Well whoa darn! Obama has failed - already?

[Flyingjj]

 

To Flyingjj: Those quantities of methane emission, when compared to the CO2 produced by vehicles, illustrate my point. Learn the metric system >:(

 

 

 

The problem is less so that I need to know the metric system(which I do), and more so that I can't pull how much CO2 a truck produces driving 20000 miles off the top of my head. Plus, I was saying your source was unclear in that its language makes it difficult to distinguish whether it is talking about all cows producing that much methane in a day or a single cow producing that much methane.

[Barihawk]

Guys, lighten up. No matter who the President is, he is going to be heavily scrutinized. You guys have been spoiled in that practically your entire awareness of politics has occurred within one Presidential era. You are so used to bashing on Bush that when people start to knock on Obama, you take it personally.

 

 

 

Guess what, it happens. Clinton had people knocking on him worse than Bush did. Does that mean he is doing a good or bad job? That's for YOU to decide. Not the news, not Chris Matthews or Rush Limbaugh, and most certainly not some (sorry) idiot on a web forum who has also spent their entire political awareness career seeing one school of thought. Do your own research, make your own views based on that.

 

 

 

That being said, he HAS only been in office for three weeks. The Honeymoon phase is still in swing. Within a year more and more people are going to be saying "wtf Obama?" All the greatest Presidents had craploads of people who hated their policies and maybe even them during their terms. But now we say "oh look, what a great guy!" Lincoln's a great example of this. Hard to love a guy when if you say "I don't like having so many soldiers in the street" you can get your rear end hauled off to jail and shot thanks to a note from Uncle Abe!

 

 

 

But give the man a break, on both sides. He's not the greatest thing that ever lived Democrats, nor is he a self-indulgent evil psychopath Republicans. He's human, and President. Wait and watch that space.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: And what's the deal with people knocking on Rush Limbaugh? He's the news equivalent of a shock jock. You may not like what he has to say, but you are in fact listening to his show, therefore he has done his job. I say that metaphorically since many of you might not have even heard his show and get all your opinions from someone else. I hope not, because that would make you sheep :o. But anywhoo, like him or not, if you have listened to his show he has done all of his research and homework. He's doing a good job, because he has looked at the facts and created his opinion. You should take his example and do the same. I've heard some people call him racist, which is silly because the offending statement was a true fact about crime rates? Seriously? But yeah, you still have to give the guy props for being smart and educated as opposed to reading a teleprompter for 1.5 million a year like *coughChrisMatthewscough*

[Wisp]

Want to know an actual waste of government money? Government money has actually been spent to study cow emissions.

 

How is this a waste of government money? Just because the topic of cows farting might not seem as serious as a truck spitting out toxins, it is still a viable issue.

[Poopingman]

Ouch, criticizing a liberal president on an online game forum? You should know better!

[Quoi_Tu]

Guys, lighten up. No matter who the President is, he is going to be heavily scrutinized. You guys have been spoiled in that practically your entire awareness of politics has occurred within one Presidential era. You are so used to bashing on Bush that when people start to knock on Obama, you take it personally.

 

 

 

Guess what, it happens. Clinton had people knocking on him worse than Bush did. Does that mean he is doing a good or bad job? That's for YOU to decide. Not the news, not Chris Matthews or Rush Limbaugh, and most certainly not some (sorry) idiot on a web forum who has also spent their entire political awareness career seeing one school of thought. Do your own research, make your own views based on that.

 

 

 

That being said, he HAS only been in office for three weeks. The Honeymoon phase is still in swing. Within a year more and more people are going to be saying "wtf Obama?" All the greatest Presidents had craploads of people who hated their policies and maybe even them during their terms. But now we say "oh look, what a great guy!" Lincoln's a great example of this. Hard to love a guy when if you say "I don't like having so many soldiers in the street" you can get your rear end hauled off to jail and shot thanks to a note from Uncle Abe!

