Re: The Stimulus Package
 

"We watched Bush do tax cut after tax cut after tax cut, and we see how perfectly it worked."

That should be answer enough. But, ask yourself this. If the country is in huge debt to the fed and to other countries, where is money supposed to be generated to pay off this debt? Give me an example of how a tax cut will make the government more money, and I'll gladly disarm it.

In my opinion, I think Obama shouldn't have touched taxes.

The republican tax cut strategy is 100% political, and in my opinion makes no sense whatsoever. They keep pushing for tax cuts over and over, even when it makes no sense.. And when their opposition gets into office they're stuck with the tough decision of raising taxes to help the situation.

Tax cuts do not help the economy, they help republicans win elections. But thanks to Bush, a lot more people see things for what they are. Hopefully Obama will take the responceable stance in the long run, and be smart enough to make people understand the truth of the sitation.

(But with how this stimulus bill is, I guess that's too late. Politics defeats common sense again.)

I actually like that the stimulus now is more of a long term thing, and not one of those bush spending bills that's treat everything like an emergency. "Zomg I need 1 trillion to give to my buddies before I leave office!" That helped...

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Professor.. I'm not behind the bill at all. In fact, I'm not for any stimulus package. I'm just bashing how politics work in general in this situation. Maybe you should read it back with that thought in mind.

I'm not defending the package at all.

And by the way, he met with the house republicans, and allowed their ideas to change the bill to an extent.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Easy. It's been shown and admitted by Charles Gibson in the Obama interview that cutting capital gains increases revenue from capital gains taxes. Glad that argument is done with...

And if the country is in such debt, like you said, how is borrowing $1,000,000,000,000.00 for the "stimulus plan" going to fix that?

So in your argument then Obama would be the biggest Republican ever. His plans are to eliminate federal taxes for over 50% of citizens, AND send many of them tax rebate checks. Talk about a vote grab... evil republican Obama...

Thats fine that you like it, but its not a stimulus plan and thaty makes it a dishonest argument for this bill.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I'll try to reply to this this coming weekend, when I'll hopefully have time to engage in an economic discussion full of bar graphs and data.

Real quick: I *think* the issue here comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of tax cuts, coupled with the need to consider other economic events in the past eight years.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

It seems the popular thing today to blame all the country's woes on Bush. Now, I wasn't his biggest fan either, but this is unfair. In this hypothetical and highly unrealistic situation, you have held all other factors but tax cuts constant. America's economy is far more complex than this, as is its interaction with the world economy.

Also, the recent banking collapse has nothing to do with Bush's tax cuts. Please see this ten-page New York Times article for the main cause behind the collapse (which, in short, was due to out-dated risk management software).

Here is a fundamental misunderstanding of tax cuts. The recent dramatic rise in debt is not due to tax cuts. It is due to increased spending, above and beyond tax revenue generated by the government.

Remember, there is little correlation between tax rates and tax revenue:



However, there is a strong correlation between tax revenue and GDP:



Since tax revenue increases with ever-increasing GDP, it makes sense to facilitate private economic growth, through smart tax policies. So, no matter the tax rate, tax revenue (what matters), remains largely the same percentage of overall GDP:



Unfortunately, that's all I have time for today. I hope this makes things a little clearer.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Bush is an awesome scapegoat though.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

One thing the charts should also illustrate is that these "new ideas" that are being pushed by President Obama, Pelosi, etc. are not new at all, just tired retreads of old ideas like The New Deal under FDR and The Great Society under Johnson.

Bond, why do you think fiscal conservatives have such a hard time making the argument that you did? It's so straight forward and simple when you put it in those terms. Do you think politicians are simply afraid that people won't understand the tax cut argument beyond the immediate affect to their pocket book?

Its things like this that make me appreciate Reagan more the older I get: He never talked down to the American people or tried to misrepresent his views out of fear his constituency wouldn't "get it". I think there is a lack of trust and confidence by politicians today, and that gets returned in kind.

As for the Bush scapegoating, the dems will get some mileage out of this right now, but they need to be wary of continuing with it. The feeling I get is that most people who disliked Bush want to get BEYOND his presidency, not give it grave dressing, and every time a politician mentions Bush's name people get more and more sick of it.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

So it doesn't seem like people are turning against Obama for this bill.
And as it stands right now unless I'm mistaken, tax cuts makes up the single largest portion of this new bill.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I haven't seen any details on the newer version of the bill, so I'll reserve comment. My comments were based on the House version of the bill.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Your guess is probably as good (or better) than mine. I do have a few ideas, though.

For one, I don't think most people want to deal with quantitative graphs, the distinction between tax rates and tax revenue, real numbers adjusted for inflation, etc.

