SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?
OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades.
OK, so then why, O Fearless Leader, are we talking about another stimulus, as we are hearing whispers of:
That’s why we have already started to hear hints of a second stimulus package on the way. On CNBC on Thursday, White House economic adviser Christina Romer answered the question of whether there would be a second stimulus with: “We’ll do whatever it takes.”
Um....could we please see the statistics and evidence of the "effectiveness" of this so-called stimulus? Here are some hard numbers:
This week, with news of some 467,000 jobs lost in June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the U.S. has now lost about 2 million jobs since the economic stimulus package was passed. Even more notable is that the average workweek has been slashed to 33 hours — the lowest number on record. When the president signed his $787 billion stimulus package into law, he confidently asserted that unemployment would not exceed 8 percent. If Congress had not passed it, he warned, it would rise to 9 percent by 2010. Well, unemployment reached 9.5 percent last month, meaning, by the president’s own logic, his stimulus package has failed.
No, this self-loving narcissus can twist logic, for here is his defense of porkulus:
If you listen to President Barack Obama, however, whatever jobs were not lost were either “saved or created” by the stimulus. In other words, credit for whatever has not gone wrong goes to the Obama administration and its Democratic allies who control Congress.
So, even though there has been a HUGE net loss of jobs since the porkulus, Obama and Pelosi and Co. should be praised for saving jobs that were already there? Hmmm....Uh, anyone find this a bit hard to swallow? Anyone think we are really getting creative with what, to coin a Clintonism, the definition of teh word is is?
And here is the real kicker folks. Only $56.3 billion of the $787 billion stimulus has been paid out, yet the push is coming to persuade us to spend more money on top of money that has yet to be spent. By now it’s clear that what little of the taxpayer-funded stimulus has been spent has created pork, not jobs. That’s why news reports keep coming about things like stimulus projects placing rails around nonexistent lakes and redecorating old theaters. Not to mention the turtle trail, the thousands to a town to stop a homeless problem that doesn't exist, etc. It is a disgrace.
What do you think Porkulus 2: Economic Boogaloo is going to do? Could we see 18% unemployment after this fraud? Will they even write a bill, or will they just pretend, like the House did with Cap and Tax? I thought this admin and Congress were going to be transparent in their dealings. The only thing transparent is their blatant attempt to destroy the American Capitalist system and take everyone down with it in a mad power grab to satisfy their own impotent egos.
And we have this analysis from the Heritage Foundation, which is like based on facts and numbers and stuff(check out the graph, which I can't pull to put here from where I am blogging from):
In January, President Obama pressed for an $800 billion economic “stimulus” package to turn the economy around. Though the bill largely consisted of increased spending on traditional liberal priorities, the President claimed that it would “create or save” 3.5 million jobs. The President’s economic advisors predicted that unemployment would rise to 9 percent by 2010 if Congress did not pass the stimulus bill, but that with the stimulus unemployment would stay below 8 percentage points.
Congress passed the stimulus bill in February 2009 and the President has repeated his claims. President Obama recently said that the stimulus bill has already created or saved 150,000 new jobs and that it will “create or save” another 600,000 jobs by the end of the summer. Asked when the public should begin to judge the effects of the stimulus, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said “I think we should begin to judge it now.”
In that case, the stimulus must be judged a failure. The figure above shows the projections the administration made in January with and without the stimulus bill, and the actual unemployment rate since then. Unemployment has risen not only above what the President’s advisors predicted would happen if the stimulus passed, but above what they estimated would occur without the stimulus. By the President’s own measure, the stimulus has failed. The promised benefits from the $800 billion in additional federal spending and debt remain invisible.
And then there is this elucidation by the President of Heritage, as well:
If there's any good news from this recession, it may be this: We've seen how Washington works. The picture is so ugly, it may be enough to spark real reform in the years ahead. Here's what's been going on:
Every so often Congress gets hold of a bill that simply must pass. A defense spending bill, say, during war time. So lawmakers exploit the situation, tacking on pet projects that have nothing to do with defense.
This year's must-pass bill is a "stimulus" measure.
True to form, Congress has loaded the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 with hundreds of billions in wasteful spending. The bill includes $650 million for digital TV coupons, $140 million to study the atmosphere and $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts.
None of these proposals would create jobs or boost our economy. They're just old-fashioned waste. And that's a problem. Crying "stimulus," Congress intends to spend money it doesn't have to accomplish things that don't need to be done on a scale never before seen. If signed into law, this leviathan would be the largest single spending bill ever passed, adding at least $819 billion (before interest) to the national debt.
If lawmakers had decided to borrow the money for this stimulus plan directly from Americans, the average family would have to fork over $10,520 this year. That's more than what that same family will spend on food, clothing and health care for the entire year.
If lawmakers were honest about what they're doing (spending borrowed money) they'd have to admit that they're asking hard-pressed American families to loan the government more this year than those families will otherwise spend on essentials.
...
Once these bureaucracies expand, good luck trimming them back. They're apt to be as temporary as the New Deal "Rural Development Utilities Programs." Its mission to electrify rural America was completed decades ago, yet it still exists.
Politicians think they can palm most anything off as "stimulus." An early version of the bill, for example, included hundreds of millions for contraceptives. "The family planning services reduce cost," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi explained while defending the plan on ABC, "to the states and to the federal government." That's arguable at best.
Still, even if that were true, reducing the birthrate would be a pretty slow-motion way of reducing federal costs. It would be faster and more efficient to axe a department or two instead.
Luckily, the contraception spending was axed once people became aware of it. That proves that, when the public pays attention -- and complains -- lawmakers will do the right thing.
Hopefully it's the beginning of a trend.
I don't know, Ed...More people have to wake up and start asking for people to answer for these crimes against American prosperity.
