Fox News' Cool Tool

Amerika

Fox News has recently added a pretty cool calculator tool to their website. It calculates each citizen’s share of the 3 biggest government spending initiatives in this recession, based on an individual's income. My cost share of these three programs was approximately $6,000. Unfortunately I estimate my benefit share of these three programs at about $100, because occasionally I use a couple of roads that are getting some minimal work done with Stimulus money. And people wonder why the Tea Party has come about.

Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/business/finance/troubled-asset-relief-program.htm

Stimulus
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/economic-stimulus.htm

Government takeover of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/business/companies/fannie-mae.htm

whatstherush

Do they have a calculator for the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Exile 1798

I wonder, as Fox was a key force in support of George Bush's candidacy and then the two terms of that disastrous Administration - perhaps they should take their share of the blame for the nations enormous troubles. Perhaps they should apologise to the American people?

Amerika

Actually, I think history will be kind to GW Bush’s presidency, and Barack Obama’s presidency will go down in history as one of the worst, with (shudder) 2.5 years yet to go.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-04-12/will-bush-be-the-next-truman/

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Fox News has recently added a pretty cool calculator tool to their website. It calculates each citizen’s share of the 3 biggest government spending initiatives in this recession, based on an individual's income. My cost share of these three programs was approximately $6,000. Unfortunately I estimate my benefit share of these three programs at about $100, because occasionally I use a couple of roads that are getting some minimal work done with Stimulus money. And people wonder why the Tea Party has come about.

Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/business/finance/troubled-asset-relief-program.htm

Stimulus
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/economic-stimulus.htm

Government takeover of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/business/companies/fannie-mae.htm

Tarp October 2008
Freddie and Fanny Sept 2008

Who was President then?


As for the bailout it is investing in the US creating jobs and may have prevented another great depression.

whynotwhycanti

Amerika wrote: »

Actually, I think history will be kind to GW Bush’s presidency, and Barack Obama’s presidency will go down in history as one of the worst, with (shudder) 2.5 years yet to go.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-04-12/will-bush-be-the-next-truman/

Thanks for that, i needed a laugh. I am no fan of Barack Obama, but Bush's legacy is just so bad it is ridiculous. Two wars, oversaw the beginning of the recession. The Iraq war itself, as history has proven has been a disaster for everybody except his buddies who made some serious money with those re-building contracts etc.

I mean at least the money used by Obama is to attempt to stimulate the economy. What about the two wars, do you ever wonder how much or even care how much that has cost you and every other american, not to mention innocent civilians in the countries invaded.

The tea party, if it wasn't full of ignorant uneducated hicks, it might actually have some influence. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the 20% of Americans who cannot locate America on a map are members of the tea party movement. Oh and Sarah Palin as a spokesperson, raking in cash making ridiculous speeches at conventions. Yeah you guys got it going on, best of luck with it. Oh and don't forget, Obama is a socialist and loves communism, and isn't even actually an american, and is probably a closet muslim too.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

As for the bailout it is investing in the US creating jobs and may have prevented another great depression.

My turn to say thanks for the laugh. What jobs were created? Any that don’t need to be sustained from additional tax dollars?

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

My turn to say thanks for the laugh. What jobs were created? Any that don’t need to be sustained from additional tax dollars?

Apologies meant to say the stimulus.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Apologies meant to say the stimulus.

No problemo, I knew what you meant. But my question remains the same.

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

No problemo, I knew what you meant. But my question remains the same.

Here,
http://www.recovery.gov/

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Here,
http://www.recovery.gov/

Cop out! What type of jobs were created?

And from your link, doesn't that come out to about $250,000 per job. Money well spent?

whynotwhycanti

Obama has tried to stabilise the stock markets. It appears that that has worked although i am highly skeptical and believe that they could take another drop and all the money pumped in may have been for nothing. Either way, it takes at least six months for developments in the market to make their way into everyday life, in terms of employment, increased retail spending etc.

So yes, unemployment is still a huge problem in the US and people are wondering, with all the money spent on stimulus how come there are no jobs being created. It is a good question and if unemployment does not decrease, then he will become even more unpopular.

You should be happy though, we have spent more money in this country bailing out our banks than in the US, even though there are approx 250 million in the US compared to approx 4million in Ireland. In the US the majority of bail out money has been paid back. The bail out money here looks like it is disappearing into a black hole.

Amerika

whynotwhycanti wrote: »

You should be happy though, we have spent more money in this country bailing out our banks than in the US, even though there are approx 250 million in the US compared to approx 4million in Ireland. In the US the majority of bail out money has been paid back. The bail out money here looks like it is disappearing into a black hole.

