Am watching Obama live in Denver right now (6:21 CST). Could someone please explain to me this:

[iheartmulletz]

I am hearing Obama listing all the investments he's going to put in America: more teachers hired and giving them more support, more clean energy, etc. I heard that we can kiss any programs or extra stuff due to the bailout (if it goes through, that is). Is this true?

[thunder rising]

1. Yep GWB will have fucked us good, if this goes through. No progressive improvements, all the money

went to the rich.

[OmahaBlueDog]

2. That would depend how we pay for it

Thaat would also depend on getting out of Iraq

[childslibrarian]

3. So true

Thanks

[Ashy Larry]

4. Nobody really knows what the situation will look like in January.

Obama will probably have to delay some things. He has said he is going to go after tax loop-holes and off-shore tax havens and corporate welfare so we may have more to work with than it looks like right now.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. You can kiss that stuff good-bye even more if it doesn't

[RoyGBiv]

6. Without some substantive action immediately ...

You can certainly kiss all that goodbye, as the primary focus of his one and only administration will be damage control.

The so-called "bailout" is dead, so that fairly moot at this point.

If Congress can put something together in the next day or two that is then passed by the end of the week ... maybe, possibly, there might be some light, or at least a hint of it. But as OmahaBlueDog said, that will depend on how whatever is done is financed.

[iheartmulletz]

9. Well, I am under the assumption that they are still gonna work on the bailout!

I mean, c'mon--with the markets crashing around us, they surely can't sit there and twiddle their thumbs, can they? They have to atleast give the impression of stopping the bleeding...Man, this really blows! I thought the money for all those programs was separate or something.

[RoyGBiv]

12. Well, they'll work on something ...

What, is the question.

I saw a suggestion in a political mag that might indeed be a silver lining to all this, the implementation of some variation of FDR's Reconstruction Finance Corporation. That would be a good idea with potential long-term benefits.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4125639&mesg_id=4125639

But Republicans will oppose it strongly, and I imagine a great number of Democrats in Congress and the rank-and-file here will too, merely because it will be seen as another bailout scheme.

[iheartmulletz]

14. I would love to see FDR-type programs of all kinds

including a work program to rebuild the infrastructure and subsidized housing (perhaps in exchange for service by citizens who benefit). We need socialism and we need it now!

[stanwyck]

15. I agree. Put Americans to work building up our infrastructure

I'm all for going all FDR on this country. Unemployment is at a 7-yr. high. Take the money OUT of Iraq. And bring it back here to build energy efficient cars and a real mass transit system, like those in Europe. Put people to work repairing bridges and levees. Even conservatives seem to be embracing socialism these days.

[iheartmulletz]

16. Oh, you are so right about high-speed rail! Especially now with the high gas prices

it would be a boon to those who must commute long distances and save energy for travelers. I don't see why socialism is such a reviled concept, but I imagine it's the usual suspects: evil capitalists.

[BlueIdaho]

7. Folks act like we will never see any of this money again.

The federal government is buying low - there is room to sell these assets to recoup losses and even sell for more than we pay for them. We are likely going to get a wad of this money back and could even potentially see a profit from this "bailout." If we let the markets (plural) crash - then you can say goodbye to any new spending - unless its for bread lines that is.

edit - typo

[1corona4u]

8. I guess it depends on who you believe.

Personally, I believe Obama. But, since there was no bailout today, I don't know what his stance would be now. He already said in the debate what he would do, given the last plan. If you can't remember, go to political videos and watch it again. He said nothing about raising our taxes, or cutting any of the things he had promised to do, but said some would have to be scaled back a bit, but that he would more importantly cut off useless programs we have now, that don't work.

I believe Obama.

[MarjorieG]

10. That's what they did to Clinton, who balanced budget-which they wasted. Instead of reinvesting....

in America. Depending on liquidity, how much we can make from repealing Bush tax cuts, other streamlining of govt, we have to make a start on health care and energy-creating new jobs, as well. That's non-negotiable

[Realityhack]

11. No not necessarily.

The bailout would add to the national debt (obviously) but so does the war and simply not bringing in as much in taxes as we spend.

Obama plans to balance the budget by increasing taxes on the extremely wealthy and not continuing the repeated 'temporary' cuts they have received. That would be coupled with tax cuts for the average American but would still result in a net increase in federal income.

Basically... say we are 10% short now. He increases spending by 10% and total revenue by 25%... net you start slowly paying back the national debt.

Of course their is interest etc. to consider but I don't think the additional programs are off the table.

We do need to remember however, that congress does the budget not the president. He just has a good place to encourage them from. Some of these things will not happen. The key right now is to look at this as a plan that Obama has. And IMO it is a good plan.

[iheartmulletz]

13. Thank you for that--I thought so

The end of the war and tax increases will be able to pay for at least some of the initiatives, I would imagine.

[gmoney]

17. just sell bonds!

(ducks)