If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   The economy is still going down. Should Congress: A) Stop having congressional sessions on steroids and baseball? B) Ignore the problem? Or C) Try another stimulus package?   (msnbc.msn.com) divider line 97
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

1851 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Oct 2008 at 2:15 AM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



97 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-10-13 01:06:34 AM  
How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?
 
2008-10-13 01:45:55 AM  
Weaver95: How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?

static.howstuffworks.com

/Pic is a little outdated. It just recently rolled over to 10 trillion.
 
2008-10-13 02:20:13 AM  
LordPistachio:

Yeah that clock ran out of digits.
 
2008-10-13 02:20:20 AM  
Borrow it from the Chinese?
 
2008-10-13 02:21:11 AM  
Torches? Pitchforks anyone?
 
2008-10-13 02:21:29 AM  
Weaver95: How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?

By selling our children to China as slave labor?
 
2008-10-13 02:21:38 AM  
We need to raise taxes. It's time that the rich pay their fair share.
 
2008-10-13 02:23:10 AM  
HITHAWSTPFATS?!

/wants to start a new Fark acronym
//How in the Hell are we supposed to pay for all this shiat?!
///the invisible hand taketh away
 
2008-10-13 02:23:31 AM  
msnbcmedia.msn.com

Here's a more up to date one.
 
2008-10-13 02:24:02 AM  
If they're serious about sending it to states and infrastructure projects, it probably makes a hell of a lot more sense than the last one's wave of direct payments to people.
 
2008-10-13 02:24:06 AM  
What if we start taxing peoples health care benefits?
That should raise a few bucks.
 
2008-10-13 02:25:24 AM  
Korovyov: If they're serious about sending it to states and infrastructure projects, it probably makes a hell of a lot more sense than the last one's wave of direct payments to people.

Fixing our infrastructure would be a wise investment. But, we got a war and so forth, so NO.
 
2008-10-13 02:26:13 AM  
And don't forget the Cost of the Iraq War Clock! Anyone know if that cost is included in the debt clock?

Link
 
2008-10-13 02:27:32 AM  
They could print off about a billion in cash, buy out all of the major media outlets and use them to convince people things are getting progressively better. After about a year maybe enough people will have bought into it to actually make it better.
 
2008-10-13 02:28:34 AM  
Jesus, this is so sick. SOOO sick. These companies took advantage of people which led them into this crisis, and now they're being handed the money of those who can't afford it to fix it. And that AIG spa retreat was those executives knowing it and rubbing our noses in it.

It makes me ill, and I would have been happy to vote for a presidential candidate who voted against the bailout, but they were both too spineless.

sigh.
 
2008-10-13 02:30:30 AM  
Weaver95: How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?

I don't know about you, but I've been explicitly told for 25+ years that deficits don't matter.

Sure, the people who told me that are starting to die off and are otherwise quite rich, but so what?
 
2008-10-13 02:38:04 AM  
The economy is still going down

Like a hockey mom wearing lipstick?
 
2008-10-13 02:40:27 AM  
I am so ahead of Congress as last month I took a big cash advance on my credit card plus I went to one of those payday loan places.

Taxes don't just go down, sometimes they have to go up, like after a few decades of reckless spending. Those who have the most capacity to pay need to start paying their fair share so there can once again be good times in a decade or so.
 
2008-10-13 02:40:36 AM  
Weaver95: How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?

Well, Bush and Co. are going to have a bunch of free time soon, so I say put them to work. World wide tour in a "Dunk-A-Dope" carnival tank, charge $10 for 3 throws. All proceeds go directly to the debt. Might only net a few hundred million, but it would do wonders for other countries view of the new administration.
 
2008-10-13 02:44:09 AM  
I think every Obama supporter thinks this is a HORRIBLE idea...
we're alright in the middle class, just fix what got to this point (Like Iraq and general mismanagement.)
 
2008-10-13 02:44:30 AM  
Genevieve Marie: . These companies took advantage of people which led them into this crisis, and now they're being handed the money of those who can't afford it to fix it. And that AIG spa retreat was those executives knowing it and rubbing our noses in it.

The AIG deal isn't quite what you describe. They weren't given "free money". They were given a 24 month loan in exchange for the US owning an 80% stake in the company. Here's an excellent AIG bailout explainer that gets into the details of it.
 
2008-10-13 02:47:56 AM  
To hell with these stimulus packages.

Why do I have the feeling that this bill will do NOTHING other than give Nancy Pelosi and other democrats a reason to get re-elected for "helping out the middle class"?
 
2008-10-13 02:50:19 AM  
brainscab: I think every Obama supporter thinks this is a HORRIBLE idea...

Obama is devout believer in socialism-lite. Sorry Obama fans, but it's true. While he has promised PAYGO to pay for new spending (by taxing the rich and giving to the poor), Obama has also flat out promised not to reduce the deficit any. Because he insists it is the lower and middle class's right to receive more money, programs, and benefits from the government. So expect $500 billion yearly deficits during his administration.
 
2008-10-13 02:56:18 AM  
helix400: brainscab: I think every Obama supporter thinks this is a HORRIBLE idea...

Obama is devout believer in socialism-lite. Sorry Obama fans, but it's true. While he has promised PAYGO to pay for new spending (by taxing the rich and giving to the poor), Obama has also flat out promised not to reduce the deficit any. Because he insists it is the lower and middle class's right to receive more money, programs, and benefits from the government. So expect $500 billion yearly deficits during his administration.


i372.photobucket.com
 
2008-10-13 02:56:23 AM  
helix400: brainscab: I think every Obama supporter thinks this is a HORRIBLE idea...

Obama is devout believer in socialism-lite. Sorry Obama fans, but it's true. While he has promised PAYGO to pay for new spending (by taxing the rich and giving to the poor), Obama has also flat out promised not to reduce the deficit any. Because he insists it is the lower and middle class's right to receive more money, programs, and benefits from the government. So expect $500 billion yearly deficits during his administration.


Where exactly did you get THAT information? Besides, we all know deficits don't matter.
 
2008-10-13 02:57:22 AM  
FTA: and $65 billion for tax rebates paid for by a windfall profits tax on oil


Uh, how would this tax on the oil companies reduce oil prices...which is the main reason America is in this stagflating recession?

I used to think $65 Billion was a lot of money, until the bailout....so I don't think such an insignificant fraction of money will do a damn thing that really matters.


/we need to fund a Manhattan project for flying unicorns to power our economy
 
2008-10-13 02:58:36 AM  
helix400: Obama is devout believer in socialism-lite.

You keep using that word [socialism], I do not think it means what you think it means.

Obama is a black Bill Clinton, who was about as far right as you can be and still be a Democrat. If things were sane in politics, if the Republican party wasn't controlled by religious extremists, both Bill Clinton and Obama would be Republicans. Things are so farked up right now hardly anyone can imagine what things should look like.
 
2008-10-13 03:05:02 AM  
sorry but it ain't gonna happen.....atleast not today
 
2008-10-13 03:07:32 AM  
KeatingFive: Where exactly did you get THAT information?

http://www.abc3340.com/news/stories/0708/534286.html
"I do not make a promise that we can reduce [the deficit] by 2013 because I think it is important for us to make some critical investments right now in America's families" -- Barack Obama
 
2008-10-13 03:13:03 AM  
helix400: KeatingFive: Where exactly did you get THAT information?

http://www.abc3340.com/news/stories/0708/534286.html
"I do not make a promise that we can reduce [the deficit] by 2013 because I think it is important for us to make some critical investments right now in America's families" -- Barack Obama


So? Deficits don't matter. And he told the truth. One of the many reasons he's going to be President.
 
2008-10-13 03:16:11 AM  
helix400: brainscab: I think every Obama supporter thinks this is a HORRIBLE idea...

Obama is devout believer in socialism-lite. Sorry Obama fans, but it's true. While he has promised PAYGO to pay for new spending (by taxing the rich and giving to the poor), Obama has also flat out promised not to reduce the deficit any. Because he insists it is the lower and middle class's right to receive more money, programs, and benefits from the government. So expect $500 billion yearly deficits during his administration.


Deficit spending does not bother me if we're doing it to invest in the future, especially for programs that are likey to generate a return on the investment.

Quick examples:

Clean energy -- wind, solar, battery tech -- exportable technology that can put the US back in a leadership position.

Health care -- I am a firm believer that we would see our nations productivity rise and health care costs lower if everyone had access to basic health care and decent preventative medical programs.

Education -- I'm pretty sure that education is the solution to the failure of supply side economics. We can't trickle down our way out of a stupid populace, but we can educate ourselves into new opportunity.
 
2008-10-13 03:26:13 AM  
alostpacket: Deficit spending does not bother me if we're doing it to invest in the future, especially for programs that are likey to generate a return on the investment.

At what point does this attitude stop? At what point to people have "enough" free health care? There's only so much money that can be thrown at these problem, and so much debt we can incur before we can't even pay interest on it.

Mostly I agree with you. Deficit spending DOES invest in the future. Just so long as debt is managed in a way that it's easier to pay down every year. Unfortunately, Obama's plans make debt worse, not easier.
 
2008-10-13 03:29:31 AM  
alostpacket: helix400: Clean energy -- wind, solar, battery tech -- exportable technology that can put the US back in a leadership position.

Health care -- I am a firm believer that we would see our nations productivity rise and health care costs lower if everyone had access to basic health care and decent preventative medical programs.

Education -- I'm pretty sure that education is the solution to the failure of supply side economics. We can't trickle down our way out of a stupid populace, but we can educate ourselves into new opportunity.


STOP BEING SENSIBLE! IT DOES NOT COMPUTE! NEOCON IDEOLOGY FTW! CUT TAXES ON THE RICH SO THEY CAN AFFORD TO GIVE THE REST OF YOU JORBS!

\meanwhile the US prints money that devalues everyone's savings. What a great plan
\\IOU a billion. Oh, a loaf of bread now costs a billion
\\\hyperinflation solves all problems!
\\except for those who saved and invested as they were told to do
\yeah, you're all screwed. Sucks to be you
 
2008-10-13 03:30:35 AM  
Legalize weed and tax the shiat out of it?
 
2008-10-13 03:42:40 AM  
I hear that Republicans are so sorry that they have been the source of so much debt, that they are going to pay it all back themselves.

Ha ha ha, just kidding, republicans would never pay any of their debts, they expect everyone else to should their stupidity. And complain about it the whole time.
 
2008-10-13 03:52:06 AM  
alostpacket:
Deficit spending does not bother me if we're doing it to invest in the future, especially for programs that are likey to generate a return on the investment.

Quick examples:

Clean energy -- wind, solar, battery tech -- exportable technology that can put the US back in a leadership position.

Health care -- I am a firm believer that we would see our nations productivity rise and health care costs lower if everyone had access to basic health care and decent preventative medical programs.

Education -- I'm pretty sure that education is the solution to the failure of supply side economics. We can't trickle down our way out of a stupid populace, but we can educate ourselves into new opportunity.


You know, if you keep presenting rational proposals like this you're going to become a total pariah here on fark...
 
2008-10-13 03:52:12 AM  
EL_FABREZ: Legalize weed and tax the shiat out of it? Fixed that for you.
 
2008-10-13 03:55:07 AM  
Anyone else notice that the debt per family went down between those two pictures of the debt clock?

So...we just need to have a ton of kids! The welfare moms knew that a long time ago and have been trying to save our economy for years.
 
2008-10-13 03:59:45 AM  
helix400: alostpacket: Deficit spending does not bother me if we're doing it to invest in the future, especially for programs that are likey to generate a return on the investment.

At what point does this attitude stop? At what point to people have "enough" free health care? There's only so much money that can be thrown at these problem, and so much debt we can incur before we can't even pay interest on it.

Mostly I agree with you. Deficit spending DOES invest in the future. Just so long as debt is managed in a way that it's easier to pay down every year. Unfortunately, Obama's plans make debt worse, not easier.


Yes I think we're in agreement mostly about how to manage debt. But I think tossing 160,000 teenagers with rifles into a desert in the middle east was more of a waste of money than health care.

And I think these programs need to finally get done. This is what Obama will be inheriting. As an industrial nation we're way behind on health care and clean energy, and really these is no excuse for that. we overstretched ourselves by dumping trillions in Iraq and we've listened to the free market nuts for far too long.

Just for reference our 2007 spending on interest on the national debt was about $243.7 billion (+13.4%)
 
2008-10-13 04:01:35 AM  
Give tax cuts to the wealthy. Isn't that what we usually do?
 
2008-10-13 04:02:10 AM  
djrez4: Anyone else notice that the debt per family went down between those two pictures of the debt clock?

So...we just need to have a ton of kids! The welfare moms knew that a long time ago and have been trying to save our economy for years.


I'm definitely willing to man up and contribute all I can.

/call me, girls!
 
2008-10-13 04:04:20 AM  
oregoncat:
You know, if you keep presenting rational proposals like this you're going to become a total pariah here on fark...


that's ok i got some silly photoshops for just such an emergency ;)



img374.imageshack.us
 
2008-10-13 04:12:45 AM  
silverfoxrocker: Here's a more up to date one.

how did we go up in total debt so much, but actually go down in debt per person?

thats a lot of population growth

also, didn't that thing used to only say like 35 grand per person?
 
2008-10-13 04:26:00 AM  
alostpacket: Yes I think we're in agreement mostly about how to manage debt.

Yep.

But I think tossing 160,000 teenagers with rifles into a desert in the middle east was more of a waste of money than health care.

Yet strangely enough, if the Iraq War were part of the budget, would only make up about 4% of it. Entitlement spending on the other hand, makes up over 57%. If you really want gobs of extra money, tweak around with entitlements, not the Iraq War.

And I think these programs need to finally get done. This is what Obama will be inheriting. As an industrial nation we're way behind on health care

I fully agree. Health care has to get fixed. But neither candidate is doing anything to really fix it. Obama's plan merely throws more money at it, not really fixing the core reasons for rising health care costs. A decade from now, we'll be right back where we started. McCain's plan is a step in the right direction by punishing employer sponsored health care (which is now causing more problems than it's helping). In return, he gives major incentives for competition and individual plans. But beyond that, his plan is really lackluster and would suffer heavily from needed regulation.
 
2008-10-13 04:28:08 AM  
Weaver95: How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?

Obama will include a handy "Your taxes on a T-Shirt" button for all online income tax filings!
 
2008-10-13 04:31:51 AM  
Weaver95: How in the hell are we supposed to PAY for all this shiat!?

Kinda silly to think we'll ever actually pay it off. Just wait until daddy takes away congress' credit card.
 
2008-10-13 04:55:00 AM  
helix400: alostpacket: Yes I think we're in agreement mostly about how to manage debt.

Yep.

But I think tossing 160,000 teenagers with rifles into a desert in the middle east was more of a waste of money than health care.

Yet strangely enough, if the Iraq War were part of the budget, would only make up about 4% of it. Entitlement spending on the other hand, makes up over 57%. If you really want gobs of extra money, tweak around with entitlements, not the Iraq War.

And I think these programs need to finally get done. This is what Obama will be inheriting. As an industrial nation we're way behind on health care

I fully agree. Health care has to get fixed. But neither candidate is doing anything to really fix it. Obama's plan merely throws more money at it, not really fixing the core reasons for rising health care costs. A decade from now, we'll be right back where we started. McCain's plan is a step in the right direction by punishing employer sponsored health care (which is now causing more problems than it's helping). In return, he gives major incentives for competition and individual plans. But beyond that, his plan is really lackluster and would suffer heavily from needed regulation.


I'm with you on most of this. But imagine if we spent $120 Billion more a year on education, clean energy, and health education (like teaching people refined sugar = bad, exercise = good (and fun!)) and we stopped subsidizing high fructose corn syrup. And we made sure people had vaccines and asthma inhalers etc etc.

Hell NASA's budget is only $15B ish.

Health care is a different beast though. And one so complicated I don't claim to have all the answers. Personally I believe ethically a single payer system would be best to provide a net for those that can't buy into private. Still the costs of such are staggering and leave me a bit confused on how to make it work as well. I will tell you however, that two of my relatives who are recently retired who spent many years working high up in the VA. I asked them a bit about this kind of health care and they actually thought it could work (even the one who was a staunch republican). His biggest concern was that doctors not be paid for treating the sniffles with a bunch of MRIs and follow up visits that really are not needed. He worried about abuse on that level. But he thought as long as you could solve that problem it would be OK.

While this could be a serious strain on the budget, I don't think our country really needs to spend more on our military than all of the other nations of the world combined. This is one of the few positions I don't side with Obama. Still I think deficit spending could work here as long as the interest is kept manageable.

As for social security, that's one I need to learn about but I've always wondered if it is a big boogeyman. The Baby Boomers' kids are now in their 30's and 40's. Those kids are the first few years that finally actually outnumber the boomers and each year after that (in general) outnumbers the previous. So with all these new workers paying into the system, it's hard for me to imagine it's so insolvent. But again, I don't know a ton about the financials of SS.


/minor side note: I don't like lumping social security in with health care and calling it "entitlement" I feel like that's a neat language trick to make it sound evil.
 
2008-10-13 05:06:54 AM  
alostpacket: Hell NASA's budget is only $15B ish.

We agree on science funding. I want to raid entitlement programs to vastly boost it. You want to raid the military for it. At least we know we gotta lynch something for science.

As for social security, that's one I need to learn about but I've always wondered if it is a big boogeyman.

SS will be fine. There's an upcoming shortfall. After that, it levels off. The options are to cut back on benefits, or increase taxes. I support the former. (SS isn't a pension. It was to prevent old people from living on the street. Today people are living longer, so it's time to reset the baseline). McCain supports a middle of the road approach. Obama wants to increase SS taxes on those making $250K and up (surprise, surprise) and keep benefits the same. But any way you shake it, SS can easily be fixed.

The scary boogeymen is Medicare and Medicaid. The growth on those two have no end in sight.
 
2008-10-13 05:08:30 AM  
And by "is", I mean "are"

/I've done learned good grammar.
 
2008-10-13 05:27:30 AM  
silverfoxrocker: Here's a more up to date one.

Wait a minute, that second picture says my family's share is 3,000 LESS than it was beforehand!

Hot damn!
 
Displayed 50 of 97 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report