Mini-Bailout, For EVERYONE!

[Mr. Shaman]

I just have to point out the obvious here.

If they build infrastructure with the money it is not a tax cut nor is it returned.

We'd have a Hell-of-a lot more to show, for that money, that what we've seen with the bucks Bush gave to the banks!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

That's very impressive, but the fact is that we're not paying for it, at least not right now. All of the money for the bailout is borrowed, every cent.

....And, all-of-a-sudden "conservatives" are worried about that NOW??!!

It's been different that BUSHCO has been financing this country's business (mostly, because of the pre-War tax-cuts) with borrowed-bucks????​

 

[PLC1]

....And, all-of-a-sudden "conservatives" are worried about that NOW??!!

It's been different that BUSHCO has been financing this country's business (mostly, because of the pre-War tax-cuts) with borrowed-bucks????​

If you think I've been supporting "Bushco" and his deficit spending, then you haven't been reading my posts at all.

Partisan nonsense in bold red letters and all caps is still partisan nonsense.

 

[Little-Acorn]

If you think I've been supporting "Bushco" and his deficit spending, then you haven't been reading my posts at all.

Reading posts by conservatives, seems to be the last thing Mr. ShamMan wants to do. From what I've seen, he wants to be free to accuse conservatives of everything under the sun, regardless of whther the people he's accusing, actually did any of it.

If he couldn't lie about what conservatives say and do, he'd have nothing to talk about at all.

Gee, that would be unfortunate.

 

[Dr.Who]

We'd have a Hell-of-a lot more to show, for that money, that what we've seen with the bucks Bush gave to the banks!​

The Bush administration thought that stimulus money needed to stimulate banks since they were the ones that were not providing loans needed for expanding credit. The Obama administration subscribes to the keynsian idea that a stimulus is money spent on absolutely anything at all.

Based on those two positions the Obamaites would have to admit that money given to banks fits the keynsian concept of money spent on anything.

 

[Dr.Who]

....And, all-of-a-sudden "conservatives" are worried about that NOW??!!

It's been different that BUSHCO has been financing this country's business (mostly, because of the pre-War tax-cuts) with borrowed-bucks????​

Actually conservatives were the only ones who were worried about it when Bush first proposed it and all the dems jumped on board too.

 

[PLC1]

Reading posts by conservatives, seems to be the last thing Mr. ShamMan wants to do. From what I've seen, he wants to be free to accuse conservatives of everything under the sun, regardless of whther the people he's accusing, actually did any of it.

If he couldn't lie about what conservatives say and do, he'd have nothing to talk about at all.

Gee, that would be unfortunate.

Yes, wouldn't it.

Ironically, I've been labeled a "liberal" more than once on this forum.

 

[Pandora]

Yes, wouldn't it.

Ironically, I've been labeled a "liberal" more than once on this forum.

I always thought you were a moderate liberal, less liberal than others here.

The Lou Dobbs picture doesnt help, he is a liberal who pretends that he is an Independent.

All the Independent's I know are liberals who dont like the term liberal

 

[foggedinn]

Little bailout, big bailout, It doesn't really matter. Either way it is going to fail.

I get the distinct impression that we're watching the decline and fall of western civilization.

 

[PLC1]

I always thought you were a moderate liberal, less liberal than others here.

The Lou Dobbs picture doesnt help, he is a liberal who pretends that he is an Independent.

All the Independent's I know are liberals who dont like the term liberal

I've thought of using Rush Limbaugh, but with a circle around him and a slash through it.

Maybe, that would make me even more liberal.

Actually, I'm of the opinion that there is really no left to right, liberal to conservative continuum, but instead a series of largely unrelated issues. Andy and I had a long discussion about that one at one point.

But I digress. Didn't mean to derail the thread.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Why doesn't the government just agree they have to shrink the size of government and cut taxes at the same time. This stimulus package is a joke and will only increase government.

because you don't grow spending that way...and why did you guys not do it for 8 years?

 

[chestnut]

because you don't grow spending that way...and why did you guys not do it for 8 years?

When you say "grow" you mean grow the government. How does that help. They can't manage anything responsibly. Surely all the news about how the first bank bailout was a farce, medicare, social security, fannie and freddie...
Those are all examples of big government.

The governments role was never to be 'cradle to the grave' solutions providers to everyone.

Somewhere along the way, people got lazy and decided they wanted someone else to be responsible, since it was too much work for themselves to be responsible.

I do not support a bigger government that is involved in every facet of my or my family's lives.

Now, most of this stimulus, is going to increase programs and make it larger, and give it even more control.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

....And, all-of-a-sudden "conservatives" are worried about that NOW??!!​

​

If you think I've been supporting "Bushco" and his deficit spending, then you haven't been reading my posts at all.

If you consider yourself a "conservative", there's not a whole lot I can do about that.​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Actually conservatives were the only ones who were worried about it when Bush first proposed it.....

Yeah, they reeeaaallly knocked-themselves-out, trying to hold-up that giveaway.

​

 

[Dr.Who]

because you don't grow spending that way...and why did you guys not do it for 8 years?

there is no doubt that both the republicans and the democrats want to grow spending - just in different ways.

Meanwhile I want to decrease spending and am left with the option of voting for the big spenders or the bigger spenders or the small spenders who have no chance of winning an election.

Keynsian economics says that it doesn't matter who spend the money and what the money is spent on - hence the Obama shotgun approach to spending on liberal programs.

but I want the money spent by the private sector and targeted toward things have the greatest stimulative impact. I cannot get on board with the Keynsians but they COULD get on board with me. Well, if they weren't socialists they could.