 

 

 

But give the man a break, on both sides. He's not the greatest thing that ever lived Democrats, nor is he a self-indulgent evil psychopath Republicans. He's human, and President. Wait and watch that space.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: And what's the deal with people knocking on Rush Limbaugh? He's the news equivalent of a shock jock. You may not like what he has to say, but you are in fact listening to his show, therefore he has done his job. I say that metaphorically since many of you might not have even heard his show and get all your opinions from someone else. I hope not, because that would make you sheep :o. But anywhoo, like him or not, if you have listened to his show he has done all of his research and homework. He's doing a good job, because he has looked at the facts and created his opinion. You should take his example and do the same. I've heard some people call him racist, which is silly because the offending statement was a true fact about crime rates? Seriously? But yeah, you still have to give the guy props for being smart and educated as opposed to reading a teleprompter for 1.5 million a year like *coughChrisMatthewscough*

 

Fascist!

 

 

 

The reason I hate Rush Limbaugh is because of the influence he has mixed with his ridiculous (and sometimes wrong, see below) commentary. Of course, I don't like Chris Matthews or Lou Dobbs either; best to avoid the talking heads in general.

 

 

 

Taken from this article in November:

 

Speaking of Obama, by the way, the Obama recession is in full swing, ladies and gentlemen. Stocks are dying, which is a precursor of things to come. This is an Obama recession. Might turn into a depression. It's -- he hadn't done anything yet, but his ideas are killing the economy. His ideas are killing Wall Street. They need some certainty. And now everybody in the drive-bys -- we don't know who Obama is. We've got a story from Jennifer Loven at the Associated Press today -- we don't know who Obama is. All of a sudden now on Charlie Rose, they're starting to talk about his ties to Saul Alinsky.

 

[...]

 

And why is this happening? Because there's no stability. The markets are frozen waiting for Paulson to say something. The Treasury secretary has all the power here. The markets are frozen because they really don't know how fast Obama is going to embark on his own destruction of the U.S. economy via his tax increases.

 

He thought Obama would raise taxes during the worst recession since the 1980s. How silly of him.

 

 

 

Also, an article in the WSJ written by Limbaugh containing wrong information on recession data: http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/200 ... rplus.html

[Barihawk]

Err, that isn't being wrong in factual information, that's being wrong in prediction :P. If anyone knew the future perfectly, that would be special would it not?

 

 

 

And you can hardly blame him for having an influence. That's the fault of the influenced, not the speaker.

 

 

 

I do have to say one thing I'm not pleased with Obama about this bill. The Democrats sold this bill and ramrodded it through based on the need for expediency in the face of impending crisis. And the bill sat on the President's desk from Friday to today before it got signed. You'd think if it was so damned vital they would have flown it to him in Colorado, no?

 

 

 

Of course this is the document that claims a direct federally-supported highway from LA to Vegas is part of the recovery effort. There is no doubt that the legislation was stuffed full of manure along with the gold. That's really more of Congress' fault than the President's, though.

[Quoi_Tu]

Err, that isn't being wrong in factual information, that's being wrong in prediction :P. If anyone knew the future perfectly, that would be special would it not?

 

 

 

And you can hardly blame him for having an influence. That's the fault of the influenced, not the speaker.

 

 

 

I do have to say one thing I'm not pleased with Obama about this bill. The Democrats sold this bill and ramrodded it through based on the need for expediency in the face of impending crisis. And the bill sat on the President's desk from Friday to today before it got signed. You'd think if it was so damned vital they would have flown it to him in Colorado, no?

 

 

 

Of course this is the document that claims a direct federally-supported highway from LA to Vegas is part of the recovery effort. There is no doubt that the legislation was stuffed full of manure along with the gold. That's really more of Congress' fault than the President's, though.

 

What was he predicting? We were already facing financial collapse in early October a month (few weeks) before that comment. Any economist would have gladly informed him (not to mention we had been in a recession since December 2007). I'm not blaming him for influence, just for his biasness (I suppose you could count him as entertainment).

