As Obama Signs $787 Billion Stimulus, the Question Is, Will it Work?

[SUPER JAM]

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...l-it-work.html

"I can't tell you for sure that everything in this plan will work exactly as we hope," he told the nation, "but I can tell you with complete confidence that a failure to act will only deepen this crisis."

In case if anyone really wants to take a look on how the funds are being distributed, Obama and his staff have set up the website : http://www.recovery.gov/

[Sundance Kid]

To answer you question "Will it work?"

We'll just have to wait and find out, at least he's focusing on the economy in a way.

[SUPER JAM]

Republicans didn't have much to do on stimulus package. They should sit down and shut the fuck up and let them work. They can't give any useful keys , but always make the nonsense objection. Instead of sitting and bitching about how the stimulus is gonna fail and still continue giving the idiot criticizes , WHY THEY DON'T OFFER SOME VALID AND APPRECIATED SUGGESTIONS. I strongly believe in Obama that he can do it! no matter how rough the track is. The world economic got hard fucked up gradually , so i hope this package will be effective.

[chaosblade77]

The main problem with a recession is the mindset that people get. "Oh crap, things are getting bad. I need to save money!"

Spending money is how you get out of a recession, because the more money is floating around, the more better off people are. If people are holding on to their money, that means businesses aren't making as much money, and that means they are going to make changes in order to remain profitable, which will very likely consist of layoffs.

That means they aren't going to have the money to spend like they did, meaning there's even less money floating around since fewer people are spending money, and it creates a cycle.

The goal of this "stimulus package" is to spend a bunch of money by putting people to work and creating jobs, meaning people will go back and spend the money they make and dump it back into the economy.


Of course, we don't live in a perfect world and things are bound to go wrong, money will surely be wasted, but the general idea behind the bill is right. Now the question becomes: How well executed is it? It's supposed to be transparent so we can see everything that's going on, but given these are politicians we are dealing with, it's hard to trust everything they say.

Edit: I think one of the first things that needs to happen is that American CEOs need to take some massive paycuts, considering they make something like 10x more than CEOs elsewhere in the world on average, compared to typical employees.

If even 50% of CEOs pay was divided between other workers in a company, people would have a lot more money to spend, which would be a huge benefit for the economy. The massive upper-class/middle class division we have now helps nothing and hurts everything.

[boomiko]

is it going to work? no not directly.
what it will do is give companies money and then force them to pay it back later. and when that later comes its just going to put those companies back into debt and we'll be back to were we started. also some companies wont be able to return the money back making them in debt to the government making the government more in debt to china and other countries we're borrowing money from. and this wont be the last bill they pass. i expect around 2-3 trillion dollars worth of government spending on this "stimulus" this year. but thats just a guess and i dont truly know the future.

but i do hope it works in the sense that people step out of their saving frenzy and reignite the dying companies and businesses, not with a government stimulus, but with people working and paying for stuff in cash.

[sobchack]

no one knows, but it sure beats doing nothing i guess

[SUPER JAM]

Honestly , i mean how much percent it's gonna be effective for their remedy. Toyota Prius.....fuck off (at least it's still better than chevy). The first and the last points have possibility for almost every people for sure. But 2nd and 3rd just require more hard works and the brilliantness of Obama to make 100% comes true.


What the Stimulus Bill Will Do For You


As President Obama signs the $787 billion stimulus package into law today, you might be wondering: What's in it for me? Well, it turns out there are a few programs that could end up changing your spending habits. Here are four ways the bill could affect you:

• You might keep more of your money. Most people will receive a tax credit of $400 (or $800 for married couples). The credit begins phasing out for anyone earning over $75,000 ($150,000 for couples).

• You might buy a home. Anyone in the market for their first home this year is eligible to receive an $8,000 tax credit. Exceptions: Anyone earning over $75,000 ($150,000 for married couples).

• Or perhaps a car: If you've had your eye on a new Toyota Prius, now might be the time to act. The stimulus bill lets you count the sales tax as a tax deduction on auto purchases up to $49,500. (Again, the deal doesn't apply to high-earners. It phases out for anyone earning more than $125,000 or couples earning over $250,000.)

• It will be cheaper to use public transportation. Workers can put up to $230 in pre-tax dollars towards the cost of commuting by train, bus, or carpool. (That amount pushes up the previous cap of $120.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

i expect around 2-3 trillion dollars worth of government spending on this "stimulus" this year. but thats just a guess and i dont truly know the future.

