Big Daddy: Give it a chance. If it works we'll all be better off. If not, we were in the ditch when he started, I guess we'll stay there.
We may have been in the ditch when he started but it seems to me that he, and many in the Congress, are maning the backhoes to make the ditch into a chasm. Instead of concentrating on the areas that will get the biggest bang for our tax dollar buck by encouraging small businesses in
many areas of commerce, they have only encouraged stimulous in construction, green energy and some parts of health care. The rest of that stimulous money was piddled away on pet projects such as studying the habitat of the salt marsh mouse (yes it is in there), high speed rail from LA to las Vegas (so that they can loose their money quicker in Harry Reids district) and other pet projects to pay back the special interests that have filled their campaign war chests. Many of these newly created jobs will have a short life span unless we, the tax payer, continue to fund them after the "stimulous" monies are spent. At the cost of an estimated $200,000 per job, I don't know that we can afford it!
Attempting to stimulate more manufacturing businesses instead of only those that produce green technologies would have been a better way to create long term jobs. We have lost our manufacturing base in the United States, and we need to get it back. We can't export the roads, bridges and buildings that the stimulous package promotes for its job growth. We can export the widgits made by new and expanding small businesses. This helps reduce the disparity between our imports and exports and strengthens our dollar, something that I don't believe they even care about.
We do need to imrove our infrastructure, but much of that could happen if the state and federal governments spent the monies for infrastructure more wisely. Instead of building new buildings, roads, and bridges, why cant they first maintain the ones that already exist. I think the reason is that they don't get as big a political bang for their porky buck if they only keep these pieces of infrastructure up. New museums, bridges and post offices make a bigger impression on their constituants than state workers fixing holes or paving roads.
New bike paths are politically correct while fixing a crumblig bridge is not (until it is unsafe). I see this in Vermont, with some frequency. I see new bike paths added to our country roads while a key bridge for much of one of our counties was negected to the point that it was unsafe. This bridge was the only reasonable way to go south from the northern areas of my county, which is a series of islands in Lake Champlain. The state government funded bike paths, walking bridges that were not wanted, and several new "Welcome Rest Areas" while this bridge crumbled. When it got to the point that it was unsafe to two lane traffic, they closed down one of the lanes and made temporary fixes. This bridge is still not fixed permanantly, the state has decided to erect a walking bridge in another town. This walking bridge will get little use because of its location. Washington's priorities are no different than those of the politicians in the states. Do what it takes to get elected. The "Stimulous Package" is being used to pay back those who got the current group elected and to "stimulate" loyalty for the next election. This is not a Democrat or a Republican problem. It is a government problem.
