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: Cogito who wrote (152253)	12/14/2010 12:20:05 AM
From: Paul Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543316

I consider the difference between spending 50 billion dollars in one year, and spending 100 over two years, I see the latter as being a greater stimulus than the former. I agree with that - that's why I'm not sure how we ended up talking past each other. If the existing run rate for the budget is 50 and then the new budget is 60 - the part that is status quo is 50 and the incremental 10 could be called stimulus. I would not call all 60 stimulus. That's all I'm pointing out. For the unemployment spending, in the example above, it is already in the 50 run-rate (thru November). It is not new incremental to the current run rate. The Social security tax holiday is new incremental because it did not exist within previous numbers. Otherwise, it seems like we need to label the entire federal budget as "stimulus."