tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post1358477226907491713..comments2023-11-02T02:35:46.856-05:00Comments on Organized Exploitation: Obama's Stimulus - Making Big Brother Even BiggerPaul Kroenkehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06905336586579220647noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-12911276214749941752009-02-10T14:22:00.000-06:002009-02-10T14:22:00.000-06:00I did not set out to prove a point. I set out to ...I did not set out to prove a point. I set out to organize all of the data into some kind of set that would make sense on a summary level.<BR/><BR/>My point was generated as I began to move my way through the bill and the spending allocations.<BR/><BR/>There are over 150 "departments," if you will, that monies are being allocated to.<BR/><BR/>Conceptually, we need a way to understand it on more of a summary level.<BR/><BR/>Feel free to go through the data yourself and begin a debate as to whether or not some of my allocations are correct.<BR/><BR/>I'm not Al Gore.<BR/><BR/>If you feel I'm wrong with something, I am open to the debate.<BR/><BR/>But your accusation, which is essentially that I wrote my article and then inserted the data to fit it, is incorrect.Paul Kroenkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06905336586579220647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-2435846432818909192009-02-10T13:42:00.000-06:002009-02-10T13:42:00.000-06:00The weakness of your analysis is that you are sett...The weakness of your analysis is that you are setting out to prove a point -- thus you study the information, not to discern the real results of the spending (which are hardly to be seen as an investment with a defined return in income), but to show a conclusion that you had arrived at prior to the investigation.<BR/><BR/>While I may share similar opinions, I do not let them influence my study of the data.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-3843152544335897312009-01-28T13:35:00.000-06:002009-01-28T13:35:00.000-06:00MH is correct. That $274 billion is going into bi...MH is correct. That $274 billion is going into big government programs that cost the government money, without providing a return value in new tax revenue.Paul Kroenkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06905336586579220647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-75073351045036170572009-01-28T11:30:00.000-06:002009-01-28T11:30:00.000-06:00Anonymous,I think that when Mr. Kroenke says that ...Anonymous,<BR/>I think that when Mr. Kroenke says that it is a complete loss, he doesn't mean that the $274B just disappeared. While Patiot Girl is right that money can actually be "lost", I think that he actually meant it's a complete loss as far as any stimulation is concerned, and he's exactly right. ON a side note, while you're right that the cash itself will circulate, and economy is not a closed system. If it was, we would never progress at all, and there would be no tangible difference between fiscal policies. The variable is work: some uses for money produce more of it, and others less. By producing the least possible work, government spending is the least efficient, and therefore the worst possible use for it.Misanthropic Humanisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13429376062651659086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-79913837728863944182009-01-27T16:05:00.000-06:002009-01-27T16:05:00.000-06:00Anonymous,Believe it or not, money CAN actually be...Anonymous,<BR/>Believe it or not, money CAN actually be lost, that is by decreasing the value of the U.S. dollar. This is exactly what will happen if this stimulus bill gets passed. As Paul pointed out, government programs won't create any new jobs in the private sector and therefor won't stimulate the economy.<BR/><BR/>Paul, <BR/>Thank you so much for this breakdown of the proposed stimulus bill. Your post will be a big help with the phone call I'm about to make to my representative.Patriot Girlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03092404008012634275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-43470685143675015522009-01-27T11:03:00.000-06:002009-01-27T11:03:00.000-06:00I don't understand how $274 billion is a complete ...I don't understand how $274 billion is a complete loss. I agree there is not a tangible ROI. However, money is still passed from one hand to another. Money just doesn't disappear. Money will find a way to circulate back into the economy whether the money is going from the hand of the consumer and straight into the hands of pharmaceuticals (for prescription drugs), banks (to pay back loans), or retail (to purchase clothes, goods, etc). I do agree job creation should be the first priority to stimulate the economy...you're not entirely wrong there, but thanks for breaking this down.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2450128688601342756.post-10628286325311873702009-01-17T19:59:00.000-06:002009-01-17T19:59:00.000-06:00Paul--take a look at this analysis, and compare to...Paul--take a look at this analysis, and compare to yours:<BR/>http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/stimulus-pie-chart/<BR/><BR/>excellent work my friendHarold Kildowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02531427515291393878noreply@blogger.com