My sincere condolences. Maybe y'all need your own form of Tea Party.

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Cop out! What type of jobs were created?

And from your link, doesn't that come out to about $250,000 per job. Money well spent?

Its all on the website. Says 608,317.
How many will need additional funding i don't know!! Doubt anyone does.

Where you get the figure per job from?

whynotwhycanti

Amerika wrote: »

My sincere condolences. Maybe y'all need your own form of Tea Party.

I think we do and i do admire your guys ability to organise such a movement. We are useless in this country at these sort of things and instead just complain amongst oursleves instead of actually doing something about it.

For the record, i am not an Obama fan, nor was i a Bush fan and i do sincerely hope that things in your country improve. The personal debt Obama is placing on the US is absolutely huge, kinda similar to here.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Its all on the website. Says 608,317.
How many will need additional funding i don't know!! Doubt anyone does.

Where you get the figure per job from?

I believe roughly 330,000 of those jobs were school related jobs alone. I shudder to think how many of the jobs are "government jobs" (probably close to the remainder IMO). School related jobs and government jobs are sustained by taxes.

I think we have spent around $169,000,000,000 of the stimulus monies so far. At 608,317 jobs, that comes out to over $275,000 per job.

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

I believe roughly 330,000 of those jobs were school related jobs alone. I shudder to think how many of the jobs are "government jobs" (probably close to the remainder IMO). School related jobs and government jobs are sustained by taxes.

I think we have spent around $169,000,000,000 of the stimulus monies so far. At 608,317 jobs, that comes out to over $275,000 per job.

Don't think its just for jobs. Looking at the recovery website it says 309billion all together. 99b for tax benefits (your for that I presume), 90b for for contracts, grants and loans I suppose thats the job making part.
120b for entitlements (social security type stuff?

So I don't think you can just divide the total by the number of jobs created.
Then there would be all the knock on affects, better infrastructure, getting people off welfare, suppliers etc etc

Amerika

As I recall, president Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka the Stimulus Plan) was created in order to save or create 3.5 million jobs over two years. Are you now saying that the creation or saving of jobs is not really what the stimulus was all about? (You got to love revisionist history! )

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

As I recall, president Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka the Stimulus Plan) was created in order to save or create 3.5 million jobs over two years. Are you now saying that the creation or saving of jobs is not really what the stimulus was all about? (You got to love revisionist history! )

Its been 1 year now only a third of it has been spent so far, so its far from finished.

There are many reasons for it besides jobs, infrastructure is a big part of it.
Here he is explaining it

Out of your three "cool Calculators" two were under Bush.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Its been 1 year now only a third of it has been spent so far, so its far from finished.

So, what odds are Paddy Power giving on Obama getting another 2,892,000 jobs created or saved in the next 8 or so months? Want to make a bet?

Out of your three "cool Calculators" two were under Bush.

Let me correct that for you. "two were started under Bush." Bush acted like a democrat when it came to spending. So, in that aspect he was a huge disappointment.

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

So, what odds are Paddy Power giving on Obama getting another 2,892,000 jobs created or saved in the next 8 or so months? Want to make a bet?



Let me correct that for you. "two were started under Bush." Bush acted like a democrat when it came to spending. So, in that aspect he was a huge disappointment.

It sounds ambitious alright wouldn't make a bet on it!!
Still the new roads, bridges and other infrastructure should come in handy.

A few posts back you said you think history will be kind to Bush. Now you think he's a huge disappointment?

Doubt Obama could have reversed the bailout or tarp once he got in, even if he wanted to which I doubt.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

A few posts back you said you think history will be kind to Bush. Now you think he's a huge disappointment?

Every president makes some mistakes. I never said he would be considered a great president, only that I believed history will be kind to him. I still do, even with his unfortunate Democrat-Like spending tendencies.

Doubt Obama could have reversed the bailout or tarp once he got in, even if he wanted to which I doubt.

Money unspent was money unspent! He could have just said no. Instead he spent and wants even more.

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Every president makes some mistakes. I never said he would be considered a great president, only that I believed history will be kind to him. I still do, even with his unfortunate Democrat-Like spending tendencies.


Money unspent was money unspent! He could have just said no. Instead he spent and wants even more.

Wasn't he legally bound because Bush had put it into law? I dunno!!
What does get me is how the Republicans are blaming him for the mess which Bush left and now Obama is trying to fix.

