Is this how Obama's Stimulus money is helping the US economy?

[Guest]

As usual, what the government is saying it's doing with the tax money they confiscate from you is far from the whole story. Money taken and redistributed supposedly with a fixed purpose is diverted from it's mission to the pet projects of politicians with no direct or indirect benefit to the American economy. You, your children and their decedents will still have to pay the bill in any case.

Here is a story relating how some of the "Economic Stimulus" money is being spent.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/75198

[Guest]

RichieLion:
For a minute I thought I was on the Just for Fun forum. It just boggles the mind knowing where our money is going.:shrug::shrug:

[Guest]

no funds or insufficient funds....or we can't afford this or that.....that is after all their pet projects are covered.

It is not their money.
They have no budget to be measured against.
They have no accountability or responsibility to see the funds are spent appropriately.
Many cannot account for where monies paid went and for what.
And best of all they are under no fear of reprisal as all politicians subscribe to circling the wagons to protect their own (and of course themselves).

They are the entitled....why else would people like that spend millions of dollars to get elected or re-elected. Sometimes their own money....millions.
Why? For the prestige of the job?
To answer duty calls and represent the will of the people:1rotfl::1rotfl:

btk

btk

[Guest]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/75198

You have got to be kidding me! :rant-rave:

[Guest]

ludicrous.

[Guest]

ludicrous.

You say this and you aren't even an American, right?

[Guest]

This is a subject worthy of asking those folks who find this forum disturbing because of attacks on anyone who supports the President or is Democratic or is liberal.

There are no attacks here except on this particular bill...no mention of any other posters...not even a mention of the President.

PLEASE...post on this subject and let us know what we are not seeing about this stimulus bill, and how it is specifically doing as promised.

Thank you

[Guest]

This is a subject worthy of asking those folks who find this forum disturbing because of attacks on anyone who supports the President or is Democratic or is liberal.

There are no attacks here except on this particular bill...no mention of any other posters...not even a mention of the President.

PLEASE...post on this subject and let us know what we are not seeing about this stimulus bill, and how it is specifically doing as promised.

Thank you

Well to be fair I didn't mention the President in the title because he is the face and the originator of the Economic Stimulus in the eyes of the American People. He talks about roads and bridges and stuff but never tells you he sending this money overseas for ludicrous foreign aid purposes. Democrat or Republican, you should be outraged by this. I'm sure there is more examples out there of this kind of thing.

[Guest]

Well to be fair I didn't mention the President in the title because he is the face and the originator of the Economic Stimulus in the eyes of the American People. He talks about roads and bridges and stuff but never tells you he sending this money overseas for ludicrous foreign aid purposes. Democrat or Republican, you should be outraged by this. I'm sure there is more examples out there of this kind of thing.


I just want to invite those, I suppose from the left, to discuss these issues without fear of anyone trampling on them. I REALLY REALLY want to hear what they have to say !

There are a few who have come in and made comments....I am going to try and make this as inviting as possible to discuss the ISSUES.

I for one PROMISE not to be sarcastic or refer to the poster them selves in any response and STICK TOTALLY to the ISSUE

[Guest]

happened under prior Republican administrations, right? Of course, you would never hear about it from cns news, because it's a right wing propaganda tool.

[Guest]

happened under prior Republican administrations, right? Of course, you would never hear about it from cns news, because it's a right wing propaganda tool.

actor take Bucco up on his offer and let's get on to an educated discussion about the present and the future.

[Guest]

happened under prior Republican administrations, right? Of course, you would never hear about it from cns news, because it's a right wing propaganda tool.

Excuse me!!!, did we have Trillion Dollar "Economic Stimulus" plans under a Republican Administration. I don't think so.

[Guest]

happened under prior Republican administrations, right? Of course, you would never hear about it from cns news, because it's a right wing propaganda tool.


Of course it did, but NEVER to this magnitude for sure,and in my opinion, never under the circumstances that surrounded this.

A bill worth so much money, in my opinion, is inexcuseable....and coming on the heels of an election were we were promised such transparency and no pork, we get a bill that was 70% pork (and you are right many media sources are slanted but you will find the 70% number to be pretty universal everywhere) !

To me this is not a party thing in anyway, and am sorry that you came from that angle, but am I assuming that you support or dont support the bill ?????

