Latest in Stimulus: 'Cash for Refrigerators'

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Latest in Stimulus: 'Cash for Refrigerators'

$300 million cash-for-clunkers-type federal program to boost sales of energy-efficient home appliances provides a glimmer of hope for beleaguered makers of washing machines and dishwashers, but it's probably not enough to lift companies such as Whirlpool (NYSE:WHR - News) and Electrolux out of the worst down cycle in the sector's history.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090824/bs_bw/aug2009db20090821304909


this is funny....dems complained bush gave money to EVIL corporations, bailouts etc....and all i've heard from the stimulus is money to corporations, big business....but corporations are evil...
 
Personally, I supported bailouts & stimulus to corporations, under both Bush & Obama.

Obama did, as well.

The economists in his admin also understand that consumer spending is the foundation of the American economy. I don't hear him out there that much saying "tighten your belts", as has been repeated on this board fairly often. Maybe you can find a quote out there, but it's not the message I hear coming out of the admin so much...
 
Yurt said:
Latest in Stimulus: 'Cash for Refrigerators'

$300 million cash-for-clunkers-type federal program to boost sales of energy-efficient home appliances provides a glimmer of hope for beleaguered makers of washing machines and dishwashers, but it's probably not enough to lift companies such as Whirlpool (NYSE:WHR - News) and Electrolux out of the worst down cycle in the sector's history.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090824/bs_bw/aug2009db20090821304909


this is funny....dems complained bush gave money to EVIL corporations, bailouts etc....and all i've heard from the stimulus is money to corporations, big business....but corporations are evil...
Click to expand...
harry-reid-scowl-photo.jpg




LOL it's hilarious. I really like the duplicity of calling insurance companies evil at the begining of the week, and by week's end, planning on forcing people to buy insurance from them.
 
Last edited:
tinfoil said:
LOL it's hilarious. I really like the duplicity of calling insurance companies evil at the begining of the week, and by week's end, planning on forcing people to buy insurance from them.
Click to expand...



My personal fear is that we end up with a bill with an individual mandate and no public option or co-op program. Congress would totally hook up the insurers with 47 million new customers that are required to purchase their product. That would be awesome.

If that's what we end up with, I'll refuse to vote Democrat for a long long time.
 
Onceler said:
Personally, I supported bailouts & stimulus to corporations, under both Bush & Obama.

Obama did, as well.

The economists in his admin also understand that consumer spending is the foundation of the American economy. I don't hear him out there that much saying "tighten your belts", as has been repeated on this board fairly often. Maybe you can find a quote out there, but it's not the message I hear coming out of the admin so much...
Click to expand...

he said it last october...

Now, make no mistake: the change we need won’t come easy or without cost. We will all need to tighten our belts, we will all need to sacrifice and we will all need to pull our weight because now more than ever, we are all in this together.

i haven't heard him say any different, nor do i see him spreading his own wealth around....well....i guess to 35 thousand dollar a week mansions in martha's vineyard
 
Yurt said:
he said it last october...

Now, make no mistake: the change we need won’t come easy or without cost. We will all need to tighten our belts, we will all need to sacrifice and we will all need to pull our weight because now more than ever, we are all in this together.

i haven't heard him say any different, nor do i see him spreading his own wealth around....well....i guess to 35 thousand dollar a week mansions in martha's vineyard
Click to expand...

It's disingenuous to say that this line, taken out of context from last October - which was basically the beginning of the crisis hitting main street - equates to his philosophy now, as we are - by many accounts - on the brink of recovery.

Obama has indeed spoken about consumer spending, and its importance to the American economy. I'd be surprised if you could find quotes from the past few months where he is encouraging Americans to stop spending; he definitely understands the importance of consumer spending to the economy.

Here is a link to a press conference where he speaks about consumer spending:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/09/obama.conference.transcript/

As for the $35K on a house, I'm glad that a rich guy like Obama is putting money back into the economy. I fail to see the hypocrisy there.
 
Onceler said:
It's disingenuous to say that this line, taken out of context from last October - which was basically the beginning of the crisis hitting main street - equates to his philosophy now, as we are - by many accounts - on the brink of recovery.

Obama has indeed spoken about consumer spending, and its importance to the American economy. I'd be surprised if you could find quotes from the past few months where he is encouraging Americans to stop spending; he definitely understands the importance of consumer spending to the economy.

