WASHINGTON, Dec. 17, 2008
Obama Stimulus Plan Could Hit $1 Trillion
Cash Infusion Would Be Carried Out Over 2-Year Period, Advisers Say
-
A stimulus package that approaches $1 trillion could run into significant Republican opposition in Congress. (AP)
-
In-Depth Q&A: Stimulating Ideas What's the best way to distribute funds of next economic stimulus package?
-
Timeline Barack Obama Key events in the life of the president-elect
The figure is far bigger than the $600 billion that Mr. Obama's team initially envisioned.
A number of economists, including former advisers to Republican presidential candidate John McCain, have suggested to Mr. Obama's team that the economy needs a much bigger cash infusion, possibly up to a $1 trillion over two years.
Mr. Obama's top economic advisers solicited the opinions as they worked to assemble a spending plan that would meet Mr. Obama's goal of saving or creating 2.5 million jobs over two years.
Mr. Obama advisers say his team has not settled on a figure. But the advice represents a far bigger sum than his advisers had considered.
Among those whose opinions Mr. Obama advisers sought were Lawrence B. Lindsey, a top economic adviser to President George W. Bush during his first term, and Harvard professor Martin Feldstein, an informal McCain adviser and former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Ronald Reagan.
Feldstein recommended a $400 billion investment in one year, Mr. Obama aides said. Lindsey told Mr. Obama's team that a package should be in the range of $800 billion to $1 trillion. The advisers revealed the discussions on the condition of anonymity because no decisions had been reached.
Mr. Obama's team has been spending the past several weeks reviewing economic data and consulting with experts to arrive at a dollar figure considered large enough to turn around the sinking economy. Many economists agree that an infusion of government spending is critical to get out of a recession.
Obama advisers say they agree with forecasts that predict that without a government infusion, unemployment will rise above 9 percent and not begin to come down until 2011.
Mr. Obama's economic team believes that to put unemployment on a downward trajectory with a goal of 7.5 percent or less over two years would require a stimulus package of about $850 billion.
A stimulus package that approaches $1 trillion, however, could run into significant Republican opposition in Congress. It also could cause heartburn for moderate and conservative Democratic lawmakers, known as Blue Dogs, who are budget hawks and loathe large budget deficits.
Mr. Obama has said he wants Congress to assemble a recovery package that includes massive spending on highway and bridge repairs and maintenance, new and upgraded schools, energy-efficient government buildings and a host of new environmentally friendly technologies.
This week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democrats are preparing a recovery bill in the range of $600 billion, blending immediate steps to counter the slumping economy with longer term federal spending that encompasses Mr. Obama's plan.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From Politics
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 8
- next
See all 150 CommentsThis lamebrain can''t even get sworn in before he has to plan on spending all that money he lied to you that he didn''t plan to spend.
ROFLMAO
This has proven the fact that white people are stupid
As everyone knew, these dems are BIG BIG spenders. They voted to blow 700 million on Wall St, now a Trillion on feel good public works projects. At the end they''ll borrow another trick from the Democrat playbook....just like their hero FDR they''ll put us into WWIII as a means of econobamic "stimulus".
The funniest will be when Federal Tax increases impact those below the 250k/yr annual level. This was the one thing that Obama swore on his honor that he would not violate.
We''ve been under Democrat rule since Jan 2007. How many here can truly say they are better off since Pelosi/Reid/Obama and company grabbed power? Personally, I''m lucky. I''m about the same. It doesn''t seem as though most are.
But then, we can take solace in knowing that Obama has had years of experience managing difficult economic time. I''ve heard that he can cure any ill by yelling "Yes We Can!" in energetic fashion!!! Thank God.
If the math is correct, why dont they just GIVE those 2.5 million people $50,000 per year over the next 8 years. It would end up costing LESS than 1 TRILLION dollars to do that since it is over an 8 year period. We should have a national lottery to get a chance to be one of the lucky 2.5 million.
This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of instrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money".
Executive Order 11110 gave the United States the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and real value worth something.
- President John F. Kennedy, 10 days before he was murdered.
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm
JFK vs. The Federal Reserve
On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Common Law Institute has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.
(The FED is acting in violation of present U.S. Law)
(as are ALL our Representatives in both Houses, the) (Judicial, and the Executive. All Federal Reserve) (Notes are unlawful.)
Seems someone knows something the rest of don''t.....
Why not $5 Trillion or $10 Trillion? After all, if government can MAGICALLY stimulate the economy with cash infusions, why not REALLY go for it?
For the economically illiterate out there, the government CANNOT ''stimulate'' part of the economy without DE-stimulating another part of the economy.
Government does NOT have its own money. It gets it all from those who actually work to earn it.
Thus, government ''stimulation'' will come at the expense of private sector DE-stimulation and the destruction of private sector jobs.
The politicians are selling you snake oil, and most of you are buying it.
Posted by ofbyfor3 at 10:22 PM : Dec 17, 2008
But he sure compromised his soul for Halliburton and his fat cronies.
President Bush:
When your own advisors warn you that you''re on the wrong course regarding the information they provided to you, but you ignore or redact their findings (Iraq, EPA, etc.)..., when you fail to provide transparency to the citizens about your meetings with oil executives to determine your future energy policies (which bled citizens with $4+ gas prices)...
...when you cannot answer an average American woman with 3 examples of where you made a mistake (or at least 1 example)--(2004 Bush/Kerry town hall debate)..., when you engage in an unnecessary war of convenience in Iraq, declare ''Mission Accomplished'' years before that war is even close to being won-- at the cost of more American lives than those who attacked us claimed...
...when you don''t care about the fact that you have a less than 20% approval rating (just ''polls'' after all), and your sympathies and policies show an obvious bias to the wealthy (your ''have more'' base), rather than to the working middle-class citizens of America, and the result is a total meltdown of your country...
...YES, sir, you HAVE compromised your soul!
Posted by jerr11
Fact: Time magazine found that 35% found it funny.
Posted by lopezf11 at 09:36 PM : Dec 17, 2008
Yeah, I''m sure they laughing their heads off at the tombstones of their loved ones.
You are one sick neocon.
16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
And I say to ye, that when the day of judgement comes, He will smite them down with his mighty sword.
Those that would bear false witness and kill innocent men and women for profit.
935 lies.
$3 trillion squandered.
4200 dead Americans.
George W Bush is an abomination to the Lord.
Son of Satan
Damned for All time!
Proverbs 6:16-19
16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
Like the Liar-in-Chief looking for those WMDs in the white house.
But those widows and orphans from his Iraq war don''''t find it so funny.
Posted by jerr11
Fact: Time magazine found that 35% found it funny.
Posted by jerr11
You are a fine gatherer of facts. Are there more?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 8
- next
See all 150 Comments