<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Exactly Are We Stimulating with Our Hundreds of Billions of Dollars?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/</link>
	<description>Harangues that just make sense</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:49:46 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dana</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-449237</link>
		<dc:creator>Dana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:38:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-449237</guid>
		<description>Whaaat????....talk about a cuckoo&#039;s nest!  

    STEPHANOPOULOS: We also heard from Congressman Boehner coming out of the meeting today that again a lot of that spending doesn&#039;t even meet the same test you just talked about right now. Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

    &lt;b&gt;PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children&#039;s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.&lt;/b&gt;

    STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

    PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whaaat????&#8230;.talk about a cuckoo&#8217;s nest!  </p>
<p>    STEPHANOPOULOS: We also heard from Congressman Boehner coming out of the meeting today that again a lot of that spending doesn&#8217;t even meet the same test you just talked about right now. Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?</p>
<p>    <b>PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children&#8217;s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those &#8211; one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.</b></p>
<p>    STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?</p>
<p>    PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neo</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-449031</link>
		<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 06:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-449031</guid>
		<description>Frankly, I think Obama has now undermined the ability of any defense of a possible return of the &quot;Fairness Doctrine&quot;.  By going after Rush Limbaugh, Obama has now focused with specificity a &quot;laser beam&quot; on Rush Limbaugh.

I seem to recall a tiff starting in 1988 involving the Boston Herald, then owned by R Murdoch, being critical of Sen. Kennedy and the Kennedy slipping an amendment into legislation to force the sale of Murdoch holdings including a Boston TV station and the New York Post.  Kennedy had bragged that this was a hit job on Murdoch and eventually the SCOTUS agreed, striking down the amendment because it targeted an individual with the specificity a &quot;laser beam&quot;, a practice specially prohibited by the US Constitution.

Obama&#039;s signaling of personal attacks on Limbaugh will provide plenty of room to use the same defense against any legislation involving the reinstatement of the &quot;Fairness Doctrine&quot; as a method of pushing Limbaugh off the air.

Limbaugh 1   Obama 0</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frankly, I think Obama has now undermined the ability of any defense of a possible return of the &#8220;Fairness Doctrine&#8221;.  By going after Rush Limbaugh, Obama has now focused with specificity a &#8220;laser beam&#8221; on Rush Limbaugh.</p>
<p>I seem to recall a tiff starting in 1988 involving the Boston Herald, then owned by R Murdoch, being critical of Sen. Kennedy and the Kennedy slipping an amendment into legislation to force the sale of Murdoch holdings including a Boston TV station and the New York Post.  Kennedy had bragged that this was a hit job on Murdoch and eventually the SCOTUS agreed, striking down the amendment because it targeted an individual with the specificity a &#8220;laser beam&#8221;, a practice specially prohibited by the US Constitution.</p>
<p>Obama&#8217;s signaling of personal attacks on Limbaugh will provide plenty of room to use the same defense against any legislation involving the reinstatement of the &#8220;Fairness Doctrine&#8221; as a method of pushing Limbaugh off the air.</p>
<p>Limbaugh 1   Obama 0</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patricia</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448936</link>
		<dc:creator>Patricia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:17:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448936</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Bush’s willingness to accept — to be an enabler to — the bloated budgets of the Congress during the years it was controlled by Republicans was, in my opinion, his greatest blunder or oversight.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Agree, too. I always tell my liberal friends I didn&#039;t particularly like Bush either, but for different reasons. IMHO he is the great liberator. Economics? Frightful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Bush’s willingness to accept — to be an enabler to — the bloated budgets of the Congress during the years it was controlled by Republicans was, in my opinion, his greatest blunder or oversight.</p></blockquote>
<p>Agree, too. I always tell my liberal friends I didn&#8217;t particularly like Bush either, but for different reasons. IMHO he is the great liberator. Economics? Frightful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan Kellogg</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448934</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan Kellogg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:12:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448934</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;What Exactly Are We Stimulating with Our Hundreds of Billions of Dollars?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Printer&#039;s ink production?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>What Exactly Are We Stimulating with Our Hundreds of Billions of Dollars?</p></blockquote>
<p>Printer&#8217;s ink production?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timms</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448877</link>
		<dc:creator>Timms</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:32:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448877</guid>
		<description>Wanna stimulate the economy?   

1)  Make our country more hospitable to business activity.  Lower taxes, across the board, for everyone, most importantly for business.

2)  Government then should step back, get out of the way.

3)  Recovery will come. 

Q)  Why won&#039;t this be done?

A)  Because politicians can&#039;t get credit for it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wanna stimulate the economy?   </p>
<p>1)  Make our country more hospitable to business activity.  Lower taxes, across the board, for everyone, most importantly for business.</p>
<p>2)  Government then should step back, get out of the way.</p>
<p>3)  Recovery will come. </p>
<p>Q)  Why won&#8217;t this be done?</p>
<p>A)  Because politicians can&#8217;t get credit for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Apogee</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448874</link>
		<dc:creator>Apogee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448874</guid>
		<description>This post seems to clarify the term &quot;orgy of spending&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This post seems to clarify the term &#8220;orgy of spending&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448870</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:23:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448870</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;President Obama:&lt;/b&gt;  &lt;i&gt;&quot;Okay, dinner on me at Olive Garden.  We will start with the A&#039;s and work our way down the alphabet!&quot;&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>President Obama:</b>  <i>&#8220;Okay, dinner on me at Olive Garden.  We will start with the A&#8217;s and work our way down the alphabet!&#8221;</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike K</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448862</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448862</guid>
		<description>Good summary of a modern economy, Howard.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good summary of a modern economy, Howard.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: howard432</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448852</link>
		<dc:creator>howard432</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 19:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448852</guid>
		<description>The purpose is to get actual money to actual consumers to spend. How to do it?? Get it to the rich via tax cuts and they&#039;ll just spend it on yachts, gold trinkets, and new multi-million dollar apartments. Get it to the poor and they will immediately spend it on drugs, beer, sex, or lawyers who will promise to get them &quot;not guilty&quot; pleas on their latest felony charges. Get it to the people in the middle and those assholes will just pay off their credit cards, a discredited practice which will only succeed in further damaging the banking system. Cynics would have us give it to the whores but they would give it to their pimps who will spend it acquiring more whores.

So what to do?

Well thinking politicians are already giving millions to their campaign contributors, present and future; they will give it to banks that have proven to be corrupt and insolvent and those banks will in turn give the money back to the politicians in the form of preferentially low interest loans that don&#039;t have to be repaid real soon, or artificially lending to phony construction companies.

How will the money eventually get to the people who will waste it on cars, TV sets, restaurants, furniture, theme parks, and clothing for their kids?

I have no idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The purpose is to get actual money to actual consumers to spend. How to do it?? Get it to the rich via tax cuts and they&#8217;ll just spend it on yachts, gold trinkets, and new multi-million dollar apartments. Get it to the poor and they will immediately spend it on drugs, beer, sex, or lawyers who will promise to get them &#8220;not guilty&#8221; pleas on their latest felony charges. Get it to the people in the middle and those assholes will just pay off their credit cards, a discredited practice which will only succeed in further damaging the banking system. Cynics would have us give it to the whores but they would give it to their pimps who will spend it acquiring more whores.</p>
<p>So what to do?</p>
<p>Well thinking politicians are already giving millions to their campaign contributors, present and future; they will give it to banks that have proven to be corrupt and insolvent and those banks will in turn give the money back to the politicians in the form of preferentially low interest loans that don&#8217;t have to be repaid real soon, or artificially lending to phony construction companies.</p>
<p>How will the money eventually get to the people who will waste it on cars, TV sets, restaurants, furniture, theme parks, and clothing for their kids?</p>
<p>I have no idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike K</title>
		<link>http://patterico.com/2009/01/23/what-exactly-are-we-stimulating-with-our-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-448850</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 19:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patterico.com/?p=21460#comment-448850</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Bush’s willingness to accept — to be an enabler to — the bloated budgets of the Congress during the years it was controlled by Republicans was, in my opinion, his greatest blunder or oversight.&lt;/i&gt;

Agreed. The other failure was that of Greenspan who should have seen where the easy money policy was leading us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Bush’s willingness to accept — to be an enabler to — the bloated budgets of the Congress during the years it was controlled by Republicans was, in my opinion, his greatest blunder or oversight.</i></p>
<p>Agreed. The other failure was that of Greenspan who should have seen where the easy money policy was leading us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
