polarized even more than ever and it is a dog eat dog world. When you have people that have a delusional mentality like the lady in this Youtube video hard to have pity for them but disgust, anger and hatred prevails. Most people that voted for Obama really do not know why they voted for him. Because he is cool? :screwy: As far as I am concerned you reap what you sow.

P36x8rTb3jI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

Most people that voted for Obama really do not know why they voted for him. Because he is cool? :screwy: As far as I am concerned you reap what you sow.



I'm glad you didn't take offense. None was intended. I want to throw up my hands and just say, "screw them all", but you know darn well it will do nothing but bring the rest of us untold amounts of grief, and it may require us to actively defend our lives and property. (if anyone doesn't know what that means, I can't help you.)

As usual, the honest, tax paying citizenry of this country will take it in the shorts and suffer far more than those getting massive handouts.

That video was probably one of the scariest things to come out of this past campaign. I, too, feel no pity, only disdain for such an ignorant and dangerous mindset. I think everyone should also follow the links at the bottom of that video to hear Stern's piece on the interviews with the voters in Harlem. THAT should definitely give you pause to consider BO's support base. It is glaringly obvious none of those people had the slightest clue whatsoever concerning Obama's positions, but they darn sure were voting for the man. They thought Sara Palin was his running mate, for crying out loud. :banghead:

However, if they end up in soup lines, this country will never recover. It may happen anyway, with our present leadership.

Well, when they see that their Messiah did not allocate enough money for them to buy a "big screen" then of course, who else can they blame but BUSH!


Exactly what is going to happen. If he gets things right he'll look like a hero and if he doesn't the dems will turn their head back at Bush. Even though he promised "CHANGE we can believe in," it will be put back off on to W if nothing changes.

I like how nobody here is even attmepting to defend Obama at this point either. :lol:

.................and if he doesn't the dems will turn their head back at Bush. Even though he promised "CHANGE we can believe in," it will be put back off on to W if nothing changes.


At that point, if the Republicans don't keep reminding people that the majority party jammed this down our throats, they will deserve whatever happens to what's left of the GOP.

Somehow, it's OK to keep bitch slapping the Republicans for every ill in this country, but it's not OK to hold the Dems responsible for their failures.

Wrong. Time to take the gloves off and kick some ass. If they go down, go down swinging. Make the Dems EARN every victory they get from now on. Make darn sure the public knows what's in every single piece of legislation the Dems propose from now on. Take out full page ads in the paper if need be. The very existence of this country depends upon it.

Obstructionist? Damn right. Deal with it. A lot of that porky pig spending NEEDS to be obstructed.

Great Depression Soup Line


http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3686/greadepressionsoupinefoku4.jpg


http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/8498/errorstickerbo8.jpg

At that point, if the Republicans don't keep reminding people that the majority party jammed this down our throats, they will deserve whatever happens to what's left of the GOP.

Somehow, it's OK to keep bitch slapping the Republicans for every ill in this country, but it's not OK to hold the Dems responsible for their failures.

Wrong. Time to take the gloves off and kick some ass. If they go down, go down swinging. Make the Dems EARN every victory they get from now on. Make darn sure the public knows what's in every single piece of legislation the Dems propose from now on. Take out full page ads in the paper if need be. The very existence of this country depends upon it.

Obstructionist? Damn right. Deal with it. A lot of that porky pig spending NEEDS to be obstructed.

We could easily get into a wasteful spending war here, and I'm pretty sure the Republicans will not fare well either. Characterizing pork spending as exclusive to Democrats is absurd. Of course there is pork in this bill! They're politicians in the United States. I'd be hard pressed to believe that anyone is arguing against this bill as a matter of principle about earmarks and pork spending, because that is something that has been happening for a long time, in Republican and Democrat congresses and administrations. I don't recall seeing any Republicans on this board up in arms about the hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money used to pay for abstinence only sex education that was known at the time to be ineffective against teen pregnancy and STD rates. In fact, abstinence-only sex ed caused a RISE in teen pregnancy rates for the first time in 15 years...yeah, taxpayer money well spent. I could go on...

I wish people could see this for what it is, which is a simple matter of partisan politics playing out... business as usual in Washington. Did anyone actually expect Republicans to get on board with the stimulus plan?

The Democrats did well to make some concessions, but they didn't make enough. There needs to be more cuts in payroll taxes for the middle and lower class (to get them spending again), more mortgage relief, and more home purchasing incentives in the way of tax credits. Increasing foreclosure and ignoring the housing market is only going to exacerbate our problems, despite what people think about personal and commercial "irresponsibility" in the lending crisis, because it's bigger than that now.

As far as Obama is concerned, how could any leader possibly be doing better in his position? He is pushing for increased personal responsibility for all Americans as well as serious review and slashing of ineffective programs (Reagan anyone?) He wants to require welfare recipients to earn their keep through public service. And he wants to create millions of jobs by investing in public works and infrastructure. I've said this before, but all 3 of the biggest economic booms in modern times (Germany WWII, US post WWII, and China recently) have been associated with massive infrastructure and public works projects. This money HAS to be spend. Cutting taxes alone will not do the job.:2cents: