American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: What Would You Do to the Bill?

[Cutlass]

We aren't going to get any savings on the military side in the next 4 years. Don't even worry about that. Once the wars are wound down the equipment deficit and added enlistment costs still have to be accounted for.

 

[Cutlass]

How is building a road going to get us out of this mess? Do you have any idea how long the planning and entitlement process is just for building one mile of roadway?

If we want to inject some steroids into this economy, building a road isn't going to do it. But at least Obama admits that too.

~Chris

Not by itself, no. But there are a lot of projects that are already planned waiting for money. These could be started soon.

 

[sonorakitch]

Well, even with the earmarked projects "ready to go", the construction of a roadway involves very few subcontractors and a surprisingly small number of workers. This isn't the 1930's when rail and roadway was laid with brawn and picks.

Honestly, this economic turmoil is going to prove near-impossible to actually "fix". Only time, and more foreclosures, will fix it.

~Chris

 

[Narz]

How is building a road going to get us out of this mess? Do you have any idea how long the planning and entitlement process is just for building one mile of roadway?

Building more roadways is foolish, I agree. We need to maintain the roadways we already have & get better public transportation to people who cannot afford cars (a number which will probably skyrocket in the near future if not already). Already total miles driven has gone down for the first time in history. US car culture is doomed.

Every mile of highway is extremely cost & labor intense not to mention environmentally disastrous.

Radio says the big BO's putting 10,000 more guys into Afghanistan.

Fine, put 10K more guys in Afghanistan on the phony Quest for Bin Laden & take our boys out of Iraq as promised. Do we really need to be giving of billions to weapons manufactures to shoot at Iraqis & rebuilding a foreign nation when we've got so much on our plate here at home?

 

[Cutlass]

Even a small increase in jobs will reduce the time and foreclosures.

 

[Narz]

Even a small increase in jobs will reduce the time and foreclosures.

Which, unfortunately is a major impetus to keep our solidiers overseas. If we brought 200,000 young men & women back from Iraq to compete for jobs with everyone else it certainly would exacerbate the employment situation. Sounds cynical but you know Obama has to think about it.

 

[Bigfoot3814]

Fine, put 10K more guys in Afghanistan on the phony Quest for Bin Laden & take our boys out of Iraq as promised. Do we really need to be giving of billions to weapons manufactures to shoot at Iraqis & rebuilding a foreign nation when we've got so much on our plate here at home?

Say whaaaaat? You don't mind the war in Afghanistan but the war in Iraq is too much to bear?

 

[Narz]

Say whaaaaat? You don't mind the war in Afghanistan but the war in Iraq is too much to bear?

Well, at least there is (or was anyway) some justification for invading Afghanistan.

 

[Merkinball]

Even a small increase in jobs will reduce the time and foreclosures.

So what? What does that matter?

A.) Who says they are productive jobs. If we are paying people to dig a ditch one day, then fill it up the next, we are not helping the economy. And guess what tens of millions to the NEA is? Increasing welfare checks? Increasing government handouts? Nobody has been able to explain to me how that stimulates the economy.

B.) The job you see tomorrow is the job you won't see ten years from now, because eventually we're gonna have to pay it. It's really easy to point to a job that's artificially created now, but it's really difficult to see the job that won't exist down the line because SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR in the future. And that someone could be hiring someone -- in the future -- with that money.

C.) This isn't even a stimulus bill. Let's face it, it's not. It's an expansion of the YEARLY federal budget. None of this crap will ever go away.

We don't have the money to pay for what we owe now.
We don't have the money to pay for what we're creating now.
We're not going to have it in the future.

But mark my words, this crap, this filth...it will never go away. It will become a permenant fixture.

And in the end our debt will sink this ship. It's an unsustainable policy.

Lastly, when a household is having financial problems. Who says, "Well, I'm going to the mall, having a shopping spree. Gotta spend my way outta this mess."

 

[Integral]

Narz: pulling out of Iraq wouldn't even pay for a fifth of the stimulus package.

Cutlass: At least you're thinking long-term, and payroll tax cuts are the most promising out of the available tax-side options. They still aren't great, however.

