It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama's faux-stimulus package

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Not a very stimulating 'stimulus' package.

Fox News


According to the CBO, only $26 billion — just over 3 percent — will be spent this year. Another $110 billion — or 13 percent — will be spent next year. Which means that by the time President Obama's term is halfway through, just 16 percent of the money will have been spent.

I thought President Obama said this is supposed to be a quick "jolt" to the economy?


Just because that 16 percent is spent in the next two years doesn't mean it's doing any stimulating. And what is in this faux-stimulus? Things that need doing and fixing. But they are definately NOT stimulus.

San Francisco Chronicle


Is $200 million to rehabilitate the National Mall a crucial way to stimulate the U.S. economy? How about $276 million to fix the computer systems at the State Department? And what about $650 million to repair dilapidated Forest Service facilities? ... a $50 million outlay for the National Endowment for the Arts ...


$44 million for repairs at the Agriculture Department headquarters in Washington.

$200 million to rehabilitate the National Mall.

$360 million for new child care centers at military bases.

$1.8 billion to repair National Park Service facilities.

$276 million to update technology at the State Department.

$500 million for the Transportation Security Administration to install bomb detectors at airports.

$600 million for General Services Administration to replace older vehicles with alternative fuel vehicles.

$2.5 billion to upgrade low-income housing.

$400 million for NASA scientists to conduct climate change research.

$426 million to construct facilities at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

$800 million to clean up Superfund sites.

$150 million for the Coast Guard to repair or remove bridges deemed a hazard to navigation.

$6.7 billion to renovate and improve energy efficiency at federal buildings.

$400 million to replace the Social Security Administration's 30-year-old National Computer Center.

Some are necessary. But are they 'stimulating'?
Stimulating is something that creates jobs for middle income America.
The tax payers have to be working in order for the economy to get going.
I'll let you decide.

And now the talking heads are talking about a 'GREEN STIMULUS PACKAGE' complete with Al Gores' scam of Carbon Credits - and personal Carbon Credit accounts.




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Just wait until ACORN gets their share of these funds.

I sense the need for some more community organizing



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:11 AM
link   
The items you listed are approximately 1.8% of the reported entire package cost, thus far. Do you have, or can you link to, data that similarly summarizes the other 98.2% of the expected spending?

Also, one can anticipate that many of the items on your list will actually provide employment opportunities for the contractors performing the actual work involved. Is that not one of the the primary intentions of the stimulus?

Now, to be clear, I'm no fan of these impulsive and reflexive actions of the "government" to arbitrarily throw money in the general direction of government contractors and favored firms to solve big problems. However, this "stimulus" has a far greater chance of actually having a positive (or not-negative) impact on the broader economy than we can expect from the "banking bailout".



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by mister.old.school
 


An online version of the CBO report is available here:

www.cbo.gov...

Going to read it now. Good call to look at the source data.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Here's a question for those that are "up in arms" against Obama's stimulus package....

...have you actually read it? I mean the bill itself...you know, the several hundred page document that is going before Congress laying out what is going where and what how its being dished out and tracked?

More than likely, the answer to that question is a not so profound "no." Most people don't bother, they'd rather get their reactionary opinions from heavily digested "news" sources so that they don't have to the heavy mental lifting themelves...

I myself have only read about 50 pages of it and, frankly, I'm quite satisfied...more than satisfied, really....astonished with the brilliance of much that is proposed...this stimulus package is coming along with an unprecedented degree of accountability and transparency, rarely seen in American politics in the modern era....

Here's a link to the one I've been digesting... Recovery Bill 2009

[edit on 28/1/09 by madhatr137]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Of course there will be SOME benefit from these items. But the fact is only 16% of this 'stimulus' will be spent in the next 2 years. That's not stimulus.

And buying new cars for politicians .. that just makes me ill.

As I said - These things need to get done.
But it's not stimulus. We need stimulus NOW.


Originally posted by madhatr137
...have you actually read it?

It's 400 pages. I have read the extractions on what is in it.



[edit on 1/28/2009 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Page 32: $1.5 billion for a “carbon-capturing contest” ?????

$6.9 billion in block grants to state and local governments to help them reduce their carbon footprints??

400 million to help state/local governments purchase efficient vehicles??

600 million to upgrade federal fleets with efficient vehicles ???

Los Angeles Times



11 billion for “smart grid” products to modernize the nation’s electrical grid
$8 billion in loans for renewable energy generation and transmission projects
$6.0 billion for energy efficiency upgrades of federal buildings
$6.9 billion in block grants to state and local governments to help them reduce their carbon footprints
$2.5 billion to weatherize low-income housing
$2 billion in development grants for efficiency/renewable research
$2 billion in loan guarantees and grants for U.S. makers of advanced batteries
$1.5 billion in loans and grants to school districts, colleges, local governments and municipal utilities for energy efficiency projects
$6.2 billion to weatherize low-income homes
$300 million for consumer rebates on efficient appliances
$600 million to upgrade federal fleets with efficient vehicles
$200 million in grants for electric vehicle technology
$2.4 billion for carbon capture demonstration technology
$350 million for research into using renewable power for military purposes
$400 million to help state/local governments purchase efficient vehicles
$500 million for demonstration projects on industrial efficiency
$300 million in grants and loans to state/local governments for projects to reduce diesel emissions
$400 million to NASA to do more climate-change research


Some are great things. Some are
But considering that only 16% is to be spent in the next two years .. not a lot of stimulus. And I REALLY don't like spending hundreds and hundreds of millions of $$$ to buy free cars for politicians.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Don't forget this little gem . . .

$335,000,000 FOR STD PREVENTION IN ECONOMIC STIMULUS BILL




Democrats may have eliminated provisions on birth control and sod for the National Mall in the "job stimulus" -- but buried on page 147 of the bill is stimulation for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases!

The House Democrats' bill includes $335 million for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

In the past, the CDC has used STD education funding for programs that many Members of Congress find objectionable and arguably unrelated to a mission of economic stimulus [such as funding events called 'Booty Call' and 'Great Sex' put on by an organization that received $698,000 in government funds.

"Whether this funding has merit is not the question; the point is it has no business in an economic plan supposedly focused on job creation," says a stimulated Hill source.

Developing...


That's a pretty hefty pricetag for a reminder to hit the pharmacy before the date for a sixpack of lovejackets!!!!



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
But considering that only 16% is to be spent in the next two years .. not a lot of stimulus.


How do you determine that $136,000,000,000 is "not a lot of stimulus"? We can't even imagine how much money that is.

And Glenn Beck is certainly no economist. He's a right-wing political hack. He's going to deride everything Obama does for political satisfaction. It's the popular thing to do.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Well in my opinion, it is still all about greed. Imagine the level of income and kickbacks that those who win/pledge the contracts will receive. Of course one could argue that it is stimulating the economy, because of all the workers that will be employed, and the need for the raw materials that go along. But does that really help long term? I think that the worst thing we can do, is allow big government to dole out billions as a sort of "stick the finger in the crack" rescue plan.

Those billions will have to come from somewhere, and if the countries currently financing our level of spending realize that we are becoming too big of a baby to sustain, they will cut the apron strings, and then it will lead to super hyper inflation, the likes of which we have never seen.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by mister.old.school
 



one can anticipate that many of the items on your list will actually provide employment opportunities for the contractors performing the actual work involved.


One can also expect most of that money to be used up on administrative costs as well as supply and material. How much do government hammers cost nowadays?

Very debatable as to how many jobs this stimulus will really create.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
The question to be asking is where is any of that huge chunk of money for the people? You know, the people that in the end, end up being the ones that pay for it!!

Dont you just wish you were on the side of the fence that gets all those millions?!!


Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoalPoster
Don't forget this little gem . . .

$335,000,000 FOR STD PREVENTION IN ECONOMIC STIMULUS BILL



That's a pretty hefty pricetag for a reminder to hit the pharmacy before the date for a sixpack of lovejackets!!!!



Actually...its not a very big pricetag...considering that if an equal share of the funds were given to all of the 50 states, that it would only be approximately 6.7 million dollars per state...or, if we want to look at it in terms of percentages of the proposed $825 billion dollar plan...its what 335M/825B= approx 4.060606 (Repeating)e-4=.000406...or less than half of a tenth of one percent of the whole package...if my math is right...(which I accept that it may not be...) Yes...$335,000,000 is a LOT of money...but in the larger scope of things, its nothing...

Actually its quite a small price-tag...and a welcomed one, considering that the previous administration favored religiously toned "abstinence only" programs...praying isn't going to make that nasty rash go away...

Creating programs means creating jobs. 6.7 Million dollars, per state is enough funding to put 134 sex-ed teachers in to schools, per state, on a fairly comfortable salary.(lets say 50K each, more than a lot of teachers.) So that could be what? 6700 teachers, nationally... I'm not saying that is how it WILL be used...but it is crunching the numbers and seeing how it COULD be used...



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by madhatr137
I'm not saying that is how it WILL be used...but it is crunching the numbers and seeing how it COULD be used...


The only thing I see being crunched here is the taxpayers who wont get any decent return on the tax bill to pay for all this so called stimulus that only stimulates the already overflowing accounts of these administrative people and companies.

Creating 6700 jobs doesnt stimulate a job market with millions out of work. And it definately doesnt stimulate the economy when jobs created are petty 9 buck an hour labor type jobs.

Alot of things wrong with that stimulus plan.




Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that less than 21% of the funds would be spent in 2009.

Apparently, we have a huge economic crisis which requires swift action (and no time to read bill text) to pass a massive spending bill --- but there seems to be no hurry at all to actually get the money into the American economy anytime soon.

Just from the first few pages...

Department of Agriculture—Office of Inspector General - $22,500,000
Department of Commerce—Office of Inspector General - $10,000,000
Department of Defense—Office of the Inspector General - $15,000,000
Department of Education—Departmental Management—Office of the Inspector General - $14,000,000
Department of Energy—Office of Inspector General - $15,000,000
Department of Health and Human Services—Office of the Secretary—Office of Inspector General - $19,000,000
Department of Homeland Security—Office of Inspector General - $2,000,000
Department of Housing and Urban Development—Management and Administration—Office of Inspector General - $15,000,000
Department of the Interior—Office of Inspector General - $15,000,000
Department of Justice—Office of Inspector General - $2,000,000
Department of Labor—Departmental Management—Office of Inspector General - $6,000,000
Department of Transportation—Office of
Inspector General - $20,000,000
Department of Veterans Affairs—Office
of Inspector General - $1,000,000
Environmental Protection Agency—Office
of Inspector General - $20,000,000
General Services Administration—General Activities—Office of Inspector General - $15,000,000
National Aeronautics and Space Administration—Office of Inspector General - $2,000,000
National Science Foundation—Office of Inspector General - $2,000,000
Small Business Administration—Office of Inspector General - $10,000,000
Social Security Administration—Office of Inspector General - $2,000,000
Corporation for National and Community Service—Office of Inspector General - $1,000,000
Government Accountability Office—Salaries and Expenses - $25,000,000, for oversight activities relating to this Act.
(TTL: 233.5 Million)

Independent Advisory Panel - $14,000,000
(TTL: 247.5 Million)

AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments - $44,000,000
Buildings and Facilities - $209,000,000
(TTL: 500.5 Million)

FARM SERVICE AGENCY

Salaries and Expenses - $245,000,000
Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations - $350,000,000
Watershed Rehabilitation Program - $50,000,000
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act - $5,838,000,000
RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT - $22,129,000,000
RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE - $2,825,000,000
WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN (WIC) - $100,000,000
EMERGENCY FOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - $150,000,000

Also Mandatory increase in Food stamps and "guaranteed" foodstamps for jobless adults

AFTERSCHOOL FEEDING PROGRAM FOR AT-RISK
CHILDREN - $250,000,000

Periodic Censuses and Programs - $1,000,000,000

(TTL: 33.4375 Billion)

NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION: Salaries and Expenses - $350,000,000

Wireless and Broadband Deployment Grant Programs - $2,825,000,000

Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program - $650,000,000

(TTL: 37.2625 Billion)

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

Scientific and Technical Research and Services - $100,000,000
Industrial Technology Services - $100,000,000
Construction of Research Facilities - $300,000,000

NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
ADMINISTRATION

Operations, Research, and Facilities - $400,000,000
Procurement, Acquisition and Construction - $600,000,000

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance - $3,000,000,000
Community Oriented Policing Services - $1,000,000,000

