The Senate Passed it

ColleenSwerb

ColleenSwerb

Brodo gettin her Swerb on
A few minutes ago the Senate passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

I added the White House blog to my reader, and it's been interesting to follow along with what's been going on with our government.
 
Lots and lots and lots of money going to states in an effort to boost the economy and provide jobs. I believe there's also a tax cut involved.
 
Ya'll know there is stuff in there about your health care being affected too? Yep your doctor will now be "guided" on what all he can do for your care. Ugh!!
 
Okay, I'm not up on US politics (I'm not even up on Canadian politics, lol), but why would this Act suck? Wouldn't putting money into the economy, saving people's jobs and lowering taxes be a good thing? I'm confused!
 
Opinion is going to depend on how you view government - I am a "small" government person. Lower taxes and give people their own money back to spend - don't find ways to spend it for them - that's my basic viewpoint. This stimulus bill has in many ways been treated as a big spending spree by the dems in congress - there are items in it that are absolutely ridiculous and will in no way help our economy (funding going to STD awareness is one example).

There are of course other items in it that hopefully *will* help our economy so there's some good to it - it's just we will be paying for it for a very, very long time.

I have no idea how the act will affect me personally other than the fact that we might buy a house this year - even if we do benefit on that front, like I said, we'll be paying for it for a long, long time.
 
To me it looks like an chance to help the economy in a realistic way became an opportunity to force in funding for everyone's pet projects that have gone ignored for the last 8 years. I think some things in the package will help. I think some will not help in a large enough way to offset the costs and I think some will not help at all.

What stimulates the economy is people having money to spend & then spending it, instead of sitting on it and hording canned goods. From what I have read money is not really going to enough people in enough amounts to help much on the 'havign money' side and you can't legislate consumer confidence. If the goverment mailed us all $1000 checks how many of us would go buy something new with it right now? I'm willing to bet most of us would either pay of a current debt or put it in the bank.
 
There are nuggets of good things in that bill. And I truly, truly hope those nuggets outshine everything and really work for the American people

But sadly it's more about spending than anything, IMO. And not the kind of spending that I see realistically creating jobs and helping those who need it so much right now. It scares me a little just how big our gov't is becoming and just how much we the people entrust Congress to do what is best for us and make the right decisions and spend our money.

eta: The health care stuff that Melissa mentioned really makes me uncomfortable.
 
Stacey42 said:
To me it looks like an chance to help the economy in a realistic way became an opportunity to force in funding for everyone's pet projects that have gone ignored for the last 8 years. I think some things in the package will help. I think some will not help in a large enough way to offset the costs and I think some will not help at all.

What stimulates the economy is people having money to spend & then spending it, instead of sitting on it and hording canned goods. From what I have read money is not really going to enough people in enough amounts to help much on the 'havign money' side and you can't legislate consumer confidence. If the goverment mailed us all $1000 checks how many of us would go buy something new with it right now? I'm willing to bet most of us would either pay of a current debt or put it in the bank.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I know if I was given $1000 right now, I'd probably go buy a new laptop, though! (Mine doesn't charge anymore, and now my internet connections aren't, well, connecting- so I have to plug it into my cable modem. Really wireless, eh?! LOL!...)

Anyways, I'm not exactly sure what to think about the economy right now, I guess I agree with bits & pieces of both sides' views! :unsure:
 
Alls I know is that when i watched the little press conference the other night obama just reminded too much of william shatner when he talks. Seriously i couldn't get past it and listen to what he was actually saying.
 
awful thing in my opinion. I wrote letters and signed an online petition to show my position. All the spending in there that will not directly stimulate the economy (new cars for government workers, office funiture, sefe sex education) should have been enough IMO to keep it from passing. Now our kids kids will have a debt to pay off while we will all be long gone.
 
I absolutely believe that we will be "paying" for this in the end. And not just us but or children and their children. This money has to get repaid back somehow and guess how that is gonna happen?? taxes, and we will be paying them for a very very long time.

