Zombie Rush the Stimulus Package...don't read it, just pass it! (1 Viewer)

[PapaG]

She so used to talking in trillions that millions seems like a rounding error.

She should have just said 500 gazillion to project an even greater sense of urgency.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Maybe she wants 100 BILLION dollars.




Sadly its more.

 

[BrianFromWA]

There's not that much money in the entire world!

Oh, wait...

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

gotta love this:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/38762217.html

Milwaukee Public Schools would reap $88.6 million over two years for new construction under the economic stimulus package just passed by the U.S. House of Representatives - even though the district has 15 vacant school buildings, a large surplus of property and no plans for new construction.

No district in the state would stand to benefit as much as MPS. In addition to the construction money, the district would get $115.5 million for special education and low income students over two years, according to detailed projections developed by congressional staffers. That totals $204.2 million for Milwaukee.

Overall, the 400-plus school districts across the state would get $729.6 million for those uses, including $317.2 million for construction.

In other words, 28% of the total number would come to Milwaukee.

The U.S. Senate is almost certain to change the numbers when it takes up the economic package this week. Then Senate and House negotiators would need to meet to come up with a compromise bill.

 

[PapaG]

What a horrific start for Obama. I almost feel bad for the guy. I sure feel bad for our citizens if this was the guy's best plan to fix the economy.

Rush it through!!!

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/04/cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul/

CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul


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

The House last week passed a bill totaling about $820 billion while the Senate is working on a proposal reaching about $900 billion in spending increases and tax cuts.

But Republicans and some moderate Democrats have balked at the size of the bill and at some of the spending items included in it, arguing they won't produce immediate jobs, which is the stated goal of the bill.

The budget office had previously estimated service the debt due to the new spending could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost of the bill -- forcing the crowd-out.

CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.

CBO said there is no crowding out in the short term, so the plan would succeed in boosting growth in 2009 and 2010.

The agency projected the Senate bill would produce between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent higher growth in 2009 than if there was no action. For 2010, the plan would boost growth by 1.2 percent to 3.6 percent.

CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I think its just more spending and if they didn't do anything, it would be roughly the same. However, if the economy just cycles and picks up, Obama will credit the "stimulus package" even though it had little or nothing to do with it.

 

[barfo]

cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul

Well, of course it is harmful over the long haul. If it was helpful in both the short term and the long term, then it would just be a great idea all around and everyone would be in favor of it and we'd have enacted it years ago.

The whole idea of a stimulus package is that it trades short term gains for long term pains. You don't get something for nothing.

barfo

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

What are the short term gains for these big projects? would they really help?

 

[barfo]

What are the short term gains for these big projects? would they really help?

Well, that is the question. I'm not necessarily defending the stimulus package, but the theory goes that the government spends a bunch of money which employs people and pays vendors and they spend their pay and the money goes round and round and everyone feels more optimistic because there is money coming in so they stop saving and start buying houses and new cars and pretty soon it is morning in America again. Or something like that.

I'm pretty sure a stimulus package would help. Whether the current proposal would help enough is hard for me to say. If you have a big pothole to fill, putting one shovel of asphalt in might not make any difference. On the other hand, dumping a whole truckload of asphalt onto the road might not be a great idea either. And if you think the pothole is being created by a volcanic vent of an impending eruption, there's no point in throwing in asphalt as it will just be melted and spit back in your face.

barfo

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Well, that is the question. I'm not necessarily defending the stimulus package, but the theory goes that the government spends a bunch of money which employs people and pays vendors and they spend their pay and the money goes round and round and everyone feels more optimistic because there is money coming in so they stop saving and start buying houses and new cars and pretty soon it is morning in America again. Or something like that.

I'm pretty sure a stimulus package would help. Whether the current proposal would help enough is hard for me to say. If you have a big pothole to fill, putting one shovel of asphalt in might not make any difference. On the other hand, dumping a whole truckload of asphalt onto the road might not be a great idea either. And if you think the pothole is being created by a volcanic vent of an impending eruption, there's no point in throwing in asphalt as it will just be melted and spit back in your face.

barfo

So that's just a non-specific spending program by the government, rather than attempt to use the money to actually fix what's ailing the country?

I think this is much of the criticism that the pub' are saying right now.

They prefer tax cuts and less special projects that should appear on a budget for the $$$.

 

[barfo]

So that's just a non-specific spending program by the government, rather than attempt to use the money to actually fix what's ailing the country?

