That's about the size of it.
Posted on 11/29/2009 8:01:01 PM PST by John Semmens
The anemic results of the first government “stimulus” bill are said to be inspiring talk of another one.
“There are nearly 16 million unemployed Americans,” complained House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif). “And this is after we approved a spending bill of over $700 billion. Every economist I’ve talked to says the problem is that the first stimulus package was too small.”
Pelosi cited the estimated cost per job created to bolster her case for an expanded stimulus package. “With a cost of nearly $500,000 per new job created, it should be obvious that $700 billion won’t get us very far toward our goal of full employment,” Pelosi said. “Even a more modest goal of halving the unemployment rate looks like it would require stimulus spending of around $4 trillion. So, I’d say we’ve got a lot of work to do in congress to get this economy moving again.”
The Speaker rejected suggestions that tax cuts along the lines pushed by President Reagan in the early 1980s might be a better option for growing the economy. “Cutting taxes leaves too much control in the hands of businesses,” Pelosi argued. “Only products and services that earn a profit would be able to expand. Those producing things that consumers don’t want would be left to the cruelty of the marketplace. This is not the kind of society the Democratic Party wants for America. Prosperity shouldn’t be narrowly restricted to those who are productive. That’s a warped and elitist perspective.”
(Excerpt) Read more at azconserv1.wordpress.com ...
What kind of economists is she talking to?
The stimulus didnt do squat except raise the debt and the next one will do the same.
Hmm, the usual “it wasn’t good enough” routine. So now we get to watch our deficit and debt grow higher and higher as the idiots in charge continue to get the wrong message.
The bigger problem is that the ‘stimulus’ money from this year runs out on Sept. 30, 2010 - so they need to have a slush fund for October and November activities that year.
Is satire really that close to reality that you don’t see it?
“That’s a warped and elitist perspective.””
Chuckle. Thanks John.
I think that is the distinctive feature of John's work. We have headlines that are beyond belief and no reaction from the vast majority of the people. So John takes the news the one step farther to show what is happening in its very essence so the insanity is plainly seen.
Whoops missed the source...nice sarcasm.
“Every economist I’ve talked to says the problem is that the first stimulus package was too small.”
Proof, yet again, that SanFranNan ONLY listens to leftwing economists. She’s not digging very deep if EVERY economist she consults provides her the same badly flawed advice.
It’s time to take back the country.
At $500,000 a job we will need a lot more money for additional jobs? It doesn’t register in her thick skull that $500,000 per job is not a very effective policy?
This moron is running the Congress and only two heartbeats from the presidency. Like maybe it would be more effective to just take that $500,000 and give it to 10 guys at $50,000 each. It’s welfare, and wealth transfer of course, but it at least covers more people than her stupid logic does.
That's about the size of it.
Idiots don’t need another stimulus......shift the remaining unused portion—about $500 billion—from the first failed stimulus and use that. Double frakin’ Pelosi idiot.
Frankly , I don’t blame her. If I were in her shoes I’d do it too. After all , outside of angry blog post no one will do a damn thing about it anyway. It’s not as if there will be riots in the street if she decides to rob us again ( a suggestion of mine by the way ..ignored ). We’ll just sit and take it like we have been doing . Good for her,sham eon us.
Activities such as SEIU and ACORN's get out the vote? I can see Face-lift Pelosi now: "We're stimulating democracy for the American people!"
Horse hockey.
$500,000 for a temporary job that pays $30,000. Or maybe $25,000.
Pelosi knows that her majority is in trouble so she needs more porkulus to buy off enough people to keep the House. It won't work. November 2010 is going to be awesome!
..................sigh.
They have to actually fund the original stimulus money first instead of holding onto it until next year before the election. The stimulus should be renamed, “The Money we promised to the people now, but will deliver later, so we can get reelected fund.”
What a joke. They are waiting to fund stimulus money in hopes of spurring the economy right before the 2010 elections and avoiding a takeover by the right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.