Comments on: The Dicey Politics of a Second Stimulus

[pachak12]

Unfortunately I am scared for what will be here for my children and they are 3.

[pachak12]

Yeah nobody is buying out the middle class or lower class, there is no stimulus to pay if they go under.We are held accountable for our actions.

[pachak12]

First of all lets think about this issue we have here in the United States. This spending that got us into a recession started a long time ago when people could not afford things so they used credit and credit cards to buy the things that the news told them they deserved. Deserved well, huh why do people in America deserve fancy million dollar homes when their neighbors are living in filth. Oh, yeah greed. Greed got us in this mess and forgetting God. People did not allow for things to come up such as gas rising over the past few years so they over spent and did not budget because they maxed out everything getting what they wanted. Then they could no longer afford their credit card bills and high outrageous mortgages (which went up with the greed of banks).Greed and desire to have more then one could afford is what is ruined America and our children's future.Government is about making things equal and fixing things but giving more credit to people is not the answer neither is giving more money the rich greedy people. I am sorry but this is not an issue that started when Bush was in office this started when Clinton wanted more credit for people. Who cares what party it is a mess and until we all come together to help each other we will not get anywhere. Stop spending and get down and dirty to help you neighbors it feels good to not think about buying something when you are helping someone.

[Resin-Smoker]

No No No... Do NOT give more of our tax money to a dying banks just to preserve the status que!

For real "change" to happen these banks have to fail... Lets hope that they can take companies like GM with them.

Beyond this these bankers need to be lined up and shot for their arrogance with our money... It's not their money so they could care less about the risks involved so long as there is chance that they might profit.

Let them all be held accountable !!!

[payasyougo]

This should be real simple.

Determine what has worked in the first stimulus.

None of these clowns can answer that.
None of these clowns can tell you what will work - if they knew, they'd have done it the first time around. They are opportunists.

What we really have here is a federal government attempting to temporarily keep afloat several state governments that cant control their spending any better than their residents. It's going to crash and burn.

Give your teenager a credit card and every time they max it out pay it off for them. When do you think the cycle will end? When you run out of money and your credit cards are maxed out.

I think I heard someone in the current administration proudly say that they turned a four state housing bubble (which they characterized as the impending end of the world) into a more manageable national disaster. At least I think that's what I heard.

The simple question is how much MORE of my grandchildren's future tax burden are you going to let congress spend today.

[pachak12]

Yeah nobody is buying out the middle class or lower class, there is no stimulus to pay if they go under.We are held accountable for our actions.

[speakinup22]

FDRs plans didn't work. I suspect we'd have done better if the Government had just kept out of the whole thing.

Obama is going to get inflation going just like Jimmy Carter did.

That will make people slow down on their spending even more.

It will hurt the middle class that has worked all of their lives to save what little they do have. I suppose it is one way to pay the Chineese for all the money we owe them, but I sure don't like the idea of losing all I have to HOPEFULLY fix a bad market.

So you aredefinitly correct. None of these folks know what they are doing - Don't go about spending blindly in the hops of fixing it.

[ram19491]

Wow. Eight years of havin a republican a** wh*** take a saving and do nothing but kill kids and put us more in debt than ever before and republicans are asking for more already. you should be die hard cub fans instead. At least you could go to wrigley field once in a while a vent your frustrations. now all you can do is blame it on demos and hope someone buys it. Yeah right!!!!

[debinok1]

The first stimulus was not big enough, was not directed at the right part of the economy, has not been released fast enough, and was not done soon enough to actually help the economy. There will most likely need to be a "second" stimulus, but they need to make sure it goes where it will do the most good, make sure it is big enough to work, and make it available "immediately". If they don't then the second stimulus that will be needed wont do any better than the first has done.

[pachak12]

Unfortunately I am scared for what will be here for my children and they are 3.

[ubrew12]

Your kids are gonna be FINE. It'll be ten years before this economy recovers and they'll be, what, 13? Perfect.

I fear the victims of this depression are somewhat older, kinda like the last one.

[speakinup22]

Recession is when your neighbor loses their job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama, Pelosi, and Harry loses their jobs.

[speakinup22]

Yeah ubrew will be there to help them. HA HA HA HA HA HA - NOT!
And neither will Mr Obama.

The Government has ALWAYS been inefficent, and THAT is why we don't want them to be in control of our money. Look at Social Security. Look at Medicare. FDR's spend policies did NOTHING to take us out of the depression in the 30s. WWII did that for us.

The recession will take care itself if left alone, most likely just as fast as barry spends our money on his "stimulus".

Do YOU know of anyone that has gotten a job because of the last stimulus ?

Recession is when your neighbor loses their job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama, Pelosi, and Harry loses their jobs.

[ubrew12]

Dude, totally looks like Pelosi with a mustache!

