Open Thread on the "Stimulus"

[The Tim]

[Chris]

Here's to build your confidence in this "stimulus".

[jon]

Where does it say in the Constitution that they can enslave me, my children, and my children's children all to bump up the GDP by a percentage point for a year ot two?

[The Tim]

[biliruben]

Jebus, Tim. This site's got more credibility than the Washington Times.

I think I'll wait until I can access the PDF, rather than take their interpretation of the CBO analysis at face value.

Focus on quality!

[rose-colored-coolaid]

[The Tim]

[biliruben]

Logical fallacy and ad hominem attacks? A little defensive, or what?

Where you got that from my suggesting your source has a tendency to spin, (which anyone who reads them regularly can hardly deny), and saying I'd wait until I was able to access the PDF, I don't know. I was simply timing out.

Reel it in and take a deep breath before throwing out big words that don't fit the situation.

I'll leave it to the reader to determine if they two quotes are equivalent, though I admit it wasn't as bad as other "news" I've read from them.

[jon]

The bill contains a $2 billion earmark for an energy plant whose design was already discarded as being uneconomical.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/? ... liOTlmYTQ=


Who put that earmark in? Rod Blagojevich

[The Tim]

I don't really have any vested interest one way or the other in the Washington Times. Wasn't even aware they had a reputation for spinning or whatever, and can't recall the last time I read anything from them. I picked them because it was the first source I came across on Google News for the story.

I just was pointing out that your comment came across as "we shouldn't believe it because it was in X publication," which definitely qualifies as ad hominem in my opinion.

[biliruben]

No sweat, Tim. I can certainly see that, though that isn't what I meant. I was just giving what I thought was a light-hearted push to use more credible links, mainly because I'm generally too busy or lazy to read the primary source.

As for the meat of the article - yes, our debt will be somewhat of a burden in the future, but this misses the other side of the story, which is we are quite possibly on the brink of another great depression. Our economic and financial engine is sputtering, and without keeping it wet with a bit of government diesel, we may well be is some serious, serious shiznet. I don't know if you've tried to get a car going after running out of gas. It can sometimes be really, really hard. You tend to wish you'd borrowed that 10 bucks to make it through death valley, as you walk along with a gas can in 120 degree heat.

[biliruben]

[The Tim]

[biliruben]

I'm all ears as to what your solution is.

I think investment of 2 trillion in infrastructure and jobs programs to build a base for our future economic growth might just get us to avoid the most dire result. Maybe.

We aren't spending enough, in the current plan. And it's only 2 years, not decades.

[The Tim]