Paul Ryan - Stimulus Cash Advocate

[krill]

Here is a list of where the monies went to.

 

http://www.propublic...ist-of-spending

 

Here is a list of what companies still owe the US taxpayers

http://www.huffingto..._n_1233374.html

http://business.time...om-crisis-fund/

http://projects.prop...rg/bailout/list

 

Here is how much we lost on GM

http://www.forbes.co...nkruptcy-again/

 

Solyndra loss

http://online.wsj.co...0910671702.html

 

I see no way that the stimulus was effective. Keep in mind the US spent 3 TRILLION dollars of US taxpayers money between GW and BO. Real unemployment is now at approximately 15% (to include previous full time now part time)

 

http://www.investorp...e-is-nearly-15/

 

53% of recent college grads under or unemployed

http://www.theatlant...yed-how/256237/

 

Again, there are numerous factors that play into the economy, but for me, looking at the total expenditures vs the current unemployment rate, the amount still owed, businesses not paying back, banks still required to execute risky loans etc..... The spendulus accomplished nothing.

 

I can link to articles w/o making my own points too!

 

http://www.slate.com..._success.2.html

 

Most of the money in the stimulus went to unsexy stuff designed to prevent a depression and ease the pain of the recession: aid to help states avoid drastic cuts in public services and public employees; unemployment benefits, food stamps, and other assistance for victims of the downturn; and tax cuts for 95 percent of American workers. And the money that did flow into public works went more toward fixing stuff that needed fixing—aging pipes, dilapidated train stations, my beloved Everglades—than building new stuff. In its first year, the stimulus financed 22,000 miles of road improvements, and only 230 miles of new roads. There were good reasons for that. Repairs tend to be more shovel-ready than new projects, so they pump money into the economy faster. They also pass the do-no-harm test. (New sprawl roads make all kind of problems worse.) And they are fiscally responsible. Repairing roads reduces maintenance backlogs and future deficits; building roads add to maintenance backlogs and future deficits...

 

That said, the national media should have tried to look past that, but it didn’t, because the national media sucks at covering public policy. The stimulus included $27 billion to computerize our pen-and-paper health care system, which should reduce redundant tests, dangerous drug interactions, and fatalities caused by doctors with chicken-scratch handwriting. It doubled our renewable power generation; it increased solar installations over 600 percent; it essentially launched our transition to a low-carbon economy. It provided a new model for government spending—with unprecedented transparency, unprecedented scrutiny, and unprecedented competition for the cash. Experts predicted that as much as 5 percent of it would be lost to fraud, but so far, investigators have documented less than $10 million in losses, about 0.001 percent. Despite all the controversy over the lack of shovel-ready projects, the Obama administration has met every spending deadline, and it’s kept costs so far under budget that it’s been able to finance over 3,000 additional projects with the savings. But the media coverage of the stimulus was almost exclusively gotcha stuff, usually without a real gotcha. And when the media did notice long-term investments in the stimulus, like Race to the Top or clean-energy research, it rarely mentioned the stimulus connection.

 

Good god...right here in Lincoln there have been at least 4 awful roads fixed in the past 3 years. South St between 48th and 17th, A Street around 48th / Cotner (there was a pothole so big there half a car could go in at one point), O street from 84th to 70th, Holdrege from 70th to 80th. The whole O Street project and watershed project was finished for that matter. A lot of these projects were funded or accelerated with stimulus money. It just amazes me that people are incapable of looking around and seeing at least that much.

[JJ Husker]

I have never understood this type of logic. Ryan was against the stimulus yet some of you think it hypocritical of him to write letters in support of constituents seeking stimulus funding after the stimulus was in fact passed. I don't get it. Just because he supported people in their attempts to secure this funding (which any reasonable person can determine was going somewhere to be spent) you want to portray it as some action counter to his true position. Newsflah- it isn't. Of you want to drag him through the coals because he was not forthcoming about helping to secure this funding then have at him but please drop the charade of him being some sort of hypocrite. It is no different than if you or I had the position that the UNL athletic office should not give away football tickets for free but, when they decided to do so, we got in line for our free tickets.

[Moiraine]

I really don't think the economy has all that much to do with under and unemployed college grads. In every article I've ever read about said grads, the grad had a degree in something that was either useless or in an already saturated field. One of the problems is that people think they have to go to college because it's what they're supposed to do. We just have a higher % of people going to college now than we used to.