What is actually ailing the country? Is it bad housing loans, or is it lack of consumer confidence? Or is it that american workers spend all day posting on internet forums instead of doing productive work?

barfo

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

What is actually ailing the country? Is it bad housing loans, or is it lack of consumer confidence? Or is it that american workers spend all day posting on internet forums instead of doing productive work?

barfo

Housing Market.

Banks (related to housing market)

Unemployment rate (related to banks + economy in general + cheaper to do business overseas)

 

[blazerboy30]

Or is it that american workers spend all day posting on internet forums instead of doing productive work?

barfo

Convincing you to agree with my economic and political views on an internet forum is extremely productive work.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I'm doing a public service also by bringing these to light. Helps fight some of this bullshit by the Govt. Besides, I make money by sending emails!

 

[barfo]

Convincing you to agree with my economic and political views on an internet forum is extremely productive work.

You'd better get started then

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Well, of course it is harmful over the long haul. If it was helpful in both the short term and the long term, then it would just be a great idea all around and everyone would be in favor of it and we'd have enacted it years ago.

The whole idea of a stimulus package is that it trades short term gains for long term pains. You don't get something for nothing.

barfo

I look at it on an NPV basis, and it looks highly negative to me.

 

[Denny Crane]

The nature of this bailout bill is "emergency." Govt. is willing to go into hock in an emergency, which is fine.

Strip out all the non-emergency spending and focus this borrowed money on things that will have measurable effect within 6 months.

Tax cuts work for many, it cuts the amount withheld by employers for taxes. It eases employers' cash flow, too. That's not the only effective short-term program. Outright cash payments to individuals (who pay taxes or not) is fine by me, as people will spend on something which would help suppliers' revenues. Unemployment benefits help people who need it right now. Incentives to buy homes or stay in the ones people already own would be an effective tourniquet.

NO earmarks, please! It's not about politicians greasing palms of their supporters this time (business as usual).

Take all of congress' actual spending plans and put them in non-emergency bills. Debate them fully, try and spend no more than the govt. takes in via taxes and other revenues. Roll 'em all up into an omnibus spending bill and vote it up/down, I don't care.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/congress_stimulus_126

Bill now at $920 billion.

"Hurry Up or Obama will add more spending to it" might be more effective.

 

[PapaG]

Hurry up already and pass the bill!

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200902051243DOWJONESDJONLINE000573_FORTUNE5.htm

TARP Watchdog: Treasury Overpaid For TARP Investments

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Treasury may have significantly overpaid for its investments in financial institutions, a government watchdog said Thursday, as criticism of the $700 billion financial rescue continues to build.

"Treasury paid substantially more for the assets it purchased under the [ Troubled Asset Relief Program] than their then-current market value," Harvard Law School professor Elizabeth Warren told the U.S. Senate Banking Committee.

Warren, who chairs a five-person congressional oversight panel overseeing the Wall Street rescue plan, said a report being released Friday by the group includes an analysis of 10 TARP transactions. Extrapolating that analysis for all of the purchases made by the Treasury in 2008 suggests Treasury paid $254 billion for assets worth approximately $176 billion, a shortfall of $78 billion.

"They did not price for risk, that's what markets do," Warren said, suggesting the Treasury's lack of consistency had made the government funds a better deal for some institutions.

More broadly, both lawmakers and other government watchdogs were sharply critical about the way the program has been implemented, the ad hoc nature of the Treasury's efforts to stabilize individual financial firms, and the lack of transparency surrounding the program.

"For the sake of our economy and the public's confidence ... we must see a sharp change in the direction of the program," Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said at the hearing.

The criticisms come as the Obama administration and new Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are drafting their plan for how to comprehensively address the credit crisis and restore confidence in the TARP program. Geithner is expected to announce the administration's plan next week, and various iterations of a " bad bank" to purchase toxic assets from bad banks and asset guarantees are widely reported to be in consideration.

The panel's ranking Republican, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, described Treasury's actions as "haphazard" and "opaque" and suggested the Treasury had been disingenuous when selling the rescue package to Congress and the public in September. He also questioned why Citigroup Inc. (C) and Bank of America Corp. ( BAC) were originally deemed "healthy" banks when receiving capital injections, but had to be saved less than two months later with billions in additional funds when they continued to face duress.

Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general overseeing the TARP, said his office is opening an audit of Treasury's multiple investments in Bank of America, as well as how lobbyists are influencing the application process for banks to receive capital infusions.

"The most significant failing from a transparency standpoint: understanding the process and criteria Treasury used to decide who would receive TARP funds and what the recipients have done with the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been invested," he said.

