READER COMMENTS ON

"Fox 'News' 'Report' on Stimulus, Replicated from GOP Press Release, Typos and All"

(10 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Yvonne Ricks said on 2/10/2009 @ 8:34 pm PT...



If the Obama stimulus package passes, never before in history will a larger fraud be perpetuated against the hard working American taxpayer.

A stimulus package that creates too much debt does not stimulate the economy so much as temporarily "overdrives it" followed by a bust when we need to pay the debt off. The US taxpayers will have to pay interest on the debt and the borrowing will take money that was available for investment and lock it up in government debt. If the US government would not have borrowed the money, then the money would have been available for industry and individuals to borrow for productive purposes. If on average, the taxpayers only pay 4% interest on the government bonds - interest rates will get higher in the future, this works out to 36 billion dollars a year. Divide the 36 billion a year by the number of taxpayers paying income tax and it comes out to $400 a year in interest for every tax payer. This is on top of all the other government obligations. People should consider whether or not their children and grandchildren should be required to pay hundreds of dollars in interest every year just to payoff Obama's political friends.

This is perhaps why over half of the stimulus package is directed to Unions. Much of the rest of the stimulus package goes to make work job type programs and liberal causes. But consider, should every taxpayer be liable for $5,000 to pay back the Obama supporters?

Obama promised 3 million jobs with a stimulus bill building infrastructure. The hard reality is that there is no way to have a net increase of 3 million jobs in the next couple of years building infrastructure or by other government programs but Obama campaigned hard on the stimulus and still would like to reward his supporters.

900,000,000,000 / 306,000,000 = $2,950 per person. 138,000,000 people file a tax return. Over 1/3 of taxpayers pay no income tax. So the tax burden for the stimulus package would go to about 90,000,000 taxpayers. 900,000,000,000 / 90,000,000 = $10,000 per taxpayer.

1) Obama's 900 billion stimulus bill. US population is about 306,000,000 people right now. The current size of the stimulus package that is being discussed is more than 900 billion. The amount of money per person is:

2) Obama even after vetting and finding out various potential nominees are tax evaders and tax cheats, he has nominated them anyway. Therefore filling some of the highest government positions including the Treasury Secretary and head of the IRS with tax cheats. What does this say to the average American tax payer? It says to me either that it is fine to cheat on taxes unless you get caught or else it is fine to cheat on your taxes is you have politically powerful connections.

3) Immediately closing Guantanamo bay and suspending military tribunals on terrorists there. If he wants to close the facility, he should have created a committee to figure out how to do it in a rational manner.

4) Tries to reverse substantially all of Bush's executive orders immediately - an incredibly stupid thing for any president to do in first days in office. Executive orders are the orders not just of one man but an administration and usually address some problem. It is impossible to reverse 8 years worth of executive orders and replace them with something else right away.

There is little question in my mind that Obama has shown himself to have the single worst record ever in the first month in office. Can we stand another 3 years and 11 months of this? The four worst decisions of Obama are:

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 2/11/2009 @ 11:15 am PT...



Yvonne Ricks -

Though your note wreaks a bit of copy and pasted talking point shill spam, I don't have time to track down the original source for now, so will presume, for the moment, that you actually believe what you've posted above. I'll also, kindly, overlook the fact that it's almost completely off topic from the original post. You're welcome.

That said, I'm no particular defender of Obama's, or Democrats, but bullshit is bullshit, and you need to be called out (again, on the presumption you're actually sincere, rather than simply posting knowing disinfo). So I'll respond briefly to some of your talking points.

4) Tries to reverse substantially all of Bush's executive orders immediately - an incredibly stupid thing for any president to do in first days in office.

Using this metric, I guess you'd have to include Bush's first four weeks as "worst in history" as well, since he did the same thing. Somehow, I feel you'd like to over look that. Moreover, a bad executive order is a bad executive order, and as far as I can tell, the ones that the Obama Admin is reviewing and/or reversing, are orders that are very bad. So I have no idea why you believe that would think such responsible behavior is somehow a mark against Obama.

3) Immediately closing Guantanamo bay and suspending military tribunals on terrorists there. If he wants to close the facility, he should have created a committee to figure out how to do it in a rational manner.

