Stimulous that was NOT meant to Stimulate?

As long as none of that stimulus package gets into the hands of white male contractors and high skilled professionals, we should be OK.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT1TkLgfinE&feature=related"]YouTube - White Males Need Not Apply For Stimulus Package- Racism is Alive and Well in the "White House"[/ame]
 
How is that hope and change doing?


Massachusetts Democrats Waste $174M in Federal Stimulus Money
by: EaBo Clipper
Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 11:00:09 AM EDT

Earlier this week I shared how the Massachusetts Democratic Party wasted close to $33 million dollars of stimulus money. They literally flushed it down the drain by overpaying for labor costs on water treatment projects.
To recap the waste comes from the difference in the prevailing wage from the Federal Prevailing wage as outlined in the Davis-Bacon act and the Massachusetts prevailing wage. According to the Beacon Hill institute this difference accounts for $17.7 of every $100 dollars spent on public works projects going directly to inflated labor costs, lining the pockets of the Unions.

How much does this cozy arrangement cost? At the Beacon Hill Institute, we computed the three prevailing wages for a group of nine construction trades in the Boston area. For the nine trades, the average wage for all workers is $27.09 per hour. The federal prevailing wage is $37.45, and the state prevailing wage $58.84. Thus union workers on Massachusetts public-works projects make more than double what construction workers in the state make on average.

How much would state construction costs fall if we repealed the state prevailing wage? The Beacon Hill Institute estimates that the cost savings would have been $177 million in fiscal 2008 - during which the state spent about $1 billion on public works projects.

Earlier this month the Massachusetts Republican House Leadership submitted an amendment to suspend the Massachusetts prevailing wage on all Stimulus funded projects. The Republican leadership was unable to force a vote when they fell one member short of the 15 needed to do so. Not one Democrat stood up for the tax payers to force a vote on the issue.

This week the Boston Globe reported that the total money earmarked for transportation projects coming to Massachusetts from the "Stimulus Package" is $800 million. Using the Beacon Hill Instutes estimates that means that $141 million dollars in Federal Stimulus money is being wasted by the Massachusetts Democratic Party's inaction on the Republican Amendment.

Couple this $141 million with the $33 million outlined earlier this week and you get a total of $174,000,000 Federal dollars wasted by the Massachusetts Democratic Party.

http://www.redmassgroup.com/diary/4659/massachusetts-democrats-waste-174m-in-federal-stimulus-money
 
:clink::clink:
red states rule said:
We are talking about the waste. Like money to remodle a bridge the town is going to tear down anyway - or honey bee ins

Yea, real job creators there

It is obvious you are not interested in how the money is being spent - since Obama and the Dems are spending it
Click to expand...

....but, but he understands the stimulus package much better than you. Gotta love it. :rolleyes:
 
TuTu Monroe said:
:clink::clink:

....but, but he understands the stimulus package much better than you. Gotta love it. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yea I know. Libs scream how Bush's excessive spending got us in this mess - yet Obama's even greater level of escessive spending will get us out of it

Bush's $500 billion annual defict was killing the economy - but Obama's $2 trillion annual deficit will save the economy
 
red states rule said:
Yea I know. Libs scream how Bush's excessive spending got us in this mess - yet Obama's even greater level of escessive spending will get us out of it

Bush's $500 billion annual defict was killing the economy - but Obama's $2 trillion annual deficit will save the economy
Click to expand...

The IDEA of the stimulus was spending. Haven't you read anything about the economics of it? It's pretty simple; you may disagree with it, but it's sound economic reasoning.

In a nutshell, the economy sucked in late '08 and early '09, in a big way. Many people were losing jobs. Because they were losing their job or afraid of losing their job, they stopped spending. In an economy based on consumer spending, this had a devastating, cyclic effect. As they stopped spending, businesses did worse, and cut even more employees. They also cut spending, hurting producers & suppliers & service providers everywhere, who in turn, cut more jobs. Even more people stopped spending. And so on.

Absent outside "stimulus," there is no reason this cycle would not continue. It was a genuine downward spiral. The economy lost more in the October - January timeframe than the stimulus and bailouts combined cost. The idea was to instigate spending again - start w/ gov't spending, and private spending will follow, and the cycle will be broken.

In case you didn't notice, new home sales went up 11% last month...
 
Onceler said:
The IDEA of the stimulus was spending. Haven't you read anything about the economics of it? It's pretty simple; you may disagree with it, but it's sound economic reasoning.

In a nutshell, the economy sucked in late '08 and early '09, in a big way. Many people were losing jobs. Because they were losing their job or afraid of losing their job, they stopped spending. In an economy based on consumer spending, this had a devastating, cyclic effect. As they stopped spending, businesses did worse, and cut even more employees. They also cut spending, hurting producers & suppliers & service providers everywhere, who in turn, cut more jobs. Even more people stopped spending. And so on.

Absent outside "stimulus," there is no reason this cycle would not continue. It was a genuine downward spiral. The economy lost more in the October - January timeframe than the stimulus and bailouts combined cost. The idea was to instigate spending again - start w/ gov't spending, and private spending will follow, and the cycle will be broken.

In case you didn't notice, new home sales went up 11% last month...
Click to expand...

I guess you didn't notice that foreign investors are really snapping those properties up.:rolleyes:
 
TuTu Monroe said:
I guess you didn't notice that foreign investors are really snapping those properties up.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm sure you have a list of "negative spin" talking points to pull from for every positive economic indicator, but 11% growth is the highest in 9 years.

