Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary
I would disagree. This is a social programs bill cloaked in a simulus package. You are only talking about smalll portions of the bill. Many jobs are not expected to be created for over 4 years from now. How the hell does that help the millions of poor sods out of work NOW? The failure of the Demoncratically controlled Congress for the last two years, you know, that body of government that controls the purse string of our economy, has screwed this up royally. Erase the BS pork and I will support the bill completely. Currently a group of Congressmen from both parties have finally called a truce are are trying to do the right thing, those people are the real workers for the people. Good on them.
|
Gee Merc, I know you are smarter than this, and trying to blame this on democrats, who have been completely powerless, even though they had a
small majority for the past two years, is fucking insane, and you KNOW it is insane.
It works like this: if people aren't spending money, because they've lost their jobs, or they're afraid of losing their jobs, then companies and businesses lose money. They can't keep producing things (or buying things to supply to people) because people aren't buying. So, businesses continue to lay people off, or worse, they close their doors. If NO ONE is buying anything, then the government can help by pumping money into the economy. If it's in the form of food stamps or unemployment, there is a return of something like $1.75 for every dollar spent (according to Moody's). If it's in the form of tax cuts, it's more like .50 on the dollar (or less), give or take, depending on what kind of tax cut it is (I believe there was one tax that would actually help, but I can't remember what it was called). Giving money to poor people or lower income people puts money into the economy more than giving it to anyone else, because they will spend it. They have to. Middle class people (or wealthier people) are more likely to save it, which isn't usually a bad thing, but at the moment, we need people to buy things. Otherwise, more jobs are lost. Giving the money to states (which many are broke or nearly broke) will ultimately help save jobs, because they are having to cut their budgets, which means laying off people like cops and teachers (hello! education spending! which repubs want to cut out of the bill). But republicans don't want to give money to the states either. They don't want to give money to fund education. They don't want ANY spending. All they want is friggin' tax cuts for the wealthy. The truth is, spending DOES stimulate the economy, no matter what form it takes.
I have a question for all those republicans who think government should play no part in anything, and that government should be kept really, really small, what the hell are you doing in a job that has no place in society? I mean really, they want to get rid of almost all government, hey, them first.