Chairman Tom Price with 1,073-page Non-Stimulus Text

[maxiep]

Well, if it turns out that the need for a stimulus bill is as much a lie as the need to invade Iraq, then I expect the Democrats will suffer the consequences, just as the Republicans did.

barfo

Yet, you're fine with the same tactics? I recall a lot of posts back on the old site complaining about "the rush to war" from you and others. Now, you seem to be fine with that same strategy. Interesting.

 

[barfo]

Yet, you're fine with the same tactics? I recall a lot of posts back on the old site complaining about "the rush to war" from you and others. Now, you seem to be fine with that same strategy. Interesting.

Well, first of all the stimulus bill doesn't involve killing a bunch of people.
Second, I'm not sure I'm defending the rush to stimulus per se. I think it would be fine to wait another week or so.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Your supposition is that they've had plenty of time to read it. If they were only provided it today--and in .pdf format which makes it unsearchable--then reading it, understanding it and thinking of a response is too much to ask in that short of a period.

As I said in a previous post, the text in the bill didn't arise out of thin air. All they need to read is the changes, assuming they read the prior versions. Which we both know most of them didn't. So to complain that they now don't have time to read it is just making a convenient excuse.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Your supposition is that they've had plenty of time to read it. If they were only provided it today--and in .pdf format which makes it unsearchable--then reading it, understanding it and thinking of a response is too much to ask in that short of a period.

As a side note, .pdfs are searchable.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

As I said in a previous post, the text in the bill didn't arise out of thin air. All they need to read is the changes, assuming they read the prior versions. Which we both know most of them didn't. So to complain that they now don't have time to read it is just making a convenient excuse.

barfo

You're right, it was created in a committee hearing with only Democrats. The Democrats had time to read it. The non-Democrats haven't.

 

[maxiep]

Well, first of all the stimulus bill doesn't involve killing a bunch of people.
Second, I'm not sure I'm defending the rush to stimulus per se. I think it would be fine to wait another week or so.

barfo

Nope, you're just defending the Democrats for doing the same thing you excoriated the previous administration for doing.

Try putting your country before your party.

 

[barfo]

Nope, you're just defending the Democrats for doing the same thing you excoriated the previous administration for doing.

Try putting your country before your party.

Ok. Seems like the stimulus bill is a good idea, so we should pass it, for the good of the country. Happy now?

barfo

 

[barfo]

You're right, it was created in a committee hearing with only Democrats. The Democrats had time to read it. The non-Democrats haven't.

Who cares about the non-democrats? They aren't voting for it anyway.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Ok. Seems like the stimulus bill is a good idea, so we should pass it, for the good of the country. Happy now?

barfo

Based on what? Or are you just saying "In Nancy We Trust"?

 

[barfo]

Based on what? Or are you just saying "In Nancy We Trust"?

Based on the idea that somebody needs to spend money if the economy is going to get going, and it is clear that consumers and businesses and investors aren't going to go first. That leaves only government.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Who cares about the non-democrats? They aren't voting for it anyway.

barfo

Why do you have so little faith in the opposition? Perhaps if they were given a chance to read it, they may vote for it. However, be happy with your tyranny of the majority; de Tocqueville is turning in his grave right now.

 

[maxiep]

Based on the idea that somebody needs to spend money if the economy is going to get going, and it is clear that consumers and businesses and investors aren't going to go first. That leaves only government.

barfo

And the vast majority of this spending comes after 2010, when the economy is likely to recover on its own. Even your party no longer calls it a stimulus package, but a "Recovery and Reinvestment Act". It's a payoff worthy of the dirty Baltimore and Chicago political machines where Speaker Pelosi and President Obama cut their teeth.

 

[maxiep]

Based on the idea that somebody needs to spend money if the economy is going to get going, and it is clear that consumers and businesses and investors aren't going to go first. That leaves only government.

barfo

And if you want the economy to get going, put money directly into the pockets of those who will invest in the economy. Tax cuts are the most direct way of doing so. Of course, then you can't control who gets the money, and the Democrats are all about controlling the purse strings.

