An Alternative to Obama's Economic Stimulus Plan

Bill Beach, director of Heritage's Center for Data Analysis, explains that aggressive tax relief would create or protect 3 million jobs between 2009-2011.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• economic stimulus
• barack obama
• tax relief
• cuts
• bill beach
• jobs
• recession
• policy

[groberts1776]

@toddghall

"Monsanto, who owns the seeds, the fertilizers, the farmers debts, even the genetics of plants..."

You forgot one - Monsanto owns the politicians too! Without subsidies, tariffs and price supports Corn Inc. would be a paper tiger and Coke would be sweeter. Most people prefer Mexican Coke because it has real cane sugar, not HFCS.

The gov't has a very poor record of resisting monopolies. By the time a monopoly is prosecuted, it is usually no longer dominant; IBM is a great example.

[toddghall]

@groberts1776

I see an expanding lower class all around me, and it doesn't take anything fancy to back it up. There are WAY less single income families. Kids are having to live with their parents well into their 20's. Even when they do get out, most can't afford to live on their own. Families sharing houses. The amount of people uninsured. There are LOTS of simple examples to show that the divide continues to grow.

[toddghall]

@groberts1776

See, you make lots of good points, but then you go to far. Just because there was some bad eggs in ACORN doesn't mean the organization did not do good things.

You can't control who is going to go to town halls. I would need proof that insiders planted them specifically.

I'm sure there was more to Walpin, there always is; however, I am not going to go look it up.

[toddghall]

@groberts1776

I totally agree with nonpartisan.

That's one way to look at Democrats. I look at it as putting safe guards in place to prevent abuse by big businesses. If we lived in a truly free capitalistic market, monopolies would rain supreme. Look at a company like Monsanto, who owns the seeds, the fertilizers, the farmers debts, even the genetics of plants. Not to mention the smaller companies that turn corn into commodities. That's just one example.

[groberts1776]

@toddghall

Lobbyists are all around. The solution is nonpartisan. We need smaller, constitutionally-restrained government. If Congress kept to Art I Sec VIII there would be virtually no lobbyists. No need for them. Nothing they could accomplish. Wouldn't be worth paying them.

Not to say Republicans are perfect, but the whole aim of Democrats is to increase the reach of gov't. Therefore it is a predetermined conclusion that Dems will increase the scope for lobbying by expanding gov't.

[groberts1776]

@toddghall

The President always does the opposite of what he says:

On Transparency:

-HHS Sec Sibelius delayed a report detailing how Obamacare will cost much more than expected.

-Blocked two judicial inquiries into warrant-less wiretapping.

-Fired IG Walpin because he found corruption that made Obama look bad

-Paid vote-fraudsters ACORN $800 M to corrupt voter regisistration records

-Packed town halls with "plants"

Virtually every article that comes up for "Obama transparency" is critical

[groberts1776]

@toddghall

Gov't approaches business and vice versa, the point is that regulations are simplistically portrayed as being anti-business when in fact they are often anti-competitive and pro-big business. The New Deal actually created and maintained anti-competitive cartels. So much for competition.

The government currently runs GM and even before the Orwellian financial stability act passed, the administration wanted to take $50 Bn from TARP to "bail out" and take over failing financial firms.

[toddghall]

@groberts1776

And only Democrats give into lobbyists right? It has to be our job to get the bad officials out. We need to argue for better government transparency. Amazingly, something Obama supports.

[toddghall]

@groberts1776

I think the opposition can just as easily look at it the other way. What came first the chicken or the egg. Did business approach government first or did government approach business.

Capitalism is proven to need regulation, else monopolies will rule all.

Government is not looking to run anything. I think this is where your intelligence goes to far.

[toddghall]

@groberts1776

I guess it is how you define rich. I don't call a color TV rich. I prefer to compare incomes.