"If you think Scripture is telling you what you want to hear, take a long, hard second look."
- The Ancient Mariner
Thursday, February 19, 2009
1- Bi-partisanship, smartisanship, dumbisanship...oh, phooey. When virtually EVERY member of the other party votes against it, maybe that should mean something if you actually care about bi-partisanship. But it doesn't. At the end of the day, idealogy is what matters. And this is liberal idealogy, plain and varnished.
2- We don't have the money. Seriously, we don't. Read carefully now. "WE. DON'T. HAVE. THE. MONEY." Of course, on the upside, if China decides not to loan us the money the stimulus package won't be able to be implemented anyway. This last sentence is not a joke and my tongue isn't in my cheek. I'm serious. The money will have to be borrowed from foreigners.
3- It's mostly government spending. Do you seriously think that money can be used most efficently by government entities to stimulate the economy? That's like deciding to send a team of five year olds to water your garden by walking from a pond to your garden with sponges. Yeah, some water's gonna get there...
4-So many of the jobs "created" are temporary construction jobs. I mean, come on, people. Do you really think that's going to stimulate the economy or have long-term impact? Yes, it will help some construction companies and workers for a couple years, but then what?...
5- The debt amassed here that will have to be paid by your children's tax dollars is beyond most of our comprehension. Think about how much of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest. Now multiply that by a million, or a billion or a trillion or a gazillion. Oh, nevermind. Who knows how much anymore?
6- It's socialism. So much of this involves government takeover and/or handouts it's .... I don't have a word.
7- Tax Cuts would work better. When people have more money, they spend it, or invest it. That's how the economy actually works. Really. And by the way, I mean actual tax cut, meaning that you send less of your money to the government. I don't mean "tax rebate" checks, or "tax refund" checks which are actually wealth redistribution when people who don't actually pay income tax get checks. I mean actual tax cuts where you and companies having to pay less at the end of the year. Or how about a tax moratorium? Rather than spending billions of dollars, why not just suspend taxes for one year? Well, OK. I don't know far $787 billion will go. Will that support our Federal Gov't for a few months maybe? During that "tax-free period" the government can borrow money to fund itself, and fund all the states too. How's that for stimulus? :)
8- The liberals used this as an excuse to spend money on their pet projects. The list of things in this package law "wish-list come true" is truly ridiculous. For congress and state governments it's like Christmas. And like the Little Shop of Horrors, those pets are going to keep growing and demanding more and more, long past our ability to feed them. "Feed me, Seymour."
9- Now more people will be on the dole. How are we going to keep paying those people once the stimulus money runs out? It's hard to go back people. Just look at Social(ism) Security. We used to live without it. Now it's political suicide to even think anything against it. And right now some of you are thinking about me, "Hey, my grandmother lives on social security. How dare you!" Exactly.
10-State and Local Governments are salivating. Today Texas Governor Rick Perry announced that contrary to his previous statement that Texas wouldn't take its billions from the Federal government, he's changed his mind. He wants to spend that money enhancing border security. State governments are going to be duped into taking that money and boosting social programs. And once the federal funds run out, they'll be faced with state government programs that they can't pay for, but that the public will continue to expect. It's political suicide to stop hand-outs. But they can't wait to get that money to do all kinds of things. Do you think they'll cut local taxes since they are getting so much outside funding? NO WAY! Now they get to do more.
11-Headlines like this one - How stimulus will affect you - The $787 billion package passed by Congress offers tax breaks, tuition help, and more. ยป What you'll get (from the Yahoo Home Page)
Greed is greed, Mr. President. Whether it's a corporate CEO or a plumber. And here you are not just encouraging the deadly disease of "I-want-itus" but creating it too.
12- The same Government that broke our economy by making banks adhere to their liberal agenda, is trying to fix it by making more industries adhere to their liberal agenda.
13- The same President that decries "corporate greed" is now fostering greed among state and local governments in ways previously unimaginable.
14- I don't think it's going to work. It reminds me of a story my former pastor told me. He had a church member who was a dermatologist. The pastor asked the dermatologist to look at a rash his son had. The doctor said,"We have two options. I can write you a prescription for a cream, and the rash should go away in about 6 weeks or you can just wait for it to go away on its own" My pastor said, "How long will that take?" "About 6 weeks", came the reply.
Please tell me good things about "Porkulous Rex" in comments. I'd love to hear something positive. And I don't mind being proven wrong. (Well, not too much anyway. 
) Or maybe you want to tell me why you're mad too. How long can we make this list?
OR PLEASE DO THIS FOR FUN - How many cool nicknames can you folks come up with for this monstrosity?
Trackbacks:
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/5253.
Comments on "Why I'm Hopping Mad About the Stimulus Law":
2. Bill
- 02/19/2009 1:50 pm CST
I have no words for how I feel about this bill . . .
Jill and I are just doing what we can. I'm doing my best to stay productive and hold on to my job. We're getting out of debt rapidly. We're doing everything on a cash-basis.
