January 23, 2009

3% for infrastructure

It did not take long for me to sour on the Congress's new checkbook.  The $800 billion dollar economic boost, which is being sold as a rebuilding of roads and bridges is spin.

For every dollar that is spent for small business tax relief, $4 are being spent for the maintenance and new grass in Washington, D.C.
$360 million for sexually transmitted disease education
$50 million for the National Endowment of Arts
$726 million for an after school snack program
Office furniture for the public health service
More money for Amtrak

Only 3% is going to be used on Roadways.  Change we can believe in?  I'm waiting for President Obama to weigh in on this.

9 comments:

Stella said...

$360 million for sexually transmitted disease education
* Yes, because for eight years, the budget went to abstinence only programs. Didn't work.

$50 million for the National Endowment of Arts
* This program has had huge cuts. Some of the money will undoubtedly be used for music education, which helps our children intellectually, especially because the same area of the brain that learns math also learns music: it's interrelated.

This fact surprised me, Lee. George Bush protected this national treasure, and increased the NEA budget annually. I believe Laura Bush was very involved in the NEA.

$726 million for an after school snack program.
* Anything to help our children grow strong. Can you remember when Ronald Reagan wanted to make ketchup a vegetable?

Lee, I don't mind if you disagree, as you well know. I'm just responding stream of consciousness. I've worked a long day and it's very late.

Lee said...

How is this Economic stimulus?

It's not.

shoo said...

Yes, looks like a bunch of stuff typically stuffed in the budget, not stimulus spending, which I would expect to be more directed to, you know, stimulate the economy.

Stella said...

Education is economic stimulus. The more educated a society, the more our children can accomplish in terms of inventions and business.

There is no greater economic stimulus than educating our children.

Stella said...

BTW, Lee commented on funding Amtrak. This is a critical part of our nation's infrastructure in terms of shipping. National infrastructure was ignored and took a serious beating during the previous administration, which gave $750 billion to the financial sector with no oversight.

That's not economic stimulus.

AIG was so pleased, they spent $44 million on a party. That's our tax dollars, and a CEO making $20 million a year for an almost bankrupt company is not economic stimulus either.

Meanwhile, middle-class families like us watched their budgets sag in the wake of this buy-out. When the middle-class can work and thrive, it helps our nation.

We might ask which administration was responsible for our sagging economy due to an unnecessary war. Halliburton "lost" $1.5 billion and was not held accountable. Economic stimulus does not occur when a vice president who is a shareholder in a company grants no-bid contracts so his stocks soar through the roof.

Our differences come from the way we look at economic stimulus.

Lee said...

lets stop with the deflection.

The last administration is gone. I contacted every representative I could to vote against stimulus.

We are talking about the here and now.

So your economic stimulus concept has nothing to do with getting people back to work at jobs that create money, not just use OUR OWN money?

I suppose the condoms could be spun to shrink the future workeforce?

Stella said...

LOL! Lee, I, too, I contacted every representative I could to vote against stimulus. Of course we're talking about the here and now, but Obama has only been president for three days. Education creates economic stimulus, but it's a slower process.

I don't know what economic stimulus President Obama will take. I'm not sure he won't. Like it or not, this mess is left over from the Bush Admin four days ago. Yes, now, the problem is in Obama's lap. But how does one person solve this error?

How we will help our country economically without using our own money as a bailout, again, Bush ignited, is a good question. Better minds than I don't know the answer either.

But like it or not, many Republicans felt Bush did act according to conservative principles and spent too much of our tax dollars. From the conservative The Economist: NEVER say that they can't multi-task. While members of the Republican National Committee snipe at each other over l'affair nègre magique, their vice chairman was drafting a resolution condemning the work of... President Bush. A motion to be debated at the RNC's late January meeting would officially state its opposition to "socialist" bail-outs of the financial and car industries.

Please know I respect your perspective. Both parties opposed the bailout.

Lee said...

$44 million on a party.

Hmmm so they spent that money for caterers, transportation and lodging?

So paying companies that pay people doesn't stimulate the economy as much as condoms?

Stella said...

LOL! That's a good point—paying salaries. Still, I wish the money had gone to people to help them keep their homes.

Lee, let's just agree that it's a mess and the problem won't be solved immediately. I think we're in for rough times for a while.