Confused Conservative... So Stimulus Bills are Good Now?

[Boss]

So that's it? Dragonlady endorses Trump's stimulus and a couple of Trumpkins assure me this is a stimulus for GOOD things, not BAD things like Obama did? Then my thread disappears into obscurity?

I think some answers are in order here. Isn't this exactly why the Tea Party was formed? Isn't this the government spending massive amounts of money and running up more debt instead of lowering our damn taxes? More Statism and not Article I Sec.8 Constitutional Conservatism?

Is this... I'm okay with Big Central Government because MY Tyrant Ruler is in charge now?

And just how many more hundreds of billions of dollars do we need to borrow to fix all the crumbling roads and bridges? What is the benchmark to know when these problems have been adequately addressed?

 

[BluesLegend]

Obama's so called stimulus for shovel ready jobs was funneled right into the pockets of government unions. At the peak of the recession when unemployment in the private sector was at its worst, unemployment in the public government unions was unchanged at 3.8%. How? They used the stimulus money to make payroll that's how, until the money ran out a couple of years later.

So Trump's stimulus doesn't resemble Obama's stimulus one iota.

 

[LoneLaugher]

This is fun.

We know that spending on infrastructure is money well invested.

What we don't know is WHICH SPECIFIC regulations are holding back our economic growth. The nebulous concept that we are "over regulated" is a staple food for nutbags who have no good ideas. It is void of nutrients, though.

 

[Boss]

Obama's so called stimulus for shovel ready jobs was funneled right into the pockets of government unions. At the peak of the recession when unemployment in the private sector was at its worst, unemployment in the public government unions was unchanged at 3.8%. How? They used the stimulus money to make payroll that's how, until the money ran out a couple of years later.

So Trump's stimulus doesn't resemble Obama's stimulus one iota.

Again... Is this... I'm okay with big centralized government spending because MY tyrant dictator is in charge now? How are YOU any different than what we just got rid of?

 

[Iceweasel]

Again... Is this... I'm okay with big centralized government spending because MY tyrant dictator is in charge now? How are YOU any different than what we just got rid of?

obama's stimulus didn't go to infrastructure but you are going to be upset for as long as the federal government exists. No one has to make you happy. I don't mind spending the money on it if the economy improves enough to easily afford it. I would oppose borrowing to do it like obama did so I have to reject your on/off binary assertion.

 

[AntonToo]

Stimulus paid to bailout banks, phony companies (e.g., Solyndra) and labor unions (GM/UAW) is bad. Stimulus to promote real economic growth is good. Get it?

No, I don't get it because it's Keynesian nonsense. The best way for government to promote economic growth is to reduce government regulations and give us more FREEDOM rather than stimulus.

IT IS NOT KEYNESIAN.

Keynesian economics advocate economy counterbalancing government policy - expansionary policies like infrastructure spending and tax-cuts in recessions and contractionary policies like tax-raises in times of growth to pay for those expansionary policies.

It is plain fiscal irresponsibility and careless economic populism. People love spending and tax-cuts, People hate contractionary tax raises and spending cuts. That's good enough for Trump to ride.

 

[occupied]

Again... Is this... I'm okay with big centralized government spending because MY tyrant dictator is in charge now? How are YOU any different than what we just got rid of?

obama's stimulus didn't go to infrastructure but you are going to be upset for as long as the federal government exists. No one has to make you happy. I don't mind spending the money on it if the economy improves enough to easily afford it. I would oppose borrowing to do it like obama did so I have to reject your on/off binary assertion.

The 2008 stimulus act did indeed go to infrastructure but you might remember republicans would not pass it without half of it being tax cuts. Everyone got a little of what they wanted and no one ever claimed that our infrastructure was entirely repaired afterward. That would cost trillions because Republicans have been neglecting the country for a very long time. Maybe you can explain why they don't want to pay for upkeep on the systems that facilitate our economic activity.

 

[Iceweasel]

Again... Is this... I'm okay with big centralized government spending because MY tyrant dictator is in charge now? How are YOU any different than what we just got rid of?

obama's stimulus didn't go to infrastructure but you are going to be upset for as long as the federal government exists. No one has to make you happy. I don't mind spending the money on it if the economy improves enough to easily afford it. I would oppose borrowing to do it like obama did so I have to reject your on/off binary assertion.

The 2008 stimulus act did indeed go to infrastructure but you might remember republicans would not pass it without half of it being tax cuts. Everyone got a little of what they wanted and no one ever claimed that our infrastructure was entirely repaired afterward. That would cost trillions because Republicans have been neglecting the country for a very long time. Maybe you can explain why they don't want to pay for upkeep on the systems that facilitate our economic activity.

You're as full of shit as always. Cite your source on infrastructure spending, not signs or administration. And tax cuts are bad? The stimulous didn't stimulate the economy so I don't see how a tax cut would be bad, but you didn't cite that either. Bad roads are the Republicans fault? You stupid little retard.