 

I think, even if the economy was doing well, the % of under and unemployed would be high. Virtually anyone can get a C in an English class (I've seen this with my own eyes with a student who had no higher than 5th grade writing skills) and can probably manage to pass their other requirements. You don't have to be smart to get a college degree. Also, I wonder if that stat includes associate degrees and degrees from places like Kaplan and Phoenix that have lesser accreditation. Some of those places exist just to make $ and swindle people.

[Moiraine]

JJ - only one person in this thread said that it was hypocritical, but they were generalizing and said "hypocrites and liars." There's nothing wrong with him taking the money. Just that he outright lied about it.

[knapplc]

I have never understood this type of logic. Ryan was against the stimulus yet some of you think it hypocritical of him to write letters in support of constituents seeking stimulus funding after the stimulus was in fact passed. I don't get it. Just because he supported people in their attempts to secure this funding (which any reasonable person can determine was going somewhere to be spent) you want to portray it as some action counter to his true position. Newsflah- it isn't. Of you want to drag him through the coals because he was not forthcoming about helping to secure this funding then have at him but please drop the charade of him being some sort of hypocrite. It is no different than if you or I had the position that the UNL athletic office should not give away football tickets for free but, when they decided to do so, we got in line for our free tickets.

 

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[lo country]

Here is the great thing to all of those in either camp. Just like religous discussions, I can post article A and you can post

Here is a list of where the monies went to.

 

http://www.propublic...ist-of-spending

 

Here is a list of what companies still owe the US taxpayers

http://www.huffingto..._n_1233374.html

http://business.time...om-crisis-fund/

http://projects.prop...rg/bailout/list

 

Here is how much we lost on GM

http://www.forbes.co...nkruptcy-again/

 

Solyndra loss

http://online.wsj.co...0910671702.html

 

I see no way that the stimulus was effective. Keep in mind the US spent 3 TRILLION dollars of US taxpayers money between GW and BO. Real unemployment is now at approximately 15% (to include previous full time now part time)

 

http://www.investorp...e-is-nearly-15/

 

53% of recent college grads under or unemployed

http://www.theatlant...yed-how/256237/

 

Again, there are numerous factors that play into the economy, but for me, looking at the total expenditures vs the current unemployment rate, the amount still owed, businesses not paying back, banks still required to execute risky loans etc..... The spendulus accomplished nothing.

 

I can link to articles w/o making my own points too!

 

http://www.slate.com..._success.2.html

 

Most of the money in the stimulus went to unsexy stuff designed to prevent a depression and ease the pain of the recession: aid to help states avoid drastic cuts in public services and public employees; unemployment benefits, food stamps, and other assistance for victims of the downturn; and tax cuts for 95 percent of American workers. And the money that did flow into public works went more toward fixing stuff that needed fixing—aging pipes, dilapidated train stations, my beloved Everglades—than building new stuff. In its first year, the stimulus financed 22,000 miles of road improvements, and only 230 miles of new roads. There were good reasons for that. Repairs tend to be more shovel-ready than new projects, so they pump money into the economy faster. They also pass the do-no-harm test. (New sprawl roads make all kind of problems worse.) And they are fiscally responsible. Repairing roads reduces maintenance backlogs and future deficits; building roads add to maintenance backlogs and future deficits...

 

That said, the national media should have tried to look past that, but it didn’t, because the national media sucks at covering public policy. The stimulus included $27 billion to computerize our pen-and-paper health care system, which should reduce redundant tests, dangerous drug interactions, and fatalities caused by doctors with chicken-scratch handwriting. It doubled our renewable power generation; it increased solar installations over 600 percent; it essentially launched our transition to a low-carbon economy. It provided a new model for government spending—with unprecedented transparency, unprecedented scrutiny, and unprecedented competition for the cash. Experts predicted that as much as 5 percent of it would be lost to fraud, but so far, investigators have documented less than $10 million in losses, about 0.001 percent. Despite all the controversy over the lack of shovel-ready projects, the Obama administration has met every spending deadline, and it’s kept costs so far under budget that it’s been able to finance over 3,000 additional projects with the savings. But the media coverage of the stimulus was almost exclusively gotcha stuff, usually without a real gotcha. And when the media did notice long-term investments in the stimulus, like Race to the Top or clean-energy research, it rarely mentioned the stimulus connection.

