[excon]

Most wise businessmen spend with an idea of a business model and a plan .They are ususally using other people's money and give realistic projections on when the investor will get a return on their investment .

I saw no such plan

Hello tom:

I did. And, it's not surprising that you didn't. Nonetheless, I know that it takes some time for money to work it's way through the economy, even if the Obamas don't.

In fact, I heard stuff, like it's going to get worse before it gets better. If I would have heard stuff like it's going to have an IMMEDIATE impact (like you seem to have heard), I would have decried it, just like you are today... But, I heard NOTHING like that.

Plus, as a conservative fellow, YOU know it takes a while, and you know the money is just starting to be spent...

So, your opposition doesn't come from an economic point of view... Because the economics haven't been played out to the degree that one could even HAVE an economic point of view about them..

No, your opposition comes from politics, pure and simple, and NOT the long term health of your country. That's not very nice.

excon

[speechlesstx]

No, your opposition comes from politics, pure and simple, and NOT the long term health of your country. That's not very nice.

Did you miss my link where the CBO says it's unsustainable? That's fact, not politics.

[tomder55]

Even if I believed the intended goal was to spend it on legitimate infrastructure work (it isn't... much of the bucket list was bs pork ) ,the fact is that all the states are doing with the funding is to prop up their own disastrous state budgets. California as an exampe has gone through all the "stimulus "money and is handing out IOUs . Not a penny went to building a thing. New Jersey illegally diverted the money to pay for the expansion of the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway .

There are scores of similar stories even though the Veep is overseeing the use of the stimulus money . So many safeguards were put in place in fact that it is impeading and slowing down the distribution of the money . That is why many states have held onto the funds and are using them for things outside of the mandate of the legislation.


There is just too much money going to too many places to fully account for it. It would've been better to return the money back to the people . It would've already been put to use towards the recovery

[excon]

There is just too much money going to too many places to fully account for it.

Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree with you... But, as much as you don't like to hear it, when it's broken as badly as George W. Bush broke it, you just can't put a bandaid on it and expect results. The dufus virtually handed the Democrats a blank check.

Thems is just the facts.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree with you.... But, as much as you don't like to hear it, when it's broken as badly as George W. Bush broke it, you just can't put a bandaid on it and expect results. The dufus virtually handed the Democrats a blank check.

Thems is just the facts.

excon

All right, I'm confused.

Exactly how did Bush "break it"?

How exactly did anything that Bush ever did justify Obama quadrupling of the national debt, quadrupling the budget deficit, nationalization of 10 of the top 12 banks, 2 of the top 3 auto makers, the largest insurance company, the attempt to hamstring industry through cap & trade, the attempt to take control of the national health care system, or the spending of nearly $10 trillion over 10 years that we do not actually possess.

I know you hate Bush really badly. I know that you continue to suffer the effects of BDS 6 months after Bush left office. But why can't you just put the blame for Obama's actions with Obama? This is Obama's presidency, not Bush's. This is the Dem's congress, not Bush's. THEY are the ones passing the laws now. As tempting as it might be to try to lay off the blame for his idiocy on others, this is Obama's baby. He's the one with the filibuster-proof congress. How long are you going to accept "Bush made me do it" as an excuse for Obama's socialism? Bush ain't doing NOTHING now. Hasn't in 6 months. But you just can't let it go...

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

Bush ain't doing NOTHING now. Hasn't in 6 months. But you just can't let it go...

Not to mention the House, which controls the purse strings, has been run by Democrats since the Trojan Horse election of 2006, when they promised to get all this under control and instead engaged in endless witch hunts.

[excon]

Hello again righty's:

Let me see if I can help you guys along.

If some guy took over Bernie Madoff's fund, as we know someone did, and if he didn't pay back everybody in 6 months, is it HIS fault?? What about in 12 months? What if he can't ever pay everybody back? Is that his fault? What if the fund was broken soooo badly that nobody can fix it?

Is it the new guy's fault?

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello again righty's:

Lemme see if I can help you guys along.

If some guy took over Bernie Madoff's fund, as we know someone did, and if he didn't pay back everybody in 6 months, is it HIS fault??? What about in 12 months? What if he can't ever pay everybody back? Is that his fault? What if the fund was broken soooo badly that nobody can fix it?

Is it the new guy's fault?

excon

On the other hand, if that same guy who took over Madoff's fund spent all the money that was left in the fund, borrowed more money and spent it as well on stuff that doesn't make more money, never paid a single creditor back, and thus quadrupled the fund's debts from $25 billion to $100 billion in 6 months, with nothing to show for it except a bigger debt, people would kind of wonder what this guy thought he was doing. It is even likely that they would call for that new fund manager to resign. And they CERTAINLY wouldn't blame Madoff, the guy who is in jail and no longer in the picture, for the actions of this new manager.

Nobody is expecting Obama to fix the economy in one day, or six months. (It took Bush about 9-12 months to fix the recession caused by 9-11 with his tax cuts. 18 months, if you are only looking at unemployment figures and no other indicators.) But we ARE expecting him not to DELIBERATELY make things WORSE and quadrupling the debt and budget problems in just 6 months. We are expecting him not to lie about the effects his actions will have on the economy and what would have happened had he not taken action. We are expecting him not to deliberately panic the public so that he can pass his political agenda. We are expecting him to take actions that HELP not HURT the economy.

MOST OF ALL, we are expecting that he stand up and be a man and take responsibility for what HE is doing, rather than trying to place the blame with those who are out of the picture.

But I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

Elliot

[galveston]

Maybe it wasn't broken as badly as some think under Bush.

I believe that without the bail out, stimulus, and porkulus, the failing banks would have gone bankrupt, and others would have picked up the pieces WITHOUT all that spending.

Same thing for the automakers.

We would likely have been past the bottom by now. Instead the bottom still looks a long way down.

Hatred is such a consuming thing. It eats up brain cells at great speed.

[tomder55]

Well the government's financial institution of choice ;Goldman Sachs somehow managed to do very well this quarter . Guess what they are planning ? Yup giving out huge corporate bonuses .

Meanwhile the President pegged another GS alumus to go through the revolving door .Robert Hormats ;a vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International,will be nominated to a top economic position at the State Department. GS (Government Sachs ) alumni in prominent positions now include among others ;Hank Paulson ,Bob Rubin, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine and New York Federal Reserve Bank President William Dudley.