[ubrew12]

gulliberal is posting for all those folks who prefer witty one-liners to history. History is long, boring, subtle, and we're from the 'doomed to repeat it' party anyway. Hey, gulliberal: lets hear some more zingers! It sure beats thinking!

[pubsrtoast]

You Libs are total freak outs... Still continuing to scream "Republicans"... and "Bush"... Ye Gads!! That only goes just so far... It's time you get over that...


ROFLMAO! You have got to be kidding, we were hearing about Clinton up until the day before Obama became president elect.

[ubrew12]

Why don't we create a system of universal healthcare, single payer, like Canada, and call THAT the second stimulus. It'll free businesses and individuals from having to pay $400 to $1000 a month for cr*ppy healthcare and so improve everyones actual healthcare coverage that the lower medical bills alone would stimulate the economy.

Businesses and individuals who suddenly have an extra $400 to $1000 a month to spend per person would do a lot to stimulate our economy.

[speakinup22]

And you'll get something for nothing, right ?

Which the rest of us will have to pay for, thru the nose.

Why don't you move to Canada ?

[pubsrtoast]

Hey speakin stupid, I suppose you forgot about Hastert's "majority of the majority" rule. Try cracking open a book or newspaper once in a while.

[stn_sage]

This article does not make it clear exactly WHO is calling for a second stimulus, friend!

So, I based my comment on previous articles I have read about it--- in which a couple of Democrats were noted as having called for a second one!

Even in this article, it is stated administration officials are considering the possibiity!

So, now you now, from where my comments derive!

[CPelzar]

The first "stimulus" was not stimulus at all. That is why it has not worked and will not work period.

[pachak12]

They do not think like real people but I like that idea.

[WiseAsOwl]

You Libs are total freak outs... Still continuing to scream "Republicans"... and "Bush"... Ye Gads!! That only goes just so far... It's time you get over that... Meanwhile, your Messiah is getting everything he can while the getting is good. Face it!! He's a lying crook.. True.. He IS YOUR lying crook, but that doesn't mean you should defend him so vehemently... NO, NO, NO!! No more spending!! Somebody stop this freak... All the Liberals of the populace are doing is "freaking out" themselves... SO, they're absolutely NO HELP.... We're in trouble... We're drowning and your Messiah is trying to save us with lead life jackets... SOMEHOW, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK !!!! How are we going to do it?????????

[pubsrtoast]

You Libs are total freak outs... Still continuing to scream "Republicans"... and "Bush"... Ye Gads!! That only goes just so far... It's time you get over that...


ROFLMAO! You have got to be kidding, we were hearing about Clinton up until the day before Obama became president elect.

[speakinup22]

pubsrtoast - All things being relative - Obama is less popular than Bush at this point in his presidency. For some very good reasons.

Check them out if you care to be informed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html

[speakinup22]

pubsrtoast - All things being relative - Obama is less popular than Bush at this point in his presidency. For some very good reasons. Bush's popularity was still on the rise.

Check them out if you care to be informed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html


It will get you up off the floor from your laughing fit.

Barry is crashing like we said he'd do.

[speakinup22]

Amazing ! Paint a moustache on Pelosi in the picture above, and who does she look like ?

[ubrew12]

Dude, totally looks like Pelosi with a mustache!

[speakinup22]

"It's the REPUBLICANS who are calling for a second stimulus, they want the Democrats to craft a second stimulus bill so they can vote it down during 2010 and try to make some gains in congress. - tmittelstaed July 9, 2009 5:03 PM PDT


Uh, tmittelstaed, are you aware that Republicans had the right to offer bill requests taken away from them, by Ms Pelosi ?

Yeah, that's right. The Republicans allowed Democrats to offer bills in the HOR when they were in control, and Nancy changed the rules back when she got into power.

So stick it with your lies, will ya.

[pubsrtoast]

Hey speakin stupid, I suppose you forgot about Hastert's "majority of the majority" rule. Try cracking open a book or newspaper once in a while.

[speakinup22]

pubsrtoast - I stand corrected. I had been mislead by an earlier post.

I ALWAYS welcome the truth.

Your delivery could be somewhat improved, but it is truthful.

I STILL think Pelosi's spending is WAY out of line. What good will it do to spend to the point of inflating our money to possibly save the economy ?

[tincup356]

Remember what Ross Perot said years ago?..."It is time to take the shovel and clean the barn"....... He could have never been more right.But we didn't and look at all the ones that were there then and still there now,,,,greedy crooks who have betrayed the American people for personal gain by jumping in bed with the lobby dollar.BOTH parties should be banned from congress and placed in the same category as the Taliban,,,,,,a threat to America.

