Democrat NO Check on Power in Senate: Stimulus to GROW even bigger

Darla, I don't want to pick a fight on this, and I won't. You're dwarfing me on rep points, anyway.

I am genuinely curious, though; what has Obama done on the stimulus that has been any sort of major concession to the GOP? I just checked around some news sites, and can't find anything I would consider very significant, but I concede that I may have missed some piece of news on this...
 
Onceler said:
Darla, I don't want to pick a fight on this, and I won't. You're dwarfing me on rep points, anyway.

I am genuinely curious, though; what has Obama done on the stimulus that has been any sort of major concession to the GOP? I just checked around some news sites, and can't find anything I would consider very significant, but I concede that I may have missed some piece of news on this...
Click to expand...

Okay. I think he made his first mistake by including the tax cuts right off. I know you are going to say, well he ran on them. Okay, fine, I don't think he ran on all of them, but that's okay. It's not really the point. You don't enter a negotiation having already met the other party half way. That's just stupid. You don't do that when you are negotiating a raise. Why would you do it on this? You have to have something to give up, to look as if you are negotiating. If you've already negotiated, before the negotiations start, then the other party does't view it that way. They view it as, wow, our starting point is a lot better than we thought it would be. Then, the negotiations start. Now, you're behind the 8-ball.

Further, when the bill went to the Senate, the Senate added some 70 billion I believe, in tax cuts. It was to fix the AMT, which is all well and good, and which I'm not necessarily against, however, it should not be part of the stimulus package. Far, far, worse than any of this, the republicans have been allowed to succesfully define this bill as a spending bill. This is very, very bad. Look at Dano right here - Democrats spending 900 billion dollas. Except they're not. Much of that is in tax cuts. So Republicans have set up a situation where additional tax cuts they add, are called "democratic spending". They have stolen the fact that they destroyed this economy and Americans need this bill. And they've turned it into the old narrative of tax and spend democrats. Further, they never thought they could kill this bill! But to their surprise, their narrative is working, and they've become emboldened. Now you have Mitch McConnell telling the media that Democratic Senators don't want the bill and they dont have the votes. And you have Obama saying he'll agree to more cuts in spending in the bill. When they talk about cuts in spending in the bill, that's when the tax cuts in it, aren't spending! Snowe is trying to cut 200 billion of it! WTF are we going to be left with? They're setting him up with a bill that won't work, and then they'll defeat him on it.

A party which had been thoroughly discredited, and for good reasons, has managed to completely empower themselves, act as if the past 8 years never happened, and portray themselves as the fiscal grown ups.

And Obama has let them, and I think he let them because of this stupid, bipartisan bullshit. Do the republicans look like they're playing that? No. And they never will. And if only one side plays it, then that's called, surrender.

Because they were able to get away with this, I don't think we'll get health care. And this was our last shot at that one.
 
evince said:
I think hes playing them.

They will push it too far.

Just watch em, they always do.
Click to expand...

I want to believe that Obama is smarter than everyone and he's got a plan, too. But at this point, it's just foolish to believe that. I used to believe that about Bill Clinton.

Then, knowing that every Republican scum in the country was sniffing his underwear daily, he went and got a blow job from a 22 year old girl.

That's when I realized that nobody is really that smart.
 
Okay, I guess we are going to argue.

Yes, he did campaign on tax cuts, and they have been a part of the stimulus proposal from the start, as they should be. A stimulus bill needs to create jobs & put money in people's pockets, and the intention was always to have a combination of tax breaks, incentives & real spending.

Second, why is that the left is allowing them to be defined by conservatives as the side that "must keep taxes high?" I know of very few economists who think that higher taxes are any kind of answer during these kinds of economic circumstances. It's almost as though some on the left think opposing any kind of tax cut is some kind of "principle," just as many on the right think it's a principle to oppose any environmental measure. These are knee-jerk responses that have nothing to do with philosophy, but which have been defined for those responding.

"The Republicans have been allowed to successfully define this as a spending bill" - I don't even know what that means. Because Limbaugh says so? And the fact is, there is plenty of spending in it. I don't see what this has to do with Obama, the admin or the proposal itself.

Frankly, as I have said before, I like this approach. There is such broad disagreement on what will work, I have generally supported trying everything - spending, tax cuts, incentives, the works.