 

Good god...right here in Lincoln there have been at least 4 awful roads fixed in the past 3 years. South St between 48th and 17th, A Street around 48th / Cotner (there was a pothole so big there half a car could go in at one point), O street from 84th to 70th, Holdrege from 70th to 80th. The whole O Street project and watershed project was finished for that matter. A lot of these projects were funded or accelerated with stimulus money. It just amazes me that people are incapable of looking around and seeing at least that much.

 

I posted the links to avoid the typing.

 

In regards to those roads that were fixed, do y'all not pay road and highway taxes through gas taxes or other ways ie state income tax, already allocated Federal funds etc......... Did those jobs actually employee more people or simply give those with jobs more work to do? If new hires, once these 4 jobs were completed, did the guys stay on? Were the roads actually fixed with stimulus monies or was there just a sign erected touting its success?

 

Just like religion, I can say A and post it with "facts" that prove my point and you can counter with B and do the exact same thing.

 

Bottom line, to quote Obama, are you better off now than 4 yrs ago? Personally, for me and my family, we are not doing better. Are you? Are your friends? To me that says more than current he said she said arguments, post and counter post and politicians.

 

The curent unemployment rate is higher now than in any time during 2008 according to this site.

http://www.ncsl.org/...hly-update.aspx

 

Again, so as not to just "post a link" the following shows what our actual or real unemployment is. That is folks who have quit looking, are under employed or who used to work full time and now are part time. The numbers suck. Obama fan or not. They suck. (my original point! )

http://www.aei-ideas...-sure-isnt-8-3/

 

I am not smart enough with economics to argue stock market adjustments, speculators driving oil prices etc... I use cave man economics and look at the numbers from non-partisian sites as well and it appears that our economy is stalled and barely breathing. Again, based on my "facts" and just my personal situation.

[lo country]

I really don't think the economy has all that much to do with under and unemployed college grads. In every article I've ever read about said grads, the grad had a degree in something that was either useless or in an already saturated field. One of the problems is that people think they have to go to college because it's what they're supposed to do. We just have a higher % of people going to college now than we used to.

 

I think, even if the economy was doing well, the % of under and unemployed would be high. Virtually anyone can get a C in an English class (I've seen this with my own eyes with a student who had no higher than 5th grade writing skills) and can probably manage to pass their other requirements. You don't have to be smart to get a college degree. Also, I wonder if that stat includes associate degrees and degrees from places like Kaplan and Phoenix that have lesser accreditation. Some of those places exist just to make $ and swindle people.

 

Both good points. The article that I had originally posted alluded to this as well. It sucks for kids who take out crazy loans to a get a degree in hopes of getting a job and get nada, but a huge loan. It used to be get a degree, get a job. Not anymore. Unsure the answer other than we need to find a way to create jobs, lower taxes and quit spending money like we have it.

[JJ Husker]

 

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

I think I know what it means and am using it correctly. Hypocrite- A person who acts contradictory to their stated beliefs or feelings. Maybe you can explain how a couple things in your OP are not insinuating this about Ryan. 1- the topic title "Paul Ryan- stimulus cash advocate" and 2- the daily show, masters of dredging up video of politicians acting other than they profess to believe.. Either you don't know the meaning of "hypocrite" or you have some ulterior motive for not wanting to admit that is what you are accusing Ryan of being. Am I missing something?

[krill]

In regards to those roads that were fixed, do y'all not pay road and highway taxes through gas taxes or other ways ie state income tax, already allocated Federal funds etc......... Did those jobs actually employee more people or simply give those with jobs more work to do? If new hires, once these 4 jobs were completed, did the guys stay on? Were the roads actually fixed with stimulus monies or was there just a sign erected touting its success?

 

I don't disagree with the reality that at least with infrastructure related stimulus funding, once the road is fixed, the job fixing that particular road is no longer needed. The road that needed fixing is however fixed though, someone had a job doing something for awhile, and had money in their pocket to buy goods and services which helps the overall economy a lot more than unemployment benefits or panhandling. This country needs so much infrastructure repaired and expanded right now, and getting to it shouldn't be a partisan issue because it can be funded with money borrowed at effectively negative interest.

 

Philosophically I do not understand what the conservatives against stimulus spending want during economic downturns. We cut taxes to give people more money in their pocket, a big part of the stimulus bill was temporary tax cuts, then it's scandal that a lot of poor people and lower middle class folks had their federal income taxes reduced to zero. Regulatory changes could perhaps help some, but gutting them wholesale isn't going to increase demand for goods and services from people who don't have jobs or extra income to spend. That's really all I hear, cut taxes, reduce regulation, and whole hell of lot of obfuscation and whining.

