quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife



Plain Talk By Al Neuharth, USA TODAY Founder

Much is being written and said about the new stimulus law (officially the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009). Not enough of us explain or realize why we're in this money mess.

It's primarily because we've spent or authorized more money on the Iraq war (its sixth anniversary is next Thursday) than we're putting into the stimulus program. Comparison: •The Iraq war $864 billion. •The stimulus program $787 billion. 

Sure, greedy bankers, covetous Wall Streeters, irresponsible buyers of homes and cars they couldn't afford all contributed to this recession. But if we hadn't blown that huge bundle in Iraq, we could have handled our problems here at home more easily.

Most of us consider Iraq to have been President Bush's biggest blunder. It was, but Congress voted to let him do it. Five months before we invaded Iraq, I wrote in this column on Oct. 4, 2002: "Congress is 'debating,' but President Bush and his hawkish cohorts are demanding a virtual blank check to wage war on Iraq. They'll probably get it. That's a mistake."

Many Democrats as well as nearly all Republicans in Congress gave Bush that blank check. Votes on the Iraq resolution: • House of Representatives: Yes, 215 Republicans, 81 Democrats. • Senate: Yes, 48 Republicans, 29 Democrats.

By contrast, the votes on President Obama's recovery or stimulus plan to clean up the mess that Congress helped create with the Iraq misadventure: • House: 246 Democrats, 0 Republicans. • Senate: 56 Democrats, 3 Republicans.

Both parties got us into this mess, but only one is trying to get us out of it. As a political independent, I understand that. No matter your party affiliation or inclination, you should, too.


Continue reading "Money mess created by six years of Iraq" »

quote:

ORIGINAL: sailorslave123

Well, according to Forbes on CNN, the war has very little negative affect on our economy. Here is the link to the article http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/10/news/economy/costofwar.fortune/index.htm. Comparing Iraq war to the Stimulus plan is absurd for many reasons. For one, the Iraq war was based on taking away weapons of mass destruction from Iraq; thus, protecting American interest and keeping us safe (in theory). Now, yes we never found any weapons of Mass Destruction; however, we already made the move in to Iraq; thus, putting us in to a situations where leaving could prove destructive to our security.

quote:

By contrary, the stimulus plan isn't going to save us from our enemies, help our economy, or take away any of your problems. Instead, it is going to bankrupt this nation and send money to worthless efforts and organization.

quote:


Another reason why the Iraq war and the Stimulus package should not be compared is because of the time frame in which the money has been spent on Iraq compared to the Stimulus: Iraq war over 800 billion over a SIX YEAR PERIOD, the stimulus over 700 billion in ONE DAY.

quote:


Lastly, Iraq isn't able to repair itself with out our help; however, our economy can repair itself through our current system because it has overcome much more serious obstacles than what is happening right now (the depression for instance).

quote:


Another thing I want to point out to you is that the Republican party does want to help the economy, but they feal as if spending 700 billion dollars on stupid nonsense like saving a species of rat, and giving money to ACORN isn't going to help the economy. Plus, they feal as if spending 700 plus billion dollars on the economy is madoptic; expectialy, when the plan will creat less than ten thousand jobs. Likewise, the liberals are trying to use GOVERNMENT to fix the economy when the government isn't even capable of fixing our schools, roads, bridges, etc.

quote:


In all, I believe that the liberals are trying to fix the economy through very socialistic avenues that have already been tested and failed. That is why the republicans voted against the stimulus plan. The Democrats voted for a plan that will fail. If you think that the stimulus plan will uplift our economy out of a recession/depression then how about you research the great new deal during the depression or more recently Bush's economic stimulus in the early 2000's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

What about 14(?) years of outsourcing and steadily growing unemployment?  Didn't that contribute or is it irrelevant?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

But on more appropriate goals.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

war is never, NEVER good for the economy.

but claiming this catastrophe is because of the war in Iraq betrays a level of ignorance that is only found on internet forums or in SDS parties.

quote:

By contrary, the stimulus plan isn't going to save us from our enemies, help our economy, or take away any of your problems. Instead, it is going to bankrupt this nation and send money to worthless efforts and organization.

quote:

I see, and I should accept this as fact because you just told it to me or can you fill in the blanks?

quote:


Another reason why the Iraq war and the Stimulus package should not be compared is because of the time frame in which the money has been spent on Iraq compared to the Stimulus: Iraq war over 800 billion over a SIX YEAR PERIOD, the stimulus over 700 billion in ONE DAY.

You mean that $787 billion was already spent?

quote:


Lastly, Iraq isn't able to repair itself with out our help; however, our economy can repair itself through our current system because it has overcome much more serious obstacles than what is happening right now (the depression for instance).

Iraq wouldn't HAVE to repair itself if we hadn't broken it.

quote:

Imagine that, and all along I was under the impression that the stimulus package specifically allocated money for projects to fix our schools, roads, and bridges.

quote:

Oh I have researched the New Deal, and it provided a great many jobs repairing those schools, roads, and bridges you mentioned earlier.

Maybe you should try your own research recommendation.  You can start with the Hoover Dam and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sailorslave123


FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS For an additional amount for the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et. seq.), except section 21, and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et. seq.), except sections 17 and 21, $100,000,000, to carry out a grant program for National School Lunch Program equipment assistance: Provided, That such funds shall be provided to States administering a school lunch program in a manner proportional with each States’ administrative expense allocation: Provided further, That the States shall provide competitive grants to school food authorities based upon the need for equipment assistance in participating schools with priority given to school in which not less than 50 percent of the students are eligible for free or reduced price meals under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act.