[tmittelstaed]

Ronald "deregulation" Raygun was the president that kicked off this deregulation nonsense back in 1980. That philosophy was responsible for (among many things) the Bell Telephone breakup that essentially took away public oversight on the phone companies and triggered 2 decades of horrendous customer service (they didn't start getting better until threatened by the cellular network). It also was responsible for the electrical energy disaster in California where the utilities were forced to sell their generators to separate companies who immediately jacked up prices and ended up raising CA utility bills. It also forced the courts to be the only avenue that the environmental lobby could exert over the out-of-control logging on the Western timber lands, and replaced a negotiated, sensible forest policy with 30 years of court orders. And it removed controls on the bankers and traders in the financial network and triggered the worst depression since the Great Depression.

There has never been any evidence that heavy regulation of industry reduced industrial economic activity. Quite the contrary - when the government sets standards for all businesses, then it creates a level playing field where no business can win by cheating - that's why we have food standards prohibiting lead in food, since the consequences of lifting regulation of the food industry is deadly. Regulation allows all businesses to have similar expenses for raw materials, and forces all businesses to follow similar handling practices and quality standards - with the result that prices are determined by which business are run most efficiently, and which businesses do the best R&D and produce new products that people want to buy - instead of things like who has the best distribution network, which is not a value-add for the consumer.

Sure, President Clinton was a Democrat after RayGun and his protege Bush. But Clinton was hamstrung by the circus over his getting a few BJ freebies from a perfectly willing adult who happened to not be his wife, and was also repeatedly attacked by fake charges during the whitewater investigation. And look at the long list of Republicans involved in sexual picadillos since Clinton, at least Clinton was playing around with another hetrosexual, in his own house - not like many of these Republican homosexuals who proposition young boys or people in public restrooms. To make the claim that Clinton was ever strong enough to stop the deregulation train is poppycock.

[tmittelstaed]

gulliberal you are a liar. Better to look like you're doing something than to debate a subject (a) you're clueless about, and (b)your best friend and former head of finance of your campaign had a hand in causing.

Phil "Americans are Whiners" Gramm inserted a 250-page rider into the 11,000-page "Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000" two days after Bush was appointed president on December 15, 2000, and on the very day that Congress was recessing for the holidays.

Senator Gramm''s rider became known as the "Enron Loophole," and it was directly responsible for the California energy crisis, the collapse of Enron, the unregulated and unmonitored trading of subprime mortgage packages as commodities, and the unprecedented rise in oil and grain prices experienced world-wide in late 2008 which in conjunction with the subprime mortgage trading triggered the 2008 financial collapse. Phil Gramm was McCain''s choice to be Secretary of the Treasury, thank God McCain lost the election.

Phil Gram went to work for Swiss-based UBS AG which pleaded guilty in Feb 19 2009 to assisting in creation of illegal overseas tax shelters, and paid a fine of 780 million dollars to the US Justice Dept.

Nothing like being elected to public office just so you can have legislation enacted that will benefit yourself, to the detriment of the rest of us. I wonder if Senator McCain and Phil Gramm still think our worries about the economy are "in our minds."

Check out the testimony of Michael Greenberger given before Congress early in 2008 to confirm the above info and if you really want to know exactly what''s wrong with our economy (it''s difficult, but important, reading): http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cong_test/27/

The Washington Post revealed that not only did the Bush administration do nothing to prevent the subprime mortgage crisis, it actually "embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye." When predatory lending practices became so prevalent five years ago that attorneys general in all 50 states started to take action against the banks responsible for the crisis, for the first time in its history Bush used the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency as a tool against consumers.

Some diligent lawyer in the administration dug up a clause from an 1863 banking act that gave the OCC the power to preempt all state predatory lending laws: "The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government''s actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules. But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks.

And because of spitzers allegations an investigation led to the resignation of Alphonse Jackson,Bush''s appointee to H.U.D. which by the way was the one who overseen the freddie mac and Fanny mae foundations.

The Wall Street Journal did report on a smaller example of the federal government''s active role in creating the crisis. Mark Maremont wrote that after the Federal Deposit Insurance Company seized the assets of Superior Bank FSB, then a national subprime lender based in Hinsdale, Illinois, the FDIC "continued to run the bank''s subprime mortgage business for months as it looked for a buyer. With FDIC people supervising day-to-day operations, Superior funded more than 6,700 new subprime loans worth more than $550 million, according to federal mortgage data."

"The FDIC then sold a big chunk of the loans to another bank. That loan pool was afflicted by the same problems for which regulators have faulted the industry: lending to unqualified borrowers, inflated appraisals, and poor verification of borrowers'' incomes, according to a written report from a government-hired expert. The report said that many of the loans never should have been made in the first place

And as far as the Republican's arguments that the Democrats were in control of the Congress in 2007/2008, think again. House control doesn't matter because a bill must be approved by BOTH houses to be sent to the President - who can then veto it anyway - to control congress you must have Senate control also. Well, 51 dems to 49 reps may be control in theory. But every time legislation on the part of the dems came up, the 41 republicans ran a filabuster and quashed the bill. Thus the theory of control is just that theory because a filabuster takes control away.