And, as far as I know, the Senate is voting on the bill tomorrow, and I haven't seen anything that I would consider significant that Obama has done to it to try to "woo" the GOP. Ulitmately, they're voting on a bill that the right is going to hate.

I don't get your reaction, at all. I can't see anything that the admin had done in the past few days or weeks to get you to react this way, say BAC was right, say Obama was a mistake, and say that we're screwed now because of some sort of dramatic change that was made to this bill. The package is still essentially what it was.
 
Onceler said:
Okay, I guess we are going to argue.

Yes, he did campaign on tax cuts, and they have been a part of the stimulus proposal from the start, as they should be. A stimulus bill needs to create jobs & put money in people's pockets, and the intention was always to have a combination of tax breaks, incentives & real spending.

Second, why is that the left is allowing them to be defined by conservatives as the side that "must keep taxes high?" I know of very few economists who think that higher taxes are any kind of answer during these kinds of economic circumstances. It's almost as though some on the left think opposing any kind of tax cut is some kind of "principle," just as many on the right think it's a principle to oppose any environmental measure. These are knee-jerk responses that have nothing to do with philosophy, but which have been defined for those responding.

"The Republicans have been allowed to successfully define this as a spending bill" - I don't even know what that means. Because Limbaugh says so? And the fact is, there is plenty of spending in it. I don't see what this has to do with Obama, the admin or the proposal itself.

Frankly, as I have said before, I like this approach. There is such broad disagreement on what will work, I have generally supported trying everything - spending, tax cuts, incentives, the works.

And, as far as I know, the Senate is voting on the bill tomorrow, and I haven't seen anything that I would consider significant that Obama has done to it to try to "woo" the GOP. Ulitmately, they're voting on a bill that the right is going to hate.

I don't get your reaction, at all. I can't see anything that the admin had done in the past few days or weeks to get you to react this way, say BAC was right, say Obama was a mistake, and say that we're screwed now because of some sort of dramatic change that was made to this bill. The package is still essentially what it was.
Click to expand...

Ok, then we'll just have to disagree.
 
Darla said:
I want to believe that Obama is smarter than everyone and he's got a plan, too. But at this point, it's just foolish to believe that. I used to believe that about Bill Clinton.

Then, knowing that every Republican scum in the country was sniffing his underwear daily, he went and got a blow job from a 22 year old girl.

That's when I realized that nobody is really that smart.
Click to expand...


Any funny looking 50 something man like Clinton who can get a 22 year old girl to give him a blowjob must be pretty smart.
 
Darla said:
I want to believe that Obama is smarter than everyone and he's got a plan, too. But at this point, it's just foolish to believe that. I used to believe that about Bill Clinton.

Then, knowing that every Republican scum in the country was sniffing his underwear daily, he went and got a blow job from a 22 year old girl.

That's when I realized that nobody is really that smart.
Click to expand...

Bill Clinton lost the congress after just two years, Obama is trying to avoid that. Hes going to reach out to them and allow them to think they have him twisted arround their finger. They will PUSH TO HARD like they Always do and will lose the public sentiment. Its coming, be patient.
 
Darla said:
Oh yeah, the most powerful man in the world would need to be smart to get a 22 year old. Or maybe not! :)
Click to expand...

Maybe thats the sole reason he became the most powerfull man in the world. So he could get a blowjob from a 22 year old once again. Maybe he never got one when he himself was 22.

Its a good thing I got my share when I was 22, or I might be Emperor by now.
 
evince said:
Bill Clinton lost the congress after just two years, Obama is trying to avoid that. Hes going to reach out to them and allow them to think they have him twisted arround their finger. They will PUSH TO HARD like they Always do and will lose the public sentiment. Its coming, be patient.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately Desh, from what I have been reading, polling is showing that the stimulus is becoming less and less popular with the American people.

So actually, it's working. And whatever Obama's plan is, is not working.
 
Well, in case anyone is interested, here is what Obama has had to say on the stimulus as of late yesterday:

“Let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the essential,” Obama said while acknowledging criticisms of the plan. “A failure to act and to act now will turn crisis into catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession.”

He took issue with Republican complaints that the plan doesn’t include enough tax cuts and has too many long-term initiatives that won’t quickly boost the economy.