PS: I might add that this is what most on here object to. When you want to discuss, you hear ONLY ...well, look what Bush did, OR what the Republicans did. SO please, restore faith.....YOUR input on how this stimulus is helping us

[Guest]

Of course it did, but NEVER to this magnitude for sure,and in my opinion, never under the circumstances that surrounded this.

A bill worth so much money, in my opinion, is inexcuseable....and coming on the heels of an election were we were promised such transparency and no pork, we get a bill that was 70% pork (and you are right many media sources are slanted but you will find the 70% number to be pretty universal everywhere) !

To me this is not a party thing in anyway, and am sorry that you came from that angle, but am I assuming that you support or dont support the bill ?????

the bill. However, I know something had to be done to get the economy moving after the Bush disaster. Remember we almost went into a depression with a complete breakdown of the banking system, etc. Maybe if some Republicans had supported a more moderate bill, there could have been some compromises that would have resulted in a better bill. But please don't tell me the Republicans aren't party to this type of wasteful pork. It's been going on for decades under both Republican and Democratic administrations. The Republicans only get religion about wasteful spending when there is a Democratic president. I have no doubt that this waste didn't bother the original poster when it occurred under Bush, and Reagan etc. I call that being a hypocrite.

[Guest]

the bill. However, I know something had to be done to get the economy moving after the Bush disaster. Remember we almost went into a depression with a complete breakdown of the banking system, etc. Maybe if some Republicans had supported a more moderate bill, there could have been some compromises that would have resulted in a better bill. But please don't tell me the Republicans aren't party to this type of wasteful pork. It's been going on for decades under both Republican and Democratic administrations. The Republicans only get religion about wasteful spending when there is a Democratic president. I have no doubt that this waste didn't bother the original poster when it occurred under Bush, and Reagan etc. I call that being a hypocrite.


Ok...again you bring up party.....this is not about party really.

You said that "Maybe if some Republicans had supported a more moderate bill, there could have been some compromises that would have resulted in a better bill. " I would submit to you that not ONE Republican has the chance to read this bill, and as far as I know, neither did the President of the United States. I know that even Democrat legislators admit they never had a chance to modify or come up with anything better or new.

The subject of this thread is THE STIMULUS BILL. I, for one, have never heard anyone defend, for example, the spending of the last administration.

NOW, I also will remind you did exactly what you have attacked others for...ie, going after a poster instead of the subject..."I have no doubt that this waste didn't bother the original poster when it occurred under Bush, and Reagan etc. I call that being a hypocrite I was under the impression we wanted to stay away from calling names.

You also said that "something had to be done to get the economy moving after the Bush disaster"
I submit that TARP put together and passed with President Elect Obama's approval would have done the job without more pork being thrown on top of it. I submit that if you reveiw the unemployment figures during the last 2 years, you will find a direct correlation in most cases between unemployment and the housing collapse (another good topic for us to discuss). And I will ignore the continued Bush bashing and hope you will discuss what is ACTUALLY in the stimulus bill.

Now I am sorry if some of the things I have said seem a bit pointed, but it behooves me to point out....you use the word hypocrisy.....of the criticisms aimed at this board when the criticizers do the most of it.

I will keep quiet on that subject if you can tell me...WHY YOU SUPPPORT THIS BILL ? WHAT IT HAS DONE FOR OUR COUNTRY ? AND YOUR FEELINGS ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY ?

Thanks again for posting and PLEASE, I am not being sarcastic...please post and tell everyone how you feel.

As another poster has pointed out, I find it educational and it has stimulated me to do a lot more research on many issues !

[Guest]

Of course it did, but NEVER to this magnitude for sure,and in my opinion, never under the circumstances that surrounded this.

A bill worth so much money, in my opinion, is inexcuseable....and coming on the heels of an election were we were promised such transparency and no pork, we get a bill that was 70% pork (and you are right many media sources are slanted but you will find the 70% number to be pretty universal everywhere) !

To me this is not a party thing in anyway, and am sorry that you came from that angle, but am I assuming that you support or dont support the bill ?????

PS: I might add that this is what most on here object to. When you want to discuss, you hear ONLY ...well, look what Bush did, OR what the Republicans did. SO please, restore faith.....YOUR input on how this stimulus is helping us

Ok...again you bring up party.....this is not about party really.