I am for small government also. who knows what is gonna happen in the long run. Some of the points in the bill are a little vague and even ridiculous. But it has passed and the world kept revolving.
 
I wasn't for it or against it, as I didn't have the time to study it. I'm sure it had a bunch of pork barrel stuff that is "necessary" to get these things passed. The thought I find interesting is that everyone against it is up in arms about "our grandkids having to pay this off", but I'm sorry, our grandkids also have a multitrillion dollar debt to pay off from an endless war in the wrong country. At least some of this debt is an attempt to stimulate the economy, rather than drain it. Not that it makes it ok, but we can't just ignore the debt of the Bush presidency and go ape about this one just because it's from the Obama presidency, we should go ape about both if we feel the need to at all, LOL!
 
Traci Reed said:
I wasn't for it or against it, as I didn't have the time to study it. I'm sure it had a bunch of pork barrel stuff that is "necessary" to get these things passed. The thought I find interesting is that everyone against it is up in arms about "our grandkids having to pay this off", but I'm sorry, our grandkids also have a multitrillion dollar debt to pay off from an endless war in the wrong country. At least some of this debt is an attempt to stimulate the economy, rather than drain it. Not that it makes it ok, but we can't just ignore the debt of the Bush presidency and go ape about this one just because it's from the Obama presidency, we should go ape about both if we feel the need to at all, LOL!
Click to expand...

I think many of those who are worried about excessive deficit spending (which is another ball of wax entirely from the national debt) were upset about the trillions spent on the war in Iraq, Republican or Democrat.
 
I know there's a lot of pork barrel stuff in the deal, but I sure would rather we all get some money to spend or save or whatever then to continue to give all these corporations billions so they don't go bankrupt which is something else we'll be paying for forever and none of that money ended up in our pockets!
 
Yes money has been wasted and squandered in the past by Bush and many others. That doesn't give a blank check nor an excuse to make it worse. People like the sound of money coming to them, but do some ever stop to think where that money is coming from? It's on the backs of our children and grandchildren now. Or, coming at you with interest from places like China and Japan. Things like leashless dog parks and fattening up welfare benefits don't stimulate the economy. They stimulate the ego of our pathetic excuse of a congress and that's it. Fattening up corporations of course doesn't sound like a good thing to do, but those corporations are the ones who provide jobs. They are also the ones going overseas to avoid our ridiculously high tax policies. About tax cuts in the bill- I don't consider a one time check to be a tax cut. How about lower the tax rates on everyone and give us a federal tax holiday. That would immediately put money in people's pockets.....but oh no, that would be way too simple and government wouldn't get their slimey paws on as much. This is nothing but payback to the people who put Obama in office, plain and simple. Pet projects and check off the wish list. They're already admitting it will take at least a year to feel any effect. That should tell us something. Pay attention to how the stock market is responding to it. Mark my words, this will be the worst mess in American history, and that's all I'll say about that.
 
Last edited:
It's not all pet projects and worthless spending though. Yes, there is always always always pork involved, and I'm not saying this bill has none. But there are also a lot of construction and infrastructure projects that are receiving aid. Yes, that's my field of work, so I admit I'm slightly biased, but those are the kind of projects that get money into the pockets of the blue collar folks. Which is where it needs to go.

Our kids and our grandkids were screwed a long time ago. This won't help that problem, but it certainly isn't the only cause of it either.
 
Hey Col, since this is your line of work maybe you can answer it. Isn't road maintenance and things of that sort up to the states and already in their individual budgets (although lacking)? Plus, I'm thinking....it takes forever for the county to fix a pothole. Wonder how long it will take for any of those projects to get started. I don't think everything in it is crap, just 90% of it. LOL
 
BrodoNY0123 said:
It's not all pet projects and worthless spending though. Yes, there is always always always pork involved, and I'm not saying this bill has none. But there are also a lot of construction and infrastructure projects that are receiving aid. Yes, that's my field of work, so I admit I'm slightly biased, but those are the kind of projects that get money into the pockets of the blue collar folks. Which is where it needs to go.

