Has anyone commented on the $300 billion the President is going to propose?

[Change Happens]

I read the Bloomberg story, which says that almost 50% of the package is tax cuts? Has this been confirmed? Has anyone like Krugman and other like him commented?

To me, the President is NOT going BIG, he is going very VERY small! Furthermore, 50% tax cuts won't cut it...The last stimulus of $787 billion had $300+ billion in tax cuts, we got nothing out of it...We needed real spending on actual projects, the shovel ready projects and monies, about $300+ billion, carried us the past 2 years...We now need a $1 trillion of the same...

Plus, the worst thing about it, is that the Pukes are going to attack it, just like they did last time, NO STIMULUS, no more more government spending, blah blah blah...What makes the WH think, this time around, propose another stimulus, and they will embrace the same exact thing that brought the Teabag Party itself?

Am I missing something?

[HappyMe]

1. Anything the President would propose, the pukes would attack. nt

[Change Happens]

6. So why not offer an overwhelmingly awesome proposal?

Something like: $3.0 trillion rebuilding upgrading project...I think some engineering organization had estimated that the country needs $3.1 trillion in infrastructure repairs...etc. Embrace that, tell the country how many jobs it will create, then run on it!!! While destroying the pukes for not wanting to invest in this country!!!

$150 billion is stupid childish misguided ....

[HappyMe]

14. I'm not going to jump

all over the guy before I hear what he has to say.

[RC]

20. You make to much sense. Never happen.

Without Living wage jobs, we will never recover - ever.

[JoePhilly]

28. CNN is already claiming 300B is too big. Heard that earlier.

Who will pay for it?

Blah blah blah.

[TwilightGardener]

2. I will wait to see some analysis of the proposal before making any judgments--

I'm not an economist, that's for sure.

[emulatorloo]

10. I will wait to hear the actual proposal too, fwiw

Rather than speculative articles.

[Broderick]

3. They are better off sending that 50%

in the form of checks to people in my opinion. This tax cut nonsense has got to stop. TAX CUTS NEVER SEEM TO GO AWAY.

[Bragi]

5. I agree -- people need income, not tax cuts

You know what else doesn't work? Classic "job creation programs" where you give employers money or tax cuts to create jobs, or shovel money to states who then give it to constructions firms owned by campaign donors.

What will stimulate the economy and job creation most would be transferring income from the rich to people who are in distress. Boost people's income, and jobs will follow.

Not that I expect that to be in the speech, of course.

[Broderick]

15. The last stimulus was 800 billion

and at best the jobs created cost 200K each - I think it is far less jobs at more around 400K per job. Where did the fucking money go. What jobs were created, the million plus they tout, and what did people make off of that --- 200K? We are being stolen from. You are spot on.

[CrispyQ]

31. And if you boost people's income, the tax base will expand.

That's another fave sound bite of the repubs, "We have to expand the tax base." Their version, however, is to tax people at poverty level, not increase employment & wages. Fucking assholes.

[Change Happens]

8. Bingo, yes...Send the poor a check!

[Broderick]

17. Better than

creating a million jobs at 200, 400K a pop in cost. The person who is thankful for one of those jobs is likely making 10 bucks an hour at best. 21K. Where did the 179K-379K go? Who was the recipient of the bilking mechanism?

[DefenseLawyer]

4. You may not have noticed, but rich people don't like to pay taxes

That's really all you need to know.

[Bragi]

11. Yep, even in these times

The rich oligarchs are sitting on mountains of corporate and personal cash right now, there's nothing they don't have that's left to buy, and they are not investing their money because the people they stole the money from can't afford to buy much.

And what's the answer? More fucking tax cuts for the rich!

We are now in the era of mass stupidity. I think the next step is some kind of economic and social collapse.

[Scuba]

7. How about a big tax increase on the wealthiest along with $3 Trillion in new spending?

[Change Happens]

9. I agree, go BIG BIG BIG!

[TwilightGardener]

12. How well do you think "3 trillion in new spending" will go over with

average Americans, who have largely been brainwashed into thinking "spending BAD"?

[Scuba]

13. Simple. Three trillion in job spending should be an easy sell....

...especially if you're willing to be honest with the American People about that and other issues.

[TwilightGardener]

18. Well, you don't live in my world, then. If newspaper editorials and

letters and talk radio are any indication, the sheeple have bought 100% the fear of deficits and spending.

[Demit]

21. You should take newspaper editorials and letters and talk radio with a grain of salt.

They've been pushing propaganda for a long time now. You should read the polls more. There's no 100% buy-in to the propaganda, not even close.

[TwilightGardener]

22. I think the people who write and call in are the most zealous, certainly.

But I live in a Republican area, and it's just taken as gospel here that spending BAD, cutting spending GOOD. I can't get away from it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. Re-frame it. It is INVESTMENT, not SPENDING.

Spending is what you do when you put out $50 for movie tickets and snacks. Investment is what you do when you put out an extra $50 for an extended warranty.

Spending is what you do when you pay 17k for a new car. Investment is what you do when you pay 17k for your kid's tuition at the state college.

Spending is what you do when you give 30 million in subsidies to already profitable corporations. Investment is what you do when you put 30 million dollars into replacing a dangerous highway overpass.

Don't let the republicans frame government expenditures as 'spending' when it is actually investment.

[Maven]

26. Then call in $3 trillion in new SALARIES

Use your imagination. Oh, that's right, we have to use Republican framing on everything per Obama.

[Claudia Jones]

27. that is easlily solved

If the money actually goes to the people, the program would, of course, go over quite well with them.

[Egalitariat]

29. Good idea, but you need a catchy tagline. Something like "Democratic Tax & Spend" plan.

You could even improve that by discussing how the effects of the plan would be to create a "Worker's Paradise".

[Scuba]

30. God forbid the right should start saying that!

[kenny blankenship]

16. Also, the 300 Billion spent is (acc. to rumor) all subtracted from other budget allocations.

Net stimulative effect=almost entirely symbolic.

[Change Happens]

24. WOW, are you sure? I did not know that...

Then, it is all way fucked up and stupid...

[Inuca]

32. Not according to this

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum/2011/03/03/gIQA9L25BK_blog.html

"it is fully paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes and asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share"

[kentuck]

19. About the same as was in the other stimulus...

It also was in the form of taxcuts.

[MilesColtrane]

23. self deleted

[Bandit]

33. McConnell basically called the President insane over it

He made a statement saying doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result was the definition of insanity.. Referring to Obama's original Stimulus program and calling it a complete failure.. He said investing in infrastructure would also be another failure... No one asked any follow up questions.

[Change Happens]

34. I rest my case then.......

Very sad - This is going to be sooooooooo easy to attack :(

[Change Happens]

35. I apologize for being somewhat critical early on...

I LOVED IT!!! Way to go Mr. President...