What is the Democrats exit strategy in the war on the recession?

In the Twilight Zone. Where else do democrats reside?

 

If I remember it correctly the Republicans passed a $750B stimulus package in the waning months of the failed Bush Presidency. Now we find out that Paulson short changed taxpayers by $87B in buying bank assets for more than they are currently worth. Just another Republican FAILURE.

 

You seem to have a problem with focusing, you always post off topic, can't seem to stay on topic, to stay focused.

On topic, they're going to pay it back by raising your taxes.

 

This is an easy question. The exit strategy is the destruction of the working class.

 

You can't handle any post that isn't anti-Democrat. That's your problem. You're terrifically biased. Try thinking things through.

 

Your memory is faulty. Democrats controlled Congress last year.

 

Perhaps they will declare victory and leave the country!

 

No, it's the republicans who have almost destroyed the middle class!

 

Wrong thread.

 

When we stop loosing 600K jobs per month and unemployment drops to a reasonable number.

I think the logic is if we put people to work we have more payroll taxes to collect and we'll collect more sales tax as the eagle shifts.

That is right, now is the time to keep the economy from totally tanking so there isn't a lot of emphasis on how we'll pay it back. Of course, we have a lot of CEO's on wall street and stars in Hollywood with more money than they can spend in one lifetime but the GOP doesn't want to raise their taxes. The way I see it, we need to get the money from someone and they seem to be the only ones with it.

The recession will last at minimum two years by every economist calculations the difference is how deep the recession will be and how much more than two years will it last. The theory is we can do nothing and risk a second great depression or we can try and head it off at the pass. I prefer doing something as opposed to nothing.

 

If for example they decide to spend $20 Billion on roads and bridges. They will spend the whole amount over time. They won't build half a bridge, see things get better so cut the funds for the other half. That was McCain's idea that if we see things change then the spending stops. I would hate to see a bunch of half finished projects.

Certain products do however the states and local Government are hurting also. Cali is forcing employees to take a day off with no pay. This is far more than just a federal crises, we are hurting at every level. Even the great and rich state of AK is looking for help.

The end is what is passed in the legislation. It is up to Congress not to pass any more legislation which is why we need the GOP to stop being silly so they can help balance the negotiations. But if $20 Billion passes $20 Billion will be spent.

The GOP is insisting on tax cuts for the rich. Why, it won't increase spending one nickel. There is no rich person not buying anything they want because of a shortage of bucks. The Democrats say they are not hurting and wants to leave them where they are. All of this is based on Obama campaign promise to raise the taxes on those making over $250K by 3%.

That is the definition of stimulus.

I've seen those speculation but don't understand how they come to those conclusions. I don't see how we define a depression based on the size of the government debt. The two don't seem to impact each other so I believe it is more conservative scare tactics.

The only way things can get worse is if at the end of the government allocated spending there has been insufficient stimulation to cause the private sector to spend. That is why the size needs to be big. This would mean all those hired because of the government spending will be again laid off and we'll be right back to a recession like we have today. If that happens it will be about 2012 and the Democrats won't get a second chance. The more we spend now the least chance there will be for no stimulation to have occurred somewhere in the spending.

From what I am hearing, this is a unique situation so we have no true historical basis to make this claim. I've heard it where they reference the great depression but economist say this is not the same condition.

Many great things have been done by people with hope and no experience. Our founding fathers had no experience leading a revolution or founding a nation. What they had was a hope and a vision and with God on their side we are free to discuss that vision today. Don't sell hope short, without it there is no faith.

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

 

Well then, you have bad information. Check out your history...there's been scores of recessions, and several outright depressions.

Economists that claim "this isn't the same" don't have a clue about US history.

 

Only one other recession/depression on this magnitude. Yes, we've had other recessions but not like this.

The only place I know whose economy came close to this was Japan in the 1990's. The conclusion is their government reacted too slow and now that period is known as the lost decade.

 

You mean like cutting taxes which Bush and the GOP did to get us into this mess. Bush cut taxes and the recession began. I know you guys want to blame it on his spending but I don't see how government spending caused this mess.

We gave tax incentives to send jobs overseas. Now that their gone, unemployment is up. We gave corporations and the rich huge tax cuts and now they are worth more but if there was a new job they made it overseas.

 

I have seen you state this quite frequently. Can you explain just exactly what you are talking about? (With some sources, please!
Thanks.)