“These criticisms echo the very same failed economic theories that led us into this crisis in the first place -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems, that we can ignore fundamental challenges like energy independence,” Obama said. “I reject those theories -- and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aj.gxocTEf9k&refer=home

The article goes on to say that both Republican & Democrat lawmakers are suggesting all kinds of changes, but that Obama has not committed to anything yet...
 
Onceler said:
Well, in case anyone is interested, here is what Obama has had to say on the stimulus as of late yesterday:

“Let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the essential,” Obama said while acknowledging criticisms of the plan. “A failure to act and to act now will turn crisis into catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession.”

He took issue with Republican complaints that the plan doesn’t include enough tax cuts and has too many long-term initiatives that won’t quickly boost the economy.

“These criticisms echo the very same failed economic theories that led us into this crisis in the first place -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems, that we can ignore fundamental challenges like energy independence,” Obama said. “I reject those theories -- and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aj.gxocTEf9k&refer=home

The article goes on to say that both Republican & Democrat lawmakers are suggesting all kinds of changes, but that Obama has not committed to anything yet...
Click to expand...


I know, I saw that. I think it's too little too late, but we'll see.
 
Onceler said:
Okay, I guess we are going to argue.

Yes, he did campaign on tax cuts, and they have been a part of the stimulus proposal from the start, as they should be. A stimulus bill needs to create jobs & put money in people's pockets, and the intention was always to have a combination of tax breaks, incentives & real spending.

Second, why is that the left is allowing them to be defined by conservatives as the side that "must keep taxes high?" I know of very few economists who think that higher taxes are any kind of answer during these kinds of economic circumstances. It's almost as though some on the left think opposing any kind of tax cut is some kind of "principle," just as many on the right think it's a principle to oppose any environmental measure. These are knee-jerk responses that have nothing to do with philosophy, but which have been defined for those responding.

"The Republicans have been allowed to successfully define this as a spending bill" - I don't even know what that means. Because Limbaugh says so? And the fact is, there is plenty of spending in it. I don't see what this has to do with Obama, the admin or the proposal itself.

Frankly, as I have said before, I like this approach. There is such broad disagreement on what will work, I have generally supported trying everything - spending, tax cuts, incentives, the works.

And, as far as I know, the Senate is voting on the bill tomorrow, and I haven't seen anything that I would consider significant that Obama has done to it to try to "woo" the GOP. Ulitmately, they're voting on a bill that the right is going to hate.

I don't get your reaction, at all. I can't see anything that the admin had done in the past few days or weeks to get you to react this way, say BAC was right, say Obama was a mistake, and say that we're screwed now because of some sort of dramatic change that was made to this bill. The package is still essentially what it was.
Click to expand...


1. It was fine for Obama to include some tax cuts in the original proposal, but many, many, many economists argued that the 40% of the bill that was tax cuts was way too much to begin with. And that's before any horse-trading with Republicans. Tax cuts aren't good stimulus in most instances. if you want stimulus, create a stimulus bill, not a tax cut bill.

2. No one is talking about higher taxes or keeping taxes high. And frankly, the fact that there is so much goddamned focus on tax cuts in discussion a stimulus bill is quite telling considering that practically everyone agrees that tax cuts do not provide much short-term economic stimulus. It's not knee-jerk to oppose tax cuts in a stimulus bill. It is based on pretty much textbook macro-economics. The tax cut claptrap is based on Republican snake oil horseshit. it's their answer to everything. And now we're getting more of it even though it will not work.

3. There isn't broad disagreement about what works among economists. There just isn't. There is broad agreement that government spending is what is needed. There may be broad disagreement about what to spend money on and how much, but there is no broad disagreement among policy experts about whether spending or tax cuts work better as stimulus measures. Again, the fact that you suggest there is such a disagreement reveals that the Republicans are dominating the Democrats on this. (And I don't solely blame Obama for this. Democrats have been totally MIA).

4. What we're going to end up with is a shitty bill with lots of tax cuts that won't work very well that almost zero Republicans will vote for. So it ends up a bill that the Democrats own by themselves but that they did not create.
 