You said that "Maybe if some Republicans had supported a more moderate bill, there could have been some compromises that would have resulted in a better bill. " I would submit to you that not ONE Republican has the chance to read this bill, and as far as I know, neither did the President of the United States. I know that even Democrat legislators admit they never had a chance to modify or come up with anything better or new.

The subject of this thread is THE STIMULUS BILL. I, for one, have never heard anyone defend, for example, the spending of the last administration.

NOW, I also will remind you did exactly what you have attacked others for...ie, going after a poster instead of the subject..."I have no doubt that this waste didn't bother the original poster when it occurred under Bush, and Reagan etc. I call that being a hypocrite I was under the impression we wanted to stay away from calling names.

You also said that "something had to be done to get the economy moving after the Bush disaster"
I submit that TARP put together and passed with President Elect Obama's approval would have done the job without more pork being thrown on top of it. I submit that if you reveiw the unemployment figures during the last 2 years, you will find a direct correlation in most cases between unemployment and the housing collapse (another good topic for us to discuss). And I will ignore the continued Bush bashing and hope you will discuss what is ACTUALLY in the stimulus bill.

Now I am sorry if some of the things I have said seem a bit pointed, but it behooves me to point out....you use the word hypocrisy.....of the criticisms aimed at this board when the criticizers do the most of it.

I will keep quiet on that subject if you can tell me...WHY YOU SUPPPORT THIS BILL ? WHAT IT HAS DONE FOR OUR COUNTRY ? AND YOUR FEELINGS ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY ?

Thanks again for posting and PLEASE, I am not being sarcastic...please post and tell everyone how you feel.

As another poster has pointed out, I find it educational and it has stimulated me to do a lot more research on many issues !

of your points. however, I'm pretty certain that most of the provisions of the bill were known to members of congress. Yes, it was a lousy bill, however, the fact that the economy was in such dire straits required some action. I don't think Obama came to office all psyched up to spend $800 million for no reason. And the fact is that there is a tremendous amount of attacks of a partisan nature on this board that in most cases are directed at the left by right wing critics who are all to willing to turn a blind eye to similar behavior by conservatives.

[Guest]

of your points. however, I'm pretty certain that most of the provisions of the bill were known to members of congress. Yes, it was a lousy bill, however, the fact that the economy was in such dire straits required some action. I don't think Obama came to office all psyched up to spend $800 million for no reason. And the fact is that there is a tremendous amount of attacks of a partisan nature on this board that in most cases are directed at the left by right wing critics who are all to willing to turn a blind eye to similar behavior by conservatives.


Well, there are two things we will need to agree to disagree on....that the members of congress knew what was in the bill (I think the President had an idea from the Dem leaders in congress) and that it was necessary at all and the more we see of the results and where it has gone, makes my point.

I will add that the President knowing in advance what was in the bill concerns me just as much as the bill itself since the cornerstone of his campaign for the office was on transparency AND that he would never sign a bill with pork (guess could add the political hyper on posting the bill)

Yes, there are attacks ...agree. I will tell you this with no fear of contradiction that those attacks go both ways. I have been called many names since I began to post on here but the biggest objection from me is this....folks will criticize those who post on here AND THAT IS IT. They do not post their thoughts on anything...they simply say....Dem good Republican bad...Bush no good and leave. THat is NOT discussing and if you dont want to discuss (that is a generic YOU, and not aimed at you personally) ...if you dont want to discuss, then why come here and simply criticize those who do ?

I hope that people READ, LEARN..become knowledgeable and share that while expresssing their opinion !

[Guest]

ACTOR...I realize you dont trust any links given that disagree with the Democratic spin, but this is a link to a very short opinion piece by a man who is a Libertarian who has and was very critical of John McCain and it is about the stimulus...

It is timely and was just written TODAY and basically debuinks those who say this actually stimulating our economy


http://reason.com/blog/2010/09/13/white-house-we-totally-didnt-s

[Guest]

ACTOR...I realize you dont trust any links given that disagree with the Democratic spin, but this is a link to a very short opinion piece by a man who is a Libertarian who has and was very critical of John McCain and it is about the stimulus...

