and three more months to go. (without healthcare even)

Yay change

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8148875.stm

7/13/2009 9:23:53 PM

NEW HIGH SCORE!

7/13/2009 10:25:26 PM

If we spend enough, the underlying problems will go away, right?

7/13/2009 10:41:48 PM

I REMEMBER WHEN A SODA POP WAS A NICKEL

7/13/2009 11:14:23 PM

^^ That's what Bush thought.

7/13/2009 11:16:27 PM

Oddly enough, 1/4 of this fiscal year came under the former regime that passed passed the legislation for 700 billion in stimulus.

Pick your poison, its either high deficits and 401ks that stopped falling at 201ks and 9% unemployment or not as high deficits and 401ks that stopped falling at 50.1ks and 10+% unemployment.

I'm not a fan of the Keynesian spending binge that was called for with current policies, but it isn't like the alternative was all that friendly either. It's really hard to know if cramming down all the debt at once would be a better alternative than 5 years of slow growth.

7/13/2009 11:38:33 PM

oh please

7/14/2009 12:19:20 AM

We were all supposed to be farting rainbows and living in a Utopia full of Hope and Change by now. Just wait till the inflation hits.

7/14/2009 1:02:04 AM

republicans obviously think Obama is a wizard.

and they are upset by his lack of wizard skills

7/14/2009 1:10:22 AM

Obama the Alchemist

7/14/2009 1:37:02 AM

Quote :

"Just wait till the inflation hits"

We've been waiting for months and all we've got to show for it with 787 billion pumped into the economy is nearly 0% inflation. When is going to happen?

7/14/2009 8:46:13 AM

probably when that money actually starts being spent, durrr. Don't worry, though. This trillion dollar bux deficit will kick it in to high gear in no time

7/14/2009 9:09:38 AM

Quote :

"former regime that passed passed the legislation for 700 billion in stimulus."

created and passed the senate and house full of dem's

7/14/2009 9:19:30 AM

Supported by the then president (R), the current president (D), and the opposing candidate (R). Either way we'd have the same spending which has occurred up until now.

Iraq and Afghanistan are largely responsible. The 700billion stimulus passed prior to Obama taking office is responsible for a significant portion. The increased in loss tax revenue, for which no president would be responsible, is also a large cause of the 1 trillion dollar deficit.

Pointing the finger at Obama and suggesting this is his brand of change and parlaying that into reasons why it is flawed is inaccurate at best and otherwise downright disingenuous.

7/14/2009 9:44:57 AM

Quote :

"probably when that money actually starts being spent, durrr. "

Ok, when is that going to happen? All I see is continued demand destruction, continued credit destruction (abated in the near term by bank bailouts), continued layoffs, and a failure to lend. Certainly screams inflation to me

7/14/2009 10:02:44 AM

You guys are getting the Tarp and the stimulus/auto bailouts confused.

7/14/2009 11:22:13 AM

the auto bailout was pulled out of the TARP funds (probably illegally, at least for what the TARP was originally passed for)

7/14/2009 11:24:57 AM

Nobody can say I ain't done my part to help out in these dire times.

I'm unemployed--tryna leave a job out there for someone who really needs it. I'm smoking more than ever and paying mad taxes for it. I also can't seem to buy a 12-pack of beer without coming off twenty bucks. I play the lotto and never win. I got no debt and always pay my exorbitant overdraft fees.

And I take my birth control reliably.

Model citizen, y'all! Where my props?!?!

7/14/2009 11:33:09 AM

agent are you sure about the future loans to the auto? It sounded like new funding to me. I honestly dont know.

The govt expects our deficit to be 1.84Trillion this year. The previous record was 454Billion.

"Under the administration's budget estimates, the $1.84 trillion deficit for this year will be followed by a $1.26 trillion deficit in 2010, and will never dip below $500 billion over the next decade."

awesome

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090714/D99DSUG00.html

haha, bridg. You drawing any unemployment or taxpayer funded benefits? and ill give you my answer.

[Edited on July 14, 2009 at 12:38 PM. Reason : .]

7/14/2009 12:36:37 PM

and a lot of that you can thank on bush's policies of lowering taxes during good economic times. and the fact that no politicians seem to be able to raise taxes when they need to.

7/14/2009 12:38:26 PM

Quote :

"republicans obviously think Obama is a wizard. and they are upset by his lack of wizard skills"

made me LOL

7/14/2009 12:47:34 PM

eyedr
http://projects.nytimes.com/creditcrisis/recipients/table
"Automakers/GMAC - $85.3B"

7/14/2009 1:15:38 PM

THE CAPITAL OF DJIBOUTI IS DJIBOUTI!

7/14/2009 1:30:07 PM

Thank agent. Although I think that was the initial bailout. Remember they kept coming back for more and getting it. Then, after bankruptcy, we have pledged more "loans".


http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/01/news/companies/gm_bankruptcy/index.htm

7/14/2009 3:06:10 PM

Quote :

"and the fact that no politicians seem to be able to raise taxes when they need to."

