Obama is on track to become the biggest-spending president since 1930

[Revenesque 2]

I thought that was a given, since a recession is a contraction of the economy.

Agreed. The big spending is not a big surprise, since this recession was the greatest since the Great Depression.

[alienlovechild 75]

Agreed. The big spending is not a big surprise, since this recession was the greatest since the Great Depression.

The big difference was that the U.S. was the largest creditor nation in world during the Great Depression and people weren't up their necks in debt. Some government spending would make sense if invested in something worthwhile but there is little evidence of that for the money spent.

[Ali G. 37]

Go back to yer socialist land of Oz. Just click yer heels together three times, and say, "I am a commie wuss."

Interesting since it's the commies in China that are bankrolling the US, to the tune of $800 billion you owe them.

[Ali G. 37]

The big difference was that the U.S. was the largest creditor nation in world during the Great Depression and people weren't up their necks in debt. Some government spending would make sense if invested in something worthwhile but there is little evidence of that for the money spent.

Why would you say that is?

Simply suggesting investing in American is frowned upon by repubs, unless it involves the military or oil / nuclear power.

[alienlovechild 75]

Why would you say that is?

Simply suggesting investing in American is frowned upon by repubs, unless it involves the military or oil / nuclear power.

Investing in things that the private can't or won't spend money on is a role for government. The Interstate highway system was spearheaded by Eisenhower for example but maintenance hasn't kept pace. The space program was popular but the spending has been erratic. You forgot Republicans also back the police departments and spending on prison construction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget

In general, the government can't assign goods and services as well as the private sector. If that wasn't true we'd give 100% of our earnings to the government then have the government decide where the money would best be spent. Sounds like communism, no? The even Chinese and Russians don't believe in that ####### anymore. That's an extreme example but freer economies tend to do better.

Edited February 18, 2010 by alienlovechild

[Ali G. 37]

Investing in things that the private can't or won't spend money on is a role for government. The Interstate highway system was spearheaded by Eisenhower for example but maintenance hasn't kept pace. The space program was popular but the spending has been erratic. You forgot Republicans also back the police departments and spending on prison construction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget

In general, the government can't assign goods and services as well as the private sector. If that wasn't true we'd give 100% of our earnings to the government then have the government decide where the money would best be spent. Sounds like communism, no? The even Chinese and Russians don't believe in that ####### anymore. That's an extreme example but freer economies tend to do better.

In my area, it's repubs that are blocking any tax hikes required to pay for roads improvements. The new repub governor has also just given delivered a budget beauty by cutting $800 million from schools. This is awesome news for Virginia.

Dude, are repubs that blind? Have you seen the billions the Chinese government is spending on investing in their country? Actually, what repubs live and die by is what is no longer practiced by any other first world country. Only third world countries now still use the each-to-their-own zero government investment approach. I won't even both bringing up AUS, as this is a KO in such an argument.

The private sector is only interested in one thing, their bottom line. To suggest that a private entity that 99% of Repubs have zero say in is the solution is lunacy. The private sector is why public transport was purchased and torn out of cities, now costing billions to install back in, per city. Billions that cities simply don't have. The private sector is why the Midwest to the South looks like Hiroshima following the nuke, since it was more profitable to sell out Americans and export jobs, to save a dime for shareholders. This sort of Rubbish is why I stopped listening to Rush, Sean and Beck.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Booyah

[mawilson 2,133]

They really believe he needs to spend even more to get the economy moving.

I thought that was a given, since a recession is a contraction of the economy.

If repubs have any better ideas, I am all ears.

How about leave it the heck alone? Borrowing billions of dollars - which your grandchildren

will have to repay - to finance an illusory, ephemeral boost to the economy is not just

irresponsible, it's criminal.

[alienlovechild 75]

In my area, it's repubs that are blocking any tax hikes required to pay for roads improvements. The new repub governor has also just given delivered a budget beauty by cutting $800 million from schools. This is awesome news for Virginia.

Dude, are repubs that blind? Have you seen the billions the Chinese government is spending on investing in their country? Actually, what repubs live and die by is what is no longer practiced by any other first world country. Only third world countries now still use the each-to-their-own zero government investment approach. I won't even both bringing up AUS, as this is a KO in such an argument.

The private sector is only interested in one thing, their bottom line. To suggest that a private entity that 99% of Repubs have zero say in is the solution is lunacy. The private sector is why public transport was purchased and torn out of cities, now costing billions to install back in, per city. Billions that cities simply don't have. The private sector is why the Midwest to the South looks like Hiroshima following the nuke, since it was more profitable to sell out Americans and export jobs, to save a dime for shareholders. This sort of Rubbish is why I stopped listening to Rush, Sean and Beck.

About half of school funding from comes local school districts not just the states. Spending per student is highest here in U.S. than in any other country or close to it yet the results aren't there.

The Chinese lagged behind the West for 200 years and naturally they need infrastructure. I don't think they have great social safety net anymore so that doesn't say much for social programs and growth.

