With Reid bill, Dems turn 180 degrees from stimulus to spending cuts--"an era of austerity"

[Karmadillo]

Well, no austerity for the people who own the government, but you little people better get used to eating whatever shit you're fed.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/174547-with-reid-bill-dems-turn-180-degrees-between-stimulus-and-cuts

With Reid bill, Dems turn 180 degrees from stimulus to spending cuts
By Mike Lillis - 07/30/11 07:24 PM ET

<edit>

And Democrats, who have warned for months that slashing government spending would cripple the fragile economic recovery, are now calling for more than $750 billion in discretionary cuts — a 180-degree turn from their 2009 strategy of pumping $787 billion into the economy to stimulate spending.

"It is clear we must enter an era of austerity," Pelosi said Monday, taking a page from Boehner.

Even Reid conceded that his bill would "give the Republicans everything they've asked for."

"No revenues, $2.4 trillion in cuts — that's a pretty good deal," Reid said Friday. "They, in effect, … have gotten everything they want and should put those chips in their pockets and walk away and declare victory."

more...

[Wilms]

1. Wilms: ‘We Get The Sacrifice, They Keep The Wealth’

[DJ13]

2. How about we share the wealth

That by itself would lower the debt faster than the austerity measures to hurt the poor and elderly.

[trayfoot]

3. Right now,

I am AS angry with the democrats as I am the reTHUGlicans!

[msongs]

4. Obama and reid are doing the repubs dirty work FOR them lol. boner must be hysterically happy nt

[deminks]

5. Prosperity for them, austerity for us.

Why are we not in the streets? Oh yeah the president told us to use our phones.

[Imajika]

6. Cuts are not nearly as bad as they seem...

Yes, the teabaggers have us talking about cuts and deficits instead of stimulus and jobs, so on that front we are losing. Still, real cuts in 2012 are not large and a future budget can simply wipe out the rest - which look bigger than they really are. And the 1 trillion plus the Reid bill claims from military operations that we have already planned to wind down are pretty much not real cuts.

The real problem here is that the economy is flat lining and what is needed is more stimulus. Now that it turns out that the original stimulus was predictably way too small (just as Krugman and smart economists said), we need to be doing more to stimulate demand. All this talk about deficits is drowning out the need to do serious things to boost our economy.

[Cool Logic]

7. Given that Geithner has emptied the magazine in his $3 trillion TARP/stimulus gun,

and Bernanke's is out of QE bullets, they really have no other choice.

[girl gone mad]

8. It's actually been about $16 Trillion in bailouts to the banks.

And of course we have a choice.

We need to expand the government deficit and increase the supply of money in the economy through tax cuts which benefit low wage workers and jobs programs. We should also spend more on infrastructure and high tech investment.

[Karmadillo]

9. This makes so much sense. Why aren't the Democrats willing to go the People with

this message instead of their Republican not so lite raw deal?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[girl gone mad]

11. Would you prefer that we allow our productive capacity to wither away..

to the point where we can no longer make the things we need or want and we're completely dependent on foreign countries?

Is that your solution?

An endless spiral of destruction of productive capacity, asset and wage deflation, an idle workforce, and our kids falling behind in education until we have no hope of ever paying off external debts?

[madrchsod]

14. like our silverware?

[girl gone mad]

15. Everything and anything.

If we lose the skills, equipment and infrastructure needed to build and innovate, our grand kids are really going to be screwed. Better to leave them with a strong, healthy economy and some fiat currency debts.

[madrchsod]

18. yes, try and find someone who can forge steel....

[Cool Logic]

17. Actually, I freely admit that I do not have all the answers.

However, I have studied the playbook and it is clear to me that we have changed the rules in the middle of the game. We no longer have a government of, for and by the People; rather, we have a government of, for, and by two corrupt political parties.

We need to expand the government deficit and increase the supply of money in the economy through tax cuts which benefit low wage workers and jobs programs. We should also spend more on infrastructure and high tech investment.

First, you complain (rightfully so) about the "$16t in bailouts to the banks," and then, you call for "expanding the government deficit." Forgive me, but how is borrowing more money going to help the People, when we both know that our corrupt Representatives will funnel it to entities represented by K Street, or squander it on another war?

and increase the supply of money in the economy through tax cuts which benefit low wage workers and jobs programs.

Your first point is sensible; however, the money you gave to K Street in your first sentence, would negate the positive of putting more money into the pockets of the People. It is not clear to me what you mean by "job programs," but if you mean government job programs, you are advocating giving even more of our money to K Street, which they will use to enhance their controlled-market economy to the detriment of the People's free-market economy.

We should also spend more on infrastructure and high tech investment.

Again, the logic is sound, but I suspect that when you say "spend," you mean spending the People's money, under the direction of two corrupt political parties. If my assumption is correct, your idea will enhance political power, not economic power.

to the point where we can no longer make the things we need or want and we're completely dependent on foreign countries?

What do you think increasing the deficit by a couple tril every few months is doing?

If a society is to be free, its government must be controlled. Regrettably, we have allowed that equation to become inverted.

[madrchsod]

13. fat chance on that....

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Angry Dragon]

16. Basicly they are saying that the stimulus was a bad idea

and Obama can not run on it.......
If you put a ton of money into the hands of the bottom 60% of households
the money will stimulate the economy
it will get spent and change hands 6-7 times
it will create demand
jobs will have to be created
more taxes will be paid
creating more money for the government to spend
creating more money for people to spend
a vicious circle will happen

put a ton of money in the hands of the rich and it will stay in their pockets creating nothing except a lost country