 

Bottom line, to quote Obama, are you better off now than 4 yrs ago? Personally, for me and my family, we are not doing better. Are you? Are your friends?

 

Yes, I am actually, and I don't think it really has much to with politics. Nebraska's economy is ag driven, ag is doing well (at least before this summer) while manufacturing is not, and we never had a housing bubble to begin with because Nebraska is not a destination state.

 

The curent unemployment rate is higher now than in any time during 2008 according to this site.

http://www.ncsl.org/...hly-update.aspx

 

The unemployment rate is unacceptably high, but I have doubts about whether America is capable of sustaining full employment as a goal to begin with. The only reason the economy did modestly well for awhile circa 2004-2006 was a housing boom, which as a turned out many people could not afford and created the whole mortgage mess. Energy prices will continue to be high, so no $10 oil like Clinton had, and other resources like copper are becoming increasingly expensive. Online retailers are killing many retail stores, and big box retailers are killing small retailers...net result less jobs. Government jobs at the federal level are growing at a rate slower than the population, while state and local governments continue to shed jobs. Manufacturing continues to become more efficient and more productive with less workers...less jobs. So tell me, without another housing boom, or government funded construction, where are we going to get large, sustained job growth as a base that feeds other jobs in services?

[Alamo City Husker]

Anyone using the Daily Show for any form of information as being a credible source is what is wrong with America!

[Alamo City Husker]

Looks like liberals waking up, better late than never.

[Alamo City Husker]

Facts from a liberal source:

 

http://www.npr.org/2...vs-bush-on-debt

[lo country]

In regards to those roads that were fixed, do y'all not pay road and highway taxes through gas taxes or other ways ie state income tax, already allocated Federal funds etc......... Did those jobs actually employee more people or simply give those with jobs more work to do? If new hires, once these 4 jobs were completed, did the guys stay on? Were the roads actually fixed with stimulus monies or was there just a sign erected touting its success?

 

I don't disagree with the reality that at least with infrastructure related stimulus funding, once the road is fixed, the job fixing that particular road is no longer needed. The road that needed fixing is however fixed though, someone had a job doing something for awhile, and had money in their pocket to buy goods and services which helps the overall economy a lot more than unemployment benefits or panhandling. This country needs so much infrastructure repaired and expanded right now, and getting to it shouldn't be a partisan issue because it can be funded with money borrowed at effectively negative interest.

 

Philosophically I do not understand what the conservatives against stimulus spending want during economic downturns. We cut taxes to give people more money in their pocket, a big part of the stimulus bill was temporary tax cuts, then it's scandal that a lot of poor people and lower middle class folks had their federal income taxes reduced to zero. Regulatory changes could perhaps help some, but gutting them wholesale isn't going to increase demand for goods and services from people who don't have jobs or extra income to spend. That's really all I hear, cut taxes, reduce regulation, and whole hell of lot of obfuscation and whining.

 

Bottom line, to quote Obama, are you better off now than 4 yrs ago? Personally, for me and my family, we are not doing better. Are you? Are your friends?

 

Yes, I am actually, and I don't think it really has much to with politics. Nebraska's economy is ag driven, ag is doing well (at least before this summer) while manufacturing is not, and we never had a housing bubble to begin with because Nebraska is not a destination state.

 

The curent unemployment rate is higher now than in any time during 2008 according to this site.

http://www.ncsl.org/...hly-update.aspx

 

The unemployment rate is unacceptably high, but I have doubts about whether America is capable of sustaining full employment as a goal to begin with. The only reason the economy did modestly well for awhile circa 2004-2006 was a housing boom, which as a turned out many people could not afford and created the whole mortgage mess. Energy prices will continue to be high, so no $10 oil like Clinton had, and other resources like copper are becoming increasingly expensive. Online retailers are killing many retail stores, and big box retailers are killing small retailers...net result less jobs. Government jobs at the federal level are growing at a rate slower than the population, while state and local governments continue to shed jobs. Manufacturing continues to become more efficient and more productive with less workers...less jobs. So tell me, without another housing boom, or government funded construction, where are we going to get large, sustained job growth as a base that feeds other jobs in services?

 

Wow! Talk about buzz kill. You bring up some great common sense points. Not to mention our reluctance to "drill here, drill now", tap into our oil reserves, use clean coal, alt energy such as wind, solar, atomic etc......