It is timely and was just written TODAY and basically debuinks those who say this actually stimulating our economy


http://reason.com/blog/2010/09/13/white-house-we-totally-didnt-s

links that disagree with the democratic spin. I'm not a died in the wool democrat. I'm more of a moderate who tries to see both sides of the issue. You'd probably be surprised if you knew who I voted for in 2004 and 2008.

[Guest]

Lots of people keep saying this mess Bush got us into. Let's not forget that a certain party controlled the purse strings for the last 4 years.

Let's also not forget what started the initial crash and the resulting domino effect. Freddie and Fannie. There's abundant evidence who protected Fannie and Freddie and who tried to fix it before they crashed. It's all very well documented and easy to find.. right here in these posts. Freddie and Fannie was the beginning to this whole mess.

Most know the stimulus was nothing more than a slush fund for the Obama administration. That's fairly obvious. It's also obvious that it didn't work.

Despite what they say, it was never designed to stimulate the economy. There were no shovel ready jobs. Now Obama wants 40 billion more for "new shovel ready jobs." Really?

On a side note, funny how all these years, the liberal mantra was BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH. But now Obama wants to extend the Bush tax cuts for those under $250k a year. So does that mean they really weren't just tax cuts for the rich?

Never heard that clarification from the democrats in Washington or the media the last 8 or so years.

Just because you're rich or richer doesn't mean your money belongs to the government to do with as they please.

There's only one thing that will jump start the economy and that's small business hiring people. + 250k tax hike will further damage the economy which I believe is their intention all along. There's no other rational explanation for what they are doing.

[Guest]

To me throw in another bit of information here. President Obama and his friends try to make everybody feel guilty if they did not want to bail out and save the jobs of teachers firefighters and police officers. I have nothing against but let's take a look at it. Teachers firefighters and police officers are not private-sector employees. They are government employees and they are union members. The whole purpose here is to suck up to unions and to bail out state and local governments rather than have them cut their wasteful spending.

Now let's look at his latest desire to spend billions on infrastructure. Union construction jobs doing projects that are normally paid for by state and local governments. Again we are looking at rather than have government cut their overspending.

So as you can clearly see, unless you work for the government already union you'll never get a dime from this president. The only thing you will do is pay higher taxes to support government and unions.

Just some thoughts

Yoda

[Guest]

the bill. However, I know something had to be done to get the economy moving after the Bush disaster. Remember we almost went into a depression with a complete breakdown of the banking system, etc. Maybe if some Republicans had supported a more moderate bill, there could have been some compromises that would have resulted in a better bill. But please don't tell me the Republicans aren't party to this type of wasteful pork. It's been going on for decades under both Republican and Democratic administrations. The Republicans only get religion about wasteful spending when there is a Democratic president. I have no doubt that this waste didn't bother the original poster when it occurred under Bush, and Reagan etc. I call that being a hypocrite.

The troubled asset relief program (TARP) addressed a liquidity crisis in the banking system that required immediate large sums be lent to a number of banks. This crisis had been caused by the 'mortgage for everyone' debacle driven by Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac policies. We can argue forever about who did what, but that gets us nowhere.

TARP was put into place during the last three months of the Bush administration. This was done in full consultation with Obama's team and the leaders of Congress. Approximately half of the appropriated funds were used by the Bush administration with the balance left to the Obama administration. TARP did what it was intended to do and stabled the banking and credit system. This was intended to be a program in which the government would receive repayment with interest of the amounts provided. This has been happening and continues to go forth. This was accomplished through a bipartisan effort that should have been the example for what came after.

Unfortunately, this did not happen. The stimulus bill had nothing to do with the banking crisis or the recovery from it. The stimulus bill was far from being a bipartisan approach. Republicans were not consulted as the bill was drafted behind closed doors with no one from either the press or the Republicans present. No news organization,members of the public or member of Congress were given the opportunity to even read the bill, much less provide input before it was put to a vote. This rush was justified by the promise that if the stimulus bill was passed, unemployment would never rise above 8%.

The truth here is that TARP, drafted and administered in a bipartisan manner worked and did prevent a banking and liquidity crisis that could have thrown the US and the rest of the world into a serious recession or even a depression. This action was led by the Bush administration.

The stimulus program was a totally partisan program rammed through by the Obama administration. It has cost approximately one trillion dollars to date and has failed miserably in its intended objectives.