This will definetly help our economy

[hellomynameis]

Originally Posted by joesushi

After 8 years of good old "conservation" (lol), we have a new deficit of over 10 trillion dollars. Doing the basic math that is double the deficit in 2000.

Originally Posted by Dundars

You could spend a MILLION dollars a DAY for 2000 YEARS and it still wouldn't equal to what this bill is going to cost. I feel deeply deeply sorry for my kids and their kids.

With the interest it will be about 1.3 Trillion dollars,

My grandparents left us with a 120% debt to GDP ratio back in 1946. Today, that percentage is sitting closer to 70%. We didn't remove that 50% by paying down the debt, instead we increased our GDP aka we GREW our economy. So long as we have policies that aim to continue to grow our economy our debt, expressed in real dollars, will most likely continue to grow. However so long as we grow our economy at the same or faster pace who cares? Our interest on our debt consumes a smaller portion of our tax receipts today than it did a decade ago. That's what's important. It might be easy to say that our debt level is twice the 2000 level today, but it's not fair to 'forget' to mention that our GDP level is also growing. (sorry, I don't have prepared data that is more recent, dig through the treasury statements if you want more current figures.)

http://boomerang.blogs.com/.shared/i...debt080415.png

http://boomerang.blogs.com/.shared/i...atch080415.png

Yes, the debt is moving up, and right now that pace is barely outstripping our GDP's growth. However we should be focusing on fiscal policy to manage that debt ratio by doing what we can to grow our economy. Don't read that and think I agree with the stimulus plan as it was passed...I don't. However making sure people have jobs and growth opportunities is important and if it can do that, then great.

Originally Posted by Dundars

[...]not to mention inflation is going to go through the roof since we can't borrow the money from anyone so we will just have to print it our selves [sic].

Except that right now the fed is trying to pump as much money into the system to prevent deflation. You have to remember that to increase the money supply (prevent deflation), the fed buys financial assets with this money from thin air. They are doing this now. The trick is being able to sell those financial assets back out to reclaim money and prevent inflation. This is the piece that everyone seems to ignore. We have the potential for (hyper-)inflation if we can't control the money supply well enough on the upswing.

Originally Posted by Dundars

Democrats response to if they read the bill or not was, "Well I had my staff look over it for me and report back." Who the hell did we vote for, them or their "staff"?

Don't delude yourself, this is how it works. I'd be surprised if anyone read any bill all the way through. Excluding ones they write themselves, of course. That's why they have a staff, to have those people do the reading late into the night and have them report back a condensed version. This isn't unique to the government. Even low level team leads and supervisors have to do the same thing with their staff in order to make decisions.

Originally Posted by RLFebo

People losing their jobs are losing them because the CEO's of their companies would rather keep their 400k a year salary, then be a man, and drop a 100k a year off their income and save 30 jobs. Its retarded.

I guess I just don’t understand you extreme conservatives. Hell I just don’t [sic] understand people in general anymore. I guess if your happy watching the rich get richer while you stay the same or get poorer then I guess [sic] Im [sic] the backwards one. Here I thought the american [sic] dream was to watch the rich get richer, and then catch up to the bastards and take their money in a coporate [sic] takeover.

So, if this hypothetical CEO did what you are suggesting, would you take the $3,333.33 per year job? What if that job is no longer needed due to new efficiencies? Should we continue to pay people to do jobs that are no longer needed? If you had your facts right, you'd realize that there are more high-wage earners now than there ever were. So, is it bad to have the rich get richer and have more rich people? Last time I checked most people want to make more money next year than they do this year....



Fact is, both conservatives and democrats have made a ton of mistakes and both sides use deficit scare tactics. The point of my post is to urge you all to try and understand the facts and what they mean

From my favourite economist: Our economic record clearly demonstrates that you will get more than your so-called fair share of the nation's economic growth if you get an education, keep educating yourself, work full time, work all year, and stay married -- regardless whether you're rich, middle class, or poor.