 

Sadly, R or D, we have been dependent on Middle Eastern oil since the 1970's and Carter. You figure somebody in control would have demanded that we find some way to get independent energy. I have read that we are sitting on one of the world's largest shale (IIRC) deposits in the world, but we refuse to exploit. Seems like that would create jobs and decrease our dependence.

 

Enjoy the back and forth and different views.

 

Glad to hear that you are doing well in NE. They do seem to be one of the areas still doing well. Trying to convince the wife to move back. Need to come back in January to make sure she is good with winter!

[knapplc]

 

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

I think I know what it means and am using it correctly. Hypocrite- A person who acts contradictory to their stated beliefs or feelings. Maybe you can explain how a couple things in your OP are not insinuating this about Ryan. 1- the topic title "Paul Ryan- stimulus cash advocate" and 2- the daily show, masters of dredging up video of politicians acting other than they profess to believe.. Either you don't know the meaning of "hypocrite" or you have some ulterior motive for not wanting to admit that is what you are accusing Ryan of being. Am I missing something?

 

Umm...... ????

 

Here's Ryan in 2002, during Bush's push for a stimulus plan:

 

We have a lot of laid off workers, and more layoffs are occurring. And we know, as a historical fact, that even if our economy begins to slowly recover, unemployment is going to linger on and on well after that recovery takes place. What we have been trying to do starting in October and into December and now is to try and get people back to work.

The things we’re trying to pass in this bill are the time-tested, proven, bipartisan solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people, to hire people back, and to help those people who have lost their jobs

. . . .

 

We’ve got to get the engine of economic growth growing again because we now know, because of recession, we don’t have the revenues that we wanted to, we don’t have the revenues we need

, to fix Medicare, to fix Social Security, to fix these issues. We’ve got to get Americans back to work. Then the surpluses come back, then the jobs come back. That is the constructive answer we’re trying to accomplish here on, yes, a bipartisan basis.

 

You can watch it if you don't want to read it:

 

 

But his tone changes when it's a Democrat's stimulus plan:

 

Ryan’s support for the auto bailout did not stop him from striking a stridently negative tone about government spending when the stimulus act of 2009 was being debated, saying it wouldn’t work to stimulate economic growth.

 

“This trillion dollar spending bill misses the mark on all counts,” said Ryan in a statement from his office. “This is not a crisis we can spend and borrow our way out of – that is how we got here in the first place.”

 

But later that year, once the bill was passed and signed into law, Ryan sought to make sure his consitutents benefited.

 

On October 5, 2009, he wrote a letter to Chu on behalf of the nonprofit Energy Center of Wisconsin, which was applying for a grant under the Recovery Act’s Geothermal Technologies Program.

 

Under the grant program the center received a total of $240,000, according to its president, Frank Greb.

 

The same day Ryan sent another letter advocating for a grant application, in which the Energy Center partnered with Milwaukee Area Technical College, for training building technicians and operators in energy-saving techniques. For that program, the government provided $740,364, according to federal records.

But the biggest payoff came for the Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation. Ryan predicted the $20 million grant would be able to “create or retain approximately 7,600 new jobs over the three-year grant period and the subsequent three years.”

 

Yet in an interview with MSNBC two years later, Ryan again bashed the stimulus package.

 

“All this temporary booster shot stimulus didn’t work in the stimulus package, didn’t work when the last administration tried these things, so we don’t want to go with ideas that have proven to fail, we want ideas that have proven to succeed,” he said in an interview on MSNBC in September 2011. “I think tax reform is the key.”

 

LINK

 

When it's a Republican's stimulus, it's "time-tested, proven, bipartisan solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people..." but when it's a Democrat's plan it's a "wasteful spending spree." Nevermind the Republican for whom he pimped the stimulus was responsible for an historic economic downturn in just seven years, and the Democrat's stimulus was simply attempting to prevent The Great Depression II - that's irrelevant. What's relevant to Paul is whether it's a Democrat or a Republican, and the betterment of the people be damned.

 

That is the very definition of hypocrisy.

 

 

hy·poc·ri·sy

[hi-pok-ruh-see] noun, plural hy·poc·ri·sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

[Alamo City Husker]

Hey KNAPP what is the reason for Obama being the only President EVER to not submit a budget? What was he afraid of when he had all three branches of government for 2 years? Looks to me like he is hiding something. At least Ryan had the BALLS to submit a budget! Put that in your objective pipe and smoke it!