Re: Yet another reason the "stimulus bill" must be defeated


"Ray" <chigarayREMOVE@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e154p4ho4dn5jnk7ps0d9ivd4mm15gj7ca@xxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:06:49 -0800, "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@xxxxxxx>
wrote:


"Ken Dixon" <nsvmiami@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:JGlkl.2217$v8.976@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Paul M. Cook wrote:
"Methuselah" <Methuselah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4991E0A6.7050809@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Paul M. Cook wrote:
"Ken Dixon" <nsvmiami@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:hPkkl.2195$v8.1203@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Methuselah wrote:
Paul M. Cook wrote:
"Ken Dixon" <nsvmiami@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
I'm curious about what's to come. Whether a brilliant success or
a
crash and burn of historic proportion it will be something to
watch.
It will be neither. It will simply be a wash. It will help a
little at first but the overall expense will outweigh the small
benefit long term. Most every economist is saying that tax breaks
are a very poor way to influence spending which is what a stimulus
is supposed to do. Money to the states now is the way to go they
pretty much all say and moey to the states has just received a 100
billion dollar cut from the bill. So in order to get 2 repugs in
line they had to hand the entire thing over to Susan Collins who
has
said it is her way or the highway basically. If she doesn't get
her
way she said, she will go along with the obstructionists. Meaning
even more ineffective tax cuts which will help China and the
credit
card companies and less spending, especially for states, which
will
otherwise keep people in jobs and creates demand for new ones. So
the end result will be a mamby-pamby watered down mess that the
repugs will claim as a great victory for their wise and always
successful fiscal policy.

Most every economist says what? Really?

You do like to exaggerate your point by greatly embellishing your
opinion. You must have difficulty sleeping for fear of an opposing
thought.
Paul is incapable of making a point without hyperbole. It's his most
entertaining trait.
I do like that he's already writing an escape plan for when Pelosi's
plan craps out. Blame the republicans.
BTW, if you actually READ what I wrote instead of jerking off on your
monitor, you'd see there was ample criticism for the dems for being
spineless. But then you being a reactionary nincompoop is part of
your
entertainment value.

Perhaps you're sore and grumpy?

http://www.astroglide.com/

Paul



Maybe you were just weaned too early and can't focus on
multi-dimensional concepts. At least you don't deny that your hand is
held open with expectations that the government will fill it from the
pockets of those whom it has picked.

What is it about you wingnuts that make you think you're the only one's
who work and pay taxes? I didn't see you guys squawk one word, not one
word, about the nearly 6 trillion in deficits Bush ran up. You do know
you have to pay for that, too, right? As does the rest of us? As
well
as Ronnie's 5 trillion? Plus interest?

Paul

That's "as do the rest of us".

The period goes inside the last quotation mark.

I thought Ronnie's 5t was paid off during the Clinton era?

Nope. Clinton left office with a 250 billion dollar surplus as well as a
sound 12 year plan for paying the rest off. Bush ran with the "it's your
money pledge" and not only spent the surplus but put us back into serious
deficit spending all over again. And since "only" 1.6 trillion was for
the
Iraq "war" the rest was all tax cuts and discretionary spending. And
unlike
the stimulus plan, we got not a thing for it. We possibly may get
something
back from Obama's plan. The debt is over 11 trillion with a total cost of
44 trillion when you factor in the cost of servicing that debt.

Now I hope you'ze a prooves of my grammer cuz I ranned it threw a czecker.
For ya.

Paul



Then you need another grammar check program, dude.
I'm guessing all the spelling errors in the last sentence are
intentional. Even so, the penultimate paragraph is loaded with
grammatical errors.


You're guessing? Oh right, yes. They were um intentional. Yeah.

Paul


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Yet another reason the "stimulus bill" must be defeated
    ... card companies and less spending, especially for states, which will ... I do like that he's already writing an escape plan for when Pelosi's ... about the nearly 6 trillion in deficits Bush ran up. ... Iraq "war" the rest was all tax cuts and discretionary spending. ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Re: Americans fare better financially under Democrats!!!!!!
    ... Money to pay down the deficit has to come from somewhere; tax cuts ... What's wrong with Obama's tax plan? ... You're fucking kidding, right? ... Without even getting into ridiculous spending on useless stuff - let's ...
    (alt.fan.howard-stern)
  • Re: Americans fare better financially under Democrats!!!!!!
    ... Money to pay down the deficit has to come from somewhere; tax cuts ... What's wrong with Obama's tax plan? ... Without even getting into ridiculous spending on useless stuff - let's ... I gave you my response. ...
    (alt.fan.howard-stern)
  • Re: The $10 Trillion Hangover - Paying the Price for Eight Years of Republican Rule.
    ... Well, he plans a massive spending program, by some estimates one trillion dollars. ... Has he said that he would cut spending, or increase taxes so that all or most of it, will not add to the national debt. ... So, while it is true that Bush did a lousy job in reducing the National Debt, there is not a whole lot we can do about that, because what is done is done. ... Cost: $4.9 trillion ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Analysis from Halbert on Obamas Deficit Spending and Market Effects
    ... Yet President Barack Obama's record large 2009 budget deficit estimated at $1.85 trillion and his own spending plans for the next 10 years show that our national debt will likely double over the next 10 years. ... The point is, while many respected analysts agreed that a large stimulus package was needed in the short-term, they didn't expect that President Obama would string-out the stimulus over four years with very little spent in 2009, plus continue to run trillion dollar annual budget deficits for several more years. ...
    (misc.invest.stocks)
Loading