2-3 trillion? Now they got pissed off because of the $700 billion bailout Obama inherited from President George W. Bush, half of which is already spent.

And also :
The Treasury Department plan has three main components: more cash for banks (with more strings attached), financing for as much as $1 trillion in consumer and business loans, and government backing for investors willing to buy up toxic assets.

They must focus more on tax cutting , not the spending. And i think 2-3 trillion is too much for the spending plan , it causes the damn deficit budget. Yep , they're gonna push more money supply to the banks , and it's the time for speculators to sell up unvaluable assets. The policy makers should reform all of regulations about the mortgages , energy markets , employment ,etc; I mean like Obama said that it's not only the ordinary crisis , but it's fucking worst damage.

what it will do is give companies money and then force them to pay it back later. and when that later comes its just going to put those companies back into debt and we'll be back to were we started.

That's also the reason why they should reform the regulation on investment system. But as we come so far , they should concern about the security of tax payers in the first place.

[boomiko]

Originally Posted by Cynthia

2-3 trillion? Now they got pissed off because of the $700 billion bailout Obama inherited from President George W. Bush, half of which is already spent.

And also :
The Treasury Department plan has three main components: more cash for banks (with more strings attached), financing for as much as $1 trillion in consumer and business loans, and government backing for investors willing to buy up toxic assets.

They must focus more on tax cutting , not the spending. And i think 2-3 trillion is too much for the spending plan , it causes the damn deficit budget. Yep , they're gonna push more money supply to the banks , and it's the time for speculators to sell up unvaluable assets. The policy makers should reform all of regulations about the mortgages , energy markets , employment ,etc; I mean like Obama said that it's not only the ordinary crisis , but it's fucking worst damage.
.

true that the bill was created in bush's term but who pushed the creation of the bill? was it obama and the democratic party? i think they had a pretty big part in this.

2-3 trillion is a lot of money and it may be a little exagerated for his 1st term but i would still hold strong on it being 1.5-2.5 trillion. when obama and his buddies see that this 1st pakage didn't do much theyre going to say "i guess we didn't put enough money into this, how about another 800billion just for the record, eh nancy(pelozi if you dont get it)?"

with tax cutting. explain this to me: the government spends more money=lower taxes... now im scratchin my head at this one and well its just plain wrong. what is actually going to happen is: government spends more money=higher taxes

now what obama will do is tax big companies and rich people. now tell me this: which supplies more jobs to american workers, big companies with low taxes or big comanies with taxes so high that they have to use one hand to keep their head on their shoulders(this is a metaphor were "hands" are providable jobs and the "head" is falling of becuase of guillotine like taxes.) the truth is that americans depend on big companies for their jobs from everything from shipping to distribution and when those companies cant afford to pay taxes with their previous budget they will cut workers.

what if specualators dont want to sell their "unvaluable assets"? it is a free market you know

and i find it interesting that you think obama is some sort of a cross between einstein and merlin but in a world of politics. he is the commander in chief of our army and probably hasn't done so much as played a war based video game in his entire life. but his solid 2 years in the senate definately qualifies him for being the smartest president. but if that doesn't convince you why dont u look at his work at harvord... oh wait you can't!!! wow i forgot, silly me.. well we'll just have to put this out on a limb

im not saying that mcain was a better choice. maybe in a time of war but not for the economy. obama is very good at speeches and such so i just have to listen to what he says and weigh the possible outcomes and consequences. what america really needs is a strong military leader, who knows how the economy runs, can act independently of his party( that means no "partisan" or "bi-partisan", and can unify americans in their homes.
(btw: this is my longest ever post!)

[SUPER JAM]

Originally Posted by boomiko

true that the bill was created in bush's term but who pushed the creation of the bill? was it obama and the democratic party? i think they had a pretty big part in this.

