- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 25,893
- Reaction score
- 12,484
- Location
- New York, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.
CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.
CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.
I think I'd rather not borrow an additional trillion dollars on a coin flip.
And thank you for your input. Now, if you will excuse us we'll go with the plan of the man we voted into office.
What really pisses me off is all those years where we racked up debt when things were going well. You save during the good times so you have reserve to keep yourself afloat during the bad. Millions of American taxpayers a understand this, but the government doesn't.
The name of it is “The Stabilization Fund”. The inventor of the Plan is Vladimr Putin, a PhD in macroeconomics. The position was – the President of the Russian Federation. The goal was not to spend all for keeping himself in power but to put a part of the profit from high gas/oil prices aside for the times when the prices WILL go down, - for the sake of the people of Russia. Who could think the prices could go down when they were claiming so steady? Nobody in the US. Not even a single American taxpayer.
This gov-nt cares not about the people but about being in power for next 8 years, - because American taxpayers did not elect it, - but those who did not carry the burden of taxes did elect it. This gov-nt does not care about American taxpayers, but it uses their money to inlarge its base of those who do not pay taxes, - and so the Treasure Secretary is appointed to the position.
This actually surprised me quite a bit. The report notes that it will help GDP growth over the next two years, but the effect will trail off after that.
So.... over 50% of america doesn't pay taxes? You sir are an idiot.
Did I ever say anything that could lead one to the conclusion that I could ever say that over 50% of America doesn't pay taxes?
You are an idioit and no sir.
I think the idea of spending a lot and investing in the rights things (exactly what this bill does) could probably increase GDP in the log run, not decrease it. .
And you spelled idiot wrong.
Every thread that JustOne pops into is Insta-win.I did. Does it change anything in your status?
Moderator's Warning: |
So..http://www.debatepolitics.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1057915604.. over 50% of america doesn't pay taxes? You sir are an idiot.
You think that you think. You are wrong. People who can think cannot say what you are saying because your speech contradicts to basics of thinking.
Spending a lot contradicts to investing. Investing in right things contradicts to taking probabilities.
And that is all in one short sentence of yours.
This actually surprised me quite a bit. The report notes that it will help GDP growth over the next two years, but the effect will trail off after that.
The name of it is “The Stabilization Fund”. The inventor of the Plan is Vladimr Putin, a PhD in macroeconomics.
There is ample proof it won;t work to stimulate the economy. specially this pork laden bill.Haven't the economists been at odds about this from the start?
Some saying to do nothing and others saying to double or triple the stimulus?
My opinion on it is that no-one really knows what to expect. Half will be right and half will be wrong.
........at least it's better odds than Bingo :mrgreen:
There is ample proof it won;t work to stimulate the economy. specially this pork laden bill.
There is thousands of years of evidence tax cuts work.
Hogwash. You are not looking at the facts of the situation and your "historical" view is blinded by partisan goggles.
When people fear for their jobs, their natural instinct is to save up, as witnessed in the jump (for Americans) in the personal saving rate. Any tax cut will be most likely saved up or used to pay personal debt and that wont help the economy. There is plenty of evidence that this would happen even in an American society.
In my own country in the early 90s, the government gave tax cuts to stimulate the economy and nothing happened. As it turned out people paid off debt or saved up, and did very little consumption. It took another tax cut to stimulate a bit, but it was no where near what the conservative government thought would happen.
But of course there should be tax cuts in any stimulus bill, but solely depending on tax cuts and on that the private sector make new jobs is beyond idiotic.. much like doing tax cuts and starting a major war.... oh yea that was the Republicans too.. You need heavy spending by the government in infrastructure projects, because the government does not have a credit problem.
The state needs to cut taxes for the majority of people, not only the rich... one would have thought that the Republicans had learned their lesson. The state needs to invest heavily in infrastructure, because no amount of tax cuts can stimulate the economy, when the problem is lack of private sector credit. Companies can not create jobs nore maintain them if they do not have access to credit and THAT is what the problem is.
So sure you can cut taxes like a drunk sailor in a strip bar, but it wont matter much since people will most likely save up or pay off debt, and it wont solve the problem of the lack of credit.
Fix the credit problem and fix the economy, but governments are not willing to do the dirty deed it seems.
Wouldn't people paying off debt be the same thing as helping fix the credit problem?
I think what politicians are looking for are near instant results. The positive changes take time and can not be wished into existence like so many of them think will happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?