 

[BluesLegend]

Obama's so called stimulus for shovel ready jobs was funneled right into the pockets of government unions. At the peak of the recession when unemployment in the private sector was at its worst, unemployment in the public government unions was unchanged at 3.8%. How? They used the stimulus money to make payroll that's how, until the money ran out a couple of years later.

So Trump's stimulus doesn't resemble Obama's stimulus one iota.

Again... Is this... I'm okay with big centralized government spending because MY tyrant dictator is in charge now? How are YOU any different than what we just got rid of?

 

[Old Rocks]

Stimulus paid to bailout banks, phony companies (e.g., Solyndra) and labor unions (GM/UAW) is bad. Stimulus to promote real economic growth is good. Get it?

No, I don't get it because it's Keynesian nonsense. The best way for government to promote economic growth is to reduce government regulations and give us more FREEDOM rather than stimulus.

Why sure, we all like seeing turds floating down our rivers, when they are not on fire. And having to breath air that looks like that in Bejing. Such wonderful plans people like you would have for us.

 

[Edgetho]

Okay, I remember vividly how George W. Bush proposed a stimulus bill before he left office and most conservatives screamed bloody murder about that. I remember McCain suspending his campaign so he could jet off back to Washington to cast his vote for it... and we were all livid.

It was $800+ billion for infrastructure, education, creating jobs, etc. There was money for roads and bridges, it was going to end the recession, put people back to work... blah blah blah! Conservatives were standing on their ears about it!

Obama came in and passed a second stimulus bill and every Republican staunchly opposed it. Again, conservatives made the argument against this Keynesian nonsense but Congress passed it anyway... they managed to have a Gang of Whatever to get the votes.... taxpayers went on the hook for another trillion-dollar boondoggle to fix the damn roads and bridges again!

NOW.... Donald Trump says he wants to do a $500 billion stimulus to fix the roads and bridges! And his little fan club of supporters are cheering this example of brilliance from Trump. So I am really confused... Are stimulus bills now a good thing? AND... how many more of these are we going to need to fix the damn roads and bridges?

The original 'stimulus package' back in 2008 was Republican, too.

dimocrap scum simply stole most of it.

 

[Old Rocks]

I hope that spending is offset by cuts to bogus climate change studies and subsidies. There is 125 billion dollars in bullshit spending in defense alone. I'm not even talking about diverting it out of defense though. I'm certain there waste and redundancy through ought the government that can be diverted to highways and shit.

Well, dream on... Trump is already meeting with Al Gore and buying into the Warmer nonsense.

The defense budget is the one thing our government is duly authorized to do under the Constitution. Granted, there is probably a lot of waste and redundancy in the defense budget just like all other departmental budgets but we need to cut the waste and return that money to the taxpayers. It's not the government's job to build fucking roads and bridges. As the poster above said, other than "post roads" there is no provision for this in the constitution. Now, we have an interstate highway system, and that's fine for the federal government to maintain.... I'm not opposed to that. But spending my tax dollars to build a bridge in New Hampshire... that's not my fucking problem! If they need a bridge, let them raise their property taxes and build their goddamn bridge like every other state does.

And see... here's the thing... in a Free Market System... whenever there is a need for a road or bridge, there are interested capitalists who are willing and able to fund such a project because they will benefit from it. Let the Free Market System handle that and get the government out of the fucking way!

By God, of course you are right. Those wonderful companies that proposed and funded our Interstates need their name carved in stone, who were they, anyway? Those wonderful businesses that funded the electrification of our rural areas need their names in gold, who were they? The brilliant CEO's that funded the great dams on the Colombia that provided the power that smelted the aluminum for the bombers that we won WW2 with should forever live in our memories.

Boss, you are one of the stupidest people on this board. You are so much into you stupid ideology of the government can do nothing right, that you deny historical facts.

 

[Old Rocks]

Uhm... this is the THIRD time we've been told that our infrastructure is crumbling and we need a massive stimulus bill to address it. So what keeps happening to all these hundreds of billions of dollars we keep spending?

Where are the news stories of bridges collapsing due to deterioration? Where is the YouTube footage of cars crashing on the highways that are falling apart? Why aren't there news stories about roofs collapsing on school children?

I CALL BULLSHIT!!!

I call bullshit on you.

U.S. highway system badly in need of repair

The U.S. highway system is broken. And it’s not clear where the money is going to come from to fix it.

Amid a steady rise in congestion and ongoing deterioration of decades-old roads and bridges, federal and state funding is failing to keep up with the need to maintain existing infrastructure and increase capacity. And the cash shortfall is only going to get worse, with the Federal Highway Trust Fund — supported by a tax on gasoline — projected to run dry in 2009.

Part of the problem stems from the increase in traffic borne by a national highway system that is 50 years old in places. In 1955, the system carried 65 million cars and trucks. Today, that number has nearly quadrupled to 246 million, according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

That added stress is taking a toll — in both increased congestion and deterioration of roads and bridges. The list of projects in need of repair is extensive, according to TRIP, a national transportation research group:

• 33 percent of the nation's major roads are in “poor or mediocre condition.”
• 36 percent of major urban highways are congested.
• 26 percent of bridges are “structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.”