Geithner's plan , and he was blamed by many investors that:
"As such, Geithner's plan was effectively a makeover - and aggressive expansion - of the $700 billion bailout Obama inherited from President George W. Bush, half of which is already spent." Because the plan just lacks of the details and it makes true valuation tough. And at least they come to the right track about the spending , they have to spend more to stimulate economy , not for the blowing shit in Iraq.

with tax cutting. explain this to me: the government spends more money=lower taxes... now im scratchin my head at this one and well its just plain wrong. what is actually going to happen is: government spends more money=higher taxes

It's gonna be the lower tax. But as in the case of the spending , it has to come through the process of domestic production power (more US own products , so it can improve the balance of payment). Obama said the tax reduction policy will be accomplished on April 1. The employees will be paid back from the tax reduction and the family will be paid back by cheque every month for $65 per month. This system will help americans 95% , and it's the most speed-up system which never happened before on tax reduction history in US.

now what obama will do is tax big companies and rich people. now tell me this: which supplies more jobs to american workers, big companies with low taxes or big comanies with taxes so high that they have to use one hand to keep their head on their shoulders(this is a metaphor were "hands" are providable jobs and the "head" is falling of becuase of guillotine like taxes.) the truth is that americans depend on big companies for their jobs from everything from shipping to distribution and when those companies cant afford to pay taxes with their previous budget they will cut workers.

They focus on the big structure first to stimulate the economic system's efficiency and to repair the banks. It just deals with the investment security. But as you said , the tax cutting does not apply to the very very rich people. But they not gonna tax more on big companies , they also spend to cure those companies. At least they gonna do something for monetary policy section for sure too. The percent of employees is not the main target , i think. It's just the detail. And of course , if the big figure is successful so they can push people back into jobs. I think it's just the concept of expansionary fiscal policy.

what if specualators dont want to sell their "unvaluable assets"? it is a free market you know

Yeah.........it ups to their choices. But now government is willing to buy up the toxic assets.

and i find it interesting that you think obama is some sort of a cross between einstein and merlin but in a world of politics. he is the commander in chief of our army and probably hasn't done so much as played a war based video game in his entire life. but his solid 2 years in the senate definately qualifies him for being the smartest president.

No , he's not magic. And also there're still some people who don't accept him much because of silly reasons. But of course it's their personal matters and it can't take the damn at all. Btw the coward president and the brave president....who do you prefer? at least no one is perfect by the nature , and he's very confident and brave enough to say "I screwed up". People need the confident leader who's worth trusting enough to secure them from this damn crisis. And Obama is man enough to admit when he screws up. Not the coward who screwed up countless times but not man enough to admit it.

but if that doesn't convince you why dont u look at his work at harvord... oh wait you can't!!! wow i forgot, silly me.. well we'll just have to put this out on a limb

I think harvard is not the vital matter. It's not important at all to follow the fixed theory , the practical way is different and more tough.

im not saying that mcain was a better choice. maybe in a time of war but not for the economy.

just forget about him....the only thing he can do best is sitting and bitching about how stimulus is gonna fail and continue giving the idiot criticizes which are not the valid suggestions at all.

obama is very good at speeches and such so i just have to listen to what he says and weigh the possible outcomes and consequences. what america really needs is a strong military leader, who knows how the economy runs, can act independently of his party( that means no "partisan" or "bi-partisan", and can unify americans in their homes.
(btw: this is my longest ever post!

But Geithner is the badass , he's tax cheater and he fakes about the theorical plan. I think should remove him from this position.
And i need MScE people or BA Econ to explain and tell the cool opinion about this topic! ToT And very thank you for your collaboration , boomiko , you have the smart idea!




I think they have to spend more on production of goods and services , especially automakers. Because it's just damn deficit balance of payment. And chevy sucks.

[boomiko]

Originally Posted by Cynthia

No , he's not magic. And also there're still some people who don't accept him much because of silly reasons. But of course it's their personal matters and it can't take the damn at all. Btw the coward president and the brave president....who do you prefer? at least no one is perfect by the nature , and he's very confident and brave enough to say "I screwed up". People need the confident leader who's worth trusting enough to secure them from this damn crisis. And Obama is man enough to admit when he screws up. Not the coward who screwed up countless times but not man enough to admit it.
.

You really are hopeless. by "coward president" i assume you mean bush and thats the opposite of what he is. he may be stupid, but hes got balls. he goes and fights the war in the middle east. 1. he goes out their to protect the civillians their cuz of his morals, despite the press and just about every democrat hating him and calling him stupid. 2. its in the terrorist "hotspot" making him a hit for terrorist assasination.

and with being able to own up to mistakes, i believe obama has stated that he believes the surge in the middle east was a failure, even though it was very succesful, and still says it was a failure to this day. it was a mistake he made and is so hopped up on being right and perfect, that he cant admit that he was wrong(watch the oreilly factor obama interview.)

