Senegal has offered Haitians land to make a new country. Haiti is overpopulated and the mountains block the rain causing crop failures. http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE60H0A820100118
Only 5% of the population over there is Christian. I'm not sure that would jive well with a culture that is 80% Catholic , 15% Protestant and 100% Vodo. All we need is to turn these people into Muslims. I'd be wary. On the other hand, perhaps it would bring a balance to the majority?
Where exactly do you believe the money has been blown? Only a small percentage of the stimulus has been spent. They are still looking at projects and awarding contracts. The money will be spent in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Most of the bank loans have been paid back with interest. In the end, the government (taxpayers) will have actually profited from the bailouts. So you want to use American tax dollars to build the workforce of another nation and import jobs there? Nobody likes that China has our jobs (aside from the 90% of Americans who have demanded low cost products), but it is what it is; a country with poor working conditions, low wages and no environmental regulation. You need all three to be guaranteed manufacturing now, and the US government isn't going to be party to creating that in Haiti or anywhere.
I'm not talking about the "stimulus" per say. In fiscal 2009 Obama spent $3.52 trillion!!! That added another $1.4 trillion to the deficit. And $1 trillion more than last year under Bush. The overall budget was about a half-trillion more than Bush's for 2008, his final full fiscal year in office. Just to put this in perspective: Clinton's spending added up to $13.5 trillion over his two full terms. Bush spent $16.8 trillion from 2001-2008. At the rate that Obama is going (GOD FORBID) if he is in for two full terms he's on track to hit over 30 Trillion in spending at his current spending rate. Back to stimulus? This is not all stimulus. The majority of this money has gone into making government larger. Hiring more government employees, spending more money on current government employees and propping up failed government programs, while also creating new failures and waste. Back to the stimulus again? Well, Obama set aside about 787 Billion bucks for that purpose, of which only half has been applied for. In reality, the majority of the multi-trillion dollar spending spree has NOT been STIMULUS. It's been SPENDULUS. If you want to really put this into perspective, start looking at where he really spent the money. Here's just one prime example. Obama spent $84,000,000.00 That's 84 MILLION DOLLLARS on a "Stimulus" Web site. Have you been living under a rock the last 12 months? Yes, that is exactly what I want. Right now the American tax dollars are being used to make Government bigger and business smaller. That's not an investment. That's throwing money away. I'd like to see us invest in something other than our own government for a change. Something that has a return on that investment. The US government currently, yourself included apparently, seems to be perfectly content with spending American dollars on Chinese products and then in turn borrowing that money you spent from the Chinese government. Don't you think its time to do things the right way for a change? What's going on right now is pretty much the same as if you went to a bank and made a deposit of $100 and then borrowed $1000 from that same bank. I'd really like to know what rock you were hiding under before you posted this.
It doesnt surprise me one bit that his approval rate is tanking. He was the carrot on a string: "Change! Yes we can!" All the happy-feel-good propaganda warmed the hearts of the vast percentage of the population who were disappointed with the way Bush was handling things, and before you know it, Obama is in. Of course, now that he's in, it's becoming increasingly clear that his goals and aspirations as President were unknown to us at the time, and are slowly becoming evident through his actions (or lack of action).
To put that further in perspective... using the most recent U.S. Census Figures: In his first year, Obama has spent enough to give every household in the USA (~105M households) $33,400 - in his FIRST year in office! The result? Wall Street is doing fine. The Unions are doing fine. Any special interest that supported Obama is doing fine. The rest of us are seeing 17% real unemployment, declining wages, and falling sales. And now, a Republican Senator from Massachusetts is a cold splash of water in the faces of the Democrats.
Gee, I would think just giving that $33,400 to each household would have stimulated the economy MORE than what was done. Momma needs a new roof....
No shit! FYI, I financed one of my roofs (it was one of those no interest/payments deals) and paid cash for the other. The later was done better and does not leak. The former was done by Home Depot and leaks. But you are right firegirl. We know how best to SPEND our own money. That said, instead of "giving" everyone "X", why not let us keep more of it in the first place? This is the big problem with the wealth redistribution model. The wealthy continue being wealthy, the worthless continue being taken care of. And those that work, e.g. the average joe get screwed.
According to the official government site (http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx) 640,329 jobs have been saved or created and $264.9 billion has been spent. That is a cost of $400,000 for each job saved or created.
Good job Barry! "Stocks slumped for a third straight session Friday, on worries over the White House's bank plan and China's lending curbs, CNNMoney.com reports." http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/22/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm?hpt=T1
According to Nouriel Roubini, the DOW should be in the 6000-7000 range and possibly as low as 5000. The US is in another bubble. It's just a question of how long the bubble can be sustained. If it wasn't for the run-up in the DOW over the last 6 months, none of the big banks would be making any money. But the sad part is that people haven't learned and continue to pour their money into stock based retirement accounts and mutual funds. http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/11/re...ties-opinions-columnists-nouriel-roubini.html
This is why it is so difficult to argue with Obama haters. Your arguments are unrational. So you want to give each household $33,400 instead of it going to the federal government. Are you willing to do your own homeland securty, fix your own roads, hire your own neighborhood police officer, etc...? Oh that's right, you don't need any of that. You just see that $33,400 per household figure and envision an HDTV in every room, a new car and a vacation.
That article is from last year. The predicted doom & gloom never took place. Only fools stopped investing. After the full recovery those people are going to be wishing they had gotten in on the heavily discounted positions.
After the full recovery? Based on what? Borrowing money from China or the Fed printing money. The fact is that unemployment is increasing and in 2010 there will be record forclosures due to arm resets. The point of the article is that stock prices don't correspond to earnings. When the bubble pops it's going to get nasty.
LOL. Where have you been the last 20 years? The stocks prices has not corresponded to earning for at least that long.
I see your point. Let me put this another way that you might find more fair: If you ONLY look at the stimulus money spent by Pelosi and Reid - ONLY the stimulus money spent for the past two years - that comes to $27,000 per U.S. household.
$400,000 for each job saved or created The problem with the stimulus is that it is a spending bill with very little stimulus. During the Great Depression the stimulus projects like the George Washington Bridge, Ports, airport and Tunnels were built no only to give jobs but to promote long term economic growth.
So the question becomes, do you give each household $27,000 or do you create stimulus programs that bail out big business? As enticing as getting a check for $27,000 to spend and help the economy is, it just isn't realistic because the money doesn't go where it is needed most. The stimulus programs that we have come to know and love inject the money directly where it needs to go. Another problem is that handing each household $27,000 means that 100% of that will have to be paid back in future taxes. Whereas the bailouts we have seen are being paid back with interest at no cost to taxpayers. Over the next couple years we are going to see a lot of infrastructure projects getting underway using stimulus funds. Especially projects like roads and bridges. The people who work these jobs are low and middle class Americans. This will put them to work. These classes also do not save anything, so everything they make will be spent and put back into the economy.
So you believe there will never be a recovery? If so, why even argue about the economy or the job the government is doing. Just accept the country's new, lower standard of living and move on. When you see this at the top of an article... Doctor Doom How Low Can The Stock Markets Go? Nouriel Roubini, 03.12.09, 12:00 AM EST The answer: Lower ... much lower. ... don't pay much attention. Articles like that are published for their shock value. But if the market is going to tank again, I would certainly see a bright side. The crash of late 2008 was IMO a once or twice in a lifetime investment oppurtunity. To see that again so soon would be pretty amazing to anyone willing to stick their neck out a little, just like last time. But again, I just don't see it happening.