The Stimulus Package

[KillerGremlin]

We shoulda let the banks/stupid people crash and burn. It might have been rough for a few years, but from the looks of things...it's going to be rough for a few years.

Bailing out the auto industry...okay not totally bad.

We should have bailed the porn industry out though, I heard they took a shot to the face.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheGame

My point wasn't to illustrate that the government goes through the exact same cycles as a single buisness. My point was to illustrate that a GROSS INCOME CHART by its very nature is meant to be misleading.

And I posted far more than you quoted that dispoved much of your apples vs. oranges reasoning.

I'm sorry the charts are not misleading because:

1) Your example that is meant to disprove them equates the way businesses treat investment and debt with how the government treats revenue and debt, and the two are completely different, as I illustrated throughout the entirety of my post. Companies borrow to eventually see a return on their investment that is greater than the deficit and debt they accrue. If they can't do that, they FAIL. The problem is that the government does not gain any revenue now or ever from it's spending, and the last time it tried in the late 80's (S&L crash) the government, meaning the taxpayer, got HOSED on the deal.

2) You continue with the incorrect assumption that taxing and spending are connected at the hip and when one goes up, the other must also. I have yet to see anything beyond anecdotal evidence from you to support this specious reasoning and overly simplistic rationale. Clinton already proved you wrong in the 90's by balancing the budget with relatively low tax rates.

What did you think of the last two resources I posted? They are directly related to our discussion.

I will repeat my question: Since the government has been shown to consistently garner the same percentage tax revenue regardless of tax rate, why do you believe that we should mess with taxes and not spending?

At this point, we've begun to go in circles, so unless you address the specific points I've raised I think it's safe to end the dialogue as all opinions have been addressed.

We shoulda let the banks/stupid people crash and burn. It might have been rough for a few years, but from the looks of things...it's going to be rough for a few years.

KG, I'm not of the opinion that we shouldn't have helped at all, but I think enough is enough. I also think the help we gave was blindly handed out with no expectations attached. AIG is getting bailed out again, and every financial expert I've heard only talks about how poorly run that company is. Plus, the banks that have been bailed out are sitting on the money, and I think that until the government states "Hey, thats all, folks!" they'll continue to sit on it hoping for more and not begin the businss transactions that will get us back on our feet. Funny how corporate welfare has the same effect as personal welfare...

Yesterday Gordon Brown gave a speech that claimed that one bad bank can corrupt all of them, and I think he's exagerrating. Regardless of cross-investment and information connectivity, businesses that were run well are survivinga dn some still doing well. I fear our politicians have become so populist in this crisis that they aren't looking to find a thoughtful solution, but instead simply out to give universal help and then condemn them for taking it, all the while passing social programs that they've purposely mislabeled stimulus, taking advantage of the crisis to push through an otherwise unpalatable agenda.

Throughout all of this from Bush/Paulson to Obama/Geitner, I've never felt confident that anyone knows what the hell they're doing, but instead simply taking wild risks with trillions of our dollars in the HOPES that it will do something or if they keep messing with the money, they'll eventually get it right.

In my mind, if we are going to take wild risks, I'd rather us put the risk in the hands of the businesses as they were on the ground floor of this mess and I believe most want to work they're way out of it. But that will never happen because we are still in the blame-game faze of this financial disaster, and mistaking what was for the most part negligence and a failure of proper planning for malice and abuse.

And meanwhile we still ignore the government's role in this whole mess, and instead of reevaluating the same regulations that helped cause it, we look to be expanding those failed programs.

[KillerGremlin]

Wow you summed up how I feel pretty good....

I don't think we should stop helping the banks completely, but bailing out companies who ran on unethical (or...unregulated) policies...I think stricter rules should be imposed, or they should be left to be bought out by the honest companies that like you said, are making it.

I don't really know anymore. Throwing money at the problem...even if we recover from this recession, won't we be back to where we started, thus perpetuating the problem?

As I previously stated, I know NOTHING about finance and money. So I'm trying to remain fairly passive here....

[BreakABone]

http://www.recovery.gov/?q=node/202

More of the stimulus money is being yet into the wild.
This to help with transportation.

Not that I'm surprised, but New York receives the most money. IT helps that we have the best and at the same time most complex transportation system.

From what I read in newspapers around these parts, this should stop the MTA from rising prices drastically (though I assume a fare hike is still in order) which in turn keeps down the cost of going to work, which gives people more money to spend. It also allows for more jobs to complete projects and repairs that would have been cut due to the ballooning deficit.