--

Regarding how we'll get the money to pay for this: primarily it'll be borrowed, not just by foreign central banks (which have already been switching into Treasuries and out of Agencies in droves) but increasingly by private holders who are getting out of any dollar asset with even a hint of risk.

 

[Merkinball]

Which, unfortunately is a major impetus to keep our solidiers overseas. If we brought 200,000 young men & women back from Iraq to compete for jobs with everyone else it certainly would exacerbate the employment situation. Sounds cynical but you know Obama has to think about it.

This is more productive and stimulating to the economy then handing out welfare checks and extending welfare benefits so people can sit on their duffs.

 

[Mowque]

But mark my words, this crap, this filth...it will never go away. It will become a permenant fixture.

And in the end our debt will sink this ship. It's an unsustainable policy.

Curious, what do you expect to happen?

 

[Bigfoot3814]

Well, at least there is (or was anyway) some justification for invading Afghanistan.

Are you pos? Because according to you the justification is either the "phony quest for bin Laden" or an excuse to "shoot at [Afghans] and rebuild a foreign nation". Or have I just gone completely crazy.

 

[Bill3000]

Who says they are productive jobs. If we are paying people to dig a ditch one day, then fill it up the next, we are not helping the economy. And guess what tens of millions to the NEA is? Increasing welfare checks? Increasing government handouts? Nobody has been able to explain to me how that stimulates the economy.

Not my fault you're too stupid and lazy to comprehend the fundamentals of Keynesianism.

Moderator Action: Warned for flaming.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Merkinball]

Not my fault you're too stupid and lazy to comprehend the fundamentals of Keynesianism.

What's to comprehend? It's elementary drivel and it doesn't work. You can teach a 5 year old about how Keynesianism doesn't work. It's unproductive at it's very heart. This stimulus package is the anti-thesis of economic stimulus aside from tax cuts.

 

[Patroklos]

Which, unfortunately is a major impetus to keep our solidiers overseas. If we brought 200,000 young men & women back from Iraq to compete for jobs with everyone else it certainly would exacerbate the employment situation. Sounds cynical but you know Obama has to think about it.

1.) There are not 200K troops in Iraq.

2.) The vast majority of the troops there are active duty, they will not be looking for jobs when they get back.

3.) Most reservists/national guard troops already have jobs in the states anyway, and there are stict rules about when and how they can be fired while deployed or when they get back.

 

[Narz]

Narz: pulling out of Iraq wouldn't even pay for a fifth of the stimulus package.

You act as if 20% of damn near a trillion dollars is a drop in the bucket. Trim the fat off Obama's plan & it will pay for half.

This is more productive and stimulating to the economy then handing out welfare checks and extending welfare benefits so people can sit on their duffs.

Strawman. Nowhere did I support increasing welfare.

Are you pos? Because according to you the justification is either the "phony quest for bin Laden" or an excuse to "shoot at [Afghans] and rebuild a foreign nation". Or have I just gone completely crazy.

I do think we're wasting time in both nations, yes. Saddam is dead, the Taliban is overthrow. I just think at least we have some pretense (even if we're not very serious about it) in Afghanistan whereas Iraq was founded on a false premise (phony WMD's). My point is that Osama exists whereas the WMD's didn't. IMO, that doesn't justify our continued resource draining war there (Afghan) but at least it's something.

 

[Bigfoot3814]

Strawman. Nowhere did I support increasing welfare.

*achem* Well, that's what the Obama's doin'.

I do think we're wasting time in both nations, yes. Saddam is dead, the Taliban is overthrow. I just think at least we have some pretense (even if we're not very serious about it) in Afghanistan whereas Iraq was founded on a false premise (phony WMD's). My point is that Osama exists whereas the WMD's didn't. IMO, that doesn't justify our continued resource draining war there (Afghan) but at least it's something.

I think you're wrong but I'm not going to talk about the war here.

 

[Narz]

1.) There are not 200K troops in Iraq.

You better edit wiki then.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_US_soldiers_are_at_war_in_Iraq

2.) The vast majority of the troops there are active duty, they will not be looking for jobs when they get back.

That's good. Guess I was wrong then. No excuses whatsoever to bring them back to safety to serve America in the flesh.

I think you're wrong but I'm not going to talk about the war here.

We can talk about it on the radio.

Nah, j/k, no politics.

 

[Perfection]