You are paying similar taxes as under Reagan, less than under Bush yet Obama is a commie!! Don't get it.

Its cos he's Black I think.
Also Bushes legacy depends on Obama failing.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

What does get me is how the Republicans are blaming him for the mess which Bush left and now Obama is trying to fix.

Left by Bush, caused by Democrats. If Obama wasn't up to the job, he should have let Hillary have it.

Its cos he's Black I think.

And there you have it. A liberals last line of defense. So disingenuous on your part.

As a matter of fact, it's becasue he is a hard left liberal, not becasue he's black! But think what you want, and don't let the truth dissuade you. :mad:

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Left by Bush, caused by Democrats. If Obama wasn't up to the job, he should have let Hillary have it.

And there you have it. A liberals last line of defense. So disingenuous on your part.

As a matter of fact, it's becasue he is a hard left liberal, not becasue he's black! But think what you want, and don't let the truth dissuade you. :mad:

Aren't the Republicans the ones who are against regulations let the market decide etc? Then the market tanked and they changed their mind and bailed it out? What did Bush do in his 8 years to prevent the crash?

I don't really see any difference between the Republicans and the Democrats tbh. You said yourself Bush spent like a democrat.

What hard left Liberal stuff has Obama done?

I'm not calling you a racist but considering Obama is pretty much the same as the Republicans and he's getting all this vitriol I think race has a lot to do with the hatred aimed at him. Didn't see the whole teabagger movement come out against Bush when he was doing pretty much the same thing, not to mention two wars.

tim_holsters

Amerika wrote: »

Left by Bush, caused by Democrats. If Obama wasn't up to the job, he should have let Hillary have it.

And there you have it. A liberals last line of defense. So disingenuous on your part.

As a matter of fact, it's becasue he is a hard left liberal, not becasue he's black! But think what you want, and don't let the truth dissuade you. :mad:

Obama?

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

I'm not calling you a racist but considering Obama is pretty much the same as the Republicans and he's getting all this vitriol I think race has a lot to do with the hatred aimed at him. Didn't see the whole teabagger movement come out against Bush when he was doing pretty much the same thing, not to mention two wars.

Isn't that rich, someone accusing others of being racist (I know not me), yet has no problem calling the Tea Party members "teabaggers." I do take offense to the term. (Everyone gets one chance, after that they get reported to the mods.)

tim_holsters wrote: »

Obama?

YUP!!! (well over here anyway).



http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Barack_Obama.htm

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Isn't that rich, someone accusing others of being racist (I know not me), yet has no problem calling the Tea Party members "teabaggers." I do take offense to the term. (Everyone gets one chance, after that they get reported to the mods.)

Calling the tea party teabaggers is racist??
Opps did it again but I was asking a question not calling them that so don't report me please!!!

So what are Obama's hard left liberal policies then?

MysNthR0p3

Amerika wrote: »

Bush acted like a democrat when it came to spending. So, in that aspect he was a huge disappointment.

I think you'll find that he was a huge disappointment in many more aspects than just that one.

Amerika wrote: »

Isn't that rich, someone accusing others of being racist (I know not me), yet has no problem calling the Tea Party members "teabaggers." I do take offense to the term. (Everyone gets one chance, after that they get reported to the mods.)

How is that racist? I'm sorry, its about as racist as calling Republicans inbred, hick, gun-toting, psycho, nutjobs or calling Democrats pinko, commie, tree-hugging, abortion-loving, liberals. Its derogatory yes, but its not racist. Its a sardonic pun on an political organisation not a slur on an ethnic culture.

Amerika

MysNthR0p3 wrote: »

IHow is that racist? I'm sorry, its about as racist as calling Republicans inbred, hick, gun-toting, psycho, nutjobs or calling Democrats pinko, commie, tree-hugging, abortion-loving, liberals. Its derogatory yes, but its not racist. Its a sardonic pun on an political organisation not a slur on an ethnic culture.

My comment was not meant to confer it as a racial slur. Just found it sad and ironic that someone has the gall to call other racists, yet has no problem following it up with tagging a group of concerned citizens with the offensive term for the act of a man placing private parts in the mouth of a sexual partner.

MysNthR0p3

Amerika wrote: »

My comment was not meant to confer it as a racial slur. Just found it sad and ironic that someone has the gall to call other racists, yet has no problem following it up with tagging a group of concerned citizens with the offensive term for the act of a man placing private parts in the mouth of a sexual partner.

Ahhh, misread, apologies.