Did you see that the market went over 9,000, as well?

Sure makes the whole "Obama will lead to our doom" argument a tough sell....
 
Onceler said:
The IDEA of the stimulus was spending. Haven't you read anything about the economics of it? It's pretty simple; you may disagree with it, but it's sound economic reasoning.

In a nutshell, the economy sucked in late '08 and early '09, in a big way. Many people were losing jobs. Because they were losing their job or afraid of losing their job, they stopped spending. In an economy based on consumer spending, this had a devastating, cyclic effect. As they stopped spending, businesses did worse, and cut even more employees. They also cut spending, hurting producers & suppliers & service providers everywhere, who in turn, cut more jobs. Even more people stopped spending. And so on.

Absent outside "stimulus," there is no reason this cycle would not continue. It was a genuine downward spiral. The economy lost more in the October - January timeframe than the stimulus and bailouts combined cost. The idea was to instigate spending again - start w/ gov't spending, and private spending will follow, and the cycle will be broken.

In case you didn't notice, new home sales went up 11% last month...
Click to expand...

The bold is kind of misleading.... while New home sales did go up 11% from May to June of this year, sales are DOWN 21% from June of last year.

As for jobs, we are still seeing massive losses each month. That will continue to weigh on the economy. The credit card bubble looks like it is getting ready to explode. The commercial real estate market as well. Both of which will result in tighter credit.

While I agree that some jobs have been created, by far the losses outweigh the gains. This is not to say that Obama is responsible for the job losses, but tailoring the bulk of the stimulus to hit during an election year rather than getting it into the economy now IS his fault (and the fault of Congress).
 
Onceler said:
I'm sure you have a list of "negative spin" talking points to pull from for every positive economic indicator, but 11% growth is the highest in 9 years.

Did you see that the market went over 9,000, as well?

Sure makes the whole "Obama will lead to our doom" argument a tough sell....
Click to expand...

yes, the market has rallied, just as it did in previous bear markets. Were you aware that there were two separate times during the Great Depression where the stock market ran up over 100%? only to turn around and give it all back.

Way too many shoes waiting to drop right now. If one hits, we likely retrace back to the March lows. If two hit, we may sink even further.

As for the 11% gain being the highest in 9 years... well again, that is typical when you have a massive downslide. Example, if you start at 1000, lose 50% to go to 500 and then tick up 10% to 550... are you really feeling good about where the economy is at?

As for Dow 9000... only another 55% to go before we regain the peak in 2007.
 
Onceler said:
I'm sure you have a list of "negative spin" talking points to pull from for every positive economic indicator, but 11% growth is the highest in 9 years.

Did you see that the market went over 9,000, as well?

Sure makes the whole "Obama will lead to our doom" argument a tough sell....
Click to expand...

great news, we can finally call this Obamas economy now? so when it goes back down, it will finally be his doing?
 
Superfreak said:
The bold is kind of misleading.... while New home sales did go up 11% from May to June of this year, sales are DOWN 21% from June of last year.

As for jobs, we are still seeing massive losses each month. That will continue to weigh on the economy. The credit card bubble looks like it is getting ready to explode. The commercial real estate market as well. Both of which will result in tighter credit.

While I agree that some jobs have been created, by far the losses outweigh the gains. This is not to say that Obama is responsible for the job losses, but tailoring the bulk of the stimulus to hit during an election year rather than getting it into the economy now IS his fault (and the fault of Congress).
Click to expand...

That wasn't misleading. It is every headline regarding that news, even on Fox. No one is suggesting or implying that it is year-over-year.

I realize there are some landmines out there, but honestly, this is better than I expected the situation to be by this point. I really though that there was a decent chance we'd see the market drop to the 5-6,000 range, with all that this would entail.

There is no telling where things go from here, but I am definitely encouraged by recent indicators, and more optimistic than I was back in January or March. Again, this is not to say we are out of the woods.
 
Onceler said:
I'm sure you have a list of "negative spin" talking points to pull from for every positive economic indicator, but 11% growth is the highest in 9 years.

Did you see that the market went over 9,000, as well?

Sure makes the whole "Obama will lead to our doom" argument a tough sell....
Click to expand...

Foreclosures are continuing to set records despite the Obama administration's $75 billion plan to help borrowers at risk of losing their homes.

Just because the market when up, doesn't mean it's going to stay that way.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Foreclosures are continuing to set records despite the Obama administration's $75 billion plan to help borrowers at risk of losing their homes.

Just because the market when up, doesn't mean it's going to stay that way.
Click to expand...
I hope it does stay that way, living in a crappy economy sucks, unfortunately I don't think it will.
 
Onceler said:
That wasn't misleading. It is every headline regarding that news, even on Fox. No one is suggesting or implying that it is year-over-year.

I realize there are some landmines out there, but honestly, this is better than I expected the situation to be by this point. I really though that there was a decent chance we'd see the market drop to the 5-6,000 range, with all that this would entail.

There is no telling where things go from here, but I am definitely encouraged by recent indicators, and more optimistic than I was back in January or March. Again, this is not to say we are out of the woods.
Click to expand...

It most certainly is misleading. However, when I stated that I was directing it more towards the idiots in the media than to you and I should have been clear on that point. The fact that the media is pumping it is misleading. They want to give the impression that things are rosier than they are. While each article states the fact that the numbers suck year over year, they put the increase in the headlines.
 
Obama_Snake_Oil_180.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top