Are the continued attacks on the stimulus bill hurting our economy?

[NJmaverick]

While it was certainly right to voice concerns and criticisms while it was being debated and passed, what is the point of the continued attacks after the fact. The economy is run by people. So there is always an emotional aspect to the economy. To get the most bang for the buck, the bill should provide a degree of optimism (which in and of itself would help spur our economy). Instead there are many that continue to bash the bill at every turn. I question their motives, at this point, and I question what sort of damage their words are causing our economy.

[KharmaTrain]

1. Too Early To Tell...

The bill was only signed the other day, the money still hasn't even left the treasury. He have no clue who will get what and where the money will go. So how can anyone judge how things are going at this point? Of course the repugnicans will pooh-pooh it as hard as they can. It's their political fortunes on the line. If President Obama is successful, they know they're screwed. So best to shout it down now or build up the expectations so high they can't be met. We're hearing both. Typical repugnican bullshit.

Let the GOOP continue to obstruct and line up against what a majoroity of the American people favor. That tactic has worked so well for them the last two elections.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. Probably

For as insensitive as it was for McCain and his advisors to suggest the recession was psychological, there certainly is a major psychological component of it. Credit and spending are based largely on confidence, and to that end, the continuing barrage against the already passed stimulus probably does have a negative impact. Really though, the attacks at this point are entirely useless - the deal is done, and frankly, if they're pro-American at all, they should be cheering for the stimulus to succeed, not fail.

[NJmaverick]

3. Been my observation that most Republicans are pro-Republican not pro-American

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. I'd say that's an astute observation.

That slimeball Sununu's appearance on the Daily Show a few night ago was proof positive of that.

[ThomWV]

8. You explain it well, and I think your assessment is correct.

[Coyote_Bandit]

5. There is nothing in the stimulus package

that directly benefits long term unemployed folks. Nor is there significant funding for SBA loans which might be made available for new business creation.

Big business will not be able to replace the jobs that have ben lost in the forseeable future. That will not occur until after the wealth that has been lost is replaced. And that will take YEARS.

That suggests to me that additional stimulus efforts will be required in the future. Hopefully those efforts will not exclude some of the folks most in need of assistance. And hopefully those efforts will direct some substantial funding toward small business creation.

Making these observations is not only a form of constructive criticism which offers future alternatives it is also an exercise of free speech.

It seems to me that pretending that the stimulus package is without fault and that any criticism of it reflects something less than support of the President is the same kind of "with us or against us" thinking that characterized the Bush administration and their suporters. Just my opinion of course.

[NJmaverick]

6. Suggesting that more may be needed is constructive

attacking what has already passed, is not.

[Coyote_Bandit]

7. Sometimes

criticism is constructive because it points out current inadequacies and inequities. Those don't disappear just because people don't talk about them.

Your logic suggests that criticism of any law should be prohibited. Yet I would imagine there are laws that you find inadequate and which you argue should change. This stimulus package is no different. If you want to be able to complain that minimum wage laws (just an example) are inadequate to provide a living wage then you also have to accept that other citizens have the right to complain about other legislative actions - including the most recent stimulus package.

If you dsagree with that then I challenge you to go into the GLBT group and tell them to quit complaining about present legislation that prohibits gay marriage. You also need to go into the animal rights group and tell them to quit complaining about present environmental and animal right legislation. Logically inconsistent isn't it?

I don't expect you to do that because this isn't about attacking legislation that has passed. It is about the fact that other people - including folks here at DU who claim to be Democrats - would dare to criticize a piece of Congressional legislation that was signed into law by President Obama. Guess what? There is nothing about the process of a bill becoming law that guarantees that law will not be lacking in some respect. I would also suggest that folks are not obligated to accept President Obama's policies without question or criticism just because they voted for him.

[NJmaverick]

12. In a case like this, if you can't do anything about it

the effects are destructive, not constructive

[Coyote_Bandit]

13. I disagree

For reasons already stated, pointing out the oversights and inequities in the present stimulus package just might influence how the next one is structured.

And there likely will be a next one. The current incarnation ain't gonna create enough jobs quick enough.

You don't have to agree. But don't expect me to hold my tongue just to keep from offending your untarnished image of the stimulus package. It's better than nothing but it sure as hell ain't perfect.

[zagging]

9. No

The $1T stimulus cannot work against worldwide economic collapse. Consider that there are over $50T in bad credit default swaps alone. The problems we are facing are much bigger than the measly $1T stimulus. Figuratively, it's a drop in the bucket. Literally, it's $1T in the unknown quantity of hundreds of trillions of dollars of disappearing capital.

The money men know this and are acting on it.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

10. Probably not.

Right now there's so much more going on that's hurting our economy that it's hard to be absolutely certain, though. At the moment, I think the fear being kicked up by GM's epic failure to adapt, Citigroup and Bank of America whining for more money, and traditional economic indicators are combining to cause a major loss of confidence in the market and economy, which in turn becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[leftofthedial]

11. undoubtedly

unless the economy is only directly benefiting the top 1%, the repukes will attack it incessantly.

Remember the 2000 campaign? bush and unka dick started of with the message, "We need tax cuts because the 'conomy is so strong!" Then the stock market fell after the dot com bubble burst and their message switched to, "We need tax cuts because the 'conomy is so weak!"

Big money is almost entirely repuke. It goes where it's told.