Where is your stimulus money going?

HBZSoftware.com said:
So you're saying if people aren't spending money, it is not because they have a rational reason not to spend it?

Why is it then? Because their too stupid to make their own decisions, so the government should confiscate their money and spend it for them on things they don't want?
Click to expand...

Again.... I'm no expert.... Go argue with economic nobel laureate Paul Krugman about the issue.

I'm in no position to argue with you.

-----------------

Edit: I'm in no position to argue the efficacy of Keynesian economics, but I'll inject it into the conversation because this is what our government is using to base most of their current economic decisions.

It also served as the economic model during the latter part of the Great Depression.

Just putting it out there.
 


hellblazer said:
Anyone else getting tired of this retard?
Click to expand...

Only the retards are. :thumbsup:

--------

Edit: Seriously, can't you learn to at least respect, a little bit, the left leaning opinions?

You for damn sure post enough of your right-leaning shit; learn that your opinion isn't the only opinion in the world (there are left wingers that exist on this forum).

I think you fit every right wing stereotype that exists, hellblazer. :throwup:
 
I think the problem here is neither the left/right divide, but the entirely false assertion that either Hydrogen or Solar or bullshit technologies from the OP.

The solar company is getting a capacity to make 500MW a year. That's about 2.5x the amount generated by an average coal fired plant. In 5 years, that's enough to power a city the size of Sydney (approaching 4.5m residents).
Don't forget the amount of electricity saved by not having to transport it along the lines either. A lot of power is lost just to transmission.
Never mind the fact that these plants will create jobs in manufacture, sales and installation, creating more taxable citizens.

And Honda's FCX-Clarity (as shown on TopGear) proves that hydrogen cars are full of win, but the main problem is the lack of infrastructure in place to support them.
 
HarveyJ said:
I think the problem here is neither the left/right divide, but the entirely false assertion that either Hydrogen or Solar or bullshit technologies from the OP.

The solar company is getting a capacity to make 500MW a year. That's about 2.5x the amount generated by an average coal fired plant. In 5 years, that's enough to power a city the size of Sydney (approaching 4.5m residents).
Don't forget the amount of electricity saved by not having to transport it along the lines either. A lot of power is lost just to transmission.
Never mind the fact that these plants will create jobs in manufacture, sales and installation, creating more taxable citizens.

And Honda's FCX-Clarity (as shown on TopGear) proves that hydrogen cars are full of win, but the main problem is the lack of infrastructure in place to support them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think it's great that we are investing in alternative fuels. :)

Others think it's bullshit. :(

Good thing this really is an "unfair" democracy or we'd have loons running the show still....
 
If alternative fuels are so good (and I think many of them are very good) then the private sector will jump on the business opportunity of growing these alternative fuels without the government wasting our government money on subsidies.
 
i would just like to say that i have personally profited very handsomely because of these issues and i am getting a kick out of the sheeple raging against each other making 0
 
UnripeArbiter said:
Yeah, I think it's great that we are investing in alternative fuels. :)

Others think it's bullshit. :(

Good thing this really is an "unfair" democracy or we'd have loons running the show still....
Click to expand...

You need to learn what conservatism is really about.

I'd be the first man in line for a car that ran on water. Just keep Al Gore's greedy hands off the issue and maybe someday we'll actually have the technology and businesses will have an incentive to harvest/use alternative fuels.

Energy efficiency and advancement should NEVER be a tool for the corrupt politicians. They mishandle everything.

Politicians don't 'invest' in anything. Business does. Once you understand that, it will go a long way to saving the blisters you are forming from all of the forum-ranting you do.
 
LotsOfZeros said:
You need to learn what conservatism is really about.
Click to expand...

Lower taxes, smaller gov't, sit on your ass and do nothing else.

Opposite of progress, I understand. (no progress isn't to tax more)

LotsOfZeros said:
I'd be the first man in line for a car that ran on water. Just keep Al Gore's greedy hands off the issue and maybe someday we'll actually have the technology and businesses will have an incentive to harvest/use alternative fuels.
Click to expand...

Yes, no technology can come from the government.....except for the technology you're using to talk to me....

Incentives are good for things that wouldn't be profitable in the short term (solar, wind power, etc.). Otherwise we would have to wait too long for the economics to align correctly.

Maybe when the world is on fire the economics will be right for some solar power.

LotsOfZeros said:
Energy efficiency and advancement should NEVER be a tool for the corrupt politicians. They mishandle everything.

Politicians don't 'invest' in anything. Business does. Once you understand that, it will go a long way to saving the blisters you are forming from all of the forum-ranting you do.
Click to expand...

Business wants to do something.... they don't have the capital for it..... they fill out an app for some stimulus and bam!..... off goes business doing what they do best (efficiently spending that money that was just allocated to them).

