U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-05-2009, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Southeast
4,296 posts, read 6,274,049 times
Reputation: 1445

Advertisements

It is all relative.

For example, to the Democrats, spending several billion dollars on creating temporary jobs, or spending millions on new cars every year is 'stimulus', to Republicans it is pork. The fact that anyone can say that 1% is 'pork' is probably the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. Anyone who actually read through that massive list of spending would agree that much more than 1% is pork.

The real issue here is whether or not Pelosi and Obama can agree and bring the DNC together. Moderate Democrats do not want to see the now $900 billion go to waste, hardcore Democrats just want to score a win for their party, and the undecideds are trying to figure out who to align with. And to be honest, it would seem the Democrats are the ones with the unstable party, now that they are back on top, they are obviously having trouble solidifying and capitalizing on their gains.

Overall I find it is truly pathetic that the DNC is using the economic crisis for political gain...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-05-2009, 08:31 AM
 
Location: North Texas
384 posts, read 867,286 times
Reputation: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117 View Post
It is all relative.

For example, to the Democrats, spending several billion dollars on creating temporary jobs, or spending millions on new cars every year is 'stimulus', to Republicans it is pork. The fact that anyone can say that 1% is 'pork' is probably the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. Anyone who actually read through that massive list of spending would agree that much more than 1% is pork.

The real issue here is whether or not Pelosi and Obama can agree and bring the DNC together. Moderate Democrats do not want to see the now $900 billion go to waste, hardcore Democrats just want to score a win for their party, and the undecideds are trying to figure out who to align with. And to be honest, it would seem the Democrats are the ones with the unstable party, now that they are back on top, they are obviously having trouble solidifying and capitalizing on their gains.

Overall I find it is truly pathetic that the DNC is using the economic crisis for political gain...

Let's see; the Dems have their boy Obama in the White House, their lib fringe in both House and Senate where they have majorities, control the orgasmic media, and they are still worrying about the minority, ignorant Reps and Rush Limbaugh?

If the socialist package is such a great deal for the American people then why does it matter what Reps and Limbaugh say and do? Are you saying that Rush Limbaugh and company are better at convincing the American people about legislation than the bought-and-paid-for lib media?

Maybe the Dems really know what a scam this package is and they are afraid that the American people will finally catch on to the bill-of-goods they are being sold. Just wait; there are more socialist scams coming!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 08:40 AM
 
34,990 posts, read 34,755,944 times
Reputation: 6163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117 View Post
It is all relative.

For example, to the Democrats, spending several billion dollars on creating temporary jobs, or spending millions on new cars every year is 'stimulus', to Republicans it is pork. The fact that anyone can say that 1% is 'pork' is probably the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. Anyone who actually read through that massive list of spending would agree that much more than 1% is pork.

The real issue here is whether or not Pelosi and Obama can agree and bring the DNC together. Moderate Democrats do not want to see the now $900 billion go to waste, hardcore Democrats just want to score a win for their party, and the undecideds are trying to figure out who to align with. And to be honest, it would seem the Democrats are the ones with the unstable party, now that they are back on top, they are obviously having trouble solidifying and capitalizing on their gains.

Overall I find it is truly pathetic that the DNC is using the economic crisis for political gain...
OMG look who's talking!

Sorry, Robert Gibbs and Obama both said it's 1%. "And most of the criticisms that have been leveled and, you know, that are — that you’ve heard on your show about various pet projects that members of Congress might have put in there, when you tally all those up, amount to less than one percent of the entire package.” — President Obama to Chris Wallace (Fox News, 2/3/09)

Tax break for new cars - the whole Senate voted for it; it helps the auto industry. = not "pork." Temporary jobs - beats no jobs at all, and once the economy is jump-started folks can develop careers again. = not "pork."

The definition of "pork" actually is money or projects that go to thank or sweet-talk some group of supporters or potential supporters, or make busy work that has no serious long-term positive outcome. The Big Dig, the Bridge to Nowhere. These things in the stimulus package arent "pork." Stuff like Pelosi's stupid STD millions - that's just a highball bid, like deMint's proposal is a lowball bid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 08:52 AM
emh
 
298 posts, read 775,822 times
Reputation: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
The definition of "pork" actually is money or projects that go to thank or sweet-talk some group of supporters or potential supporters, or make busy work that has no serious long-term positive outcome. The Big Dig, the Bridge to Nowhere. These things in the stimulus package arent "pork." Stuff like Pelosi's stupid STD millions - that's just a highball bid, like deMint's proposal is a lowball bid.
I just pointed out the same thing in a different thread. Pork has a very specific meaning and nothing in the bill meets that definition. Heck, if there was pork in the bill, Republicans probably would have voted for it (assuming they could have put some of their own pork in it)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 09:04 AM
 
17,803 posts, read 19,817,095 times
Reputation: 7455
I added it up before the article was even printed it... it was around 18 Billion from what the Repubs were posting... the package at that time was 885 Billion... using simple math... it was about 2%... so the less than 1% isn't really true... and if you think 18 Billion is not a big deal, can i get some? I would even take 1% of the "pork", if that makes you feel better... That would mean I would get 180 Million dollars... not exactly "nothing"...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 09:09 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,492 posts, read 51,399,522 times
Reputation: 24613
We need a lot more pork in that package as well as effectively eliminating income taxes on everyone with less than 250K coming in. We also need to pay for the package with taxes on the folks making over 250K.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 09:25 AM
 
34,990 posts, read 34,755,944 times
Reputation: 6163
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
I added it up before the article was even printed it... it was around 18 Billion from what the Repubs were posting... the package at that time was 885 Billion... using simple math... it was about 2%... so the less than 1% isn't really true... and if you think 18 Billion is not a big deal, can i get some? I would even take 1% of the "pork", if that makes you feel better... That would mean I would get 180 Million dollars... not exactly "nothing"...
Maybe you added in stuff that is being called "pork" but actually isnt. For example the tax break to encourage buying new cars benefits every business related to cars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 10:53 AM
 
4,182 posts, read 5,801,347 times
Reputation: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
OMG look who's talking!