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION

Science - $400,000,000
Aeronautics - $150,000,000
Cross Agency Support Programs - $50,000,000

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Research and Related Activities - $2,500,000,000

(TTL: 45.8625 Billion)

EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES

Education and Human Resources - $100,000,000
Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction - $400,000,000

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FACILITY INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS - $4,500,000,000
ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, DEFENSE - $350,000,000
ENERGY AND WATER DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL CONSTRUCTION - $2,000,000,000
Mississippi River and Tributaries - $250,000,000
Operation and Maintenance - $2,225,000,000
Regulatory Program - $25,000,000

(TTL: 55.7125 Billion)


So far, nothing that really translates into "new" jobs, Although there is a large chunk of change that will get broadband to rural areas and of course, the Free Wireless that the FCC is pushing. But reality states that even these measures won't really create new jobs, just make sure that the cable and internet companies won't (hopefully) reduce their labor forces further.

This is a HUGE bill. I can almost guarantee that most of our elected officials have not read it - maybe a summary, but not the whole thing



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I sure wish I were on that list to receive money. I'd promise to spend my allotment with gusto. I'd pay off my mortgage and credit card, thus putting money into a bank that needs it: Bank of America. I'd hire a crew to do magic with my yard and have my house painted, thus beautifying my neighborhood. I'd have some updating done to the interior too, which would bring my property value up which would benefit the whole neighborhood. (If you don't understand this, watch some HG tv.) I'd travel and put money in the hands of airlines, hotels, restaurants, bars, cab drivers and other random small businesses. I'd do it all while eliminating the middle man.

I heard that the money needs to all go to "already existing spending authorities" so it can get spent as quick as a bunny. For spending authority read middle man who uses up a bunch while redecorating their own offices.

Also the word is stimulative, not stimulating. I heard a congressman say it over and over yesterday. stimulative stimulative stimulative. I suspect stimulative sounds more proactive than stimulating.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
$136,000,000,000 is "not a lot of stimulus"?

Because of what is it spent on and where it's going.


And Glenn Beck is certainly no economist.

His figures came straight from the Congretional Budget Office.


Originally posted by madhatr137
Actually its quite a small price-tag...and a welcomed one,

As I said before, some of what they want to spend it on is okay.
But they are not 'stimulus'.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   
If money was being used to set up companies who would develop useful products or services that would be sold, their market expanded, more employees hired, profit coming in, taxes being paid, that would be fine. A self-sustaining profitable company that just needs some start up capital to get going. That, to me, would stimulate the economy. But to spend money on all the stuff you would spend on if you didn't have to have a budget--like building stuff, remodeling stuff, studying stuff, that's not stimulus, that's just spending money like there's no tomorrow.

If I did that, I would very quickly lose my house and my old car and all the old stuff in my house though it wouldn't sell for much, but unlike someone like Bernie Madoff, I wouldn't get too far before I would be stopped from spending. Every once in awhile there's a movie like that, where a person is going to die (or they think they are) so liquidate everything and spend it all on one final good time. That's what our government seems to be doing.

When I'm not fuming over the idiocy of gov thinking spending beyond our means can "jump start the economy", I'm noticing that they are indeed spending like there is no tomorrow. Like this will never have to be paid, like there will be no consequences to this. So is there something they know that we don't?

I know this sounds cazy, but this is ATS so why not: maybe something is coming that they know about that makes them know it doesn't matter. Possibilities: large enough solar flaring that our planet will be scorched, pole shift, global warming for real (caused by the sun, not human activity that we can stop by throwing money at the right people),


anybody else have this feeling?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by earlywatcher
 


Yes... after all, we don't have any more money now than we did Four months ago. Where is all the money going to come from?

Easy. They'll print more money. The dollar, as has been well established in other threads, doesn't have any intrinsic value. The FED prints more whenever the country needs it, aside from dropping interest rates.

So that 800 billion is literally going to come out of thin air, and will be backed by zero.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   


$400 million to replace the Social Security Administration's 30-year-old National Computer Center.


This one is one of my favorites. Do we really need to spend 400 million on Social Security computers when the whole thing is bankrupt in the first place? Do they just want the numbers to come up faster? Let's hope they don't upgrade to Vista!







 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join