The business gets the money from the government which gets it from the people.... I know.
 
UnripeArbiter said:
Business wants to do something.... they don't have the capital for it..... they fill out an app for some stimulus and bam!..... off goes business doing what they do best (efficiently spending that money that was just allocated to them).

The business gets the money from the government which gets it from the people.... I know.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously telling me that there are no private investors willing to put huge money in alternative energies without any sort of government incentive?

If alternative energy has any sort of viable future, people will invest in it because it is profitable to do so. I'd rather use my own money to invest in alternative energies than the government stealing my money to do so on my behalf (and I don't get any return on this when these companies I've been funding through my taxes start to succeed).
 
hellblazer said:
Anyone else getting tired of this retard?
Click to expand...

Me.

Yeah, I think it's great that we are investing in alternative fuels. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, given the government's history of allocating resources more efficiently than the free market, I think it's great that the government is "investing" too!

I think it's just fantastic that private individuals who wouldn't invest in alternative fuels (irrational idiots, right?) get their money taken by the government (the most efficient allocator of resources in history!) so it can be invested wisely.

/sarcasm
 
Business wants to do something.... they don't have the capital for it..... they fill out an app for some stimulus and bam!..... off goes business doing what they do best (efficiently spending that money that was just allocated to them).

The business gets the money from the government which gets it from the people.... I know.
Click to expand...

You do have a point. The government is the only entity with any sort of meaningful staying power. Private individuals and businesses definitely won't invest in any enterprise unless they are guaranteed a profit within minutes!

Dumbass.
 
BurntPickle, I know you're only mentioning it's a loan, but since you bolded some other parts I had to address them.

If it was such a good idea to loan these guys money, the private sector would have done it.

BurntPickle said:
enough to avoid 300 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. Further, Solyndra estimates that the construction of this complex will employ approximately 3,000 people, the operation of the facility will create over 1,000 jobs, and hundreds of additional jobs will be created for the installation of Solyndra PV systems, in the U.S.
Click to expand...

Because of course, the private sector wouldn't do anything useful with that $535 million, they'd just just pay people to move rocks from one place to another until they ran out of money.

But you know we could really employ a lot of people? Drop a nuke on Los Angeles. Just look at all the jobs that would be created - construction, medical, etc.

Employment is not desirable, production is. Employment is just a cost of production.

300 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions
Click to expand...
Big deal, we could kill some cows for far less money.

Why is carbon dioxide bad anyway? I thought plants needed it to survive...
 
Doesn't matter anyway.... (admits defeat to all conservative talking points)

The hell world you guys are so scared of.... we're living in it now. (the debate's over)

Welcome and enjoy your stay. :)

welcome_mat.jpg


I'll just kick back.... pay my MASSIVE (ZOMG!) taxes and continue my livin'..... I couldn't care less.....
 
We are in a 'recession' (the Federal Reserve and Congress lag behind by a few months before they officially proclaim that there is indeed, a recession) and Congress / the President are trying to get us out of the recession by exercising expansionary fiscal policy either through the increase of government purchases or decreasing taxes.

By spending money on these projects they are increasing the equilibrium real GDP much more than just by the dollar amount that they spent. The money will carry over to the firms they hired to work on the projects that hire additional workers who will spend this money on cars, furniture, appliances, etc. It's a multiplier effect that helps bring real GDP closer to potential GDP, while also raising the price level to hopefully bring us out of the 'recession'.

With interest rates already low as balls, the Federal reserve can't practice much expansionary monetary policy, so Congress / President felt like maybe this would be a good idea. In the end, the spending on these projects should shift the aggregate demand curve to the right, and as previously said increase real GDP (closer to potential GDP) and the price level in the short run and bring us out of the recession.

Additionally, some of you may be asking why not cut taxes instead? Remember the multiplier effect that I mentioned? Economists agree that the government purchases multiplier is around 2, that is for every $100 billion spent will result in a $200 billion increase in equilibrium real GDP. The tax multiplier is around 1.6 because households will rather save than spend some portion of the decrease in taxes, and spend some portion on imported goods. Therefore a $100 billion cut in taxes will only result in a $160 billion increase in equilibrium real GDP.

P.S. Say Dullspace if you didn't read my post.
 
JamesH said:
By spending money on these projects they are increasing the equilibrium real GDP much more than just by the dollar amount that they spent. The money will carry over to the firms they hired to work on the projects that hire additional workers who will spend this money on cars, furniture, appliances, etc. It's a multiplier effect that helps bring real GDP closer to potential GDP, while also raising the price level to hopefully bring us out of the 'recession'.
Click to expand...


Forgive me if I am misunderstanding you, but I think you just said the government should take money from a dude who could buy a car with it, takes some percentage for themselves, and then give it another dude so he can buy a car with it.


wat.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom