Missed the edit: I believe it will take longer and more painful **without **the money.
God, I really hope more people start thinking like you.
I think the stimulus probably will work- at least, the recession will be over in a couple of years, Washington will pat itself on its collective back, and we’ll go back to business as usual. Then we can do this all over again in another 10 years when it’s time for another market correction. In other words, we’ll be fine whether we spend all this money or not.
However, while I’m getting pretty tired of this deficit spending, I don’t see any way out of it. As long as it appears that politicians will be able to pass their bills along to the next generation, they will continue to do so; Democratic governments have been teaching voters that they can increase spending with no ill effect, and Republican governments have been teaching them that they can decrease taxes and increase spending.
I’m starting to think that the system is irretrievably broken. In order to pay down any significant amount of the debt, we would have to decrease spending and raise taxes. No President or Congress is going to threaten short-term growth for long-term stability. It’s political suicide.
Relevance.
Epic fail.
If only! I fear their actual motives are far more emotional.
Except that this is exactly the wrong time to decrease spending. Once the economy is back on the rails, go right ahead.
That was exactly Ross Perot’s message in 1992 and again in 1996. The people had a chance to vote for it. Remember how that worked out?
I attended one in Springfield, OH. I held up a sign that said, “Socialism is Evil.”
I agree with this whole-heartedly. I don’t think anyone has actually explained why they feel it’s going to fail; just that they don’t see how it can work. We’re not even into this long enough for anyone to measure much of anything, yet all we hear is how it’s not going to work. Is it typical American Impatience at its worst or are people ranting about another issue(s) disguised as Untapped Economic Brainiosity That Holds All The Financial Know-How In The World? Beats me.
Damn those evil Scandinavians!
That’s why I said it would be political suicide.
What makes you think it’d be any easier to push through simultaneous spending cuts and tax increases if the economy was doing well?
Glad to see you chose such a well-thought out message for your moment in the spotlight.
Because people tend to object more when they’re in danger of going bankrupt than when they’re not.
And yet, even Clinton never got around to paying down the debt.
Well he did waste a lot of time not being hounded from office by the Republicans.
:: post snipped and slight tangent :::
Well, I believe that the question should be ‘Why in the hell do we have a tax system that is so convoluted and wacked that corporations have to spend tons of money on tax lawyers so that they do not get totally fleeced?’
The tax code is a nightmare. The politicians, in an effort to win votes pass all kinds of tax laws that go after businesses. The same set of politicians then write in loopholes when the buisness owners freak over the taxes because they got totally screwed by the first set of tax law. The end result is a giant mess where tons of money and time is wasted on a) the tax lawyers/accountants finding loopholes b) the IRS going through the whole mess and c) politician finding more ways to complicate the whole situation.
Taxes are too complex, with too many loopholes and too many politicans playing to contradictory special interests.
Slee
Sure I do: it was pissed away on needless spending. Some of it had to do with the end of the tech bubble, but there’s no question that the Bush admin and both parties in congress blew a chance to make headway on the debt.
Here’s a clue for you: some of us have actual ideas and principles that we follow, regardless of who advocates them, and regardless of their popularity.
The surplus went towards reducing the debt.
Completely false, which isn’t surprising.
And if all the money was geared towards short-term stimulus, that’s be one thing – that’s Keynesian. But Obama’s own projections show ever-more-massive deficits, even well into a hopefully robust recovery. That’s not Keynesian, that’s irresponsible.
A few reasons. First, we all know they’re lying about this being a “spontaneous uprising.” These outbursts were organized by FreedomWorks, the Heritage Foundation and Fox News. The Fox viewers who showed up didn’t have a specific reason for being there; it was basically a general tantrum by people who are still fighting the last election in which their philosophy was rejected. They’re angry. It’s sour grapes. And it’s free comedy, so take it for that at least.
Hmmm… so Iraq was a good investment, and Bush spending was wise. Thanks for checking in.
Hint: It’s possible to be anti-spending AND anti-tax cuts. Might even be prudent policy if you’re like, massively in debt or something.
In an article in today’s paper, there were quotes from some people who participated in the protest. Some of them indicate that the wrong people are in mental institutions. “America is a christian nation, not socialist!” “I’m a christian, and deep in my heart I know for a fact that Obama is an undercover terrorist!”
Words fail me for once.