Comments on: Politically, Stimulus Fight Has Just Begun

Washington Post: In Aftermath Of Bill's Passage, Parties Position Themselves To Claim Credit, Cast Blame

[endurorob]

The amount of money these people make is obscene, but their pay levels SHOULD NOT be regulated by the government.

But I haven''''t heard that Obama wants to limit compensation for ALL executives. Do you have a link, or is this more Fox News fear mongering?


Posted by hungry686 at 09:13 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I don''t want to make the effort to find the story but it was on this site. It was when the story of the limited salaries first came out and it said the Obama administration was recommending not only salary caps for those recieving tarp funds but for all corporate execs. I can''t make up that kind of crazy s.h.i.t. I don''t have that good of an imagination.

[endurorob]

They probably didn''''t read it. But they know what''''s in it, since it was just created.

And you can''''t complain about the democrats doing it, when the republicans did the exact same thing in the 109th and 108th congresses!!

Posted by hungry686 at 09:06 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I am willing to bet you cold scan the bill, find some random item and ask a senetor about it and you would have a 50-50 chance he/she would say "I didn''t know that was in there" I have heard that many times. I also saw an interview of one of the dem reps. and he flat out said Pelosi told them not to worry about reading it just shut up and vote yes.

[endurorob]

Uh huh.

Then WHERE did you get the proof of your claims to back up your post at 8:46?

I heard that yesterday, almost word for word, on Fox news.

Posted by hungry686 at 09:03 AM : Feb 17, 2009


As i stated earlier I was too busy yesterday to watch any news. My claims from 8:46 are based partly on the fact that your man Obama had preciously stated that the "Stimulus Package" would be targeted and temporary. My opinions on the additional socila programs is from the excerpts I have seen of the package and the history of social programs in this country, once they begin it is almost impossoble to stop them. You give people something for free once and many of them expect to keep getting it.

[endurorob]

The government started to subsidize the banks in the 1990''''s, but they didn''''t do anything to regulate the banks and their highly questionable business and loan practices that caused the mess.

That''''s Bush and his "TARP" policy - not Obama''''s current solution.

I''''m hoping that Obama and Geithner are going to impose MASSIVE amounts of regulations on the banking industry, (with congressional approval, of course), to prevent them from doing ANYTHING questionable ever again.

They should permanently eliminate "credit default swaps", "deferred interest loans", "Pick a Pay loans", and eliminate the practice of trading mortgages like securities or bonds.

Posted by hungry686 at 09:01 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I am all for limited regulation of not only banks but all industry. And I do mean limited. The Obama folks are talking about wanting to limit executive compensation not only for the banks that take the bailout loans but all bamks and that is not at all acceptable.

[endurorob]

Posted by hungry686 at 08:51 AM : Feb 17, 2009


Something else to ponder. All those representatives and senetors voted for this bill less than 12 hours after it''s final version was completed. How could they possibly have been able to read and understand what is in this thing especially when so much of it refernces other documents. They voted for it because Pelosi and Reid told them to.

[endurorob]

You have nothing substantive to base your claims on, other than "Fox News told me......"

Posted by hungry686 at 08:51 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I watch all the news with the exception of MSNBC and read CBSnews.com, CNN.com, and FOXnews.com. I also read the washington post and times. I base my opinions on many sources.

[endurorob]

That''''s what the Japanese said about the 1990''''s.

They now refer to that as "the lost decade".



And NOW you''''re crying about "wasteful spending"?

Where the hell were you for eight years?

How much money do you think was wasted, just because Bush REFUSED to open government contracted jobs to the competitive bidding process?

Please! I agree that wasteful spending is a massive problem, but don''''t save your complaints for just the democratic president!

Posted by hungry686 at 08:46 AM : Feb 17, 2009

when Bush was in office I complained about his bad policies but he is gone and now it is the new guys turn. As far as the Japanese lost decade. They did not do nothing. They did the same thing Obama is doing and it was a major failure. As a matter of fact I think one estimate I heard was they ended up pouring something like $11T into the economy. It failed and that is the basic model this spending bill is based on.

[endurorob]

Posted by hungry686 at 08:40 AM : Feb 17, 2009

Whats being apposed is the numerous social programs added inot this thing. This was supposed to be targeted and temporary. The social programs added will not go away so that is not temporary and they will have to be funded. If you pay income tax you better expect to see those taxes increase drastically in the next couple of years.

[endurorob]

You''''re opposing it, and you haven''''t even read it?!?!?


http://www.rules.house.gov/
111/LegText/111_hr1_text.pdf


Posted by hungry686 at 08:31 AM : Feb 17, 2009

Are you sure this is the latest? The date on it is Jan 23. Yes I have read portions of it when available. And I have read excerpts from many websites.

[endurorob]

Perhaps you could tell us what his bad policies are?

Fixing the republican destroyed economy? Getting funding to repair our infrastructure that was neglected for the last 8 years? Putting money into education for a change?



Or maybe you could define his "poor leadership abilities".

Posted by hungry686 at 08:29 AM : Feb 17, 2009

The economy would fix itself if left alone and what he is doing is at best a bandage with a very high price tag. If the government would make an effort to cut wastefull spending, all governments local to federal, then the funding to fix infrastructure could be had without this excessive borrowing that will have to be paid back.