Secondly, most of our politicians are lawyers, from liberal arts backgrounds. I would have to assume few understand economics. It's very complicated, and I only have a very basic understanding. As you go into more complex economic theory, the conclusions that are drawn become more and more subjective. But, I think it is possible to arrive at at least a few fundamental truths, at the most basic level, which the graphs I posted illustrate.

Also, economic discussions (really arguments) in politics always boils down to class warfare rhetoric, which is neither helpful, nor accurate. Each part of an economy depends on the other part: rich depend on poor, poor depend on rich, etc. The graphs are evident of this. The goal of economic policy, in my opinion, should always be to create the most wealth within the society (as I believe the creation of wealth is unlimited). Once you understand we are all interconnected, and all need to work toward wealth creation, there is no reason to hate thy neighbor, whether they be rich or poor. But that's just my view.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I plead ignorant, which is why I'm avoiding this discussion for the most part.

However, I think part of the problem is the media too. I mean, turn on FOX or CNN or even the extreme liberal media (Daily Show), and all they talk about is how the Republicans are all opposing the Stimulus, or how it is Dems vs. Pubs.

There is very little content actually explaining how our economy works, and why our economy is in such a shitty spot right now.

Does the mass media get a cookie for polarizing/stupidizing the American Public? How come the American public are too ignorant to be educated on their own economy. Of course that makes me a huge hypocrite, but when I have some time I would like to sit down and learn US Econ 101 because soon I'll be doing all my own taxes and stuff.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Bond, if you don't mind, can you scale that first graph down to the last 10 years? And also include real numbers instead of percentages? (You did post a nice secondary graph that helps, but a 50 year example is too large.)

By the way, I don't think tax cuts are ALWAYS bad, I just don't believe that they're ALWAYS the answer. Two different extremes there.

And of course, I have to toss in the fact that if you put a 50 year example of the debt the country has gotten into, I'm sure the slope would move up a lot faster then even the GDP.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

The Senate has voted for cloture on the Stimulus bill.
Not exactly sure what that means.
But it does get us past the filibuster stage, right?

Anyhow a vote of 61-39.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I thank the 3 of you for caring about the people out there that are suffering right now. Thank you.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I believe thats correct. At least the debate was able to pear down the stimulus by $106 billion... not that it matters much when we tax payers are already on the hook for $9.7 trillion.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aNDaPlDwNZak

Thats a number thats just too big to comprehend. We haven't even gotten to the banks or housing plans yet...

I'm no economic expert and I'll be the first to admit I have no clue how national debt affects mainstreet economies, but this kind if daunting debt and IMO recklessness can't be good. But then again we're in new territory here. No one has ever taken the US or another world power this far into the red. Who knows? Maybe we'll spend so much we'll tear a whole through our own reality into a land of gumdrops and money trees.

In the end we'll see how wallstreet reacts tomorrow. That will be a decent indicator of whether or not this now inevitable spending bill will help or delay economic recovery.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

You should read up on the fed. Its not exactly the best situation to say the least. Though the funny part is they couldn't recollect what we owe them even if they wanted to, but if they were to request any type of plan with any type of reasonable time limit... The economy here is done. lol

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I'll do this over the weekend (it will still prove the same point, though).

Will post some more thoughts on the economy then as well.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

The market is, at least initially, responding very poorly (looking at today's trading numbers).

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

The DOW has dropped 300 points since the stimulus bills passed the cloture vote. Awesome.

By the time the banking and housing plans pass we'll be bartering beads for beaver pelts...

EDIT: Sorry make that a 400 point drop... ugh... I hope I can look at my 401k balance sheet again sometime soon...

EDIT2: Now its back up and finished almost even on the day... I'm just not going to look at it anymore...

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

DOW: THE RIDE!

(warning: pregnant mothers and people with heart conditions not recommended)

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

On a similar unrelated note, I liked one of the answers when Leno did his "Presidential Jeopardy" last night. One of the answers was Stimulus Bill. "Bush" responded with "What is Bill's nickname in the White House". I busted out laughing at it and then wondered why I never thought of that.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_...public_review/

Think can review the final version of the bill here.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

TheGame, here's the data that you asked for in real (2000) dollars:



You can view the full budget here (very large document): http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...7/pdf/hist.pdf

Again, the problem is not that tax revenue is too low, or that tax rates are too high, the problem is spending massive amounts of money above and beyond a nearly constant tax revenue stream.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I can't imagine what a revised amount would look now based on the fact that data is from '07 right before all hell broke loose.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-02-13-voa53.cfm

The funny thing is they would never give any specific examples of why they voted against it.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

The even funnier thing is that it is nearly inconceivable that any representative had time to read the finalized bill for a re-vote (not for lack of trying, simply because the bill was slammed through so fast):

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Game, those that were against this bill have been VERY specific about their reasons and have expressed this in multiple televised press conferences. I've even posted video clips of some of the specific reasons why they're against it. If anyone has been vague, it's those that have been FOR the bill, talking more about partisanship and obstructionism than the bill's merits.

