Democrats Split on Stimulus as Job Losses Mount, Deficit Soars

#28
#28
droski said:
Done! The problem is old people don't spend money on anything. I have a client who is worth around $10 mil that recently asked me if she could afford to buy fresh strawberries.
Click to expand...

That is hilarious. Not sure how you kept from laughing yourself right out of your chair.
 
#29
#29
volinbham said:
Here's my answer - take that $400 billion out of the 700 billion or so THAT HASN"T BEEN SPENT YET of the original bill and do what should have been done in the first place.
Click to expand...

Yep. That's the first thought that came to my mind.
 
#30
#30
droski said:
i pay into lots of taxes that aren't optional and never plan on seeing a cent out of it. it has always been a tax, never has it been a retirement program.
Click to expand...

Amen. I don't know how old you are, but I am 31 (today actually :) ) and I don't expect to see a dime of what I put in. It's a tax, plain and simple, I'm on my own for my retirement.
 
#31
#31
lawgator1 said:
Let me ask you guys this, seriously, if a second stimulus bill of say, $400 billion, went directly to jobs creation, with no pork projects in it for anyone, would you support it? Or at least not oppose it?
Click to expand...
What kind of job creation are you talking about? :unsure:
 
#32
#32
SavageOrangeJug said:
Why do we need another stimulus bill? Why couldn't the first one have went directly to jobs creation with no pork?

Surely you're not suggesting the Obama Messiah made a mistake with the first bill.
Click to expand...
Lets not give Bush a pass on this. He had some involvement in this as well.
 
#34
#34
SavageOrangeJug said:
Cut it after they have paid into it all their working lives? :nono:

It's not like paying in is optional. I want every damn nickel out of it.
Click to expand...
How about this, allow people 40 years and younger the opportunity to opt out of SS. If they chose to do so, they forfeit future benefits and they will no longer have to pay into it. But, the money they would have paid into SS has to go into a pretax 401(k) type deal. Of course, to go along with that, you would have to raise the limits on how much a person can contribute per year. Also, if you are an enployer and you have an employee that opts out, you can allow the employer to not pay any SS payroll tax (half of your SS is paid by the individual and the other half is paid by the employer,I believe).
 
#35
#35
BigPapaVol said:
In the stimulus bill?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
Let me clarify, the first problem we had is this TARP bill that was supported by Bush and carried over into Obama's administration. Obama compounded the problem with his stimulus plan. But even if Obama had done nothing, the promises we heard about TARP would have still never materialized, and we would probably be in the same mess. Even though most of the TARP money hasn't gone out, it still appears to have had a net zero, if not negative effect on the economy.
 
#36
#36
Rasputin_Vol said:
Let me clarify, the first problem we had is this TARP bill that was supported by Bush and carried over into Obama's administration. Obama compounded the problem with his stimulus plan. But even if Obama had done nothing, the promises we heard about TARP would have still never materialized, and we would probably be in the same mess. Even though most of the TARP money hasn't gone out, it still appears to have had a net zero, if not negative effect on the economy.
Click to expand...

TARP money hasn't repaired the lie being perpetrated by this admin when they tout that they're loosening the credit markets as they have regulators absolutely crushing lenders, but it had helped many community and regional banks shore up their capital to the point of remaining somewhat viable banks. Without it, real estate would have seen a much larger devaluation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#37
#37
Rasputin_Vol said:
How about this, allow people 40 years and younger the opportunity to opt out of SS. If they chose to do so, they forfeit future benefits and they will no longer have to pay into it. But, the money they would have paid into SS has to go into a pretax 401(k) type deal. Of course, to go along with that, you would have to raise the limits on how much a person can contribute per year. Also, if you are an enployer and you have an employee that opts out, you can allow the employer to not pay any SS payroll tax (half of your SS is paid by the individual and the other half is paid by the employer,I believe).
Click to expand...

that sounds great, but it would bankrupt the system. the need to milk the young to pay for all the baby boomers.

Rasputin_Vol said:
Let me clarify, the first problem we had is this TARP bill that was supported by Bush and carried over into Obama's administration. Obama compounded the problem with his stimulus plan. But even if Obama had done nothing, the promises we heard about TARP would have still never materialized, and we would probably be in the same mess. Even though most of the TARP money hasn't gone out, it still appears to have had a net zero, if not negative effect on the economy.
Click to expand...

a) the tarp money will be repaid by 90% of the banks with interest. which makes it completely different from the stimulus package.

b) how the hell could the tarp money have had a negative effect on the economy?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top