Stimulus Bill Explained

by Keli Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:32 pm

Stimulus explained

Shortly after class, an economics student approaches his economics professor and says, "I don't understand this stimulus bill. Can you explain it to me?"

The professor replied, "I don't have any time to explain it at my office, but if you come over to my house on Saturday and help me with my weekend project, I'll be glad to explain it to you." The student agreed.

At the agreed-upon time, the student showed up at the professor's house. The professor stated that the weekend project involved his backyard pool.

They both went out back to the pool, and the professor handed the student a bucket. Demonstrating with his own bucket, the professor said, "First, go over to the deep end, and fill your bucket with as much water as you can." The student did as he was instructed.

The professor then continued, "Follow me over to the shallow end, and then dump all the water from your bucket into it." The student was naturally confused, but did as he was told.

The professor then explained they were going to do this many more times, and began walking back to the deep end of the pool.

The confused student asked, "Excuse me, but why are we doing this?"

The professor matter-of-factly stated that he was trying to make the shallow end much deeper.

The student didn't think the economics professor was serious, but figured that he would find out the real story soon enough.

However, after the 6th trip between the shallow end and the deep end, the student began to become worried that his economics professor had gone mad.

The student finally replied, "All we're doing is wasting valuable time and effort on unproductive pursuits. Even worse, when this process is all over, everything will be at the same level it was before, so all you'll really have accomplished is the destruction of what could have been truly productive action!"

The professor put down his bucket and replied with a smile, "Congratulations. You now understand the stimulus bill."

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:08 am

Keli, can you name a single bit of pork in the bill.

I'm not saying that there isn't any, I just defy you to name some.

Shawn Hannity couldn't.

link

by Aaron Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:12 am

The bill doesn't provide for the rail between Ca and LV but it does provide billions for 'rail lanes' to be determined at a later date. There were a lot of provision that called for 'to be determined later.'

That makes it a lot easier to push the pork where they want it, when they want it and not have to answer the tough questions now.

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:13 am

The bill doesn't provide for the rail between Ca and LV but it does provide billions for 'rail lanes' to be determined at a later date. There were a lot of provision that called for 'to be determined later.'

So you can't point to a single example, either?

by Aaron Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:33 am

I'm sure I could if I thought trying to prove something to someone who's already got their mind made up was worth my time.

If you're interested, here's a good place to start. Let me know what you find.

I think you should focus on the 'clean coal' technology. Considering clean coal doesn't exist, how can it not be pork?

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:43 am

I'm sure I could if I thought trying to prove something to someone who's already got their mind made up was worth my time.

You have the time to be snarky.

I never said there wasn't pork in it.

I was pointing out that people screaming the loudest can't actually name any. Jindal and Hannity are two excellent examples.

BTW, your source is unabashedly unreferenced (and unabashedly right-wing).

Anyone have a link to the actual legislation? After listening to Hannity, I don't know what to believe anymore.

by **ohio county** Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:54 am

Re: Lobbyists see Bill--Congress doesn't.
by ohio county on Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:13 pm

You are correct that the traditional democrat constituencies are the rich winners in this legislation but there is special interst pork aplenty:

New Tax earmarks in Bailout bill
- Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
- Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
- 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)

Tax earmark “extenders” in the bailout bill.
- Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)
- American Samoa (Sec. 309)
- Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)
- Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)
- Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)
- Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)
- Railroads (Sec. 316)
- Auto Racing Tracks (317)
- District of Columbia (Sec. 322)
- Wool Research (Se

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/01/senate-bailout-bill-hits-the-internet/
If the women don't find you handsome they can at least find you handy. - Red Green

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:57 am

Thank you, Ohio.

I was pretty sure there was.

I just thought it funny that the GOP talking heads couldn't actually name any pork when put on the spot.

I'm sure there is GOP pork in there, also.

Whores and politicians, cut from the same cloth. At least you get something when a whore screws you...

by Aaron Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:59 am

You don't trust US News and World Report?

At any rate, I don't know that the bill, which is over 1,000 pages, has been released in its entirety yet. Here's 258 pages of supplemental appropirations. Have a go at it and believe what you want to believe, I could frankly care less. Like I said, trying to prove something to you is a complete and utter waste of time so why bother?

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:02 am

Believe what you want to believe, I could frankly care less. Like I said, trying to prove something to you is a complete and utter waste of time so why bother?

Aaron, don't be a douche.

I never said there wasn't pork in the bill.

I said that republicans have railed against it but couldn't actually name any. Did you see my link to the Hannity article?

Also, if you haven't heard Jindal speak about it, you should.

Epic fail.

by Aaron Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:11 am

I'm not being a douche, I'm being truthful. You've got your mind made up and your looking to argue. I'm not playing today. You'll have to wait for another day. I've got to get out of here early so I can sign the new lease on my apartment and I'm going to the WV-UC game tonight so I don't have time.

And I told you why you can't reference a lot of the pork in the bill. It is in the way democrats wrote the bill, which appropriates and awards money at a later date but that wasn't good enough for you.

Take ACORN as an example. They are getting any money directly. But indirectly, they stand to collect as much as $400 million through the community and investment part of the bill, which will be awarded at a later date.

The fact that democrats wrote this bill in this manner to keep some of the heat off makes it that much more despicable imho and sooner or later they'll answer for it.

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:14 am

I'm not being a douche, I'm being truthful. You've got your mind made up and your looking to argue. I'm not playing today. You'll have to wait for another day. I've got to get out of here early so I can sign the new lease on my apartment and I'm going to the WV-UC game tonight so I don't have time.