Sorry, Robert Gibbs and Obama both said it's 1%. "And most of the criticisms that have been leveled and, you know, that are — that you’ve heard on your show about various pet projects that members of Congress might have put in there, when you tally all those up, amount to less than one percent of the entire package.” — President Obama to Chris Wallace (Fox News, 2/3/09)

Tax break for new cars - the whole Senate voted for it; it helps the auto industry. = not "pork." Temporary jobs - beats no jobs at all, and once the economy is jump-started folks can develop careers again. = not "pork."

The definition of "pork" actually is money or projects that go to thank or sweet-talk some group of supporters or potential supporters, or make busy work that has no serious long-term positive outcome. The Big Dig, the Bridge to Nowhere. These things in the stimulus package arent "pork." Stuff like Pelosi's stupid STD millions - that's just a highball bid, like deMint's proposal is a lowball bid.

Anything that creates jobs is not pork. Example, Hollywood is a big employer in California. It not only employs actors/actresses, but there are thousands of workers in the background who are directly and indirectly connected to it. Who are we to say that any funds that go to them is pork? Jobs are jobs; if the stimulus package creates a Hollywood job, gives you a paycheck, lets you pay your bills, and the money gets circulated in the economy creating more jobs downstream, then the stimulus package will have achieved its purpose. There's no law which says the only legitimate jobs worthy of support are in defense manufacturing, construction, or banking.

STD prevention program is even a legitimate stimulus beneficiary. If the program creates jobs among condom manufacturers, then hallelujah.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,907,156 times
Reputation: 12178
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Scream "pork" and Rush Limbaugh appears, lol.

I havent been paying attention to the news really the last couple of days but it just kills me that this hysteria has been over less than 1% of the total stimulus package.
LOL. And even that less than 1% they are calling pork is part of reinvestment program in what is a partly a reinvestment package. I see a few main reasons for their opposition:
- They didn't get to play the same old game, and if it works (which it promises to, they will be in a terrible shape, politically).
- Much of the recovery package went way above their head.
- They, and their friends and relatives won't benefit from anything but major tax cuts which is the only thing they believe in.
- Limbaugh and Joe The Plumber advised them so.

Someone please tell them... this is not just a stimulus package. It is a recovery and reinvestment package, with not just near term fix (all that they seem to be fixated on) but with long term implications.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
STD prevention program is even a legitimate stimulus beneficiary. If the program creates jobs among condom manufacturers, then hallelujah.
What the GOPers and their sheeple are stuck on isn't just about STD (unless they believe influenza etc is also STD)... and the idea on this piece of spending is for that reinvestment part of the package, as is the contraception programme. They are designed to reduce government spending in the near future. Based on a study done in the 1990s, these pieces have exceptional return (savings) for each dollar the government spends.

The only strike against it is that they will take a few months to take effect, and isn't exactly designed for "stimulus". It is designed with the idea to be fiscally responsible and reduce budget in the future. Even with 10% success of these programs, we may be looking at billions less in government spending. But then, when was the last time we saw republicans as being fiscally responsible and brimming with ideas towards it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Here
311 posts, read 454,128 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
washingtonpost.com - Time to Play Hardball
Republicans -- short on new ideas, low on votes and deeply unpopular in the polls -- have been winning the media war over the president's central initiative.

They have done so largely by focusing on minor bits of the stimulus that amount, as Obama said in at least two of his network interviews, to "less than 1 percent of the overall package." But Republicans have succeeded in defining the proposal by its least significant parts.

"This plan is a spending plan; it's not a stimulus plan," said Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), ignoring the truth that stimulus plans -- including Republican proposals to put more money into resolving the housing crisis -- by definition include significant new spending.

And Republicans who in one breath say they want more tax cuts declare in the next that they are against the tax cuts Obama has proposed.

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona said of Obama's $500 refundable tax credit: "Calling a rebate to people who don't pay income taxes a tax cut doesn't make it a tax cut." Presumably Kyl doesn't consider as taxes the payroll taxes (or, for that matter, sales taxes) paid disproportionately by low- and middle-income Americans.
Obama in his editorial "The Change We Need," says, "[Americans are] patient enough to know that our economic recovery will be measured in years, not months. But they have no patience for the same old partisan gridlock that stands in the way of action while our economy continues to slide."
minor bits of the stimulus? minor bits of the stimulus?? well, I guess when the pakage is a trillion dollars, then what's couple of billion to lobbyists friends in comparisson?

no "stimulous plan" is a good stimulous plan. government involvment in economics only causes damage. get over it.

people ho dont pay taxes dont pay "payroll taxes". you kno that too, so who you trying to fool? sales taxes?? please, don't make me laugh!

you don't call a handout a tax cut. don't like the truth? keep your head in the sand and believe all you are told by the democrats
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top