Public transport was already in decline before nearly everyone got a car. The place where my Dad went to college removed the streetcars before he got here in 1944. The U.S. was oil exporter, built cars and had the best Interstate system around and had plenty of cheap housing in the suburbs. It wasn't a conspiracy. Sad to say but we need to jack up gas taxes for revenues and to get the poor lower middle classes off the roads and into buses for starters.

It's not easy as most of the country isn't set up for densely populated cities anymore and abandoning outlying areas would cost trillions. No modern country has done that voluntarily outside of a war.

[scandal 951]

The U.S. was oil exporter, built cars and had the best Interstate system around and had plenty of cheap housing in the suburbs. It wasn't a conspiracy. Sad to say but we need to jack up gas taxes for revenues and to get the poor lower middle classes off the roads and into buses for starters.

Wow. We agree on a major domestic policy area. Bipartisanship - it's ALIVE!

[mawilson 2,133]

The U.S. was oil exporter, built cars and had the best Interstate system around and had plenty of cheap housing in the suburbs. It wasn't a conspiracy. Sad to say but we need to jack up gas taxes for revenues and to get the poor lower middle classes off the roads and into buses for starters.

Wow. We agree on a major domestic policy area. Bipartisanship - it's ALIVE!

The free market will take care of the poor lower middle classes. They're getting poorer and poorer and

soon will be unable to afford to drive anywhere near the extent they do today.

[Ali G. 37]

About half of school funding from comes local school districts not just the states. Spending per student is highest here in U.S. than in any other country or close to it yet the results aren't there.

Guess who is against raising taxes to pay for that, who refuses to consolidate counties to capitalize on economies of scale, and prefers duplicated bureaucracy in every single city and country? This is something know as inefficiency in the private sector you cherish so much. Have you ever heard of a company having a separate, from the ground up, operations in every single county / city? Why do you think this would be ridiculous?

The Chinese lagged behind the West for 200 years and naturally they need infrastructure. I don't think they have great social safety net anymore so that doesn't say much for social programs and growth.

Lagged but rapidly catching up. Anyways, I'd say 90% of the country is extremely rundown, stick in the 70s and 80s and dilapidated, when compared to various other modern first world countries. Excluding scandal who is a clown, everyone who visits Aus is always impressed. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of those visiting the US.

Public transport was already in decline before nearly everyone got a car. The place where my Dad went to college removed the streetcars before he got here in 1944. The U.S. was oil exporter, built cars and had the best Interstate system around and had plenty of cheap housing in the suburbs. It wasn't a conspiracy. Sad to say but we need to jack up gas taxes for revenues and to get the poor lower middle classes off the roads and into buses for starters.

Guess again, the oil companies and automobile manufactures purchased light rail systems and ripped them out of the ground. That is not a conspiracy but a well know fact. You must also seriously think the professional folks worldwide, in first world countries, using public transport are stupid. Yet idiots in their truuuucks are the smart ones.

It's not easy as most of the country isn't set up for densely populated cities anymore and abandoning outlying areas would cost trillions. No modern country has done that voluntarily outside of a war.

Hence the problem. Just in case some have not noticed, the US is no longer a farming country, with mom and pops run stores; walmart screwed that employment avenue. The economy is now propelled by highly skilled knowledge based industries, which tend to be centered around major cities and along coast lines; for ease of export. The Tobacco cotton days are gone, Google and co are now the billion dollar sheriff in town. In state that does not shift their focus and modernize towards such industries, like it or not, will meet the fate of Detroit.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Booyah

[Ali G. 37]

The free market will take care of the poor lower middle classes. They're getting poorer and poorer and

soon will be unable to afford to drive anywhere near the extent they do today.

I take it you are joking as no one with a semester of high school economics would think keeping people poor actually benefits their country, or even their own bottom line.

[mawilson 2,133]

I take it you are joking as no one with a semester of high school economics would think keeping people poor actually benefits their country, or even their own bottom line.

Well yes, I was joking. However, I don't believe in forcefully making people poorer by "jacking up" their taxes

as the OP suggested.

[Ali G. 37]

How about leave it the heck alone? Borrowing billions of dollars - which your grandchildren

will have to repay - to finance an illusory, ephemeral boost to the economy is not just

irresponsible, it's criminal.

Close any tax loopholes for corporations and the mega rich, then use borrowed money to kick-start the economy. Once the economy gets going, the tax revenue collected will pay off the debt. After all, this is something businesses do on a daily basis, using accounts known as line of credit.

The best form of government is run like a business. Their focus should be to generate revenue in order to invest in their business (the community); all while trimming any cost and delivering the best service. As revenue increases, because of the initial investment, they then reinvest it into their business, generating even more revenue and so on.

The second must to is the implementation of a federal GST/VAT. Which the billions roll in that are currently lost in the gray / black market.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Booyah

[Ali G. 37]

Well yes, I was joking. However, I don't believe in forcefully making people poorer by "jacking up" their taxes

as the OP suggested.

I was about to say dude, don't pull a Matt on me..