Bailouts or Stimulus???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
415
Location
OR
New Welfare in the Stimulus Bill

The House stimulus bill overtly increases federal welfare spending by $264 billion. Most of this spending will occur in the first two years after passage. For example, if enacted, the House stimulus bill will spend an additional $88 billion in means-tested welfare aid in FY 2009, an increase of more than 20 percent above prior spending levels. Federal welfare spending (including small increases built into existing law) will rise from $491 billion in FY 2008 to $601 billion in FY 2009. This one-year spending explosion (by far the largest in U.S. history) will not be a byproduct of unemployment generated by the recession but the result of a deliberate expansion of welfare eligibility and benefits by President Obama and Congress.

Camel's Nose in the Tent

While $264 billion in new welfare spending may seem like a lot, it is only the tip of the iceberg. If the stimulus bill is enacted, the real long-term increase will be far higher. This is because the stimulus bill pretends that most of its welfare benefit increases will lapse after two years. In fact, both Congress and President Obama intend for most of these increases to become permanent.[1] The claim that Congress is temporarily increasing welfare spending for Keynesian purposes (to spark the economy by boosting consumer spending) is a red herring. The real goal is a permanent expansion of the welfare system.

The notion that Congress intends to temporarily increase Pell grants and EITC benefit levels for just two years and then allow benefits to fall back to their original status is out of touch with Washington reality. Any Congressman who, two years from now, suggests that the new welfare spending be allowed to lapse to pre-stimulus levels would be pilloried for slashing welfare.

"Spread the Wealth" Tax Credit

A major new welfare program in the stimulus bill is Obama's "Make Work Pay" refundable tax credit. This credit represents a fundamental shift in welfare policy. At a cost of around $23 billion per year, this credit will provide up to $500 in cash to low income adults who pay no income taxes. For the first time, the government will give significant cash to able-bodied adults without dependent children. Since most of these individuals have little apparent need for assistance, the new credit represents "spreading the wealth" for its own sake.

The lack of connection between this credit and "economic stimulus" is evident in the fact that the first payments under the program will not be made until April 2010.[2] This refundable credit is not included in the stimulus bill because of its "stimulus" effect. Instead, the inclusion of this new welfare program makes good on an Obama presidential campaign promise. While the stimulus bill claims this new credit will terminate after two years, President Obama and the congressional leadership clearly intend it to be a permanent part of a new, much larger welfare state.

Hidden Welfare Spending

There are another six welfare expansions in the stimulus bill that will almost certainly become permanent if the bill is enacted. These include expansions to food stamps, the EITC, the refundable child credit, Medicaid eligibility standards, Pell grants, and Title I education grants. Added to the "Make Work Pay" refundable credit, the aggregate annual cost of these welfare expansions will be nearly $60 billion per year.

The claim that these welfare expansions in the stimulus bill will lapse after two years is a political gimmick designed to hide their true cost from the taxpayer. If these welfare expansions are made permanent--as history indicates they will--the welfare cost of the stimulus will rise another $523 billion over 10 years.[3] The total 10-year cost of welfare increases in the bill will not be $264 billion but $787 billion. The overall 10-year fiscal burden of the bill (added to the national debt) will not be $814 billion but $1.34 trillion.
 
It's funny how suddenly the Republicans became fiscally responsible after plundering the budget for the past 8 years with the ever increasing spending and budget deficits.

About 3 million people have lost their jobs recently. How do you think these people are going to survive? They need help.
 
Originally Posted By: CivicFan
It's funny how suddenly the Republicans became fiscally responsible after plundering the budget for the past 8 years with the ever increasing spending and budget deficits.

About 3 million people have lost their jobs recently. How do you think these people are going to survive? They need help.



Absolutely true. Borrow against the future with impunity. I'm sure the GOP would do it as well, and that would make it right.
 
Help by creating jobs, not handing out checks. I know so many people through the inner-city ministry that I am a part of, whom refuse to work because they make as much collecting welfare checks while also sponging off other programs. They will get a raise while in the mean time my company has imposed a wage increase freeze. Is the goal of the government to make 7% or higher the norm for unemployment?
 
Originally Posted By: CivicFan
It's funny how suddenly the Republicans became fiscally responsible after plundering the budget for the past 8 years with the ever increasing spending and budget deficits.

About 3 million people have lost their jobs recently. How do you think these people are going to survive? They need help.


I agree with you on your first point, but the last 2 years, they weren't in charge. The R's were idiots!!

The spendulous bill has not much if anything to do with jobs. If you think it does, either you don't read well...or.......is the Acorn money still in there? Smoking cessation? Grass for the capital mall? Welfare?
 
Originally Posted By: GROUCHO MARX
The government should go into an infinite amount of debt if it's good for the economy and the future.


It appears that is how they all think, Republicans included. Fed will benefit for sure.

Republicans are all talk when it comes to reducing government. All talk. More debt has been created under Bush than many Democratic presidents.

It's a shame the GOP and talk radio don't rally behind the ONLY conservative out there, Ron Paul. Republican party today is a bunch of frauds. Democrats are not better.

It KILLS me to hear the Republicans all of a sudden start to whine about DEBT. It's absurd on so many levels.

Until enough people in this country realize we have one party, nothing will change. They are both Keynesian...with Republicans being a bit more business friendly but a lot worse in other areas. IMO.
 
I have to say, I was hoping to hear about a large investment in alternative, renewable energy in this bill. Re-tooling factories in economically blighted areas so as to manufacture wind turbines or solar panels.

I would have loved to see an investment in infrastructure using old tire mountains as a source for long lasting roads made of an asphalt/rubber combination.

I didn't see much that was new. Just an I.O.U. I've seen too many of them.
 
I think that you mean all of the previous ones combined buster.

Down here, the stimulus package is there to buy this quarter's growth from a negative number to a positive. Just like it did in December.

It's not fixing the problem.

Our opposition are blocking it at present to make it look like they are conservative, but they'll let it through.

Stupid thing is, my SIL has taken affront and on her facebook has "Malcolm Turnbull, keep your hands off my money" (Turnbull is opposition leader).

It's currently MY money that's about to be given to her.
 
No amount of financial finagling can alter the basic demographic problems faced by Canada and the USA. The only politically acceptable solution is to allow massive immigration to fill in the voids. I don't think a Logan's Run scenario would fly. Japan has suffered almost two decades of recession because of their lack of ability to correct the problem. We don't have that racial angst limitation.
 
It's all such a terribly sad joke.

All this government activity of late is desperate, ineffective flailing. They have no idea if it'll help my economy or not - and I bet most of them don't really care.

It's depressing to witness the overwhelming self-interest that infects the politicians and helps make them almost totally useless during this financial mess.

We can only count Washington's solutions as overdone and badly executed. Hit a fly with a sledgehammer - but it's the wrong fly and the sledgehammer has a broken handle held together with scotch tape.
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
No amount of financial finagling can alter the basic demographic problems faced by Canada and the USA. The only politically acceptable solution is to allow massive immigration to fill in the voids. I don't think a Logan's Run scenario would fly. Japan has suffered almost two decades of recession because of their lack of ability to correct the problem. We don't have that racial angst limitation.


Forget immigration to fix it. Suffer through it until the bulging boomers are dead. No one needs conductors for empty trains. This is all the non-sense dealing with the need for perpetually expanding economies. Let it all collapse and cope with it. Around 2020-2040 all the baby boomers will be dead ..you'll have lots of surplus housing ..roads that are not congested ..etc..etc.

Who cares if you keep the trains on time when there will be no one riding them ..or is there some REAL NEED to keep things expanding for the sake of filling empty chairs?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom