Senate passes stimulus package...

[JMD]

Those things decrease GDP. Government spending on (as you pointed out) goods and services produced in America increase GDP. It worked in the 40's, it'll work now. It's simple math.

It's not simple math. If government spending was all that was required to boost the economy and create jobs, then we would never have to worry about any recession or economic crisis. After all, the government can just spend more money, right?

It's been proven time and time again, that you cannot spend you way into prosperty. Total GDP is not as accurate a measure as government spending as % of GDP. As government spending as % of GDP increases, economic growth shrinks.

 

[Sanchez]

It's better than nothing.

Ah yes, the "doing something" argument. This is where the President and Congress need to look like they are DOING something. Never mind that there is no certainty that this plan will work and never mind that there are predictions that the recession will end without government involvement.

I am not an expert. I have no idea what plan, if any, will work. But I do not understand how anyone can believe with certainty that "It's better than nothing." The risks include inflation and a massive increase to the national debt among other things. But at least they are DOING SOMETHING and the Obama supporters are satisfied with that.

 

[Master Mason]

OK

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/housing/2004-01-20-fha_x.htm

Careful Anewman, you'll get accused of being a right wing wingnut

 

[bsnyder]

OK

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/housing/2004-01-20-fha_x.htm

Yep, the Bush Administration clearly continued down the misguided path that the Federal Government should ensure (and insure) home ownership for all!

I think it was a terrible, misguided policy over successive Administrations.

How about you?

 

[Chicago526]

You and your son are responsible people. Can you imagine the number of people who would have said, "Cool beans!" and went out shopping with that card?

Do 17 year old kids still say "cool beans"?

Seriously, my BF got a credit card as a freshman in college, her mother added her to her account so if my BF had an emergency, she'd have it as back up. Six months later, she got approved for her own card.

She is 33 and is still paying off the debt she ran up in college. This is not a stupid person (made the dean's list, graduated with honors from a top private school) but like most young people, didn't really understand how to handle money, just saw that $25 minimum payment and went nuts.

They need to do a better job of educating teens and young adults about credit cards specifically and money management in general (including info on what kind of trouble student loans can bring). If the high schools can't/won't do it, it should be a manditory class in a freshman's first year of college. Yes, the parents should do it but often they are as clueless as their kids.

 

[SSAVL]

How about this......its not asking much. Lets have a website or some type of information vehicle that will list where every dollar will go, and just exactly HOW it will stimulate the economy. Let us see WHO gets the $$ and what they do with it and hold them accountable. WE have been circling the drain the last few weeks getting ready for this "package" Now that it will pass, i will be able to accurately describe what the inside of the pipes look like on our way to the septic tank!!!!

 

[Geoff_M]

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

One small problem with this "smoking gun" against Bush... FHA loans haven't been a source of the problem.

 

[SteveInBrooklyn]

Ah yes, the "doing something" argument. This is where the President and Congress need to look like they are DOING something. Never mind that there is no certainty that this plan will work and never mind that there are predictions that the recession will end without government involvement.

I am not an expert. I have no idea what plan, if any, will work. But I do not understand how anyone can believe with certainty that "It's better than nothing." The risks include inflation and a massive increase to the national debt among other things. But at least they are DOING SOMETHING and the Obama supporters are satisfied with that.

Well, we have history as a guide. Government spending during World War II got us out of the Depression, right? It worked before, it'll work again.

 

[moburg]

OK

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/housing/2004-01-20-fha_x.htm

I don't think any of the previous posters absolved Bush of any culpability in the mess. I certainly didn't. He was right in there with the rest of them trying to increase home ownership and therefore was part of the problem.

 

[Sanchez]

One small problem with this "smoking gun" against Bush... The FHA is humming along fine and hasn't financially imploded.

That's right. Many homeowners are going back to FHA loans because in the current market that is where credit is available.

 

[Anewman]

One small problem with this "smoking gun" against Bush... FHA loans haven't been a source of the problem.

The open market has to compete, right?

If you dont want to see, that is up to you.

 

[SteveInBrooklyn]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122298982558700341.html

Took me all of 10 seconds on google.

Are all them laws allowing poor folk to get free house money still on the books? I want to get mines too.

 

[bsnyder]

The open market has to compete, right?

If you dont want to see, that is up to you.

Could you be a little less cryptic?

 

[NYDisGuy]

Careful Anewman, you'll get accused of being a right wing wingnut

How is this any different then giving a minority a job over someone who is double qualified? Or giving a minority education at a pristine university if their grades were lower then others? This bill was established because of the country's political correct attitude. They were not forcing lenders to hand out shaky loans because of their own greed which has been afformentioned. This subject has been debated through congress and economic conventions for a number of years and it could be a catalyst but no one knows for sure. I actually have been stating that the 0% down loans were a major fault of this, but the blame also has to be put on the people asking for these loans which was my point with the right wing talk. It's always the government and never the people.

 

[Charade]

I'm not crazy about a TRILLION dollar trial and error program. We don't have the first trillion dollars; where do you propose we come with additional trillion dollars?

Me neither.

FYI Obama supporters; its really ok to admit your man missed the mark with this "stimulus" package. You can still support the man and not support this pork project at the same time.

Blasphemy!!

 

[CPT Tripss]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122298982558700341.html

Took me all of 10 seconds on google.

That article says that Fannie/Freddie were required to make loans to families with income below the median income for their area.

area median income can be found at: https://www.efanniemae.com/sf/refmaterials/hudmedinc/index.jsp
For reference, in my area, (Philadelphia) median is $74,300. In Santa Clara Co., CA it's $97,300, Spartanburg, SC is $54,000, Pittsburgh, PA is $60,000, Orlando is 59,200 and New Haven is $74,900 (the lowest in the state, it goes up into the 90s).

 

[Anewman]

I don't think any of the previous posters absolved Bush of any culpability in the mess. I certainly didn't. He was right in there with the rest of them trying to increase home ownership and therefore was part of the problem.

Just replying to a Post, I did not place all of the blame on him. Post I replied asked how the GOV forced banks into granting "shaky" loans, I showed where Bush lowered FHA lending standards.

It is obvious to most that if Bush forced FHA lending standards down, lenders like CountryWide were going to do something to stay in business.

 

[Charade]

Those things decrease GDP. Government spending on (as you pointed out) goods and services produced in America increase GDP. It worked in the 40's, it'll work now. It's simple math.

Well heck. If massive government spending works to make lean times better, would it also make fat times better? Is there some inverse relationship I'm missing here?

 

[LukenDC]

Too bad the Republicans did not see fit to be fiscally restrained during Bush's 8 year wild spending spree. Between Bush's reckless spending and now this, for once both sides of the aisle will be able to take credit for something----spending America into the ground.

 

[Sanchez]

Well, we have history as a guide. Government spending during World War II got us out of the Depression, right? It worked before, it'll work again.

Are you conceding that the numerous New Deal programs of the early 1930s did not help? This package seems to closer to New Deal Legislation rather than wartime spending. Nevertheless, it is not as simple as you make it sound and government spending during the second World War was hardly the only reason the depression ended.

Check out how massive bailout programs failed in Japan inthe 1990s.