 

 

 

Congress did a horrible job with this bill, but I didn't expect anything better.

[Barihawk]

Kicker:

 

 

 

(I suppose you could count him as entertainment).

 

 

 

That's what he is and what he claims to be. And what all talking heads should, really. Would make it easier for people to stop getting their opinions from them.

[magekillr]

I mean, if you guys wanna call Rush just a "talking head that entertains", that's great, but the reality is that millions take him seriously, and believe him to be the Second Coming of Christ.

 

 

 

I wouldn't call him an entertainer, either. He's nothing but a hate mongering, racist, sexist, xenophobic moron. Who fails out of college, including ballroom dancing, I mean...really. Surely not someone that's knowledgeable about economics.

 

 

 

I want everything hes doing to fail . . . I want everything hes doing to fail.

 

 

 

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archi ... o_tank.php

 

 

 

No one hates America more than Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh. No one in their right mind would HOPE that what he is doing will fail, just so he can prove a political point. He is so deafly afraid of a second New Deal because it brought in 50 years of Democratic majorities, and shut morons like him out. Sad, Rush, that you'd put yourself and your ideology ahead of millions of people.

[mmmcannibalism]

I want everything hes doing to fail . . . I want everything hes doing to fail.

 

 

 

that was from the hannity interview right? Read the context, he says something to the effect of "if Obama is going to pursue turning america into a socialist country I want him to fail"

 

 

 

Believe me, I dont like Rush limbaugh at all, he is an idiot, but he didnt say he wants obama to fail. He said he wants a socialist policy for america to fail, which Im sure many of you disagree with but the key thing is he said he wants policy to fail not the overall presidency.

[Quoi_Tu]

I mean, if you guys wanna call Rush just a "talking head that entertains", that's great, but the reality is that millions take him seriously, and believe him to be the Second Coming of Christ.

 

 

 

I wouldn't call him an entertainer, either. He's nothing but a hate mongering, racist, sexist, xenophobic moron. Who fails out of college, including ballroom dancing, I mean...really. Surely not someone that's knowledgeable about economics.

 

The flaw of all talking heads/pundits is that they put their agenda/opinion before the facts. I think it's safe to say very few public figures are truly knowledgeable (or show it) of economics. Partly because some key points the majority of economists agree on aren't favorable in the public eye (like raising minimum wage raises unemployment). Of course, it is the dismal science.

 

 

 

Irrelevent link on where economics got the name, the dismal science (for any interested folks): The Secret History of the Dismal Science. Part I. Economics, Religion and Race in the 19th Century

[raven_gaurd0]

I mean, if you guys wanna call Rush just a "talking head that entertains", that's great, but the reality is that millions take him seriously, and believe him to be the Second Coming of Christ.

 

 

 

I wouldn't call him an entertainer, either. He's nothing but a hate mongering, racist, sexist, xenophobic moron. Who fails out of college, including ballroom dancing, I mean...really. Surely not someone that's knowledgeable about economics.

 

The flaw of all talking heads/pundits is that they put their agenda/opinion before the facts. I think it's safe to say very few public figures are truly knowledgeable (or show it) of economics. Partly because some key points the majority of economists agree on aren't favorable in the public eye (like raising minimum wage raises unemployment). Of course, it is the dismal science.

 

 

 

Irrelevent link on where economics got the name, the dismal science (for any interested folks): The Secret History of the Dismal Science. Part I. Economics, Religion and Race in the 19th Century

 

 

 

People don't like listening to real economists, and I'm not going to pretend like I know half of what they say myself, despite having some, though overall lacking education in the field. As for public figures being 'knowledgeable' in general, I think that few have it, less show it. Honestly, if you get your news for America, FROM America, you're probably getting something that's biased. At least try to find a more mediated source, unlike Fox or Mr. Limbaugh. Try international views from people who are likely to have a neutral view of America - like France, England, or Germany. Don't get news of it from Israel or Russia.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I do, but apparently people don't particularly like where my news comes from...by the response it warrants from these forums. -.-

[magekillr]

I want everything hes doing to fail . . . I want everything hes doing to fail.