Over 2,000 bridges on the interstate highway system are in need of an overhaul, according to Frank Moretti, TRIP's director of research.

It's not clear just how many of those bridges are unsafe. According to the Federal Highway Administration, most bridges in the U.S. Highway Bridge Inventory — 83 percent — are inspected every two years. About 12 percent, those in bad shape, are inspected annually, and 5 percent, those in very good shape, every four years.

 

[Ame®icano]

Uhm... this is the THIRD time we've been told that our infrastructure is crumbling and we need a massive stimulus bill to address it. So what keeps happening to all these hundreds of billions of dollars we keep spending?

Where are the news stories of bridges collapsing due to deterioration? Where is the YouTube footage of cars crashing on the highways that are falling apart? Why aren't there news stories about roofs collapsing on school children?

I CALL BULLSHIT!!!

Whenever Congress can't sell us some other spending, they just wrap it in infrastructure blanket and pass it. The "infrastructure" is a magic word for their pork spending, where roughly only one third of the money goes to infrastructure, and rest goes to pay the cronies.

Just reminder, there was $305 billion infrastructure bill passed just last year.

Obama signs $305B highway bill

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

NOW.... Donald Trump says he wants to do a $500 billion stimulus to fix the roads and bridges! And his little fan club of supporters are cheering this example of brilliance from Trump. So I am really confused... Are stimulus bills now a good thing? AND... how many more of these are we going to need to fix the damn roads and bridges?

I don't have a problem with money to fix roads and bridges. That actually needs to be done, although that is something the states really should be doing, not the federal government. If the money actually goes to fixing our outdated infrastructure without increasing the national debt then I'm fine with it. The Bush/Obama/McCain stimulus was nothing but a criminal bail out to corporate America.

 

[Richard-H]

The problem with these stimulus bills is the system of government contractors. Most of the money goes to middlemen and contractor's profits, very little goes to the actual infrastructure work. The result is that despite hundreds of billions paid by the government for infrastructure we still have an infrastructure that's outdated and falling apart.

It's all a big boondoggle.

 

[Richard-H]

Here's one that I heard a while back:

A section of fence at the White House needed repairs, so the grounds keeper asked three contractors to inspect it and submit a bid. The first contractor looked at it, did some calculations and finally said that he'd do the work for $1200. The second contractor did the same but said he's do the work for $1000. The third did not even look at it, instead he immediately bid $3000.

The groundskeeper asked the third contractor how he had arrived at $3000 without even looking at the fence. The third contractor said "Easy....$1000 profit for me, $1000 donated to your political party and with the rest I'll hire the second contractor to do the work".

The groundskeeper smiled and said "It's a deal"!

 

[Boss]

Again... Is this... I'm okay with big centralized government spending because MY tyrant dictator is in charge now? How are YOU any different than what we just got rid of?

obama's stimulus didn't go to infrastructure but you are going to be upset for as long as the federal government exists. No one has to make you happy. I don't mind spending the money on it if the economy improves enough to easily afford it. I would oppose borrowing to do it like obama did so I have to reject your on/off binary assertion.

No offense, but you sound EXACTLY like a Democrat in 2008. If we have a $20 trillion deficit, how are we spending this without borrowing it from somewhere?

I will be satisfied when the Federal government stops doing shit it's not supposed to be doing. And I'm sorry... I think I DO have to be made happy or I am going to be pissed. I didn't support this Keynesian nonsense with Obama and the Democrats and I damn sure won't support it with Trump and Republicans.

 

[Boss]

Stimulus paid to bailout banks, phony companies (e.g., Solyndra) and labor unions (GM/UAW) is bad. Stimulus to promote real economic growth is good. Get it?

No, I don't get it because it's Keynesian nonsense. The best way for government to promote economic growth is to reduce government regulations and give us more FREEDOM rather than stimulus.

IT IS NOT KEYNESIAN.

Keynesian economics advocate economy counterbalancing government policy - expansionary policies like infrastructure spending and tax-cuts in recessions and contractionary policies like tax-raises in times of growth to pay for those expansionary policies.

It is plain fiscal irresponsibility and careless economic populism. People love spending and tax-cuts, People hate contractionary tax raises and spending cuts. That's good enough for Trump to ride.

It's EXACTLY what it is!

 

[Boss]

I don't have a problem with money to fix roads and bridges. That actually needs to be done, although that is something the states really should be doing, not the federal government. If the money actually goes to fixing our outdated infrastructure without increasing the national debt then I'm fine with it. The Bush/Obama/McCain stimulus was nothing but a criminal bail out to corporate America.

OMG... Where in the living fuck are you people getting the idea that we have money to spend on stimulus packages? We have a $20 trillion DEBT! That means... we don't have any fucking money!! ANY money we spend will have to be borrowed! We can't even pay the bills we have to pay... we'll run close to a trillion dollars over what we take in this year WITHOUT a stimulus!

Do you people think we elected Trump's BANK ACCOUNT?