 

[barfo]

And if you want the economy to get going, put money directly into the pockets of those who will invest in the economy. Tax cuts are the most direct way of doing so. Of course, then you can't control who gets the money, and the Democrats are all about controlling the purse strings.

Who are those people who will invest in the economy, and why aren't they investing now, and do you really think if they get a tax cut, they'll all of a sudden start investing? Or would they just buy more zero interest treasury bonds?

barfo

 

[barfo]

And the vast majority of this spending comes after 2010, when the economy is likely to recover on its own. Even your party no longer calls it a stimulus package, but a "Recovery and Reinvestment Act". It's a payoff worthy of the dirty Baltimore and Chicago political machines where Speaker Pelosi and President Obama cut their teeth.

The argument that the title of the bill proves something is pretty silly. It was never called the "Stimulus Package Act", so pretending like they changed the name isn't a winner.

The delay in some of the spending is indeed a flaw.

And as for a payoff, it's not. It's the platform Obama and the Democrats ran on. I know you don't like it but that doesn't make it corrupt.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Who are those people who will invest in the economy, and why aren't they investing now, and do you really think if they get a tax cut, they'll all of a sudden start investing? Or would they just buy more zero interest treasury bonds?

barfo

Who do you think would make a better decision on how to spend money: a coterie of bureaucrats or 100MM taxpayers? I believe in the law of large numbers. Give individuals more money on an on-going basis (so they know it's not a one time thing) and get government off the backs of small businesses and watch them grow.

P.S. Existing housing sales increased last month without any help from the government.

 

[maxiep]

The argument that the title of the bill proves something is pretty silly. It was never called the "Stimulus Package Act", so pretending like they changed the name isn't a winner.

The delay in some of the spending is indeed a flaw.

And as for a payoff, it's not. It's the platform Obama and the Democrats ran on. I know you don't like it but that doesn't make it corrupt.

barfo

Hmm, interesting. I must have missed "more money for ACORN", "$650MM for television converters", "$8B for a railroad from LA to Vegas". And I know they did run on saying they were going to be bipartisan and allow 48 hours for review of all bills.

People voted for "Hope" and "Change". The polling numbers show that people don't think this spending bill represents either.

 

[blazerboy30]

Who are those people who will invest in the economy, and why aren't they investing now, and do you really think if they get a tax cut, they'll all of a sudden start investing?
barfo

Yes, I think they will.

Many housing market prices are now approaching a reasonable investment when you look at prices, rents and incomes. I believe that if a stimulus is going to be given, a little more incentive in the real estate taxes and interest rate areas would get some investors that are on the fence to finally jump in.

I know I fit this description, and I know several others in the same position. Yes, small sample set, but decent example.

 

[barfo]

Why do you have so little faith in the opposition? Perhaps if they were given a chance to read it, they may vote for it.

Yeah right. Since they didn't vote for either of the two bills that were merged to make this one, it seems not very credible to claim they'd vote for this one. But in any case, they don't matter.

However, be happy with your tyranny of the majority; de Tocqueville is turning in his grave right now.

I'm happy with it so far. It beats the most recent alternative.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Yes, I think they will.

Many housing market prices are now approaching a reasonable investment when you look at prices, rents and incomes. I believe that if a stimulus is going to be given, a little more incentive in the real estate taxes and interest rate areas would get some investors that are on the fence to finally jump in.

I know I fit this description, and I know several others in the same position. Yes, small sample set, but decent example.

Uh huh. But you aren't going to jump in unless you get a tax cut, right?

If you were already jumping in, and were saying that if you got a tax cut you'd add that to your investment, then I'd find it convincing.

Sitting on the sidelines is exactly the problem.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Yes, I think they will.

Many housing market prices are now approaching a reasonable investment when you look at prices, rents and incomes. I believe that if a stimulus is going to be given, a little more incentive in the real estate taxes and interest rate areas would get some investors that are on the fence to finally jump in.

