• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Concerns about the $1.9T stimulus package

Let's put it on the table. Those who oppose stimulus can give their predictions.

Keep in mind though, we've gone down this road many many times. For some reason, the opposition party has a very poor track record.

Since I doubt many who oppose stimulus will be here for long, and since those that have managed to scrape by will not make predictions, it's arguably an exercise in futility. Nevertheless... 😏
 
Last edited:
Cope said:
Tax cuts alone don't grow anything. If the tax cuts don't come with spending cuts then I agree.
Click to expand...

When have tax cuts ever accompanied spending cuts? Not ever not never.
 
HumblePi said:
The only concern I have about the American Rescue Plan is that not one republican voted for it. This is a concern to me because there are many things in this bill that were in the last bill in December, yet republicans in Congress decided for some reason that, despite the bill giving much needed relief to American families, they would not support it, simply because it's proposed by democrats with the support of President Biden.

Not a single republican voted to send a lifeline out to Americans. Not one republican voted to expand Covid vaccination programs. Not one republican voted to fund the safe reopening of our schools. Not one republican voted to extend unemployment benefits. Not a single republican voted to give aide to restaurants and small businesses in our communities. Not one republican voted to expand our food program so children don't go to bed hungry. And not a single goddamned republican supported a bill that would give tax credits to families living in poverty.

Yes, this type of political gridlock is not only concerning, it is deeply disturbing. Everyone in this country is just trying to stay alive and survive. I feel that republicans have lost their purpose of being in Washington at all if members of Congress can't let go of party politics and divisiveness long enough to do the job of taking care of the people they represent. Incidentally, democrats supported both stimulus bills last year proposed by republicans.
Click to expand...

That is simply not true. Opposition to parts of that monster borrow and spend “package” bill existed, yet amendments to address (alter?) that were rejected. As you noted, much of that relief (stimulus?) borrowing and spending received bipartisan support in the past - what was different this time was take the Pelosi package in total as is or don’t being the only options.

You make it seem as if it was never suggested that a lower amount of borrowing and spending (not spread out over future years) could have been effective to accomplish many of those objectives.
 
Kushinator said:
When have tax cuts ever accompanied spending cuts? Not ever not never.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the “starve the beast” idea never happens, “the beast” simply resorts to more borrow and spend.
 
Kushinator said:
Let's put it on the table. Those who oppose stimulus can give their predictions.

Keep in mind though, we've gone down this road many many times. For some reason, the opposition party has a very poor track record.

Since I doubt many who oppose stimulus will be here for long, and since those that have managed to scrape by will not make predictions, it's arguably an exercise in futility. Nevertheless... 😏
Click to expand...

Any prediction made will likely far outlive any of us. Government is famous for kicking the can down the road.

And yes, starve the beast doesn't happen for one single reason. Spending cuts are not popular among ANYONE
 
Shrink726 said:
Remember the parable about "Give a man a fish; teach a man to fish?" I really, really wish there were more bold job training/creating initiatives in this $1.9T bill and less direct handouts. Those handouts will be spent leaving recipients with nothing to show. New vocational skills and job creation last a lifetime.
Click to expand...
Well it's not terribly different from Trump's 2 trillion bill, a bit more money for the People and funding for schools and such. But I do suspect that like last time, a large chunk of this money will find its ways to Corporate bank accounts and such.
 
Cope said:
Any prediction made will likely far outlive any of us. Government is famous for kicking the can down the road.

And yes, starve the beast doesn't happen for one single reason. Spending cuts are not popular among ANYONE
Click to expand...

As expected 🙂
 
KLATTU said:
Did you pay extra in your taxes?
Click to expand...
so you did take the welfare and are now trying to change the subject.

did your company take the PPP welfare?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, I receive SS retirement payments on a monthly basis. Of course, they withhold (divert?) some of it to help fund Medicare.
Click to expand...
SS isn't welfare.
 
CaughtInThe said:
SS isn't welfare.
Click to expand...

It is income redistribution. You seem to call spending money offered as “stimulus” by the government (for the express purpose of doing so) “welfare” - what is that so?
 
[/QUOTE]
Luther said:
Psst... Farmer welfare was only in the lower Billions
Click to expand...
For a fraction of the numbers of people and businesses. Let's talk about how much each farmer got ......never mind that it was a problem created by Trump and the relief never went through the legislative process.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It is income redistribution. You seem to call spending money offered as “stimulus” by the government (for the express purpose of doing so) “welfare” - what is that so?
Click to expand...
did you pay into SS? if so, how much?
 
CaughtInThe said:
did you pay into SS? if so, how much?
Click to expand...

It is a myth that anyone paid for their own future SS benefits. SS is based on current workers supporting current retirees (aka a pay as you go system).
 
Luther said:
Except money doesn't grow on trees

Except we we're already in almost 28 TRILLION in debt
Click to expand...
Debt only matters when democrats are in office.
 
CaughtInThe said:
so you did take the welfare and are now trying to change the subject.

did your company take the PPP welfare?
Click to expand...
no-I'm not changing the subject at all.
I tied you up in knots and now YOU are the one changing the subject.
Since I pay a lot in taxes, I have no problem accepting the Government check if I get one.
Since I pay so much I don't consider it 'welfare' . Just getting a very small payback of what I paid in.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It is a myth that anyone paid for their own future SS benefits. SS is based on current workers supporting current retirees (aka a pay as you go system).
Click to expand...
did you pay into SS? if so, how much?
 
Cope said:
Yes, FORCED insurance because people are really really bad at providing for themselves and we as a nation refuse to allow those people to die.
Click to expand...

You can try to rationalize lack of... support... but that doesn't change the terminology.

Furthermore, the use of the term redistribution in this context is dog whistling.
 
Kushinator said:
You can try to rationalize lack of... support... but that doesn't change the terminology.

Furthermore, the use of the term redistribution in this context is dog whistling.
Click to expand...
I don't really need to rationalize anything. I think it is needed for more than 50% of our country. I do think that it has been an overall bad move to design a program to mandate reliance on the government but that is for a different day. And when my time comes up, I'll collect it along with my other retirement funds and live a good life.
 
Cope said:
I don't really need to rationalize anything. I think it is needed for more than 50% of our country. I do think that it has been an overall bad move to design a program to mandate reliance on the government but that is for a different day. And when my time comes up, I'll collect it along with my other retirement funds and live a good life.
Click to expand...

Ok.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Exactly, the “starve the beast” idea never happens, “the beast” simply resorts to more borrow and spend.
Click to expand...

So?

The only thing that matters is if economic growth exceeds deficit growth over a longer term trajectory.

That the government borrows and spends more money is irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom