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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (529471)	11/17/2009 1:10:58 PM
From: RetiredNow	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574053

You are very wrong. Bush spent even more on stimulus than Obama did. Bush did it through two tax cuts that make Obama's stimulus look like small change. The kind of stimulus I support is money that is invested with a specific return on investment in mind. For example, stimulus money that is spent on renewable energy projects or loans to the renewable energy industry, or money spent on broadband penetration or schools, or money spent to fix crumbling infrastructure...all of these are not wasted dollars, because ultimately, they pay for themselves through economic efficiencies or through new growth industries. Stimulus that I am against is an increase in unemployment or sending checks to people and telling them to go on a spending splurge, like Bush did. That is borrowing money from China to buy Chinese goods and is toxic for our economy. The stimulus bill that Obama and the Dems passed through was 80% investment and 20% waste. Now you can spend all your time parsing the 20% and concluding it was a boondoggle, but when our Congress can get something 80% right, then that is success. Democracies rarely deliver anything greater than 50% right due to all the compromises.