Tax hikes are not going to solve this one (especially in a bad economy). This is a spending issue that was started last term and is only going to get worse. Remember when Obama was campaigning? He said above 250K would pay increased taxes....then 150K.....and most economists were saying that this was a drop in the bucket compared to the spending that he was proposing.......well the economists were right. Its only going to get worse. China is going to own the US pretty soon with this borrowing. Under these circumstances, the dollar can do nothing but devalue......its coming, just wait a few more months.....

7/14/2009 7:44:24 PM

Quote :

"Tax hikes are not going to solve this one (especially in a bad economy)."

that's sort of one of the major points of keynsian economics...

if you want to drop spending, be my guest. what program do you propose? unemployment benefits? ha, yeah, you don't like them until it's you that's unemployed. welfare? hmmm...yes, the alternative of all those welfare mommas lining all of your streets begging for money sounds fun. medicare? lol, you don't know the elderly, do you. social security? same.

defense? defense contractors? DHS contractors?

AND LET THE TERRORIST WIN?

[Edited on July 14, 2009 at 7:49 PM. Reason : .]

7/14/2009 7:48:53 PM

I'd like to see some cuts to some of the entitlement programs. Maybe not now (during a recession), but when we start to come out of it. There is no reason for people to be able to collect unemployment benefits for longer than 6 months once we pull out of this downturn. Entitlement spending is expected to increase at more than a 6% rate over the next decade, and eat up more than 2/3rds of the federal budget. That is unsustainable.

But beyond the entitlement programs, we could save a lot by paying realistic wages to bureaucrats and federal employees, rather than the above-market wages and generous benefits packages that they receive. These federal employees can retire at 55 and receive a full retirement package, provided that they worked at least 20 years with the govt. No private-sector job provides that kind of package for rank and file employees, aside from the automakers maybe. And look where that led them. And of course the govt pays for full-time union reps as part of their CBA, which is more wasted taxpayer money. Public service unions have already bankrupted the biggest state in the country. We need to keep them under control before they contribute to the bankruptcy of the fed.

7/15/2009 1:55:40 AM

^ Concerning spending, I'm not sure that spending $18 million on the Recovery.gov Web site--and things like it--really helps us recover.

Quote :

"By Monday, the General Services Administration and Smartronix are expected to release a version of the contract to design and operate recovery.gov, a spokesman for the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board said Tuesday. The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board has been urging GSA and Smartronix to release the Recovery.gov contract, which is worth up to $18 million. Watchdog groups such as OMB Watch and the Sunlight Foundation have begun doing so as well."

http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/stimulus/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218500430

7/15/2009 3:54:17 AM

18 million on a website?

That's a screaming deal compared to the 1.6 billion dollars Bush spent on advertising (including illegal propaganda) between 2003 and 2005:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021301897.html

To be clear, that's billion with a b.

7/15/2009 11:54:10 AM

Quote :

"if you want to drop spending, be my guest. what program do you propose? "

how about all these fucking bailouts for starters?
how about the billions of dollars that the government CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR?
8 years is long enough in Iraq. Time to pass the torch and GTFO.
I'm sure there are myriad cases of similar expenditures such as the $800 hammers of the (80s or 90s?)
Redundant Federal departments.

i'm sure if we had another Thompson Report (i think it was about 7-8 years ago), it would uncover so many ways that the government is wasting tax dollars that $800 hammers would seem like a bargain.

7/15/2009 12:14:34 PM

Quote :

"epublicans obviously think Obama is a wizard. and they are upset by his lack of wizard skills"

does Obama even own a robe and hat?

7/15/2009 12:53:58 PM

7/15/2009 1:02:13 PM

Quote :

"18 million on a website? That's a screaming deal compared to the 1.6 billion dollars Bush spent on advertising (including illegal propaganda) between 2003 and 2005"

Let's be perfectly clear here . . . PARTIES DON'T FUCKING MATTER!!!! BOTH GODDAMNED GROUPS WASTE OUR MONEY!!!!

I was pissed when Bush was doing it and I'm pissed now that Obama is doing it.

7/15/2009 1:40:50 PM

^I'm not talking about Republicans or Democrats or whatever party.

I'm talking about George W. Bush, and anybody who voted for him. I can't let it go. He sucked so bad, and so many people voted for him. Any criticism I hear about Obama, the first thing into my mind is something Bush did a hundred thousand times worse. I can't move on.

And don't try to pretend like your some righteous independent. You lean right enough to identify as conservative. And I'm pretty sure you voted for Bush.

7/15/2009 2:18:04 PM

I'm just saying I'm remember hooksaw explaining that he wouldn't criticize Bush because he couldn't do that to a sitting president. He also promised that he would not criticize Obama, but now here he is bitching about a relatively paltry 18 mil.

I'm just sick and tired of the idiots.

7/15/2009 2:56:22 PM

Actually I'm what many would call a "small l" libertarian.

Quote :

"He sucked so bad, and so many people voted for him."

Only the second time. The thing is, John Kerry sucked as bad, if not worse. Gore would have been a wash I think.