What have I got my mind made up about, Aaron?

Did I say there wasn't pork in the bill?

I said that critics of the bill are ignorant of what is actually in the bill.

BTW, not all "earmarks" are bad.

Some of the money, for instance, is to repair bridges that are ticking time bombs.

I don't consider that to be "pork".

Whatever.

by Aaron Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:48 am

No, they are not ignorant of the pork. Hannity was correct in that Pelosi is diverting money to save some field mouse. She's just doing it in a way that it doesn't show in this bill, it will be 'appropriated' at a later date. But you're saying that because it's not in there now, it's not pork and the critics are ignorant.

That's what you've got your mind made up about and you're wrong.

And if it's for a bridge, then say it's for a bridge or road or whatever. But when Chicago gets a disproportionate amount of money over say, a Republican state, that is indeed pork and yes, it's bad.

And jus so you know, that only people I’ve ever heard use the term “whatever” are bitchy little girls. You might want to find something a little more manly.

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:51 am

No, they are not ignorant of the pork. Hannity was correct in that Pelosi is diverting money to save some field mouse. She's just doing it in a way that it doesn't show in this bill, it will be 'appropriated' at a later date. But you're saying that because it's not in there now, it's not pork and the critics are ignorant.

Then point to it. Hannity and Jindal couldn't actually name a single bit of pork.

If it is so obvious to you, could you point to the "mouse legislation".

And jus so you know, that only people I’ve ever heard use the term “whatever” are bitchy little girls. You might want to find something a little more manly.

And people that say, "I could show you but why bother" are lazy losers that can't back up their assertions.

I guess this bitchy little girl is in good company.

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:56 am

But you're saying that because it's not in there now, it's not pork and the critics are ignorant.

I NEVER said that.

I feel sure there is "pork" in it (not all earmarks are "pork", BTW), I said those most critical of it can't provide concrete examples.

So, if you are done putting words in my mouth...

by TerryRC Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:00 am

This isn't too far off topic:

Stimulus Watchdog Earl Devaney

An Obama appointment I actually approve of.

Devaney has a record of competence.

by ziggy Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:19 am

Aaron wrote:No, they are not ignorant of the pork. Hannity was correct in that Pelosi is diverting money to save some field mouse. She's just doing it in a way that it doesn't show in this bill, it will be 'appropriated' at a later date. But you're saying that because it's not in there now, it's not pork and the critics are ignorant.

That's what you've got your mind made up about and you're wrong.

And if it's for a bridge, then say it's for a bridge or road or whatever. But when Chicago gets a disproportionate amount of money over say, a Republican state, that is indeed pork and yes, it's bad.

And jus so you know, that only people I’ve ever heard use the term “whatever” are bitchy little girls. You might want to find something a little more manly.

Congratulations, Terry RC. When Aaron or Sam call you a sissy, you know you've got the best of 'em. It is one of their trademarks of desperation.

by Aaron Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:29 am

I didn't call him a sissie Ziggy.

Perhaps you should take your foot out of your mouth, go back and read what I wrote and try again.

Rolling Eyes

by **Stephanie** Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:33 am

Please. Sean Hannity does not speak for conservatives. His head is so far up his own ass he can't see the light of day. He is clueless about nearly everything and I'll never understand how he became "popular" with any group. It is unlikely that if he read the legislation he would have a clue what it says. He'd need someone to read it for him and explain it to him.

Good grief. Don't go lumping Sean Hannity with conservatives.

by TerryRC Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:46 am

Please. Sean Hannity does not speak for conservatives. His head is so far up his own ass he can't see the light of day. He is clueless about nearly everything and I'll never understand how he became "popular" with any group. It is unlikely that if he read the legislation he would have a clue what it says. He'd need someone to read it for him and explain it to him.

Good grief. Don't go lumping Sean Hannity with conservatives.

No, but Bobby Jindal does and he was just as ignorant.

I pray for a Jindal/Palin ticket in 2012. I need a good belly laugh.

by Aaron Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:55 am

TerryRC wrote:I pray for a Jindal/Palin ticket in 2012. I need a good belly laugh.

I've heard that statement from more then a few liberals but when I referred to you as such, you became offended. Why so?

by **Stephanie** Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:16 am

Jindal is unproven, Terry. I actually think in many ways he is the GOP's version of Barack Obama. He has little history.....his a shooting star. Unlike US Senators, his role as governor will force him to actually make policy decisions that will reveal to us who and what he really is.

The jury on Jindal is still out, at least in my mind. Talk is cheap, my friend.

by Aaron Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:18 am

I only heard a few minutes of his speech but I heard him on the radio the next morning and I don't see how he was such a flop. Someone will have to explain it to me.

by SamCogar Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:17 am

Stephanie wrote:Jindal is unproven, Terry. I actually think in many ways he is the GOP's version of Barack Obama. He has little history.....his a shooting star. Unlike US Senators, his role as governor will force him to actually make policy decisions that will reveal to us who and what he really is.

The jury on Jindal is still out, at least in my mind. Talk is cheap, my friend.

TRC says such things about anyone with brains and talent.

.

by **Stephanie** Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:41 am

I read the transcript. Jindal was mediocre at best. His speech, at least in my mind, indicated that he too shares the socialist belief that the government can solve all of our problems.

The government creates more problems than it solves.

by Sponsored content

Stimulus Bill Explained

Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained

Re: Stimulus Bill Explained