>>>>>>>>>>>820 billion dollars. ... plus interest
>>>>>>>>>>>I read that it would be cheaper to give every home owner in America $17,000.00 or they could pay for gas for every car owner for five years.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Very close. So far between the original 800Billion screwing and this weeks 800Billion ADDITIONAL screwing + interest assumed on both (which actually is far underestimated) we are looking at $2 Trillion being thrown away that the government does not have. If that money existed and was divided among approx 300Million US citizens each man/woman/child would get approx $7000. Of course, each will owe more than that over the long haul since this is borrowed/phoney money to begin with.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Most people will not get anything except massive debt from these 'stimulus' packages.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>This is just the start. We're only 2 weeks into the worst of it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Well, obviously the objective isn't to add to the national debt. It's to goose the economy and get it moving again. That is a valid role of government spending when the economy is in the doldrums, as it surely is. In recent years (not meaning just the Bush administration) the Fed has primarily just used one fiscal tool, tweaking one interest rate every quarter. More energetic measures are needed. We don't know yet whether it will work or not. But they can't just stand by and watch the economy continue to implode.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Remember that government spending is not money thrown away unless it is not recouped in some way. It's not like the $820 billion is being dropped in the middle of the ocean somewhere.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Correct. The 820 billion (and the original 800 billion) don't exist, so they can't be dropped in the ocean. If the money did exist, then it would be almost exactly alike, except the government won't pay transportation to the middle of the ocean.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So cynical! Let's see what happens rather than immediately concluding it's just a waste of money. These are unusual economic times, to say the least. The way out may not come from traditional ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So throwing money at STD prevention is going to stimulate our economy?
>>>>>
>>>>>It involves employing people and then they spend that money. And you get better health (not you personally obviously) :-)
>>>>
>>>>But doesn't real economy boost comes from producing goods that can be sold for profit?
>>>
>>>But which comes first the chicken or the egg. At the moment nobodies buying anything because they are worried about their income and job security, good firms are going bust because they can't trade and can't get credit to tide them over.
>>
>>I can certainly see how throwing money at preventing STDs will provide jobs and stimulate the economy. :o) What's the new title? STD Preventer or STD Preventer Sales Person or STD Preventer Marketing Rep? Will those be government jobs or is the money going to non profits or businesses? Will we all get government sponsored STD prevention workshops at the office now?
>
>Chastity Czar? Commissioner of Commingling? Emissions Regulator?

ROFL :o)