"there is no broad disagreement among policy experts about whether spending or tax cuts work better as stimulus measures"

I was wrong on that one; you are correct. There isn't really debate on that aspect. However, every single economist I have heard or read agrees that some degree of tax cuts & incentives should be a part of this package. The debate is on the level, and you may be right that it is too high at the moment.

Still, the package is essentially what it was in the beginning. I have not really seen any major capitulation to the GOP; they are setting the tone right now, because they're out in the press, and the media is picking fights with Limbaugh, and that's just how coverage is in America. Still, the bill they vote on is going to be much, much closer to the original proposal than to anything the GOP is suggesting.

Still, that won't stop a flurry of threads on Monday with the theme of "Obama caved to them, and they still voted against it!"
 
Using all methods at our disposal to their best effect is just fine. Obama can have a fireside chat with the people here in a few days. He can tell them straight form his perspective how he has tried to include the republicans and how they wont come to his social gatherings designed to spur bipartisanship and refuse to sign even when they make concessions to try to please them. Hes going to pull the rug out from underneath them when the time comes. They are going to find themselves in the wilderness soon if they dont step up to the line when its time to play for the team and not just for the defense.
 
Onceler said:
"there is no broad disagreement among policy experts about whether spending or tax cuts work better as stimulus measures"

I was wrong on that one; you are correct. There isn't really debate on that aspect. However, every single economist I have heard or read agrees that some degree of tax cuts & incentives should be a part of this package. The debate is on the level, and you may be right that it is too high at the moment.

Still, the package is essentially what it was in the beginning. I have not really seen any major capitulation to the GOP; they are setting the tone right now, because they're out in the press, and the media is picking fights with Limbaugh, and that's just how coverage is in America. Still, the bill they vote on is going to be much, much closer to the original proposal than to anything the GOP is suggesting.

Still, that won't stop a flurry of threads on Monday with the theme of "Obama caved to them, and they still voted against it!"
Click to expand...

If he doesn't give in and cut the 100 to 200 billion dollars that the "moderates" want cut, then I won't put up that thread.
 
Obama should just keep repeating this over and over and over again until the Senate passes the bill:

According to these estimates, implementing the Senate legislation would increase
GDP relative to the agency’s baseline forecast by between 1.2 percent and 3.6
percent by the fourth quarter of 2010. It would also increase employment at that
point in time by 1.3 million to 3.9 million jobs, as shown in Table 1. In that
quarter, the unemployment rate would be 0.7 percentage points to 2.1 percentage
points lower than the baseline forecast of 8.7 percent. The effects of the
legislation would diminish rapidly after 2010. By the end of 2011, the Senate
legislation would increase GDP by 0.4 percent to 1.2 percent, would raise
employment by 0.6 million to 1.9 million jobs, and would lower the
unemployment rate by 0.3 percentage points to 1.0 percentage point.
Click to expand...

What's the problem? The argument is pretty straight-forward:

1) Look at the latest jobs report.

2) Look at the CBO report.

3) What the fuck are you waiting for?
 
Onceler said:
"there is no broad disagreement among policy experts about whether spending or tax cuts work better as stimulus measures"

I was wrong on that one; you are correct. There isn't really debate on that aspect. However, every single economist I have heard or read agrees that some degree of tax cuts & incentives should be a part of this package. The debate is on the level, and you may be right that it is too high at the moment.

Still, the package is essentially what it was in the beginning. I have not really seen any major capitulation to the GOP; they are setting the tone right now, because they're out in the press, and the media is picking fights with Limbaugh, and that's just how coverage is in America. Still, the bill they vote on is going to be much, much closer to the original proposal than to anything the GOP is suggesting.

Still, that won't stop a flurry of threads on Monday with the theme of "Obama caved to them, and they still voted against it!"
Click to expand...



This is the crap:

Among the initiatives that could be cut are $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $14 million for cyber security research by the Homeland Security Department, $1 billion for the National Science Foundation, $400 million for research and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases, $850 million for Amtrak and $400 million for climate change research. But so far, none of the suggestions come close to being enough to shrink the package on the scale proposed.
Click to expand...


Obama should tell them to fuck off. If they want to vote against a bill that is an absolute necessity and that the CBO projects will create between 1.3 to 3.9 million jobs by the end of next year over this nickle and dime shit then they can go ahead and do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top