He didn't "immediately close Guantanamo". You've either been misinformed, or don't care. He ordered that it be shut down within a year. Big difference. (Even if I'd rather have had him close it down immediately, as you wrongfully asserted he did). Suspending military tribunals, many of which have been illegal up until now, or incredibly poorly carried out --- such that there is not even evidence collated for most of those being held, despite years in captivity --- makes perfect sense, of course. In fact, many of those prisoners may end up going free, eventually, even the ones who shouldn't, if the tribunals aren't reviewed. Check your facts, because it seems you have no clue what you're talking about here.

2) Obama even after vetting and finding out various potential nominees are tax evaders and tax cheats, he has nominated them anyway. Therefore filling some of the highest government positions including the Treasury Secretary and head of the IRS with tax cheats.

The Treasure Secretary and the head of the IRS, in the context you're using it, are the same person: Timothy Geithner. So, even if you believe he is a "tax cheat" (which he may be, as far as I know), he is not "tax cheats" (plural). Therefore, unless you are aware of something I'm not, he has not "fill[ed] some of the highest governmnent positions...with tax cheats."

I make no excuse for his having nominated others with questionable tax issues (notably, Daschle, as the others I've heard about are ridiculous issues.) But it'd be nice if you got your facts correct rather than risking becoming the "Worse Commenter in BRAD BLOG history for a first time Commenter".

Finally, your "number 1 worst decision" is the most filled with nonsense and debunked GOP talking points, but I'll touch on a few of them.

For a start, again, I'm not defending the package. I'll leave that up to others. I am, however, defending facts. Particularly the ones which you simply make up, or pass along, though already debunked elsewhere.

Obama promised 3 million jobs with a stimulus bill building infrastructure. The hard reality is that there is no way to have a net increase of 3 million jobs in the next couple of years

He promised no such thing. He said he hoped to create or save 3 million jobs (actually, it may have been 2, I can't recall, but that's not my point here). Again, he said he hoped the plan would create or save x number of jobs. Big difference.

Obama campaigned hard on the stimulus and still would like to reward his supporters.

That's just silly. Doesn't even merit response, since a) it's wholly without substance and b) George W. Bush spent 8 years, explicitly --- and with miles of evidence to demonstrate it, and for much much larger sums --- doing exactly that. Did you bother to call him out on that anywhere? If so, please share the URL with us.

Much of the rest of the stimulus package goes to make work job type programs and liberal causes.

Pure GOP talking point nonsense. "Make work" gave you away, chief. The prhase is both meaningless, and otherwise, incorrect.

But consider, should every taxpayer be liable for $5,000 to pay back the Obama supporters?

Maybe, maybe not. And a perfectly legitimate question to ask and discuss. Had the rest of your screed been as reasonably writ, you'd not be getting smacked down for idiocy at this point.

A stimulus package that creates too much debt does not stimulate the economy so much as temporarily "overdrives it" followed by a bust when we need to pay the debt off.

Again, not sure I agree with you, but I'm not an economist, and had you brought up just these points, you might not have given away your GOP shill status and we'd welcome a legitimate conversation about it.

The US taxpayers will have to pay interest on the debt and the borrowing will take money that was available for investment and lock it up in government debt. If the US government would not have borrowed the money, then the money would have been available for industry and individuals to borrow for productive purposes.

That point is pure nonsense. The reason we're in this mess, is that there is no borrowing going on, because the banks have locked up the money. You've heard of "the bailout" right? The TARP program (for better or worse,) that makes money available to institutions to try and open up lending again, since the Government, at this point, is the only one who can borrow money?

There is no substance to your allegation that private borrowers will have a smaller pool from which to borrow, because the government has locked it up. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I hope you'll share the URL with us.

People should consider whether or not their children and grandchildren should be required to pay hundreds of dollars in interest every year just to payoff Obama's political friends.

Too bad you ruined your own legitimate point by tossing in that "Obama's political friends" bullshit. Had you avoided that, we might have had a conversation about the otherwise legiimate question you were asking about the cost of the program to future generations. (I'd likely argue the cost will be much greater to future generations if this isn't done, and that you didn't bother making the same argument when it was Bush running up your grandkids tabs far higher, but at least we could have had the discussion).

If the Obama stimulus package passes, never before in history will a larger fraud be perpetuated against the hard working American taxpayer.

Not true. Your comment here might well qualify in that category.