Should the Stimulus Package fail....

[Muenkel 0]

Will you still be happy with the current administration?

Who will you blame for its failure?

Despite my personal doubt that this stimulus will work, I do want it to succeed. I want it to for the sake of our country and citizens. I don't generally side with the Democrats but I do not want this to fail just to see them fail.

_________________________________________
Chris

[quade 4]

Currently there is no absolute, 100% guaranteed and proven method to do what needs to be done. If there was, I'm pretty sure we'd be doing it. I find it impossible to blame the current administration for the troubles we currently find ourselves in. It had no part in its creation whatsoever. It would be a bit like trying to blame the fire department for not putting out a fire already well in progress. I'm nearly certain they're doing all they can to extinguish the flames, but if the building burns down, I can't see any possible way to blame them.

I certainly can see blaming people that are trying to block the fire crew's path.

I'm not talking about the people that might simply have a different opinion. I'm talking about the 20% or so that would block any action at all no matter what simply because they aren't the ones in power. What kind of idiots are these anyway?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[shropshire 0]

Hi Chris... I think that the problem is global and perhaps individual uncoordinated Stimuli packages are not the right way to go... They may work (slowly) but perhaps a better approach is to tackle the problem at a wider level.

As for apportioning blame.... well, it's too early to say and could be counter productive (?).


The problem is world wide so perhaps the solutions(s) should be too.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

I find it impossible to blame the current administration for the troubles we currently find ourselves in. It had no part in its creation whatsoever.

Is that a joke? What were Obama and Clinton doing prior to this election and what was their voting records as senators? Is this a new congress or have the democrats been in control for the last two years? What have they done to reverse the economic crisis that we are in? Why do we have to put our country in such an insane debt all at once on such a massive scale with such waste and in doing so give up so much of our personal freedoms? Any congress person that votes for this package republican or democrat in its present form I will vote against in the next election.

And don’t get me wrong, I think Obama has been dealt about the crappiest hand that he could get. I also think that people have put way to much hope on one person. There is almost no way he can win which means we all lose. Congress needs to get its head out of its ass and do the right thing for a change and not look out for their own interest.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Andrewwhyte 1]

The problem is what are the yardsticks for success. Did the new deal succeed or did it prolong the depression? The answer is probably both. The new deal brought relief to millions of Americans who were truly desperate, but then it had to be paid for.
If the goal of the program is to halt the recession by the next quarter then it will fail. If the goal is to reduce the depth of the recession by 0.5% of GDP maybe it will succeed. But if the price is one additional quarter of flat output is it still a success? What if the price is three additional quarters? What if it results in a "lost decade" such as Japan endured?
One thing is sure, twenty years from now the Dems will hail it as a success and the GOP will not.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Currently there is no absolute, 100% guaranteed and proven method to do what needs to be done. If there was, I'm pretty sure we'd be doing it. I find it impossible to blame the current administration for the troubles we currently find ourselves in. It had no part in its creation whatsoever. It would be a bit like trying to blame the fire department for not putting out a fire already well in progress. I'm nearly certain they're doing all they can to extinguish the flames, but if the building burns down, I can't see any possible way to blame them. I certainly can see blaming people that are trying to block the fire crew's path.

If the fire crew have negligently loaded their hoses with gasoline instead of water, then the people would be doing the right thing by stopping them before they reach the fire.

[wayneflorida 0]

Well, if the title had "five year plan" in there somewhere I would say it would be a failure.

[sfc 1]

Quote

Quote

Currently there is no absolute, 100% guaranteed and proven method to do what needs to be done. If there was, I'm pretty sure we'd be doing it. I find it impossible to blame the current administration for the troubles we currently find ourselves in. It had no part in its creation whatsoever. It would be a bit like trying to blame the fire department for not putting out a fire already well in progress. I'm nearly certain they're doing all they can to extinguish the flames, but if the building burns down, I can't see any possible way to blame them. I certainly can see blaming people that are trying to block the fire crew's path.

If the fire crew have negligently loaded their hoses with gasoline instead of water, then the people would be doing the right thing by stopping them before they reach the fire.

That's not what is happening, a better analogy would be that they are stopping the firemen because they are from the other side of the political spectrum.
They would rather see it burn down than have a left winger put the fire out. (lush rimjob is a good example of this kind of person)

[wmw999 2,534]

Quote

That's not what is happening, a better analogy would be that they are stopping the firemen because they are from the other side of the political spectrum.

Nah. The fire is pretty close to being out of control. The firemen think they have a pretty good plan, but if it doesn't work, the house will burn down. The onlookers (who are also firemen) have a different plan, which they think will work better. But if they talk about it too long, the house will burn down. The onlookers' plan has no better guarantee than the firemen's plan.

But either plan, executed honestly, and with cooperation from as many people as possible, stands a better chance of working than doing nothing.

As a country, we're generally not in a position where we HAVE to do something -- it's better to do nothing, or something very small, than the wrong thing when situations aren't emergent. But the situation is emergent right now.

This isn't the right plan. But just cutting taxes isn't the right plan either. People are selfish, and these economic times are likely to make them more selfish. And that's what any plan has to take into account.

"Trickle down" only works when people aren't too busy trying to keep it all. Think about all the rivers that are having more and more of their water used by cities early in their path, so that there's almost no water left by the time they get to where they hit the ocean.

I don't think we're likely to change human nature. So we have to figure out a crisis that Americans can pull together in -- we're really, really good at pulling together in a crisis that we perceive threatens all of us together. It's when the crisis threatens us individually that we pull apart.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[sfc 1]

Quote

Quote

That's not what is happening, a better analogy would be that they are stopping the firemen because they are from the other side of the political spectrum.