I know I fit this description, and I know several others in the same position. Yes, small sample set, but decent example.

The problem is that Congress took out the first time homebuyer exception and are unlikely to engage in conforming loans--the two areas that could bring much needed help to a flagging market.

 

[barfo]

Hmm, interesting. I must have missed "more money for ACORN", "$650MM for television converters", "$8B for a railroad from LA to Vegas". And I know they did run on saying they were going to be bipartisan and allow 48 hours for review of all bills.

People voted for "Hope" and "Change". The polling numbers show that people don't think this spending bill represents either.

Well, if he doesn't deliver, he and/or his party will be accountable at the next election, just like always.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Uh huh. But you aren't going to jump in unless you get a tax cut, right?

If you were already jumping in, and were saying that if you got a tax cut you'd add that to your investment, then I'd find it convincing.

Sitting on the sidelines is exactly the problem.

barfo

But that's one area where a change in government policy would help clear the market. In fact, its the loss of value in the real estate market that have turned our negative savings rate to 3.6% in a period of two months. Instead we're creating a $1.2 trillion debt for the next generation so we can payoff some people who voted our current administration in. Shameful.

 

[barfo]

But that's one area where a change in government policy would help clear the market. In fact, its the loss of value in the real estate market that have turned our negative savings rate to 3.6% in a period of two months. Instead we're creating a $1.2 trillion debt for the next generation so we can payoff some people who voted our current administration in. Shameful.

You call it payoff, I call it investment in the future. I think a train from LV to LA is a great idea, for example.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Well, if he doesn't deliver, he and/or his party will be accountable at the next election, just like always.

barfo

It's much worse that that. Government programs have a ratcheting effect. It's easy to give them and tough to take them away. Once these programs are in, its unlikely they're ever going away.

Oh, and if you're interested in private investment, tell me how almost $1T of government money hopping to the front of the line helps private entities to investing in the economy. The crowding out of private investment has yet to rear its ugly head.

 

[maxiep]

You call it payoff, I call it investment in the future. I think a train from LV to LA is a great idea, for example.

barfo

Explain how it's a positive NPV investment. BTW, my response will be a one word answer: Amtrak.

 

[maxiep]

You call it payoff, I call it investment in the future. I think a train from LV to LA is a great idea, for example.

barfo

Have you even bothered to see what's in this bill?

 

[barfo]

Explain how it's a positive NPV investment. BTW, my response will be a one word answer: Amtrak.

Ever been to a country where the rail system works? Explain why it isn't possible here.

barfo

 

[blazerboy30]

Uh huh. But you aren't going to jump in unless you get a tax cut, right?

You must not have seen the part where I mentioned the interest rate incentives.

Yes, if there were an incentive / stimulus bill passed to produced fixed, lower-rate mortgages, you bet I would be getting back into the real estate investment market.

Tax cuts would help. Real estate tax cuts would make it so that real estate investments got into my personal target area much more quickly.

If you were already jumping in, and were saying that if you got a tax cut you'd add that to your investment, then I'd find it convincing.

If people were already jumping in, there would be no need for incentives and stimulus packages. I'm still in the real estate investment market. If I got a tax cut, I wouldn't use the tax cut to reduce my investment.

Sitting on the sidelines is exactly the problem.
barfo

Yep, we're in agreement here. That is why I am saying that money spent on fixed rate mortgage incentives would go a lot further than giving money to the National Endowment for the Arts.

A few weeks back, one of the republican senators put out the idea of a government backed, 4.0% mortgage rate. That is a better idea for a stimulus than most of what I see in this bill.

 

[maxiep]

Ever been to a country where the rail system works? Explain why it isn't possible here.

barfo

Cultural differences, high percentage of car ownership, density of investment in road infrastructure, inexpensive flight options and distance between destinations.

Acela doesn't turn a profit, and that runs along the most densely populated stretch in the US. How is a desert railway going to make money?