[Nagase]

Originally Posted by boomiko

You really are hopeless. by "coward president" i assume you mean bush and thats the opposite of what he is. he may be stupid, but hes got balls. he goes and fights the war in the middle east. 1. he goes out their to protect the civillians their cuz of his morals, despite the press and just about every democrat hating him and calling him stupid. 2. its in the terrorist "hotspot" making him a hit for terrorist assasination.

No, the men FIGHTING in the war have balls while he laughs his ass off.

Bush is an utter asshole who tells more lies to the people of his own country than any other president ever will. He deserves the death sentence for the shit he's pulled.

Anyway, the entire war is pointless. Especially gtfo of Iraq imo, we have no need to be there.

[Azure Presul]

Originally Posted by Nagase

No, the men FIGHTING in the war have balls while he laughs his ass off.

Bush is an utter asshole who tells more lies to the people of his own country than any other president ever will. He deserves the death sentence for the shit he's pulled.

Anyway, the entire war is pointless. Especially gtfo of Iraq imo, we have no need to be there.

Couldn't agree more.

[boomiko]

Originally Posted by Nagase

No, the men FIGHTING in the war have balls while he laughs his ass off.

so true, GO ARMY!

[Misschoco]

Originally Posted by boomiko

You really are hopeless. by "coward president" i assume you mean bush and thats the opposite of what he is. he may be stupid, but hes got balls. he goes and fights the war in the middle east. 1. he goes out their to protect the civillians their cuz of his morals, despite the press and just about every democrat hating him and calling him stupid. 2. its in the terrorist "hotspot" making him a hit for terrorist assasination.

And how exactly did he fight the war in the middle east directly? He wasnt on front lines and if he was Proofz please.He has balls but only in a physical sense.I dont think anyone could surpass how manipulative he was and his lack of articulacy compared to obama im not even going to discuss.

About the bill-Im not gona analyse everything and speculate of whether it'll be successful or not its just something we have to wait and see the outcome of.

[NEALBLEWMEONCE]

Seriously, there's so much glibness/bad info/confusion in this thread it would probably take 3+ hours just to straighten out half of what's been said!

You guys think government spending is the answer, huh?






When have government stimulus packages ever worked? Seriously, show me a clear-cut example!

Maybe we should look at the $900,000,000,000 worth of stimulus packages Japan tried in the nineties?

Result: Massive corruption, waste, and all they had to show for it was a mountain of debt and some public works projects that look suspiciously like bridges to nowhere!


I am diametrically opposed to this stuff on principle. As most people probably would be if they understood the long-term ramifications.


That being said, I can see the need for republican opposition to either get behind the plan or get the hell out of the way so they can ram it through as fast as possible.


History/economics teaches us that if you're going to go the stimulus route you're best chance, theoretically, would be to go hard, fast and deep!

Originally Posted by Misschoco

About the bill-Im not gona analyse everything and speculate of whether it'll be successful or not its just something we have to wait and see the outcome of.

^ You're right, years down the road we'll be able to see the full effect (or ineffectivness) of this stuff, and we'll still have a fat debt staring us in the face with not much to show for it! It'll be too damn late!





P.S.:

Originally Posted by Nagase

No, the men FIGHTING in the war have balls while he laughs his ass off.

Bush is an utter asshole who tells more lies to the people of his own country than any other president ever will. He deserves the death sentence for the shit he's pulled.

Anyway, the entire war is pointless. Especially gtfo of Iraq imo, we have no need to be there.

^ This sounds semi-sarcastic/trollish. Are you serious? What the hell is this shit?

[Nagase]

^ This sounds semi-sarcastic/trollish. Are you serious? What the hell is this shit?

Stop waving your American flag dickshit. Watch something called loose change and then you'll understand. Wanker.

Oh and yes, before you say it, governments DO lie to their people, especially BUSH.

[Dream Machine]

Originally Posted by Koronzen

When have government stimulus packages ever worked? Seriously, show me a clear-cut example!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_deal

It's never clear-cut because the economy is complex, so a simple solution is never gonna make everything all fine and dandy. But only very silly people would think that the New Deal did nothing.

[NEALBLEWMEONCE]

@ Nagase: What you posted (including your sig, BTW) was so offensively dumb I assumed you were joking. Sorry for giving you the benefit of doubt.

Somehow you got the idea that because I was shocked at the fucking immature, Zach de la Rocha-esque lunacy you posted (including your sig), I must be a big fan/supporter/apologist of George W. Bush, which I'm not.

