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.
The fact that all 177 GOP Congressional Reps who voted voted No (and 1 of them did not vote) is a GOOD thing for ALL Americans. This package is worthless and does far more harm than good!
As much as I support tax cuts, the Government needs to start with spending. It always starts with spending. Only if spending is restrained can individual tax cuts even be considered. In the meantime, Capital Gains and Corporate tax cuts can be implemented.
The cost of Government is in what it spends not in how much it taxes. They can spend far more than they take in through taxes by borrowing and or printing money (both of which are bad for all of us). They need to CUT SPENDING! Unfortunately, the candidates who campaigned on the cut spending platform (Paul and Barr) got nowhere.
The Repubs are taking a large risk on this vote. They obviously didn't find any reason to support its final version, even after negotiating into it things that they always stand for, like tax breaks. It smacks of a sabotage job, of course.
I hope that Obama quickly learned his lesson with this vote. He must deal the GOP rank and file from a position of strength. He has the "bully pulpit," and he needs to constantly use it. For him to paint them as obstructionists in a time of dire economic circumstances could pay even further political dividends for the Dems in 2010.
If the economy does in fact get much worse going forward, how will the GOP's vote on this bill appear to the public? That they were the cause of too small a stimulus that will have to be overcome again later with a perhaps even more drastic stimulus package? The GOP will be the odd man out by the time that comes to pass, and it won't be later than 2 years from now, either.
You are right, sort of. I am 64 and will not be going out and building bridges. However, when I was young, I did lots of construction work--everything from carpenter's helper to concrete man. Hard work.
And I am not rich, and I have never been on welfare--not even close. I have been poor, and I always handled it two ways--finding another job and seriously cutting my budget. There have been times that I have had two full time jobs and one part time job. So watch what you say about us.
I'm pretty sure small arms was talking about the younger liberals of today. They are a different breed from when you and I were younger. And I base that on the ones I know.
The Repubs are taking a large risk on this vote. They obviously didn't find any reason to support its final version, even after negotiating into it things that they always stand for, like tax breaks. It smacks of a sabotage job, of course.
I hope that Obama has learned his lesson with this vote. He must deal the GOP rank and file from a position of strength. He has the "bully pulpit," and he needs to constantly use it. For him to paint them as obstructionists in a time of dire economic circumstances could pay even further political dividends for the Dems in 2010.
You could look at it the other way. If Democrats push silly spending down our throats and the GOP stands firm in opposing it (which is already happening), the GOP will win the 2010 Mid Term elections in spades! The Dems already control the vast majority of competitive House and Senate seats, so it's easier for the GOP to peel seats away from them than the other way around.
Look at it this way: If the economic truth is that it is a game of guiding the perception of the business community and of the public to be willing to spend and invest again, then the actual targets of the stimulus's spending are perhaps less important and therefore the GOP criticism of the bill doesn't cut any ice. If Obama is eventually successful at getting people to be hopeful again about the economy's prospects, that is the key. And he must get some buy-in from the "business community" to do so. I think he's clever enough to figure out pretty quickly what he needs to do to get the right amount of buy-in. The banks really screwed themselves this time around. If Obama and his team can figure a way to get the banks to trust each other again and to improve their asset condition, then this recession won't be as bad as the nay-sayers and perma-bears are bloviating about.
The Heritage Foundation launched a massive attack to try to discredit keynesian economics! Basically they have an agenda and its to further dismantling of government! They want to end almost all government programs including social security! Based on the postings here many of you have bought into their campaign, which would mean you have had blinders on for tghe last twenty years!
You could look at it the other way. If Democrats push silly spending down our throats and the GOP stands firm in opposing it (which is already happening), the GOP will win the 2010 Mid Term elections in spades! The Dems already control the vast majority of competitive House and Senate seats, so it's easier for the GOP to peel seats away from them than the other way around.
That is the exact reason Obama wants republican votes.
I see that not a single Republican in the House voted for the stimulus package.
Many of them felt fine about voting for bail out packages for banks and corporations. Welfare for the wealthy and the comfortable.
Yet, they cannot vote for a plan that will create middle class jobs and help out the average Joe, claiming it costs too much.
It does cost a lot. But with the huge number of job losses announced this week along with the 2.6 million jobs lost last year, you would think that they would work with the Democrats to craft a plan they could live with. The Democrats compromised by including tax cuts.
It seems the Republicans don't mind deficits for going to war to destroy a nation, bailing out CEO's who make extreme salaries, giving money to corporations for lavish parties, redecorating of offices, and purchasing corporate jets. But, when it comes to rebuilding our nation's infrastructure and helping the middle class, it is always too expensive.
Oh well, some of that bail out money spent on the parties, the expensive desks, the Persian carpets will surely trickle down to the middle class. Let them eat cake. (I have been waiting to be trickled on since Reagan was elected in 1980 and used that term. I guess that I just need to wait a little longer. I have, however, as a middle class guy, been s*** on quite often.)
To be fair, Democrats also approved the first bail out package--and they did so in larger numbers than Republicans. But there was more of a feeling of bipartisanship then than now.
They didn't vote for it, because it isn't a "stimulus" package. It's a bunch of pork and FDR style spending, for which most of the money won't even be available till 2010!
It's a lousy plan (it's really no plan at all).
I'm glad no Republicans voted for it (and 11 Democrats were with them). Perhaps they are finally coming to there senses and displaying some backbone. I'm tired of Republicans acting like Democrats. That's why they lost in 2008.
Partisanship is good.
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.