I'm balancing out my pessimism about this bill and our Government with my optimism about America.
3. Sherry Early
- 02/19/2009 2:33 pm CST
The Child Slavery Law--We've just promised our children in slavery to the federal government and to whomever they borrow the money from (China).
5. Crossbow
- 02/19/2009 2:51 pm CST
Can't say that I disagree with much other than point #3. I used to work for a few government agencies. Their actually really good at stretching dollars pretty far. You'd be surprised. Just because some don't do that great, don't go lumping the whole lot into the same category.
7. Andrew
- 02/19/2009 3:35 pm CST
When virtually EVERY member of the other party votes against it, maybe that should mean something if you actually care about bi-partisanship. But it doesn't. At the end of the day, idealogy is what matters. And this is liberal idealogy, plain and varnished.
Well, a lot of liberal talking heads are pretty pissed off that we aren't spending enough. When a bill makes both sides mad for opposite reasons, isn't it somewhere in the middle?
The same Government that broke our economy by making banks adhere to their liberal agenda, is trying to fix it by making more industries adhere to their liberal agenda.
There's plenty of blame to go around.
Other than those two objections, I'm with you, mostly. I'm finding it hard to be hopping mad, because everybody's yelling and I can't tell one voice from the next.
8. Evan
- 02/19/2009 3:42 pm CST
I'd agree with most of this, but none hits exactly why I am against this bill and even more so, the housing bailouts.
The main reason I oppose them is that they reward bad behavior at the expense of people who played by the rules and lived within their means. The guy who refinanced his house five times and took all the equity out possible, then spent all that money on cars and trips, now gets his mortgage subsidized by taxpayers, or the foreclosure loss borne by the banks.
Meanwhile the guy who just made his regular mortgage payments and worked and saved rather than spend and play, gets higher tax bills to help bail out his neighbors bad behavior.
I realize that this situation is similar to the parable of the prodigal son, where the dutiful son is uncharitably angry at his father for welcoming the prodigal son back home. We're obviously not supposed to be that, since we too are sinners.
However, I think there is a major difference here. The prodigal son repented, asked forgiveness from his father, assumedly changed his behavior, and likely even made restitution for his sins by losing his inheritance. All I see among many of today's prodigals (aided by politicans and the press) is a sense of continued entitlement and statements that they actually still blame their father (i.e. bankers) for giving them their inheritance they demanded (i.e. loans).
9. Whitney
- 02/19/2009 4:22 pm CST
Yay Phil! I read this w/o looking at the author, and then thought "I bet Phil wrote that", and sure enough...
I do mostly agree with you. I also agree with several other comments.
Can't say that I disagree with much other than point #3. I used to work for a few government agencies. Their actually really good at stretching dollars pretty far. You'd be surprised. Just because some don't do that great, don't go lumping the whole lot into the same category.
That's true, but after seeing my sister & her family struggle to deal with the foster care/adoption process in another state, it would be nice if rather than ADDING to the systems, they could FIX the problems (totally reminded myself of the SNL "fix it" skit... you know? ah well, it reminded me anyways...). Example: her family moved houses. She called and let DSS know about it. They changed the address in ONE of the files, but 'cause they aren't crossreferenced, they didn't change the address in the 2 other files. *sigh* I seriously doubt that kind of ACTUAL IMPROVEMENT will happen though.
I love the idea of the tax moratorium! Yay for no taxes! At the risk of sounding slightly (or a lot) Libertarian, I'd totally go for that over a rebate check!
I'm also curious about how long people will protest all of this. I mean, our nation is far less "socialized" than many others, and as far as I can tell, the people in those countries don't complain about what their government is like. Will we reach that point? Scary. Is it like the steps of grieving? We're angry now, what's next???
That's it. I'm supersuper happy that you posted this. Not only 'cause it's important, but also, I have to confess... I don't watch Lost, and am bored by all of that! :)
10. Quaid
- 02/19/2009 4:45 pm CST
I wonder if we had done something to fix the illegal alien problem a year ago instead of just debating about it if more people paying taxes would help at all, right now. If they threw the amount of money that they're using to "fix" the economy at the real problems we face as a country, then we'd be setting ourselves pretty far ahead of the rest of the world.
Does anyone else feel like this money is going down a deep, dark hole? It won't ever return. ever.
Phil, have you seen the CNBC video that Drudge has linked? You'll find a like-minded soul. I'm for a new Tea Party, too. Let's dump the idiots who are spending my money for me without considering my opinion.
Pennsylvania - get rid of your idiot senator who endorsed this. Arlen Specter needs to be kicked out of office, stat.
It's time to collect ourselves and begin to help people understand how much damage this is doing to our country. If China calls the bank notes of the trillions of dollars we owe them, we're s-c-r-e-w-e-d.