Barofsky's office has significant authority to oversee the TARP, but lawmakers are already pushing to give him additional authority to bolster his authority to pursue criminal investigations. A measure quietly passed by the Senate on Wednesday evening would allow him to seize evidence and ask for warrants without receiving prior approval from the Department of Justice, as well as require the Treasury to address any problems found in audits done by the IG's office.

The three TARP watchdogs testifying Thursday suggested Treasury has to better communicate the purpose of TARP, describing to the public how the many announced programs form a cohesive strategy for stabilizing the financial system.

"Our money - and our economy - are on the line, and we all have a stake in the outcome," Warren said in her testimony.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

what a clusterfuck.

 

[maxiep]

The desperation seems to be setting in for the Obama Administration.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/congress_stimulus_126

Here's his editorial: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../02/04/AR2009020403174.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

He's using panic language to try to force this thing through. Also, by appealing to the public, it's a sign that he's losing traction on this abomination.

 

[barfo]

Also, by appealing to the public, it's a sign that he's losing traction on this abomination.

Not sure how you mean that, but I'd say appealing to the public is the first thing he needs to do. If the public isn't sold (and at the moment from what I read it really isn't sold) then he won't have support in the senate. If on the other hand the public decides that it does want the package, then he'll have a relatively easy time lining up the votes.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Not sure how you mean that, but I'd say appealing to the public is the first thing he needs to do. If the public isn't sold (and at the moment from what I read it really isn't sold) then he won't have support in the senate. If on the other hand the public decides that it does want the package, then he'll have a relatively easy time lining up the votes.

barfo

Chicken and egg. Clearly by going to the public this late, he hasn't had an easy time lining up the votes.

 

[PapaG]

The desperation seems to be setting in for the Obama Administration.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/congress_stimulus_126

Here's his editorial: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../02/04/AR2009020403174.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

He's using panic language to try to force this thing through. Also, by appealing to the public, it's a sign that he's losing traction on this abomination.

Using words like "catastrophe" and comparisons to the Great Depression. Isn't Obama the same guy who said that the politics of fear are over? What did that last, two weeks?

I've never seen a President with a self-professed mandate not be able to pass a bill with his party controlling both sides of Congress.

 

[PapaG]

Chicken and egg. Clearly by going to the public this late, he hasn't had an easy time lining up the votes.

He has the votes, or at least he should. I heard on the radio a few minutes ago, however, that 7 or 8 Senate Dems are getting cold feet on this thing. Obama is burning up a lot of political capital right now. If his bill isn't passed by a Dem Congress, he may be on the path to irrelevancy in terms of setting a domestic agenda.

 

[maxiep]

He's gone from "Hope" and "Change" to "I hope I can change people's minds on this bill".

 

[Denny Crane]

I kinda wonder why Obama doesn't go on TV and pitch the thing directly to the people. The networks will give him all the time he wants, they love him.

Then I kinda figured out why. The republicans would get to respond.

 

[maxiep]

I kinda wonder why Obama doesn't go on TV and pitch the thing directly to the people. The networks will give him all the time he wants, they love him.

Then I kinda figured out why. The republicans would get to respond.

Not on MSNBC.

 

[PapaG]

Some really bright minds are starting to come out against the pork package.

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...ster"?tickers=^dji,^gspc,QQQQ,SPY,DIA,TLT,UDN

Peter Schiff: Stimulus Bill Will Lead to "Unmitigated Disaster"

Posted Feb 06, 2009 08:05am EST by Aaron Task in Investing, Newsmakers, Recession
Related: ^dji, ^gspc, QQQQ, SPY, DIA, TLT, UDN
The fiscal stimulus bill being debated in Congress not only won't help the economy, it will make the recession much worse, says Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital.
Schiff scoffs at the notion the economic decline is starting to level off and concedes no government action means a "terrible" recession. But the path of increased government intervention will lead to "unmitigated disaster," says Schiff, who gained notoriety in 2007-08 for his prescient calls on the housing bubble and U.S. stocks.

The problem, he says, is the government is trying to perpetuate a "phony economy" based on borrowing and spending. With the U.S. consumer tapped out, the government is "now taking on the mantle" of consumer of last resort, he continues, predicting the bond bubble will soon burst - if it hasn't already - ultimately leading to a collapse of the dollar and an "inflationary depression worse than anything any of us have ever seen."

If nothing else, Schiff is an nonpartisan critic of American policymakers, comparing President Bush to Herbert Hoover and President Obama to FDR, and neither in a favorable way.

http://finance.yahoo.com/video_ifra...ulus+Bill+Will+Lead+to+"Unmitigated+Disaster"

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

schiff is the man.