Obama Appeals to Congress for $50 Billion in Emergency Aid

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob Sacamano
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob Sacamano

Guest
Digger president is saying we need $50B for schools, police, and fire because he's blown the rest of the budget on wars and bailouts.
 
This fucking guy, so the 787 billion dollar stimulus wasn't enough? I thought once that was passed unemployment numbers would go down, guess not.

WASHINGTON -- President Obama is pressing Congress to approve emergency aid money to support economic recovery and help avoid widespread layoffs of public workers, the Washington Post reported Saturday.
Congressional leaders received a letter from the president asking for almost $50 billion for distribution to state and local governments, saying that increased spending is
 
Have you fucks figured out he doesn't know what the fuck he is doing?

The 787 billion stimulus bill isn't even half spent.


Let me repeat this for the slow Obama supporters here.

There is still HALF THE MONEY from the first stimulus bill that hasn't been touched.


And he's now asking for 50 billion more.
 
if by inherited you mean campaigned over a year and spent millions of dollars to convince the majority of the population to vote for him based on false promises.
 
swayze you continue to prove that you can't discuss politics because you are terribly misinformed

just stop
 
What excuse?

It's the Obama's responsibility to handle everything that is going on right now. Lets just stop pretending he wasn't handed a flaming bag of dog shit.
 
lol, country is so fucked economically, mom and pop shops closing up left and right so much for small business and the american dream
 
my only issue with spending on infrastructure is that it tends to have a high outside lag (time between the policy's enactment and its effect on the economy). plus, the american political system already means that fiscal stimuli have higher inside lags (time taken to enact the policy) than european parliamentary system. I can show you a study/paper that shows that of the infra/education part of the feb.2009 stimulus act, only 11% entered the economy in 2009 and 36% in 2010 - more than 50% will enter the economy in 2011. I do, however, appreciate the broader arguments that infrastructure spending is useful in the future as well and will pay itself off, and it is generally good investment in capital that is needed - however, I wouldn't support it as part of a fiscal stimulus where the primary purpose is 'fine-tuning' the economy.

I'd argue for money in favour of automatic stabilisers - stuff like food stamps/unemployment benefits (during the recession). this money would enter the economy quicker and I think would be better in terms of fine tuning the economy. the same study shows that out of such spending in the feb.2009 act, 32% will enter the economy in 2009 and 41% in 2010.


edit: the paper i mention is http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/102xx/doc10255/06-02-IMF.pdf
 
I'd add another reason to run a deficit; spending on infrastructure benefits future generations as well as current ones, so they should bear part of the burden for such expenditure (through a deficit).

dont know much about theory behind your war tax idea, but it seems good intuitively. certainly would make people think twice - but would it have to be devised so as not to have an overly negative effect on the economy?
 
You do realize that Congress has been in control of the Democrats for the last 4 years...right?
 
Yeah I agree with you, but my point is that if you are going to make statements like it was 'rushed" you should at least have some decent examples to make yoru point, otherwise you'll hurt your cause when discussing with friends.
 
Get Chris Matthews on the phone, lets get this guy on Hardball. I think he's ready for the big leagues.
 
Back
Top