11. Crossbow
- 02/19/2009 4:53 pm CST
When we bought our house, all of the advice we found everywhere about home buying was "listen to your bank - they won't ever loan you more than you can handle." Like, every where you read or looked it said that. When we got our numbers back from the bank, we immediately thought "these guys are crazy - no way we can afford that" and we went with what our budget told us... not the bank. Same advice was for re-financing or any money issue for that matter: you can handle what ever the banks say you can. Everyone wants to point fingers at people that did just that - followed what was supposed to be good advice. Well, that advice has always been bad, I don't care who is influencing the banks. But, to me, the bigger fool is the one that gives the money to the person that can't re-pay it, rather than the one that takes the money being handed to them. Begging for bailouts from stupid financial decisions happened in the Bible after all - it's nothing new. Like Andrew said - plenty of blame to go around. I just hate it when people only pile it on one side.
We worked hard to get a house we could afford, still make payments, didn't do anything like an ARM or anything. But I could care less about people wanting to get bailed out from making bad decisions on buying a house. Couldn't give a flip. They were just doing what they were told they were supposed to - chase after the American Dream at all costs. This message is all over TV, movies, the news, screamed from every street corner, etc. Now people that have been complacent about the stupidity of the cult of the American Dream want to point fingers at people that just did what they were told they were supposed to? Whatever. (more referring to people in general than people on this blog)
12. Crossbow
- 02/19/2009 4:57 pm CST
That's true, but after seeing my sister & her family struggle to deal with the foster care/adoption process in another state, it would be nice if rather than ADDING to the systems, they could FIX the problems
I would be totally in favor of fixing it... but in most cases (especially the foster care system), the problems come from lack of money. I saw that so much in government work - lack of money caused so many problems. The real solution is to cut out the overpaid top level jobs or redundant managerial positions (why do every two people need a manager anyways?) and redistribute that money to where it is really needed. Then you can fix the problems AND not spend more money.
13. Bill
- 02/19/2009 7:48 pm CST
Evan, you wrote:
"The main reason I oppose them is that they reward bad behavior at the expense of people who played by the rules and lived within their means. The guy who refinanced his house five times and took all the equity out possible, then spent all that money on cars and trips, now gets his mortgage subsidized by taxpayers, or the foreclosure loss borne by the banks.
Meanwhile the guy who just made his regular mortgage payments and worked and saved rather than spend and play, gets higher tax bills to help bail out his neighbors bad behavior."
As usual, very insightful comment.
Home run.
Touchdown.
If we want to talk about principles, one of the dumbest things to do with money that one is a steward of (whether $1 or 1 trillion dollars) is to reward bad behavior with it. May as well throw it down a hole.
These bailouts are all about rewarding bad behavior.
Government has a quaint and unshakable faith in the dubious assertion that spending money on a problem always fixes it.
Thanks for the great comment
14. Whitney
- 02/19/2009 10:02 pm CST
I would be totally in favor of fixing it... but in most cases (especially the foster care system), the problems come from lack of money. I saw that so much in government work - lack of money caused so many problems. The real solution is to cut out the overpaid top level jobs or redundant managerial positions (why do every two people need a manager anyways?) and redistribute that money to where it is really needed. Then you can fix the problems AND not spend more money.
Crossbow, I agree with what you said. I wasn't trying to say that they (foster care systems) had an overabundance, and were wasteful, I think if they are given more by their states they need to make wise choices with it. (ie: the "fixing" it part) Wise choices would be, as you indicated, possibly restructuring some systems to be able to better care for the children being serviced, and the families caring for them. I'm sure cutting management and redistributing funds would help, but I honestly don't believe that will happen. If I've seen anything when it comes to state run programs (and granted, this is my only experience, through my sister's struggles), it's that there is not going to be a cut back, but an addition in beauracracy and red tape.
Ultimately, I would love to see more education for parents in how to care for their children. I'd like to see more people taking responsibility for their children. I'd like to see the family unit become a stronger player in our country. Money can't fix everything, ya know?
I hope I didn't sound rude or snippy. I don't mean to. I just get kinda soapbox-y about this particular situation! :)
16. Shrode
- 02/22/2009 6:47 am CST
Exposing my own laziness here of not wanting to go reread every comment looking for the initials D.S.S.....
Roy, what is a DSS? And who are you asking?
Thanks. :)
Leave a Comment:
You didn't get to the part where they create a medical technology bureaucracy to ration medicine to the elderly...
Most the bill is pork-barrel, meaning public projects, not direct handouts. What the bill does mostly to put people on the dole is undo the welfare reforms of the 80s and 90s that got people off the welfare rolls.
The upshot to this bill? Voters, at the least, are deeply skeptical, with most opposing it. In all likelihood, it's going to lengthen and worsen the recession, which is going to make people feel the pain, handouts or no handouts. That will likely lead to a backlash against the Dem-controlled Congress and give a chance to pull us back from the brink. Even heavily socialist economies occasionally have to privatize when economic reality hits.