More Stimulus

Originally posted by John W Booth
Stimulate the economy at the grassroots level by increasing defense spending. Increase employment by cutting unemployment benefits. Liberate the economy - and boost the health sector - by cutting Medicare. Avoid future financial crashes by completely deregulating the entire financial sector.

Why is it that those on the right only support government spending when it comes to defense? Why are many on the right largely deaf when it comes to the trillions thrown away overseas in terms of money going to two different wars?

If I were running against Obama in 2012, what I would do would be to focus on energy independence as my central theme. To do this, I would encourage exploiting the recently discovered vast amounts of natural gas found in the US and begin to encourage cars to run on it. Such industry in the US WOULD create jobs and, at the same time, reduce the need to run back over to the Middle East every time they get out of line.....that is unless you enjoy policing the world. It would also diminsh the power of OPEC over the US. In the long term the US needs to build nuclear power plants that will produce cheap energy and again more jobs. Of course, just saying you would bring the troops home would probably even gain support from those on the left because they think war is never acceptable and, at the same time, gain support from those on the right due to all the ridiculous spending.

As for Medicare/Medicaid, I would repeal Obamacare and focus on reducing fraud and introduce FSA's. Give people the power over their own medical care whether the government or private industry is paying for those who don't have the money themselves. Then let the statists come out and explain to the public why they don't think they should have such power using their own tax dollars. It would be the beginning of the end of those in power over us dictating to us what kind of health care we should have and how it will be rationed.

And lastly, I would run to fix the illegal immigration problem by vowing to secure the borders once and for all!!

That is the winning recipe for success. All of these isssues would be popular and stimulate the economy.

Originally posted by whodey
Why is it that those on the right only support government spending when it comes to defense?

No brainer, dude. It keeps us ahead in hi-tech. It employs one in ten in the manufacturing sector. It breathes financial life into millions and millions of patriotic and selfless American families. It treats and cures veterans. It secures the resources and the geopolitical leverage we need. It makes us the safest people on Earth. And, some would say, we owe it to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

Originally posted by whodey
And lastly, I would run to fix the illegal immigration problem by vowing to secure the borders once and for all!!

Give the job to DoD, along with a blank check. Worth every cent. The illegal immigration problem is the key. Solving it creates 11 million jobs.

Originally posted by whodey
Have we found common ground!! 😲

Of course, printing money is a type of tax on the American people as well. It is a round about way to make peolpe pay more for things without an official tax.

Not necessarily, generally inflation is considered benefitial to those who hold debt in that currency.

Originally posted by John W Booth
Stimulate the economy at the grassroots level by increasing defense spending. Increase employment by cutting unemployment benefits. Liberate the economy - and boost the health sector - by cutting Medicare. Avoid future financial crashes by completely deregulating the entire financial sector.

So really if you went back to the Bush economy it would be fine, from which I assume the crash never happened after all? What a laugh you guys are. What you advocate is the very policies that created your mess in the first place. Please hit me!!

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Not necessarily, generally inflation is considered benefitial to those who hold debt in that currency.

What? You are joking of course.

Originally posted by finnegan
So really if you went back to the Bush economy it would be fine, from which I assume the crash never happened after all? What a laugh you guys are. What you advocate is the very policies that created your mess in the first place. Please hit me!!

I'm no Bush supporter. You can ask people I talked to privately even back in his early days in the White House. But I do blame Obama, openly. I think it is only right that we do. Accountability, dude. What we advocate are the very policies that created the U.S. that we all hark back to and which defeated the Gulags and Groupthink. The mess is Obama's. November 2nd was a new dawn in the Battle For America.

Originally posted by spruce112358
What? You are joking of course.

I think I should have said (and it's what I meant) have debt.

Originally posted by whodey
CUT SPENDING.

Of course, its all monpoly money isn't it? So who the hell cares?

Once again whodey appeals to bumper sticker solutions to the perceived problems.

There is nothing wrong with the current program of stimulus packages, on the contrary, despite the unprecedented debt the US finds itself in this policy has successfully prevented a depression such as the one seen in the 1930s. If anything it is common sense that this policy is continued.

Originally posted by whodey
Economic growth would not be such a concern if the government's solvency was not dependent upon future tax dollars would it?

Yes, economic growth is always a primary concern, at least to the sane.

Originally posted by whodey
CUT SPENDING.

Of course, its all monpoly money isn't it? So who the hell cares?

How exactly will that promote growth in an economy with 30 million un- and underemployed?

If the government doesn't spend money hiring people, and the rich people don't spend money hiring people, where does that leave us whodey?

It leaves us with the assumption that rich people will act selfishly and that somehow this will lead to a utopia if only the idiot masses would stop interfering through government. It's not necessarily a good idea to cut government spending.

Originally posted by John W Booth
Stimulate the economy at the grassroots level by increasing defense spending. Increase employment by cutting unemployment benefits. Liberate the economy - and boost the health sector - by cutting Medicare. Avoid future financial crashes by completely deregulating the entire financial sector.

JWB: Avoid future financial crashes by completely deregulating the entire financial sector.

It takes a bizarre misreading of history to make such a ridiculous claim. Crashes and Panics were and are an endemic part of capitalism.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
If the government doesn't spend money hiring people, and the rich people don't spend money hiring people, where does that leave us whodey?

It leaves us with the assumption that rich people will act selfishly and that somehow this will lead to a utopia if only the idiot masses would stop interfering through government. It's not necessarily a good idea to cut government spending.

In principle the available resources are always infinite - what is short is opportunities to invest and obtain a positive return which, after accounting for risk, is better than the return from retaining the cash and storing it for example in low risk securities.

Giving money to the rich, whether individuals or corporations, or not taking it from them (e.g. as tax), will only result in investment that generates jobs and growth in an environment offering real investment opportunities. In a recession and a high risk economic environment, they will prefer (rationally) to retain their wealth in a secure form, by reducing debt (paying off the debt from past investment) and improving their bank balances. That is what has been happening. Business is pocketing all the help it receives, reducing debt, improving balances, while deferring plans for investment.

The problem is to get economic activity moving again - to get the wealth circulating in the form of investment, jobs, consumer spending. That requires borrowing and spending - which the private sector cannot rationally be expected to do.

The more governments withdraw to a balanced budget ideology, the more they deprive the economy of the only engine it has to promote circulation and activity. In a dead economy without jobs and without consumer spending, sadly, there are few reasons for anyone to invest at all.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
If the government doesn't spend money hiring people, and the rich people don't spend money hiring people, where does that leave us whodey?

It leaves us with the assumption that rich people will act selfishly and that somehow this will lead to a utopia if only the idiot masses would stop interfering through government. It's not necessarily a good idea to cut government spending.

It would help if the government was not taking our tax dollars to give to corporate America. Do you think corporate America does all the hirng? 2/3 of the work force is hired by small business every year. Corporate America and Big Brother are one in the same.