Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it wont work bek this is not FDR workforce this is a stinky lazy mega attitude workforce.
mexican people are the only ones that will benefit from a stimulus package.
they got work ethic.
I think you are on to something here. Why is it that so many think the only thing that will work is something completely unrelated to actual labor (i.e. tax cuts)?
The same people who no doubt scream about illegals taking all the jobs (like scraping bird poop off of a statue) are now complaining about the 'quality' of the jobs that would likely be created even though they insist that there are Americans out of work who would do those jobs if the illegals hadn't stolen them.
The same people who castigate Bill Gates for pointing out the gaps in our educational system are the same ones who complain about money being spent to enrich our children through arts education, or modern science labs or providing incentives for more people to teach so that class sizes can be reduced.
There is no logic to any of these arguments except that contrary to what 'they' tell us, it is the pro-tax cuts people who have their hands out and want to get paid simply for being alive.
I think you are on to something here. Why is it that so many think the only thing that will work is something completely unrelated to actual labor (i.e. tax cuts)?
The same people who no doubt scream about illegals taking all the jobs (like scraping bird poop off of a statue) are now complaining about the 'quality' of the jobs that would likely be created even though they insist that there are Americans out of work who would do those jobs if the illegals hadn't stolen them.
The same people who castigate Bill Gates for pointing out the gaps in our educational system are the same ones who complain about money being spent to enrich our children through arts education, or modern science labs or providing incentives for more people to teach so that class sizes can be reduced.
There is no logic to any of these arguments except that contrary to what 'they' tell us, it is the pro-tax cuts people who have their hands out and want to get paid simply for being alive.
SEC. 1106. SET-ASIDE FOR MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT.
5 Unless other provision is made in this Act (or in other
6 applicable law) for such expenses, up to 0.5 percent of
7 each amount appropriated in this Act may be used for the
8 expenses of management and oversight of the programs,
9 grants, and activities funded by such appropriation, and
10 may be transferred by the head of the Federal department
11 or agency involved to any other appropriate account within
12 the department or agency for that purpose. Funds set
13 aside under this section shall remain available for obliga
14 tion until September 30, 2012.
15 SEC. 1107. APPROPRIATIONS FOR INSPECTORS GENERAL.
16 In addition to funds otherwise made available in this
17 Act, there are hereby appropriated the following sums to
18 the specified Offices of Inspector General, to remain avail
19 able until September 30, 2013, for oversight and audit of
20 programs, grants, and projects funded under this Act:
21 (1) ‘‘Department of Agriculture—Office of In
22 spector General’’, $22,500,000.
23 (2) ‘‘Department of Commerce—Office of In
24 spector General’’, $10,000,000.
1 (3) ‘‘Department of Defense—Office of the In
2 spector General’’, $15,000,000.
3 (4) ‘‘Department of Education—Departmental
4 Management—Office of the Inspector General’’,
5 $14,000,000.
6 (5) ‘‘Department of Energy—Office of Inspec
7 tor General’’, $15,000,000.
8 (6) ‘‘Department of Health and Human Serv
9 ices—Office of the Secretary—Office of Inspector
10 General’’, $19,000,000.
11 (7) ‘‘Department of Homeland Security—Office
12 of Inspector General’’, $2,000,000.
13 (8) ‘‘Department of Housing and Urban Devel
14 opment—Management and Administration—Office
15 of Inspector General’’, $15,000,000.
16 (9) ‘‘Department of the Interior—Office of In
17 spector General’’, $15,000,000.
18 (10) ‘‘Department of Justice—Office of Inspec
19 tor General’’, $2,000,000.
20 (11) ‘‘Department of Labor—Departmental
21 Management—Office of Inspector General’’,
22 $6,000,000.
23 (12) ‘‘Department of Transportation—Office of
24 Inspector General’’, $20,000,000.
(13) ‘‘Department of Veterans Affairs—Office
2 of Inspector General’’, $1,000,000.
3 (14) ‘‘Environmental Protection Agency—Office
4 of Inspector General’’, $20,000,000.
5 (15) ‘‘General Services Administration—Gen6
eral Activities—Office of Inspector General’’,
7 $15,000,000.
8 (16) ‘‘National Aeronautics and Space Adminis9
tration—Office of Inspector General’’, $2,000,000.
10 (17) ‘‘National Science Foundation—Office of
11 Inspector General’’, $2,000,000.
12 (18) ‘‘Small Business Administration—Office of
13 Inspector General’’, $10,000,000.
14 (19) ‘‘Social Security Administration—Office of
15 Inspector General’’, $2,000,000.
16 (20) ‘‘Corporation for National and Community
17 Service—Office of Inspector General’’, $1,000,000.
18 SEC. 1108. APPROPRIATION FOR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT
19 ABILITY OFFICE.
20 There is hereby appropriated as an additional amount
21 for ‘‘Government Accountability Office—Salaries and Ex
22 penses’’ $25,000,000, for oversight activities relating to
23 this Act.
lol...The Republicans refuse to supply accurate information. Case in point...
What the Romer analysis actually does show is that if you factor in the reduced size of the substitute with the lower stimulative impact of tax cuts, the number of new additional jobs created would decline from 3.9 million under the committee bill to about 1.3 million under the substitute. The Camp substitute would actually create fewer jobs than the economy has lost in just the last three months.
So if I understand correctly, this Republican spokesperson is up there in front of the American people claiming that the Rep alternative would create 6.2 million new jobs, but if you actually use the very same numbers this guy says he's using, the actual answer that you get works out to be 1.3 million???
Is that anything at all like I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky??? Except of course for the fact that somebody else's sexual relations don't actually matter to anyone, whereas jobs do...
I think you are on to something here. Why is it that so many think the only thing that will work is something completely unrelated to actual labor (i.e. tax cuts)?
The same people who no doubt scream about illegals taking all the jobs (like scraping bird poop off of a statue) are now complaining about the 'quality' of the jobs that would likely be created even though they insist that there are Americans out of work who would do those jobs if the illegals hadn't stolen them.
The same people who castigate Bill Gates for pointing out the gaps in our educational system are the same ones who complain about money being spent to enrich our children through arts education, or modern science labs or providing incentives for more people to teach so that class sizes can be reduced.
There is no logic to any of these arguments except that contrary to what 'they' tell us, it is the pro-tax cuts people who have their hands out and want to get paid simply for being alive.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law and in
13 a manner consistent with other provisions in this Act, all
14 laborers and mechanics employed by contractors and sub
15 contractors on projects funded directly by or assisted in
16 whole or in part by and through the Federal Government
17 pursuant to this Act shall be paid wages at rates not less
18 than those prevailing on projects of a character similar
19 in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor
20 in accordance with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title
21 40, United States Code. With respect to the labor stand-
22 ards specified in this section, the Secretary of Labor shall
23 have the authority and functions set forth in Reorganiza-
24 tion Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (64 Stat. 1267; 5 U.S.C.
25 App.) and section 3145 of title 40, United States Code.
Will this result in that "living wage"? That's basically using tax payer funds to standardize pay across huge sectors and if it goes to states for assistance (practically all of them) it mise well be a federal wage standard increase. A federal wage increase via the tax payers pockets...is that even sustainable without huge unionization?
$233 million in oversight. Guaranteed government jobs there.
So we should have no oversight, then???. Aren't there like at least ten threads around here in which complaints are being made over the LACK of oversight in the first tranche of TARP? So which is it? Should there be oversight or not? Simple question...pick one or the other.
Meanwhile, those oversight fees are at a rate of 0.50%. What was the rate that your typical mutual fund advisors charged for "professionally" managing all that money that used to be in people's 401-k accounts?
Last edited by saganista; 01-31-2009 at 09:51 AM..
Will this result in that "living wage"? That's basically using tax payer funds to standardize pay across huge sectors and if it goes to states for assistance (practically all of them) it mise well be a federal wage standard increase. A federal wage increase via the tax payers pockets...is that even sustainable?
For those who don't recognize it, this language merely confirms the applicability of the Davis-Bacon Act which requires payment of locally prevailing wages so that projects done in Cleveland are done by people who live in Cleveland rather than seeing low wage workers recruited and brought in from other areas, thereby undermining local wage rates and undercutting the welfare of local workers.
So we should have no oversight, then???. Aren't there like at least ten threads around here in which complaints are being made over the LACK of oversight in the first tranche of TARP? So which is it? Should there be oversight or not? Simple question...pick one or the other.
Meanwhile, those oversight fees are at a rate of 0.50%. What was the rate that your typical mutual fund advisors charged for "professionally" managing all that money that used to be in people's 401-k accounts?
No, oversight is needed. Just pointing out things of interest (at least to me maybe others) since this thread seems to have the most information about the act. I thought it important people know they could go to recovery.gov to keep track. I might have found it more important to know the oversight cost than maybe another. I'm also curious about this $93,000 that's been thrown out and called "petty cash" I guess to support the constituents? I haven't found anything in the report yet confirming that.
I can't see everyone getting on board. But maybe if opposition to it can watch every step of the thing it won't be such a shrilling chalk board to them. Again IMO with no bipartisan support it's all or nothing for Obama, Pelosi, Reid. By the way I'm not one of the for you or against you type people. I've learned a lot on this thread...
Last edited by BigJon3475; 01-31-2009 at 10:07 AM..
$233 million in oversight. Guaranteed government jobs there. And it can't be used for:
This is always one of my favorite Republican Joseph Heller moment's. If you don't have oversight, then its just an irresponsible give away. If you have oversight, its too expensive. Of course during Republicans administrations oversight gets an astigmatism, it can't see by it still pays for the glasses.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