Our kids and our grandkids were screwed a long time ago. This won't help that problem, but it certainly isn't the only cause of it either.
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting this! The very one-sided tone that this thread had taken had begun to make me quite angry, considering I am one who may be directly affected by this. I work in higher ed and the money that is going to this state from the bill (probably about 3 billion to the state I work in) will be put toward infrastructure projects and education. People can go ahead and call that pork or wasteful all they want, but it will create and save jobs...potentially mine and thousands of others in this state alone.
 
Here's the thing. The Infrastructure of this country is in SHAMBLES. I'm not joking even a little bit when I say that. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE, which I am a member of) has given the country's infrastructure a rating of C or lower for the past 8 years or so I believe. They issue a report card every 2 years. 2009's rating is a D for overall infrastructure. You can see it here.

Yes, states budget for things like maintenance of roadway structures, and the updating of roadways to meet federal codes. And yes, the state gets federal funding for certain projects or portions of projects. The problem is that those budgets get smaller and smaller every year (partly due to pork, partly due to the fact that the general population doesn't get it, so to satisfy their constituents the politicians they don't fight for it, plus the politicians have their own agendas). Instead of fixing 5 entire bridges that have serious problems, the state will patch up problems on 20 of them. Why? Because the politicians can then go back come election time and say hey! I got money for 5 projects, I'm awesome!

One situation that MD is facing, is that over the summer when gas prices were sky high, less people were driving their cars and buying gas. That meant less money coming in from tolls, less money coming in from the gas tax. It sounds like no big deal, but it was a HUGE dent in MD's expected budget. I'm sure that MD is not the only state that had such problems. The tax on gas hasn't increased at all since it was put into effect. It's a monetary value, not a percentage.

I'm not totally sure, but I believe President Obama is also planning to push a separate infrastructure stimulus package. That may have ended up rolled into this one, I'm not totally sure. But I know that since the end of last year, MD has started the wheels turning on many projects that have been put on the back burner due to lack of funding. Roads, bridges, street-scape projects, water and waste water improvements. All kinds of stuff that takes all kinds of construction workers, and will provide numerous opportunities for folks while also increasing the quality of the infrastructure in this country.

The theory is, that money put into actual PROJECTS will multiply into the economy several times (I think like 7 times). The government gives the state money, the state awards contracts to construction firms who can hire more people, those people get money and spend it, whatever they spend it on (tv's, cars, groceries, anything really) helps the businesses that they make purchases from, etc etc etc. That sort of spending is better than just straight giving it to people who will just end up saving it or paying off debt, which doesn't help the economy hardly at all.

I didn't mean to write a novel, lol! Sorry!
 
What bothers me more than anything is that what passed through the Senate is a HUGE compromise and really most of the more worthwhile funding has been cut in favor of tax cuts which isn't going to help with job creation. The Republican party had eight years to be in charge and look where it got us. It's time for them to step back and stop insisting on fiscal policies that simply don't work. According to the Center for American Progress:

"The Senate compromise recovery and reinvestment legislation provides for 12 to 15 percent fewer jobs created or saved than the House-passed Recovery and Reinvestment Act despite costing slightly more. The House-passed legislation creates or saves between 430,000 and 538,000 more jobs than the Senate compromise.

The consequences of this lower job creation go beyond the immediate impact of the recovery plan to the labor market. The recovery and reinvestment legislation as passed by the House was designed not just to create jobs through spending but also to put the economy on an upward trajectory where the private sector is once again creating jobs without the aid of intensive government intervention. The compromise necessitated by conservative influence in the Senate weakens the ability of the package to achieve that aim. ( … The greater job creation in the House bill is because the balance is more focused on investment programs than on less effective tax cuts.) " - This is essentially what Col is talking about with the projects vs giving people money.

