2/5     Really Obama?  Really?  "This recession might linger for years. Our
        economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach
        double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some
        point, WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REVERSE," Obama wrote in the newspaper
        piece titled, "The Action Americans Need."
        \_ Nice selective quoting there.  That's what he is saying we need to
           prevent, not what is going to happen.  Here's the two sentances
           RIGHT BEFORE THAT.  "Because each day we wait to begin the work of
           turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their
           savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession
           might linger for years."
           \_ I wasn't selectively quoting.  He's claiming if we don't pass
              this bill, the USA will end.  What a moron.
              \_ If nothing is done, will the things that he suggests come to
                 pass? Possibly. His stimulus package may not be a silver
                 bullet, but it will be doing something.
                 \_ Ready, Fire, Aim!
                    \_ Sure, fair point: doing something dumb is as bad/worse
                       than doing nothing. Still doesn't invalidate what he
                       said.
                    \_ It's pretty funny to hear Republicans talking about
                       cautious policy (c.f. Iraq) and fiscal responsibility
                       (c.f.  pretty much everything).
                       \_ Iraq wasn't exactly "incautious" -- but yes, the R's
                          have certainly not been the party of small gov't
                          lately.
                          \_ You think that Iraq was carefully thought out?
                 \_ No, if the government sits on its collective hands, we
                    won't go into an IRREVERSIBLE tailspin.  "His" stimulus
                    package is a crap sandwich of every earmark from the House
                    and Senate, only 3% goes to "shovel-ready" projects, and
                    less than 1/4 will be spent in 2009.
                    \_ It would help your case if you hadn't taken his
                       words out of context to start with.  As it is your
                       credibility is, shall we say, low?  Hell you
                       couldn't even be bothered to make it clear you had
                       cut off the first half of the sentance you were
                       quoting.
                    \_ "We may not be able to reverse" includes the possibility
                       of reversing it.
                    \_ No, that is not the plain meaning of the words he used.
                       You are too stupid to bother with explaining the
                       obvious meaning too, though.
                       obvious meaning though.
        \_ There are plenty of non insane respected economists, not waaay to
           the left or waaay to the right who really believe that if some
           massive stimulus action is not taken soon we are really seriously
           in for a long deep depression. You could argue that is just how
           free markets work and that a depression will simply finally cut out
           all the fat, make us more competitive, and really prove that FDR's
           massive expansion of gov spending and LBJ's great society brought
           us to this point, but my point is, many believe the danger is real.
           The Fed is and was REALLY scared. What is your plan to avoid
           economic ruin, or is your position that we shouldn't do shit?
           \_ How many of them predicted our current situation?  When we're
              talking about make-work projects and protectionism, I get all
              itchy worrying that we're headed right back to the beginning of
              20th century.
              \_ Yeah, that would be terrible.  Let's tear down the Golden
                 Gate and Bay Bridges while we're at it.  -tom
           \_ Their "stimulus" is only possible via huge borrowing, which is on
              top of the already huge borrowing that we've been doing for
              many years.  That itself could lead to economic ruin and in
              any case is a long term burden.
              The fed should have been scared a long time ago.
              Is the answer to just keep doing what we've been doing, only more
              so?
              \_ "what we've been doing" is throwing billions down a rathole
                 in Iraq while cutting taxes on the wealthy.  I'm all for
                 stopping both of those things.  -tom
              \_ When the market is willing to loan the government money at
                 near-zero interest, NOT running a deficit would be
                 irresponsible.
        \_ ok.  what are the alternatives?  tax cuts?  Bush has done plenty of
           that.  I don't know how you are going to convince me tax cut is
           going to work this time.  *IF* you are a true free-market type,
           you would totally let GM, Ford, Bear Stern, Bandk of America,
           Citibank to die.
           or you are the type who supports "socialize the cost,"  asking
           the tax payers to buy those "bad asset" so banks can be free of
           their responsbility of making bad investments?