Nah. The fire is pretty close to being out of control. The firemen think they have a pretty good plan, but if it doesn't work, the house will burn down. The onlookers (who are also firemen) have a different plan, which they think will work better. But if they talk about it too long, the house will burn down. The onlookers' plan has no better guarantee than the firemen's plan.

But either plan, executed honestly, and with cooperation from as many people as possible, stands a better chance of working than doing nothing.

As a country, we're generally not in a position where we HAVE to do something -- it's better to do nothing, or something very small, than the wrong thing when situations aren't emergent. But the situation is emergent right now.

This isn't the right plan. But just cutting taxes isn't the right plan either. People are selfish, and these economic times are likely to make them more selfish. And that's what any plan has to take into account.

"Trickle down" only works when people aren't too busy trying to keep it all. Think about all the rivers that are having more and more of their water used by cities early in their path, so that there's almost no water left by the time they get to where they hit the ocean.

I don't think we're likely to change human nature. So we have to figure out a crisis that Americans can pull together in -- we're really, really good at pulling together in a crisis that we perceive threatens all of us together. It's when the crisis threatens us individually that we pull apart.

Wendy W.

Yes I can agree with most of what you write. The one thing that the firemen who are onlookers need to remember is that they got fired for doing a crappy job, they would do well to work with the other firemen rather than throw rocks at them and stand on their hoses. Your point about working together is well taken.

[kelpdiver 2]

It's not a binary question - failure or success. in 2 years, and then in 4 years, everyone who votes will make a judgement call on how the Administration handles this. It may be a no win scenario. But doing this, doing nothing, doing something else, all result in some sort of change. It's difficult to accurately summarize the current economic indicators until after the fact. But the person who has a job again, or who doesn't even have a place to live will praise or blame Obama for it.

There are of course about 30% on each party that are diehards (like the ones still saying they approve of Bush's performance), but in the middle is a pretty big polling ground.

[TheAnvil 0]

I want it to not pass the Senate because it's bad for America and just plain fucking stupid.

[barf]

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[hwt 0]

Has anyone noticed that this bill is being written, and controlled by a legislative branch which has a lower approval rating then Bush. The congresses approval rating is down to friends and family..

[kelpdiver 2]

congress nearly always has a lower rating than the President. That's true right now as well, with Obama at about 60%.

It's hardly surprising - 1 person will usually have a higher rating that 535 people - the latter always has a few unlikeables that drag down the view of the body as a whole.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

...they would do well to work with the other firemen rather than throw rocks at them and stand on their hoses.

When the problem is a fire, the solution is not to start more fires.

When the problem is rampant government spending, the solution is not to spend another trillion dollars.

What we have here, is firemen committing acts of arson.

[wmw999 2,534]

Well, John, actually, the fire service often does a controlled burn to set some boundaries for a fire, so that it'll burn itself out.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[vortexring 0]

I think John has a good point of sorts. It's what Gord Broon is doing over here. Below you'll find a link, providing excellent examples of his mis-calculations!

Top tip: Just click on the = symbol to save yourself time - and of course, turn up your volume too.
edit: Just noticed every forth calculation or so his eyes cross!

http://www.tpadata.com/browncalculator/

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Well, John, actually, the fire service often does a controlled burn to set some boundaries for a fire, so that it'll burn itself out.

So if you're in debt up to your eyebrows, with your credit cards all maxed-out at their limits, you think it's a great idea to obtain yet another credit card and immediately run that one up to the limit too?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Well, John, actually, the fire service often does a controlled burn to set some boundaries for a fire, so that it'll burn itself out.

So if you're in debt up to your eyebrows, with your credit cards all maxed-out at their limits, you think it's a great idea to obtain yet another credit card and immediately run that one up to the limit too?

Why the fuck not John.... Reagan did it.... BUsh did it....if its good for the Gipper.... why not????

You guys set the standard..... lets run with it...... MMMMMKKKKKK

[vortexring 0]

He's right - at least on a personal level. How it relates to a national economy internationally?

Who can tell? Encouraging the banks to lend again? Wasn't that one of the fundamental causes? It isn't as if they'll immediately start lending responsibly; they never did!

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[Amazon 7]

Quote

He's right - at least on a personal level. How it relates to a national economy internationally?

Who can tell? Encouraging the banks to lend again? Wasn't that one of the fundamental causes? It isn't as if they'll immediately start lending responsibly; they never did!

No but they could restructure a lot of the crap they sold... so that they make a good profit.. and the people they help could keep their homes... BUT that is not the way these guys rolled....

Rip off all they could in as short a time as possible.. and run with the money..

[shropshire 0]

I think that that is the key ... Responsible Lending.

The banks 'appear' to have stopped lending at all, which is causing problems for even productive companies, who have good orders and sale - because they have cash flow problems. These types of companies need assistance to keep going.

But I'm also with John, that throwing good money after bad - would be the wrong thing to do. The problem, at the moment, appears to be lack of sensible judgment and this is causing otherwise good businesses to struggle and go under. That needs to change and change fast.

.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Muenkel 0]

In regard to this economic nightmare, there is plenty of blame to go around. The list is huge and it includes D's and R's, GWB, the financial sector and many private citizens. Hell, some of this actually goes back to decisions made by the Clinton administration. Yes, Obama inherited a mess of epic proportions but he and his congress own this latest stimulus package. The pork in this package may just finish the job in regard to the destruction of our economy and ripple into the global economy.

Anyone know where the bread line begins?

_________________________________________
Chris