WOW, this is really going to boost up our economy.

Oh, and this one
SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN (WIC) For an additional amount for the special supplemental nutrition program as authorized by section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786), $500,000,000, of which $400,000,000 shall be placed in reserve to be allocated as the Secretary deems necessary, notwithstanding section 17(i) of such Act, to support participation should cost or participation exceed budget estimates, and of which $100,000,000 shall be for the purposes specified in section 17(h)(10)(B)(ii): Provided, That up to one percent of the funding provided for the purposes specified in section 17(h)(10)(B)(ii) may be reserved by the Secretary for Federal administrative activities in support of those purposes.

What the hell does all of this have to do with our economy? In fact, please read the dam stimulus plan http://readthestimulus.org/index.php?doc=hr1final&page=5.

quote:



Yup, the money is guaranteed.

quote:



Shouldn't of, could not of, Would not of? Your point being? We already are in Iraq and leaving would be disastrous to our nations security because it would empower almost all of our enemies: Alkidah and Iran for instance.

quote:



The new deal extended the depression and hurt the lower class even more.
http://blogs.usd.edu/crepub/entry/fdr_s_new_deal_hurt .

quote:



I am not arguing that there isn't money going to such programs like education and economic structures. But, I am arguing that the government doesn't know how to run many of those programs. An example would be our education system which has been slowly declining over the years. And, I don't think all 787 billion is going to our schools, roads, and bridges. Instead the money going to democrat ally activist groups such as FOOD DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS: all $5,000,000 of it.

quote:



Oh ok! The building of the hoover dam was started in the late 1920s, but the new deal was passed in 1933 and is the reason for why the dam was started according to your research? It isn't named the Roosevelt Dam is it? I think you are confused, the construction of the Hoover Dam finished on 1935 and the completion of it had nothing to do with the Great New Deal

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

yes, he is an ignorant individual with a large base of readers?

is that your defense of his argument?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Yes, I guess it is.

An ignorant individual with a whole lot more in his cache of accomplishments then my guess is you have.

But it's always fun to be a Monday morning quarterback.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Yes, I guess it is.

An ignorant individual with a whole lot more in his cache of accomplishments then my guess is you have.

But it's always fun to be a Monday morning quarterback.

that's fantastic. he can have all the accomplishments he can possible acquire, that won't make him any less wrong.

unfortunately for some people, prestige does not determine truth.

quote:

In your opinion, and those of many conservatives historians trying to revise history

quote:

ORIGINAL: sailorslave123

Oh man! Ok, a stimulus package is for the economy. It is not for giving food to small interests groups. Can you please quit being so irrational in your arguments. We are not arguing about giving money to AIG ( I don't agree with giving money to any industry, company, or corporation to save them or to get them out of debt) or helping any small interest group to get food. In all, you made a phew statements that are untrue and very biased.

quote:



1. You believe that Iraq is the main cause of our economic downfall. That is wrong, I know I have proven you wrong by using actual facts and logical thinking. Almost every one agrees that the economy is in a weak state because of the housing crisis, debt accumulation with in government and people, and the federal government producing too many dollar bills. You however have done nothing to prove that Iraq is the source of our economic troubles.

quote:



2. You also stated that the Democrats are helping this nation while the republicans cross their fingers and hope for the down fall of our country. I am simply arguing that the way the democrats are proceeding to help this nation is the wrong way to go. The stimulus package will fail the people because most of the money is going to earmarks to help small worthless interest groups that all have one thing in common and that is they are all looking out for their own self interests.

quote:



I think you forget that we are already in a 13 trillion dollar hole. Also, you never mentioned anything about the republicans attempting to voice their opinions on how to fix the economy. Which they have done , by creating their own economic stimulus plan that was only worth 250 billion dollars.

quote:



Finally, I don't think you understand that the money that Oboma is spending on this plan will have to be paid by you and me. The only way he will be able to pay for all of his plans will be by raising taxes in an environment that is already in a deepen state of trouble. This sounds like what happened during the depression when Roosevelt passed his Great New Deal.

quote:



I FIND IT FUNNY THAT YOU TRIED TO REWRITE PART OF THE ARTICLE BY SAYING

quote:

In your opinion, and those of many conservatives historians trying to revise history

So, I will re-paste what you pasted but with out any changes

Scholars tend to view the Depression and New Deal differently depending on their own ideological perspective.

Conservative historians place a high value on the ideal of laissez-faire.   Thus, the Depression was simply a painful but necessary market correction which would have corrected itself if left alone.  To conservatives, small government means maximum freedom; and, the New Deal means the beginnings of an irresponsible and/or over-regulatory welfare state.

For liberal historians the Depression represents the failure of laissez-faire, but not capitalism itself.  Liberals value capitalism and democracy, asserting that democratic governments must be responsive to the social needs of the people.  For many liberals the New Deal represents another American Revolution leading to the empowerment of previously powerless and oppressed groups and laying the foundation for a humane welfare state.

To leftists the Depression represents the failure of market capitalism to protect the interests of the majority.  The New Deal was simply laissez-faire capitalism's replacement with corporate statism (a more systematic partnership between corporations and the government).  Rather than empowering the masses, for leftist scholars the New Deal represents capitalism's resilience and continued power.

quote:

Well, considering your previous statement that you use "actual facts and logical thinking" maybe you can come up with some of either to prove to me why the stimulus package will fail and some documentation on how "most of the money is going to earmarks to help worthless interest groups".