[jjwoodhull]

Will the stimulus package help us or hurt us? Unemployment rates are climbing at a frightening rate. How do we get our economy back on track?

[Choux]

We are headed into a Great Depression... that has to be avoided at all costs per economists on the left and right.

[inthebox]

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/politi...ml#post1498993

[George_1950]

Congress should not pass the Stimulus Porkage, if for no other reason, they do not have the money.

[jjwoodhull]

Congress should not pass the Stimulus Porkage, if for no other reason, they do not have the money.

If they don't, what will the reprocussions be? How do we stop the unemployment tailspin?

I tend to agree that passing it is a dangerous game. However, the majority of financial experts - from all ends of the spectrum - say it is necessary. Some even say it should be larger.

[KISS]

OK, try this for an idea:

Tie executive salaries to some other benchmark that has meaning like (company growth) per employee-hours per quarter. Use a weighted average based on pay grade and how many hours the employee works to get (employee-hours)

Maybe something like a 1/2 time employee gets counted as 0.5 employee.

There has to be some benchmark which says, if I rent a jet, I get paid less.

CEO's count as zero people, but there salary and expenses is figured in for profits.

[Wondergirl]

Everyone over 18 who makes under $100K a year should get $15K, no strings attached.

[BABRAM]

We can either be passive by sitting on our hands or eventually come to some sort conclusion on a stimulus package. Either way we (you and I) will pay. The question is whether we are helping our neighbor, our families, or are we stepping over dollars to get to pennies? Personally I do support the vision of a very large stimulus package. In fact, I'd prefer one larger than the current proposal, although not necessarily in it's current form for various purposes.

[Wondergirl]

From the Chicago Sun-Times --

FDR's grandson to Obama: 'Go for broke' on the economy

January 17, 2009

NEW YORK -- Frank Roosevelt thinks Barack Obama could learn a thing or two from his famous grandfather -- starting with FDR's mistakes.

Roosevelt, an economics professor at Sarah Lawrence College in Yonkers and the 32nd president's grandson, said Obama should throw more money at the fractured economy than FDR ever did into the New Deal.

He said Obama should do something his grandfather wouldn't do 77 years ago -- embrace the deficit-spending theories of economist John Maynard Keynes.

"FDR never did get the Keynsian thing, and therefore the whole New Deal effort was not big enough," said Roosevelt, 70. "I mean, it didn't get us out of the Depression, really, until World War II came along, and then government spending really got big enough to really employ everybody and then some."

"I think Obama has to learn from that and forget about balancing the budget," Roosevelt said. "Spend, spend, spend until we've done enough to stop this decline.

"So if I could talk with him I would say go for broke," he said. "Literally, go for broke."

[tomder55]

The bill will be passed and signed anyway but no ;as it is presently constructed it is a disgrace.

It spends money on all sorts nonessential projects and creates new permanent spending programs that will never go away.

Bloomberg did a tally of all the loans ;bailouts ,stimulus checks ,guarantees ,included in this and through all last year and is added up to over $9 trillion. To put that in perspective ;that is 2/3 of the total US economy! Enough already!!

But will it work ? Not according to the Congressional Budget Office. They think this does more harm and we'd be better off doing nothing . The CBO says the "stimulus" bill would reduce GDP 0.1% to 0.3% over 10 years. All this will do is tie up money and prevent it being used in real job creating investment .

Christina Romer,President Obama's top economics adviser argues that tax cuts is the best stimulus . I agree with her. Too bad the President isn't listening . He has taken the position that he basically did not care where the money is being spent ;so long as the dollar amt. was correct. In this he shares the opinion of House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey who responded to a question about the spending priorities ; "So what? This is an emergency."

Huh ? This is responsible governing ?
The President should scrap the bill . Craft one that has his signature on it ;with his ideas and those of his top economic advisors .There is no rush despite the chicken-little scare tactics being employed . It is better to get this right then to get it done by President's Day.

[Emland]

The US government stimulated the economy through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and look what it got us.

[excon]

Will the stimulus package help us or hurt us?

Hello jj:

There's been a loud complaint on Wall Street that CEO's will do anything they can to raise the price of their stock - because much of their compensation is based on the that price... In fact, CEO's do real long term damage to their companies by trying to make them look GOOD, in the short run...

In my view, that's what will happen to our economy. Certainly, a HUGE burst of cash on the scene NOW will make a difference. It'll FEEL good. Will it be a big enough difference - big enough to reverse the trend - or just big enough to give us a bump, and then turn around again??

I opt for the latter...

I don't know much about these things, but I know a little. I don't know whether they're going to PRINT the money they're about to spend or BORROW it. From my vantage point, it doesn't make much of a difference. In either case, we're mortgaging our children's future, for today's unemployment rate. There IS a cost to pay.

So, as distasteful as the comparison might be, I think we're just like heroin addicts. We NEED the cash. When cash runs short, we start to feel pain. The reality about our pain, however, is that it will go away in a short time, if we just hang on.

Or, we can shoot up, and kick the PAIN can down the road to wait for its inevitable eventuality. And, we KNOW it's going to be worse THEN, than it'll be NOW.

So, is it GOOD for us? Not really.

excon

[excon]

Hello again:

While I'm clearing up things, let's get off the Republican talking points about Fannie and Freddie. I KNOW you got the email...

But, if the problem were limited to Fannie and Freddie, it'd be a breeze to handle... This AIN'T no breeze.

The problem is that Wall Street bought those mortgages, bundled them into all sorts of exotic packages and sold them to the world. Then the world found out that they bought a pig in a poke, and they're stuck with worthless paper.

That's where we are today. The banks of the world are STILL stuck with this worthless paper. They're not lending because they think OTHER banks are stuck too, and won't pay them back...

So, you can listen to the Limp one about how bad Barney Frank is. Or you can listen to me, and learn something.

excon

[tomder55]

Partly true . There is of course enough blame to go around. But the point is that the gvt. Compelled the two Fs and other banks to issue the worthless paper in the 1st place .

As for Frank ,he was in denial about the solvency issues with Fannie and Freddy to the end.

[excon]

But the point is that the gvt. compelled the two Fs and other banks to issue the worthless paper in the 1st place .

Hello again, tom:

And MY point is, that under successively "conservative" administrations over the last 30 years, beginning with Reagan saying that "government IS the problem, the regulatory infrastructure that was in place since 1929, was torn down.

The tearing down of that protection sped up under the dufus in chief. IF those protections were still in place, Fanny and Freddie wouldn't have been able to do what they did.

excon

[tomder55]

Sorry you are wrong. It was government mandates (especially ordered by the Cuomo run HUD , that compelled Fannie and Freddie(two semi-government run banks ) to ease their lending requirements .This is indisputable fact.
Even the liberal 'Village Voice ' has stated it.
New York News - Andrew Cuomo and Fannie and Freddie - page 1

There are as many starting points for the mortgage meltdown as there are fears about how far it has yet to go, but one decisive point of departure is the final years of the Clinton administration, when a kid from Queens without any real banking or real-estate experience was the only man in Washington with the power to regulate the giants of home finance, the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC), better known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country's current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded "kickbacks" to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons.

It was not Republican deregulation but Democrat feel good social engineering that caused the 2 banks problems.

[speechlesstx]

We are headed into a Great Depression..... that has to be avoided at all costs per economists on the left and right.

And economists left and right are calling this "stimulus" a mistake.