Quote :

"ny criticism I hear about Obama, the first thing into my mind is something Bush did a hundred thousand times worse."

why does it have to be a binary decision? I'm personally sick and tired of this, "oh you don't like Politician A? Well Politician B is even worse!" Don't try to impose your narrow perception of the political spectrum on me.

Quote :

"I can't move on."

Sounds like a personal problem.

Quote :

"I'm just sick and tired of the idiots."

Aren't we all.

7/15/2009 3:02:23 PM

It is a personal problem. I need closure, and since he's left office, I've been getting there, but I'm still angry. I don't think any lessons have really been learned.

In terms of the Politician A v. Politician B, I understand that that's annoying, and I don't do it that often. This instance is really specific to hooksaw and George W. Bush. And pretty much everybody claims that they don't like the pa v. pb bit, but almost everybody is guilty of it at one point or another.

Since I don't normally get into the "Yeah, well, your guy did this!" game, I was really taken aback by your response to me. I don't think my view of the political spectrum is overly narrow, and I don't think you do either. You're just using my post to make a pretty tired point about human nature and our often faulty dichotomous instincts. And I'm not even sure that your point applies to me or my post given its context (hooksaw swore he wouldn't criticize the Obama administration in the same way he wouldn't criticize Bush).

7/15/2009 3:24:38 PM

^ BridgetSPK,

hahah 3 back-to-back posts about hooksaw? You must be in love.

Anyways, I am not sure when hooksaw claimed he would not criticize Bush. Indeed, a 30 second post search reveals that he was complaining about Bush's spend-thrift ways as far back as 2006.
http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=438567&page=2

Maybe you imagined it? I guess you could track down the post you think he made. Or you could just do us all a favor, let it go, and hop off his balls. I guess its your call. Personally, I'm out of this conversation (as hopefully everyone soon will be)!

[Edited on July 15, 2009 at 3:46 PM. Reason : ``]

7/15/2009 3:27:01 PM

WTF?

This is how I post sometimes.

Dill.

7/15/2009 3:44:34 PM

^


For the gazillionth time, I'm not a Republican and I've criticized Bush here and elsewhere on numerous occasions. I don't know if you've heard--I mean, you were probably drunk--but Obama is the president now.

I know you miss Bush, but you simply must move on. Dill.

7/15/2009 4:12:03 PM

Then seriously, guys, who said that they would not criticize Obama in the same way that they could not criticize Bush?

Was it Willy Nilly?

It was one of those guys who acts all independent, but when randomly challenged about his blatant Bush love, he pledged some bizarre allegiance to the office of the sitting president and promised to never criticize the president.

Who did this?

7/15/2009 4:15:55 PM

^ Honeymoon's over, toots.

7/15/2009 4:24:54 PM

^^ TreeTwista10 IIRC

7/15/2009 4:49:48 PM

Quote :

"PHOENIX – A $700,000 management conference held by the Social Security Administration in Phoenix last week continues to draw new national attention. It all comes on the heels of an ABC15 investigation. "It's unsurprising that a massive government agency would fall victim to an 'entitlement mentality,'" said Arizona Congressman Trent Frank. "This is clearly a case of sheltered bureaucrats forgetting that they work for the American people and deciding that the taxpayers' money is their own personal bankroll." Our hidden cameras captured hundreds of federal employees dancing in Phoenix on your dime at the conference, along with private dance recitals and paid motivational speakers. There was also a trip to a local casino. Social Security Regional Commissioner Peter Spencer earlier told ABC News that staff members needed to learn how to reduce stress because of a growing number of death threats made against them. The letter says the purpose of the forum was, "to enhance the quality and effectiveness of the Social Security Administration's service provided to the American public by providing substantive training for managers"

Remember, there is nothing we can cut from the budget except vital services.

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/investigators/story/Social-Security-responds-after-700K-Phoenix/QquF2A8bO0yZAOhtte5i6A.cspx

7/16/2009 9:34:17 PM

Quote :

"how about all these fucking bailouts for starters? how about the billions of dollars that the government CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR? 8 years is long enough in Iraq. Time to pass the torch and GTFO. I'm sure there are myriad cases of similar expenditures such as the $800 hammers of the (80s or 90s?) Redundant Federal departments."

this all makes sense, but at the same time, money's always going to get lost in a bureaucracy, public or private. that's where the hammer thing came from.

i think the biggest change should first be ending no-bid contracts. and while it's too late now, the bailout was a bad idea (at least as they did it).

7/17/2009 3:13:57 PM

Personally, I'm surprised the thread is still going. marko already won the discussion so brilliantly it apparently went unnoticed.

Quote :

"I REMEMBER WHEN A SODA POP WAS A NICKEL"

Inflation is a bitch and discussing the budget deficit in nominal terms is pointless.

7/17/2009 4:59:29 PM

you're trying to explain this away with inflation? seriously?

7/17/2009 9:01:44 PM

^I was looking for that recently... thanks.

7/17/2009 9:15:31 PM

Quote :

"I REMEMBER WHEN A SODA POP WAS A NICKEL"

7/17/2009 9:21:53 PM

7/18/2009 12:43:04 AM