For those of you who are so insistent that the stimulus is a bad idea, I really encourage you to take the time to read this column by Paul Krugman. He's a Nobel-Prize winning economist and I think he does a good job explaining what the purpose of the stimulus is and why spending is needed. It's from November but clearly it still applies for the situation today. I think everyone has gotten so caught up in the numbers that they've completely forgotten what is really at stake here. Based on what I've read, it seems that if something isn't done, the amount of debt left for your children will be the least of your worries. :(
 
Thanks for posting that Lynnette. I'm gonna read it in the morning. I read the Krugman article back in November/December, but I want to see what the center has to say.
 
Ya'll know there is stuff in there about your health care being affected too? Yep your doctor will now be "guided" on what all he can do for your care. Ugh!!
Click to expand...

YES, this is always a big discussion between my hubby and I and how against this we are. :( They are slowly working their way into fully taking over the health care bit. We are very worried.
 
Last edited:
The theory is, that money put into actual PROJECTS will multiply into the economy several times (I think like 7 times). The government gives the state money, the state awards contracts to construction firms who can hire more people, those people get money and spend it, whatever they spend it on (tv's, cars, groceries, anything really) helps the businesses that they make purchases from, etc etc etc. That sort of spending is better than just straight giving it to people who will just end up saving it or paying off debt, which doesn't help the economy hardly at all.
Click to expand...

Col, I'm completely in favor of this. There is an appropriate place for fiscal policy, and infrastructure tends to be an excellent job creation engine. The National Endowment for the Arts, on the other hand, has never been known as an economic stimulator (no matter how much you believe in its aims).

As to the Krugman article, it's important to understand that this was written well in advance of the current bills, so it's not a piece in favor of the particular legisilation. Also, as with any other source, it is important to examine information for biases. All economists have them, so it's important to understand what they are. He makes some excellent points, and one of his best is this:
The policy response should be as well-crafted as possible, but time is of the essence.
Click to expand...
I think this is a standard against which the bill should be measured and, in my opinion, it fails to meet this criterion.

As to those concerned with red ink, it is wise economic policy to go into deficit spending during times of recession. As Col pointed out, revenues fall during difficult economic times, and forcing a balanced budget could lead to contractionary policies, which often deepen recessions. Many states who have balanced budget requirements written into their constitution are facing this exact problem.
 
cheltzey said:
Many states who have balanced budget requirements written into their constitution are facing this exact problem.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the issue in the state I work in, and it's a huge, huge mess. So many jobs are going to be lost because the state is forced by law to balance its budget. The deficit is beyond comprehension.
 
I am not against the bill but the stuff added into the bill which is not going to stimulate the economy and is not in the best interest of the people they are supposed to be fighting so hard to get it passed for. If the money being spent was ALL going for creating jobs/keeping jobs and helping get us out of this recession it would be ok with me and a whole lot of other people but adding things like purchasing vehicles and office furniture is not going to help anyone but the government officials receiving these items. My thought on this is NOTHING should have been included in this economic stimulus bill UNLESS it directly helps American citizens and is going to somehow help keep jobs/create jobs or to add something to our economy which would bring us out of the recession.
 
lissab said:
Ya'll know there is stuff in there about your health care being affected too? Yep your doctor will now be "guided" on what all he can do for your care. Ugh!!
Click to expand...

IMO, it's just one step closer to Socialism.

You know what I've decided would be the best thing... as "never-gonna-happen" as it is... I think the Govt. should pay off everyone's bank loans. Actually cut a check in your name for the amt of your loan. Then, we'd have more $ to spend, people wouldn't lose their homes and the banks wouldn't need a bail out.
 
Reading that article now Chels.

To say that the stimulus shouldn't have been passed unless there was NO pork, is a little unreasonable in my opinion. When was the last time ANYTHING in the government was done without adding pork?

I'm not saying that it's right to add pork, and I'm not saying that this stimulus is perfect, but pork is an inescapable part of government in this day in age. Yes, Obama wants to stop that by getting both parties to work together to come to compromises (without pork), but it can't happen over night. And with the economy in such dire straights as it is, we simply can't afford to wait around until that time comes before we try and do anything to fix this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2026 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top