Bush signs stimulus package

  • Thread starter Thread starter john1863
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

john1863

Guest
usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-13-stimulus_N.htm
WASHINGTON — President Bush, flanked by Congressional leaders of both parties, signed a $168 million economic stimulus package Wednesday that he called “a booster shot for our economy.”
Click to expand...
I just have an interesting question. Since the President has less than a year left, should this not work…would it be called the Bush Recession?

In my opinion, there are some interesting issues of morality involved. As Catholics, regardless of our political leanings, this is very interesting.

John
 
john1863 said:
usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-13-stimulus_N.htm

I just have an interesting question. Since the President has less than a year left, should this not work…would it be called the Bush Recession?

In my opinion, there are some interesting issues of morality involved. As Catholics, regardless of our political leanings, this is very interesting.

John
Click to expand...
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be called a Bush Recession?

What are the interesting moral issues?
 
Robert,

Simple truth, which you have already given.

Guess it wasn’t as interesting as thought. Not the first time I’ve been wrong…rare as it is:rolleyes: .

Be well my brother,

John
 
john1863 said:
Robert,

Simple truth, which you have already given.

Guess it wasn’t as interesting as thought. Not the first time I’ve been wrong…rare as it is:rolleyes: .

Be well my brother,

John
Click to expand...
Hi John,

I wasn’t arguing that there aren’t moral issues involved. I’m just not sure what they are. What did you have in mind?
 
john1863 said:
usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-13-stimulus_N.htm

I just have an interesting question. Since the President has less than a year left, should this not work…would it be called the Bush Recession?

In my opinion, there are some interesting issues of morality involved. As Catholics, regardless of our political leanings, this is very interesting.

John
Click to expand...
I would have to say no because there is no real recession.

This recession has been manufactured by all parties involved in campaigning for the presidential election as there were no other real issues to deal with. None of them have a plan for how to end the conflict in Iraq, none of them are willing to take on immigration, abortion, and domestic policy so they had to invent this recession to have a campaign platform.
 
gelsbern said:
I would have to say no because there is no real recession.

This recession has been manufactured by all parties involved in campaigning for the presidential election as there were no other real issues to deal with. None of them have a plan for how to end the conflict in Iraq, none of them are willing to take on immigration, abortion, and domestic policy so they had to invent this recession to have a campaign platform.
Click to expand...
For clarification…I assumed two down quarters is what John meant by “if this doesn’t work.” If we have a recession this year, of course it will be called the Bush Recession. If we don’t have a recession this year, then I guess you could argue that it possibly worked by preventing a recession. 🤷
 
john1863 said:
usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-13-stimulus_N.htm

I just have an interesting question. Since the President has less than a year left, should this not work…would it be called the Bush Recession?
John
Click to expand...
Probably. Remember, the last recession started before Bush was President and the MSM still called it the “Bush Recession”. :mad:

Most likely, their hate will continue and every recession for the couple of decades will be blamed on Bush. :rolleyes:
 
gelsbern said:
I would have to say no because there is no real recession.

This recession has been manufactured by all parties involved in campaigning for the presidential election as there were no other real issues to deal with. None of them have a plan for how to end the conflict in Iraq, none of them are willing to take on immigration, abortion, and domestic policy so they had to invent this recession to have a campaign platform.
Click to expand...
If there is no real threat of a recession, why do you think Bush is giving this stimulus? :rolleyes:
 
WanderAimlessly said:
Probably. Remember, the last recession started before Bush was President and the MSM still called it the “Bush Recession”. :mad:

Most likely, their hate will continue and every recession for the couple of decades will be blamed on Bush. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You mean the recession where we had a surplus when Bush took office? :rolleyes:
 
wow said:
You mean the recession where we had a surplus when Bush took office? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You are aware that the GDP went down in 3Q2000 and then again in 1Q2001? Do you believe President Bush was responsible for those declines?
 
rlg94086 said:
You are aware that the GDP went down in 3Q2000 and then again in 1Q2001? Do you believe President Bush was responsible for those declines?
Click to expand...
He is responsible for keeping the declines.

Now the governments new solution to this recession is issue more debt. Lowering the dollar again which will lead to inflation. The same mistake made in the 70’s
 
Re: Stimulus package ~ I just want to know where my $600 check is!! 😃

Re: 3rd Quarter 2001 decline ~ didn’t something happen then that affected the economy? Whoops, my bad, Bush had those planes fly into the WTC. Sorry, I forgot for a second. :rolleyes:

OK, sarcasm off. I do think that all the talk of “recession” or “depression” or whatever has some negative psychological effect. I’ve never understood the benefit to the country of talking down the economy.
 
Look here, if we have a recession I’m not gonna participate in it. I’m gonna take my “stimulus check” and buy a new LCD high def. I’m gonna continue to eat Mexican after Mass on Saturday eveings. My wife is after me to buy new kitchen appliances, and you can count on some long motorcycle trips this year. In fact, I’m not gonna change ONE thing from what I do now. Recession is a state of mind, and I ain’t buying into it

I’ll leave all that “woe is us” stuff to those who live thier lives on what the newspapers say, and then look for WHOEVER is President to come save them. I ain’t got time for* that*.
 
“This recession has been manufactured by all parties involved in campaigning for the presidential election as there were no other real issues to deal with. None of them have a plan for how to end the conflict in Iraq, none of them are willing to take on immigration, abortion, and domestic policy so they had to invent this recession to have a campaign platform.”

I’ll accept this theory as long as it involves blaming Greenspan and Bernanke for taking so many liberties with our currencies. I believe our esteemed Congressman from Texas is more knowledgeable than any of us on the situation.
 
“Recession is a state of mind, and I ain’t buying into it”

That’s the spirit. God bless you.
 
There is NOT a recession, though one is possible…the “stimulus” package is a bill of goods doing no more than sinking the US further into debt.
 
Yerusalyim said:
There is NOT a recession, though one is possible…the “stimulus” package is a bill of goods doing no more than sinking the US further into debt.
Click to expand...
Since you don’t want the govt to slip any further into debt, what YOU need to do when you get YOURS is to send it back to the IRS with the note, " I don’t think it’s a good idea to be sending out these checks, and putting us further in debt, so as a matter of prinicipal I’m returning mine." Anything less would not be consistent with your views.

As for me? I promise ya I’m gonna spend mine on that LCD TV I talked about, and not feel the least bit guilty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top