January 30, 2009

$819 Billion Economic Stimulus package passes

"I'll tell you about the hope and the change he really wants... He's after the change in your pockets. Yep, he's hoping you don't notice him snatching the change from your pockets."


That was my comment earlier tonight to Nic. Call it gloating if you want; I'm ok with that. President Obama has shown in his first few major moves that he never got beyond Econ 101's notion that you have to put money into a system to stimulate it.

Pres. Obama's idea? Give our money to these people: third-world nationals in poverty, illegal immigrants, people who don't work or pay taxes.

Never mind that none of these groups is likely or even able to put money back into a system that they don't participate in! Third-world hunger relief? It's a fine cause, but not one that we taxpaying citizens should be obligated to give to.

Illegal immigrants? They should have no benefits given to them by our government, especially not in the form of a government check (which, in all liklihood, would get cashed in their home country, not the United States).

Lastly, the unemployed, though I myself am frequently counted in their ranks, should not receive more money when they already don't pay any taxes. I could be wrong (I frequently am), but it seems like the President wants to take my tax payments for this year's earnings and loan them into the future to fund all these projects. That's not the kind of loan I'm comfortable with. How about you?

CNNmoney had a recent article
(before the package was voted down Wednesday by every single Republican representative and 11 Democratic reps as well) outlining how the stimulus package would "affect you." Take a close look at the absurd amounts of money going into rather vague projects. For example, "$32 billion for a "smart" utility grid and renewable energy production" and "$79 billion to help states offset education costs."*

Does this mean we're going to be required, no, mandated to use "green" energy, environmentally-friendly homes and vehicles? What is this, Russia?

Does the money flooding into "offsetting education costs" mean home-schooling parents will be receiving those vouchers after all, and the lessoned student population will naturally result in lower education costs? What is this, a dream come true?

It'll probably turn out to be neither Russia nor a conservative parent's dream situation. As the Wall Street Journal reported, the stimulus package "embodies President Barack Obama's philosophy... that a nation in crisis has moved beyond 'stale political arguments' over the size and reach of government."

Apparently an economic crisis is a fine time to convince taxpayers that central government should be even bigger than it is, that its almost tentacle-like reach into what should be private sectors of health care, elder care, special education, preventative medicine, housing standards, environmental concerns and so on could and will expand until Obama says 'when.'

My question is, when will this carousel ride that Democrats are on come to an end?

Not a single House Republican voted for this stimulus package; that is more than just a casual difference of opinion. The House Republicans run the gamet from extremist to moderate to liberal conservative. How then can their total solidarity not yield even a murmur amongst Democrats in the House and Senate? Do they (Dems) just not care about the 48% of U.S. voters who would not support a president with such liberal leanings?

What about the 82% of voluntarily-polled Wall Street Journal online readers- some of whom are surely Democrats, even liberal ones- who feel strongly this package will not result in our economy being stimulated? What about the stats showing that the package from last year didn't really help either? Can all these things just be ignored?

More and more I am feeling underrepresented in my government. And not just because I am a hard-line conservative, but because I am a person who believes in representational government at all! There seem to be fewer and fewer elected officials who are even remotely interested in the earnest concerns of informed, educated, passionate, voting citizens like myself.

And that worries me a great deal.


*I found another site that outlines the education makeover offered by the stimulus package. You can access it by clicking on this link.


Parisienne Farmgirl said...

Oh I have been waiting for another post from you girl! This is a good what - the Mad Housewife had something to say about it too.

LaurenFaythe said...

Hi- got a recommendation from your sister in law to say hi!

Stephanie H. said...

Hi. I found your blog through Parisienne Farmgirl's blog. Great post. Isn't this scary? I am very happy that the Republicans voted no. It sends a strong message that at least they have to own this "stimulus package" when it fails, and it will fail. Hopefully this will revive the republican party and get them back on the path to conservatism. This new administration is soooooo far left that it just might backfire. Let's hope.

Anonymous said...

Hi! I came from your SIL's site, too!

Thanks for sifting through all of the info on this "stimulus" package--I had no idea of what, exactly, was going on with it.

I've read through several of your posts and agree with many, many things--I'll be back!! :)

Maalie said...

My word! I have never seen so much bitching about one person who at least stands a chance of making your country great and internationally repected again!


Maalie said...

Sorry to trouble you again, but I meant to add, are you not happy that President Barack Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act into law?

cityfarmer said...

"On Jan. 29, 2009, President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law.

The bill's passage means that women’s ability to challenge unequal pay will be restored. We celebrate with women and their families who can once again stand up and fight for the pay they so desperately need and deserve."

For some reason it's not clicking with me what this has to do with the post content.

help me out here????!!!

Victoria said...

Woah, quite a few comments here! I'll just go down the line...

Thank you to everyone who is a first-time reader. Ah, don't be too offended, and read again!

PF- I will check out that blog for her usual fiery p.o.v. :)

Lauren- Hi back! I hope you come back to read again sometime!

Stephanie- Hi! Good point about who "owns" the stim. package; the Dems seem to flaunt their expertise in billing the American people until someone questions the necessity of it. I'm proud of the Repubs finally, well, getting some cajones.

I really hope they all find a package that might actually help to bail us out without bailing out our pocketbooks, too.

SK- The amount of items within the package are astounding. And I feel confident that many find themselves unsure of what it covers. But the red flag should be the price tag- $825 (it's up now) billion is a lot of money.. and if people don't remember, we are in a recession! Who's paying for this?
All that talk about "no pork barrel spending" was laughed off by Obama pre-election, and now here his first move is to do the same thing. Talk about audacity.

Maalie- Hello! Thanks for reading.
Yes, I am very happy about the Fair Pay Restoration Act being signed in. President Obama has done well to recognize, legally, a woman's right to equal pay for equal work in that regard.

In regards to your other comment, however, I have to disagree with your premise. I don't think our new President is too highly concerned with protecting our integrity as a nation more than he is in protecting our popularity. The two are not the same.

Sure, he could make some changes- indeed, he already has- but foreign relations is not a major area of interest for him; he has said as much himself.

Our country was great long before Obama and hasn't, in my mind at least, ceased to be so in the last eight years. (responding to an implication)

Great photos on your blog, by the way. Thanks for reading!


Related Posts with Thumbnails