Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (102362)	1/29/2009 4:27:39 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 542147

Well I think your broad definition of stimulus is silly I'm using the definition that's out there. It's not my creation. Read any news article, listen to any speech, etc, you will see everyone using that definition. It's a given. Stimulus is about pumping money into the economy and producing jobs. Here's an example that predates the current stimulus package: "Detail's of Bush's Economic Stimulus and Tax Rebate Plan Friday January 25, 2008 President Bush and House legislators have agreed on the basic policy objectives for boosting the US economy in the hopes of warding off a recession. Bush hopes that the plan will provide an "effective, robust, and temporary set of incentives that will boost our economy and encourage job creation." The plan contains provisions to eliminate the 10% tax bracket, the lowest tax bracket, to zero percent for one year only, and will provide a tax incentive for businesses to invest in fixed assets such as machinery and equipment. The details of the plan are provided in a fact sheet provided by the White House. " taxes.about.com Tell me how giving food stamps to people creates jobs? If you recall, in the last stimulus, they sent everyone a check. People were expected to spend it. Spending money creates jobs. If more people go to a restaurant, it hires staff. If more people buy TVs, the TV producers, supply chain, etc hire more staff. If people have more money to spend on potatoes, then that's jobs for farmers, groceries, and middlemen. That's stimulus 101. The government can either 1) give people the money to spend, 2) reduce taxes so people get to keep more of their money, or 3) buy product directly. Whichever way you do it, stuff is being bought, which creates jobs. I think you are wrong here Lane - and so do lots of republicans. I think Republicans understand quite well what stimulus is. They're pushing for cutting taxes as their mechanism for putting money into the economy. Or extra condoms, how does that create jobs? I already explained in some detail how giving money to family planning programs creates jobs. You chose to ignore my response and just continue on your merry way holding on to your notion that it doesn't create jobs rather than taking my points and refuting them. Building a bridge or broadband internet or electric power grids or medical electronic records - ALL put people back to work Indeed. As I mentioned, the government can buy the product directly. Bridges are things it can buy. Your list would certainly be considered stimulus right along with staffing up the family planning clinics and giving people money to buy food. In the former, you're putting a medical technician to work, in the latter a farmer a produce truck driver. In your examples, you'd be putting steel workers, computer programmers, and engineers to work. Yes, indeed, "ALL put people back to work." I don't understand why you can't see that stimulus is stimulus and jobs is jobs. People with different POVs may favor certain stimulus approaches and certain jobs over others, but that doesn't make the ones you don't favor any less stimulus or any less job. and eventually and hopefully get us out of this economic downturn. The quality of a particular stimulus is in part a function of how quickly it can be implemented. Money allocated to sodding the Mall can be spent before summer. Allocate it to a bridge and it could be a year or two or more before the first steel is produced. That's a long time to wait for a job and for a recovery.

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (102362)	1/29/2009 4:30:47 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 542147

<<<Well I think your broad definition of stimulus is silly as it only accomplishes pushing people into corners. Your stimulus items are a dead end - and are more easily defined as government spending. Tell me how giving food stamps to people creates jobs? Or extended unemployment benefits, how does that create jobs? Or extra condoms, how does that create jobs? Building a bridge or broadband internet or electric power grids or medical electronic records - ALL put people back to work so they can pay back taxes and eventually and hopefully get us out of this economic downturn. any spending that pumps money into the economy creating jobs short term would be a stimulus I think you are wrong here Lane - and so do lots of republicans. >>> It is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Program. It is not a pure Reinvestment program. The American Economy has been greatly damaged. Large numbers of people are hurt. The ARRP has to do a lot of things. It can't be focused on a narrow set of objectives. People are losing their jobs. People are losing their homes. People are going hungry. Yes we have to stimulate the economy. Yes we have to reinvest in American, but we also have to help those that are being hurt. We have to help different types of people in different areas of this country to keep their jobs. There are people without health care insurance. These are all things things that have been made worse by the policies of Ronald Reagen and 12 years of Bushes. There is a lot of work to be to done.