In the end it's passed and we'll see what happens. Personally, I think that the economy will recover, because it always does, but it will in spite of the "stimulus bill". I just hope the delay isn't too crippling.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Now barring this stimulus package is a complete and utter blow-up.
I think Obama won the war on words as well. He got the stimulus passed in about the time he claimed he would. He offered to reach out to Republicans for this bill, but they tried to fight it.
And well, he still has a pretty high approval rating of his performance.

Curious to see what the following weeks hold now. And how much Republican opposition will grow or die.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

It's interesting how our discussion of the stimulus package has turned away from facts and quantitative economic measures, to more of "feelings" arguments. I think this only mirrors the larger discussion in our country around economic issues, though. Complex economic discussions get boiled down to class-warfare and emotional arguments in the twenty-four hour news cycle that we live under.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Part of this is the idea I maintain and shared earlier, that politicians just think we're too stupid to understand the economics and/or they want to "slip" something past us. I keep being reminded of Rahm Emanuel's statement that a good crisis should never go to waste.

In the end, the Republicans have the best argument based on real numbers but they are afraid to voice it (or apply those pronciples looking at the past 8 or so years), and democrats have the best argument based on "social justice" simply because pandering to class envy and anger is effective. Just look at Jason1's political views for a perfect illustration. Keep someone angry and spiteful against a common enemy and they'll stop thinking.

What has really angered me during all of this is how damaging it has been to our democratic process. We're passing massive bills that haven't been read or understood out of FEAR and ANGER, not reason. The only real argument we hear repeatedly from those that support this bill is that of immediacy; "something has to be done now!". But no one is talking about what that something is or how it will affect our nation beyond broad political arguments.

The last time that happened we ended up with The Great Depression and a lost decade of failed economic policies.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

I do wonder how the GOP will continue going forward with this, I mean the House none of them voted for the stimulus and I believe only 3 in the Senate, but when aspects supports their followers... will they continue saying it was a bad move or try and save face.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

To use a cliche: The proof is in the pudding.

If the bill succeeds, the Republicans were against a successful economic policy and they'll be crushed come 2010 elections. If the economy continues to stumble and fail for the next two years, the Republicans look like prophets that no one listened to and when the mid-term elections come, and they will gain seats quite easily.

This bill and the coming banking and housing bills are a huge gamble for both sides, and our political landscape will be shaped by the outcome for YEARS.

In any case, I hope that I am proven wrong by these actions by our legislature. Now that it whas bee passed I truly hope the bill succeeds, because in the end thats what everyone wants, we just disagree in what will succeed. My fear is that it will fail and fail spectacularly.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Personally, I don't think anything will change.

You can pour money into whatever you want, but as long as people are scared enough about another "depression", they will hoarde their money, and not spend it as frivilously (in most cases).


Once things tend to get really bad, they don't get better until they hit what appears to be rock bottom - and I just don't think there is any stopping that. Slowing it down, sure.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Wether or not Obama turns out to do a good job as president or not, it's nice to have a president who can actually put a complete sentence together.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

That's the bottomline really.
As long as people continue to believe in a recession and hard times, they just won't spend money as much.

Or if they get extra cash will save it or use it to pay down debt more rapidly than spending on frivolous things.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

http://www.recovery.gov/

This is a cool idea.
Let's see if it is put to use.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Nice to know where my parent's money is going.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

and mine unfortunately. College things will help me this fall, but I'd rather have not gotten it from a "package" like this.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

See, this is the thing that really ticks me off. The Democrat's economic platform doesn't benefit the middle class any more than the Republican's economic platform. In fact, one could argue that Democratic economic policies perpetuate poverty and feed class warfare. So really, they're simply perpetuating a lie to feed political desires.

Here's my question: Why are Chemistry and Physics required classes to graduate from high school, but Economics is not? Why can most high school seniors solve any basic chemical formula, but not balance a check book? Maybe there is something in keeping people uninformed. It creates the ability to tap in to these "feelings" arguments.

Re: The Stimulus Package
 

Economics is a requirement at all the high schools in my town.

By the way, if you haven't noticed I've pulled out of the economic discussion in his thread. The reason being that I don't want to argue off of anything but results. Everyone is quickly jumping on Obama's back about his plan, even though nothing he has done so far has affected the economy whatsoever.

The republicans had their chance to help the economy, but had a historic fail. The reason for the big fallout is the government not taking enough action and setting stricter regulations for the banks. The reason they didn't do that is because the republicans where over the government at the time, and allowed it to happen.