Here is a link to a press conference where he speaks about consumer spending:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/09/obama.conference.transcript/

As for the $35K on a house, I'm glad that a rich guy like Obama is putting money back into the economy. I fail to see the hypocrisy there.
Click to expand...
You honestly see two rich people exchanging money as "putting money back into the economy?" Honestly?
 
TurdFerguson said:
Wait a minute. You don't think rich people spending money contributes to economic growth? Honestly?
Click to expand...
I don't think moving money from one account to another stimulates anything. True stimulus comes from buying a product produced here. What jobs are created from money going from one account into another? One new job?

I own rental property, when somebody is renting the property it doesn't create a new job for even one person.
 
Damocles said:
You honestly see two rich people exchanging money as "putting money back into the economy?" Honestly?
Click to expand...

Um...yeah?

I do, definitely. Money tends to flow. You can argue that the renter will just keep it or put it into an offshore account, and he or she may, but he or she may keep it flowing, as well.

I have no problem whatsoever with rich people spending money on expensive things.

Loving the class envy that is suddenly coming out of the right, though...
 
Onceler said:
Um...yeah?

I do, definitely. Money tends to flow. You can argue that the renter will just keep it or put it into an offshore account, and he or she may, but he or she may keep it flowing, as well.

I have no problem whatsoever with rich people spending money on expensive things.

Loving the class envy that is suddenly coming out of the right, though...
Click to expand...
There's no "class envy", it is simply questioning the logic. In earlier posts on this very board we heard the left say that giving money to producers (the rich who own corporations) will not stimulate anything, that he "rich" do not spend the cash and it is far more "stimulating" for the economy to give money to the poor who will spend it.

It seems that some people want to have it both ways.

I personally don't care. Once I found out we're not paying for the place I'm cool with it, no skin off my nose.

I'm just wondering why somebody would call this "stimulating" for the economy when they say that rich people don't spend money and that "trickle-down" doesn't take place. Suddenly this money will "trickle" all over... :dunno:

I hope he attends Chelsea's wedding. She deserves the best of days for dealing with all the crap that came with being Clinton's kid.
 
Damocles said:
There's no "class envy", it is simply questioning the logic. In earlier posts we heard the left say that giving money to producers will not stimulate anything, that he "rich" do not spend the cash and it is far more "stimulating" for the economy to give money to the poor who will spend it.

It seems that some people want to have it both ways.
Click to expand...


"The left" wasn't saying that. Economists were saying that. And it's true. Feel free to check with the folks at Moody's.

And it's a comparative measure. It would be much more stimulating for Obama to give $1,000 each to 15 families at the poverty line than it would be to use $15,000 to rent a house on the Vineyard, but the latter contributes to economic growth, just not as much as the former.


Edit: And I'd not for the record that Onceler merely said that Obama was putting money back into the economy, which he is, not that it was particularly stimulating.
 
Last edited:
Damocles said:
I don't think moving money from one account to another stimulates anything. True stimulus comes from buying a product produced here. What jobs are created from money going from one account into another? One new job?

I own rental property, when somebody is renting the property it doesn't create a new job for even one person.
Click to expand...

I'm not with you on this one Damo. Spending money keeps the economy flowing and through that jobs are created. Properties need people to maintain it, clean it etc. At the end of the day rich (or any) people spending money is good.
 
Damocles said:
There's no "class envy", it is simply questioning the logic. In earlier posts we heard the left say that giving money to producers will not stimulate anything, that he "rich" do not spend the cash and it is far more "stimulating" for the economy to give money to the poor who will spend it.

It seems that some people want to have it both ways.

I personally don't care. Once I found out we're not paying for the place I'm cool with it, no skin off my nose. I'm just wondering why somebody would call this "stimulating" for the economy when they say that rich people don't spend money.
Click to expand...

I have said often that I believe in the kitchen sink strategy. You know quite well that I supported the bank bailouts & big 3 bailouts, and that I support a wide range of stimulus spending, and cuts for small business.

I think any money flowing is a fairly good thing. What good would it do for Obama to find a $2K rental for symbolic purposes?

You're a renter. If you got $35K for one of your rentals, I would wager that you would invest or spend that in some way that would be stimulative right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top