I am, however, an American citizen who's very proud of his country. Don't like that? Tough noogies. Dickshit.

Originally Posted by Nagase

He deserves the death sentence for the shit he's pulled.

^ Sorry, the whole 'war crimes'->'death sentence' wet dream thing just ain't gonna happen.

But look on the bright side, I'm sure there are other guys like you who splooge at the very thought of the man being put to death/tortured.

You should form a support group and get the fuck over it. Wanker.

Originally Posted by Nagase

Oh and yes, before you say it, governments DO lie to their people, especially BUSH.

^ Governments LIE to their people? You don't say! And here I was going around thinking my government was an open book!

Any other words of wisdom you want to share, fuckface?

Originally Posted by Nagase

Watch something called loose change and then you'll understand.

^ No thanks.

I haven't seen this, but I have seen Terror Storm, been to the whackjob conspiracy websites and done the fact-checking for myself (something you should seriously consider).

Personally, I could think of a million better things to do with my time than listening to some tweaked out filmmaker's fever dream of government conspiracies.

Originally Posted by Nagase

Anyway, the entire war is pointless. Especially gtfo of Iraq imo, we have no need to be there.

^ I was going to argue with you about this, but judging from the other deeply ignorant/idiotic stuff you wrote, I seriously doubt it would do any good.

Originally Posted by Dream Machine

It's never clear-cut because the economy is complex

^ By 'clear-cut' I don't mean simple. I mean clearly demonstrable. As in give me one example in recorded history where a government has been able to effectively control its economic cycles by mass spending during slumps.

Originally Posted by Dream Machine

But only very silly people would think that the New Deal did nothing.

^ It did something alright, there's no disputing that. Some of it was actually good. Most of it was not so good.

Whether it pulled us out of the Depression (or blunted recovery) is something an untold number of economists have debated/written about and there's still no clear resolution.

It's an interesting comparison/connection though.

You'd think market confidence would be soaring, considering the massive government 'rescue' about to take place. I wonder what the reason could be?

[Nagase]

Originally Posted by Koronzen

@ Nagase: What you posted (including your sig, BTW) was so offensively dumb I assumed you were joking. Sorry for giving you the benefit of doubt.

Somehow you got the idea that because I was shocked at the fucking immature, Zach de la Rocha-esque lunacy you posted (including your sig), I must be a big fan/supporter/apologist of George W. Bush, which I'm not.

I am, however, an American citizen who's very proud of his country. Don't like that? Tough noogies. Dickshit.


^ Sorry, the whole 'war crimes'->'death sentence' wet dream thing just ain't gonna happen.

But look on the bright side, I'm sure there are other guys like you who splooge at the very thought of the man being put to death/tortured.

You should form a support group and get the fuck over it. Wanker.


^ Governments LIE to their people? You don't say! And here I was going around thinking my government was an open book!

Any other words of wisdom you want to share, fuckface?


^ No thanks.

I haven't seen this, but I have seen Terror Storm, been to the whackjob conspiracy websites and done the fact-checking for myself (something you should seriously consider).

Personally, I could think of a million better things to do with my time than listening to some tweaked out filmmaker's fever dream of government conspiracies.


^ I was going to argue with you about this, but judging from the other deeply ignorant/idiotic stuff you wrote, I seriously doubt it would do any good.





^ By 'clear-cut' I don't mean simple. I mean clearly demonstrable. As in give me one example in recorded history where a government has been able to effectively control its economic cycles by mass spending during slumps.


^ It did something alright, there's no disputing that. Some of it was actually good. Most of it was not so good.

Whether it pulled us out of the Depression (or blunted recovery) is something an untold number of economists have debated/written about and there's still no clear resolution.

It's an interesting comparison/connection though.

You'd think market confidence would be soaring, considering the massive government 'rescue' about to take place. I wonder what the reason could be?

I sense you're getting angry?

Go be a blind patriotic drone now, go on. Gooood booooy! ;D

(I love how the internet has a picture for every situation.)

I haven't seen this, but I have seen Terror Storm, been to the whackjob conspiracy websites and done the fact-checking for myself (something you should seriously consider).

Spoiler:

I haven't seen this

done the fact-checking for myself

I haven't seen this

done the fact-checking for myself

I haven't seen this

done the fact-checking for myself

[Zezlar]

Yes we can!