 

 

 

that was from the hannity interview right? Read the context, he says something to the effect of "if Obama is going to pursue turning america into a socialist country I want him to fail"

 

 

 

Believe me, I dont like Rush limbaugh at all, he is an idiot, but he didnt say he wants obama to fail. He said he wants a socialist policy for america to fail, which Im sure many of you disagree with but the key thing is he said he wants policy to fail not the overall presidency.

 

 

 

He wants the stimulus plan to fail. Rush Limbaugh doesn't know what socialism is. He wants it to fail because he knows full well that if it works then everything he's been talking about since Clinton will be one big lie (even though most people know it is already). He just wants to prove a political point, nothing more. This has nothing to do with "socialism" The "S" and the "N" words (socialism and nationalization) are like the boogie man to uneducated people that are still stuck in the Cold War. Now I'm not saying if you oppose the two that you're uneducated, I'm saying the uneducated doesn't know what socialism really is.

 

 

 

The flaw of all talking heads/pundits is that they put their agenda/opinion before the facts.

 

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Rush Limbaugh ALWAYS does it, however. He never backs up his arguments with guests that know what they're talking about, it's just him blubbering.

 

 

 

I agree many talking heads don't know much about economics, but that's why they read what economists say in order to talk about it. Rush just blabbers on about how "it's never worked" and, "this is such a waste of money, I hope it fails."

 

 

 

This is still a murky and shallow amount of economists on their shows, but it's not hard to find even conservative economists supporting a stimulus:

 

 

 

http://mediamatters.org/items/200902110027

[Quoi_Tu]

People don't like listening to real economists, and I'm not going to pretend like I know half of what they say myself, despite having some, though overall lacking education in the field. As for public figures being 'knowledgeable' in general, I think that few have it, less show it. Honestly, if you get your news for America, FROM America, you're probably getting something that's biased. At least try to find a more mediated source, unlike Fox or Mr. Limbaugh. Try international views from people who are likely to have a neutral view of America - like France, England, or Germany. Don't get news of it from Israel or Russia.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I do, but apparently people don't particularly like where my news comes from...by the response it warrants from these forums. -.-

 

I like to get my news from The Economist, NYT, and WSJ. All fairly low on bias and usually well written with minimal mistakes.

 

 

 

The flaw of all talking heads/pundits is that they put their agenda/opinion before the facts.

I agree many talking heads don't know much about economics, but that's why they read what economists say in order to talk about it. Rush just blabbers on about how "it's never worked" and, "this is such a waste of money, I hope it fails."

 

 

 

This is still a murky and shallow amount of economists on their shows, but it's not hard to find even conservative economists supporting a stimulus:

 

 

 

http://mediamatters.org/items/200902110027

 

Academia in general isn't given a lot of air time (maybe with the exception of political PhDs). I don't why, but I'm sure the media has some reason or maybe it's a academic faux pas to appear on talk shows (I'm just speculating, I don't know).

[Dalcyte]

This post had me chuckling.

 

 

 

Why, yes he did fail in the first few days of office...if you were bitter about the election, did not like him whatsoever, and had it in your mind that whatever he did was going to fail. The bailout bill comes down to the fundamental issue of 21st century American politics: Democrats like to spend, Republicans hate it, and both sides will spin it both ways to suit them. You're just spinning it one way. The bailout bill is coincidentially opposed and supported 50-50! hm...

[Flamewhisker]

 

(if pro is the opposite of con, what's the opposite of progress...?)

 

 

 

CONGRESS!!!!

 

 

 

I read that somewhere....but I honestly thought he would fail from the beginning, he doesn't have the expirience

[raven_gaurd0]

I want everything hes doing to fail . . . I want everything hes doing to fail.

