Are you for (or against) the economic stimulus plan?

I'm not sure about this at all.

My intuition---not to mention life experience!---tells me that we can't spend our way out of debt. However, if we're going to bail out every industry that comes to Washington with their hands out, why not the American taxpayer?

I just don't know enough about economics to make a good judgement on complex issues like this. I hope the President has surrounded himself with good financial advisors who know what they're doing.

I'm not in favor of it as it stands, because a few hundred dollars one way or the other is not going to save any of us from the cripeload of trouble we're in. That said, I'm not behind on any bills and for someone else, that $500 may make the difference in their electricity being on or off.

Tax cuts aren't the way to go. (1$ of tax cut yields about 97 cents in stimulus. 1$ in infrastructure spending yields 1.50 in stimulus. IOW spending does act to leverage economic activity while tax cuts yield almost no economic activity.) Paul Krugman is on record calling for a large stimulus package because of the very real risk of our economy grinding to a halt.

Certain projects are very worthwhile as a means to improving economic performance. (EG electrical grid modernization, energy projects, mass transit etc.) Investing in shovel ready projects puts money in the hands of people most likely to spend it.

Dang, I can't find the "What he said" emoticon, or I'd use it for Viking.

I think the bill has too much in the way of tax cuts (which don't really help) and not enough in actual stimulus projects. There are tons of things that are ready to go in terms of infrastructure projects that would make a difference immediately. I want to see more in education aid too, b/c with layoffs more people will be going back to school.

Give me tangable stuff that leaves a lasting legacy in improved buildings, roads, power grid, etc.

And make sure the jobs are gender equitable.

I love that the WPA funded things like writers and artists, not just projects that needed physical labor.

I'm concerned about electronic medical records.

Like the idea of jobs building and creating our infrastructure, getting us more energy independent, improving schools. And many states really need help to stop layoffs of needed workers like police, teachers, and firefighters.

It's better to have people doing productive work than collecting unemployment.

Obama issues US recovery pledge

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7848977.stm

If you have time this is a very interesting 11 minute interview:

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/2...enda_for_a_new

I think the best analogy to this that I can come up with is:

Robbing Peter to pay Paul
(then simply reverse, repeat, wash, spin)

Op-Ed Columnist

PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: January 25, 2009

As the debate over President Obama’s economic stimulus plan gets under way, one thing is certain: many of the plan’s opponents aren’t arguing in good faith….

…First, there’s the bogus talking point that the Obama plan will cost $275,000 per job created. Why is it bogus? Because it involves taking the cost of a plan that will extend over several years, creating millions of jobs each year, and dividing it by the jobs created in just one of those years….

…The true cost per job of the Obama plan will probably be closer to $100,000 than $275,000 — and the net cost will be as little as $60,000 once you take into account the fact that a stronger economy means higher tax receipts. …
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/opinion/26krugman.html

OK, if we accept Krugman's figures, the cost of each job created or saved by the stimulus plan is still almost double the average household income in the U.S, and almost three times the average individual income in the U.S. This is simply too expensive for the results it is projected to produce.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...55/ai_68147472
AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD INCOME: $53,100

http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/769229.html
Mean income -- $35,499