Teaxchers: SAVED By The DEMS....

[Mr. Shaman]

.....and TWO(?) Republicans??????? ​

"Even though the bill was fully paid for by cuts elsewhere and closing tax loopholeshttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sc-dc-senate-state-aid-20100804,0,1735062.story, Republicans argued that the federal government should not be bailing out the states. Republicans called the funding payback to the teachers' unions that support Democrats.

​

 

[Oddball]

...as Bailout/Handout Nation chugs along.

 

[oreo]

.....and TWO(?) Republicans??????? ​

"Even though the bill was fully paid for by cuts elsewhere and closing tax loopholeshttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sc-dc-senate-state-aid-20100804,0,1735062.story, Republicans argued that the federal government should not be bailing out the states. Republicans called the funding payback to the teachers' unions that support Democrats.

​

YEAP--Stimulus Jr. is now out at a cost of 28 BILLION dollars to save all those government jobs. Teachers/Fireman/Police. Geez it must be nice to have a guaranteed government JOB.

This while the private sector is at 9.5+% unemployment--our government is just determined to add this new stimulus jr. to our tab--even though we don't have a job--

 

[theDoctorisIn]

.....and TWO(?) Republicans??????? ​

"Even though the bill was fully paid for by cuts elsewhere and closing tax loopholeshttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sc-dc-senate-state-aid-20100804,0,1735062.story, Republicans argued that the federal government should not be bailing out the states. Republicans called the funding payback to the teachers' unions that support Democrats.

​

YEAP--Stimulus Jr. is now out at a cost of 28 BILLION dollars to save all those government jobs. Teachers/Fireman/Police. Geez it must be nice to have a guaranteed government JOB.

This while the private sector is at 9.5+% unemployment--our government is just determined to add this new stimulus jr. to our tab--even though we don't have a job--

When it's fully paid for by other cuts, that means it's budget-neutral.

And remember you said that, the next time you need the help of any of those "government jobs".

 

[Oddball]

When it's fully paid for by other cuts, that means it's budget-neutral.

And remember you said that, the next time you need the help of any of those "government jobs".

Irrelevant.

This is nothing more than a plain old bailout of states, which allocated their resources poorly.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

When it's fully paid for by other cuts, that means it's budget-neutral.

And remember you said that, the next time you need the help of any of those "government jobs".

Irrelevant.

This is nothing more than a plain old bailout of states, which allocated their resources poorly.

Yes.

What's your point?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

.....and TWO(?) Republicans??????? ​

"Even though the bill was fully paid for by cuts elsewhere and closing tax loopholeshttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sc-dc-senate-state-aid-20100804,0,1735062.story, Republicans argued that the federal government should not be bailing out the states. Republicans called the funding payback to the teachers' unions that support Democrats.

​

YEAP--Stimulus Jr. is now out at a cost of 28 BILLION dollars to save all those government jobs. Teachers/Fireman/Police. Geez it must be nice to have a guaranteed government JOB.

Kinda like the DEA, huh?

​

 

[Oddball]

When it's fully paid for by other cuts, that means it's budget-neutral.

And remember you said that, the next time you need the help of any of those "government jobs".

Irrelevant.

This is nothing more than a plain old bailout of states, which allocated their resources poorly.

Yes.

What's your point?

Point being that the states should've dealt with their own profligacy and the feds should've butted out.

But I guess as long as the welfare bailout goes to nice AFSCME and NEA/AFT union minions, everything is just jake...Right?

 

[Greenbeard]

Ben Bernanke says:

A question for the longer run is whether the vulnerability of state budgets to business-cycle downturns can be ameliorated. The pressures that states face during and after a recession are the result, in part, of balanced-budget rules in state constitutions that prohibit the use of long-term borrowing to cover operating budget shortfalls, a constraint not faced by the federal government, as you know. I do not advocate changing the balanced-budget rules followed by 49 of the 50 states; they provide important discipline and are a key reason that states have not built up long-term debt burdens comparable to those of many national governments. However, as is the case today, these rules may force significant state cutbacks in bad economic times when services are most needed. Moreover, many government programs--in areas such as education or health care, for example--are likely to be most effective when funding sources are stable and predictable, allowing for longer-term planning.

Tools exist to help mitigate the effects of the business cycle on state budgets. Many states deal with revenue fluctuations by building up reserve--or "rainy day"--funds during good economic times. Measured as a percent of general fund expenditures, the aggregate reserve fund balances for all state governments stood at a record of about 12 percent at the end of 2006; the states represented by the SLC had accumulated above-average reserves of around 16 percent. These high reserve-fund balances were helpful in lessening the severity of spending cuts or tax increases in many states. Nevertheless, given the depth of the recent recession, even these historically high reserve-fund balances proved insufficient to buffer fully the budgets of most states. Thus, state governments may wish to revisit their criteria for accumulating fiscal reserves. Building a rainy-day fund during good times may not be politically popular, but it can pay off during the bad times.

 

[Oddball]

Who elected Baghdad Ben to any political office?

 

[cad]

the stimulus bill directed tens of billions to the states which they used to retain government workers.
how many times have you heard the argument that schools, fire departments, police departments would have been forced to lay off x amount of workers if it wasn't for the stimulus? did the stimulus "save" a bunch of jobs? yes (according to bobby gibbs, that number is up to 8 million) but here we are a year later, and guess what, the states are still fucked, and now need more money to avoid those layoffs that were inevitable last year
can we finally admit that the economic recovery act (stimulus bill) was not a stimulus but a bandaid?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually, all that money is going to save teachers jobs that have already been saved.

Intercepts: Education Intelligence Agency