 

 

 

that was from the hannity interview right? Read the context, he says something to the effect of "if Obama is going to pursue turning america into a socialist country I want him to fail"

 

 

 

Believe me, I dont like Rush limbaugh at all, he is an idiot, but he didnt say he wants obama to fail. He said he wants a socialist policy for america to fail, which Im sure many of you disagree with but the key thing is he said he wants policy to fail not the overall presidency.

 

 

 

He wants the stimulus plan to fail. Rush Limbaugh doesn't know what socialism is. He wants it to fail because he knows full well that if it works then everything he's been talking about since Clinton will be one big lie (even though most people know it is already). He just wants to prove a political point, nothing more. This has nothing to do with "socialism" The "S" and the "N" words (socialism and nationalization) are like the boogie man to uneducated people that are still stuck in the Cold War. Now I'm not saying if you oppose the two that you're uneducated, I'm saying the uneducated doesn't know what socialism really is.

 

 

 

The flaw of all talking heads/pundits is that they put their agenda/opinion before the facts.

 

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Rush Limbaugh ALWAYS does it, however. He never backs up his arguments with guests that know what they're talking about, it's just him blubbering.

 

 

 

I agree many talking heads don't know much about economics, but that's why they read what economists say in order to talk about it. Rush just blabbers on about how "it's never worked" and, "this is such a waste of money, I hope it fails."

 

 

 

This is still a murky and shallow amount of economists on their shows, but it's not hard to find even conservative economists supporting a stimulus:

 

 

 

http://mediamatters.org/items/200902110027

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

[Quoi_Tu]

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

[raven_gaurd0]

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

 

 

 

I detest it for the reasons in my initial post. That is has unnecessary spending in the middle of a recession which are used to further party agenda rather than help the economy, like the fuel-economic cars for government workers of Obama's administration. Yes, that's a good thing, but not now.

 

 

 

And I think it will, in general, fail, because it's similar and even less effective than the less-expensive Bush bailout bill, which didn't do much to help the economy.

[mmmcannibalism]

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

 

 

 

well

 

 

 

a. there is a lot of spending that is going to end up being wasteful

 

 

 

b. I am worried about inflation

 

 

 

Obviously without reading through the bill I cant be more specific, but I generally dont trust rushed law making

[magekillr]

b. I am worried about inflation

 

 

 

Why?

[Quoi_Tu]

[hide=]

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

[/hide]

 

I detest it for the reasons in my initial post. That is has unnecessary spending in the middle of a recession which are used to further party agenda rather than help the economy, like the fuel-economic cars for government workers of Obama's administration. Yes, that's a good thing, but not now.

 

 

 

And I think it will, in general, fail, because it's similar and even less effective than the less-expensive Bush bailout bill, which didn't do much to help the economy.

 

If it's a good thing, it's a good thing now. Basically, the stimulus bill is part of fiscal policy which has been shown to be effective in keeping recessions from getting worse and usually helping bring the economy back into a period of expansion. Fiscal policy for a recession encompasses government spending (to offset the decline in private spending) and tax cuts to give people more money to spend and create jobs.

 

 

 

When you say Bush bailout bill, do you mean TARP (the wallstreet bailout) or the tax return checks back in May of 2008? TARP's only been half spent and helped a little, but not enough and is not a stimulus plan. The tax rebates seemed to help a bit through August, but then the economy tanked again.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

 

 

 

well

 

 

 

a. there is a lot of spending that is going to end up being wasteful

 

 

 

b. I am worried about inflation

 

 

 

Obviously without reading through the bill I cant be more specific, but I generally dont trust rushed law making

 

There is inevitably some waste, but the hope is that the majority is actual helpful stimulus, which I think would be hard for it not to be.

 

 

 

As for inflation, we were worried about deflation a month ago and the CPI (a decent indicator of inflation) is still negative, so inflation is unlikely to cause much harm.

[mmmcannibalism]

b. I am worried about inflation

 

 

 

Why?

 

 

 

I forget if the stimulus is officially 1 trillion or 800 something billion, lets just say 800 billion for the sake of discussion. The Us is in effect printing 800 billion dollars for an 800 billion dollar spending project/stimulus. Printing 800 billion new bills has a way of causing inflation, granted with the whole world in economic trouble it wont be as bad of inflation. The other problem is that talking like the economy is going doomsday hurts markets based on emotional speculation.

[Quoi_Tu]

b. I am worried about inflation

 

 

 

Why?

 

 

 

I forget if the stimulus is officially 1 trillion or 800 something billion, lets just say 800 billion for the sake of discussion. The Us is in effect printing 800 billion dollars for an 800 billion dollar spending project/stimulus. Printing 800 billion new bills has a way of causing inflation, granted with the whole world in economic trouble it wont be as bad of inflation. The other problem is that talking like the economy is going doomsday hurts markets based on emotional speculation.

 

$789bil I think. Remember the stimulus is to replace private spending with public. Also, we've been borrowing a lot of money too, so not all of it is printed. For some reason, our treasury bonds are still being bought even with the low rates of return, which the Fed might lower more.

[raven_gaurd0]

[hide=]

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

[/hide]

 

I detest it for the reasons in my initial post. That is has unnecessary spending in the middle of a recession which are used to further party agenda rather than help the economy, like the fuel-economic cars for government workers of Obama's administration. Yes, that's a good thing, but not now.

 

 

 

And I think it will, in general, fail, because it's similar and even less effective than the less-expensive Bush bailout bill, which didn't do much to help the economy.

 

If it's a good thing, it's a good thing now. Basically, the stimulus bill is part of fiscal policy which has been shown to be effective in keeping recessions from getting worse and usually helping bring the economy back into a period of expansion. Fiscal policy for a recession encompasses government spending (to offset the decline in private spending) and tax cuts to give people more money to spend and create jobs.

 

 

 

When you say Bush bailout bill, do you mean TARP (the wallstreet bailout) or the tax return checks back in May of 2008? TARP's only been half spent and helped a little, but not enough and is not a stimulus plan. The tax rebates seemed to help a bit through August, but then the economy tanked again.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh hoping the stimulus FAILS certainly is pigheaded, if that's the fact. I, while I do detest the stimulus, do not hope it fails. I hope it succeeds, but I highly doubt that it will.

 

 

 

Rush Limbaugh is a whole different animal, and I very highly dislike him as much as I dislike O'Reilly, but please, I hardly think that this all over a political point.

 

Why do you detest the stimulus and think it will fail?

 

 

 

well

 

 

 

a. there is a lot of spending that is going to end up being wasteful

 

 

 

b. I am worried about inflation

 

 

 

Obviously without reading through the bill I cant be more specific, but I generally dont trust rushed law making

 

There is inevitably some waste, but the hope is that the majority is actual helpful stimulus, which I think would be hard for it not to be.

 

 

 

As for inflation, we were worried about deflation a month ago and the CPI (a decent indicator of inflation) is still negative, so inflation is unlikely to cause much harm.

 

 

 

Inflation, I agree, is unlikely, as the debt isn't being printed in paper. It's all credit. I wonder how that all works, actually? I'm not an economist, of course.

 

 

 

As for the Bush bailout, I meant both. The stimulus checks of 2008 didn't work because the people didn't spend it, and that's their fault for only spending it on paying off debts. As for TARP, there are plenty of 'bailout' pieces of the stimulus plan, such as sending money off to private corporations, as was illustrated on the Pie charts I sent.

 

 

 

I don't think that A stimulus plan is bad; I think that this partisan, agenda-based stimulus bill is bad. Do you see where I'm coming from? I'd be all for a 3 trillion spending bill that sheer-jolted the economy through force-buying or something, but that's far too socialist for anybody but Russia's taste.