Issue isn't so much of the Chinese solar cells hitting the US market, it is more a concern in the global market (where everyone but the US seems to be moving towards solar energy)
Quote from: jehu on 08-31-2011, 07:58pmYeah, that sucks. Not much you can do when the Chinese are dumping solar cells at lower then costs. that wouldn't happen if we put proper tariffs in place to prevent the chinese from flooding our markets with their cheap merchandise
Yeah, that sucks. Not much you can do when the Chinese are dumping solar cells at lower then costs.
and "$2,700" with "over $21 billion and the morale of the entire US military service."
No haha, that is how the financial institutions the Bush administration have been working for the past 15 8 years....
Three contractors are bidding to fix a broken fence at the White House. One is from Chicago , another is from Tennessee , and the third is from Minnesota . All three go with a White House official to examine the fence. The Minnesota contractor takes out a tape measure and does some measuring, then works some figures with a pencil. "Well," he says, "I figure the job will run about $900: $400 for materials, $400 for my crew and $100 profit for me." The Tennessee contractor also does some measuring and figuring, then says, "I can do this job for $700: $300 for materials, $300 for my crew and $100 profit for me." The Chicago contractor doesn't measure or figure, but leans over to the White House official and whispers, "$2,700." The official, incredulous, says, "You didn't even measure like the other guys! How did you come up with such a high figure?" The Chicago contractor whispers back, "$1000 for me, $1000 for you, and we hire the guy from Tennessee to fix the fence." "Done!" replies the government official. And that, my friends, is how the new stimulus plan will work.
Quote from: skwirrlking on 02-15-2009, 11:06amso are you saying we should have spent even more money in Iraq?Actually, yes.While it’s no secret I’ve never been a supporter of the war, anything worth doing is worth doing right — a sentiment completely alien to Bush II, as well as his Defense Secretary, who wanted to prosecute two wars “on the cheap”, for instance by making their soldiers have to buy their own body armor. The same President and Secretary who later failed to take care of those soldiers once they returned home, both by cutting the benefits they were promised, as well as the decent medical care they deserve.Really, I think any idiot would have spent more on the Iraq war than Bush and Rummy did. Maybe if they'd planned the thing worth a damn, we wouldn't still be there five years and 4,000 dead Americans later.
so are you saying we should have spent even more money in Iraq?
Quote from: skwirrlking on 02-15-2009, 11:06amso are you saying we should have spent even more money in Iraq?Actually, yes.
The New Republic has a great, thought-provoking piece on why the stimulus would benefit from more pork — in fact, far more. Basically, it follows the Keynesian argument that a stimulus package is a spending package: The whole point is to waste money, to inject it into the system. Chait gets to the meat of it in these two paragraphs:QuoteA stimulus can shock the economy back to life if it happens quickly, but there are only so many useful projects you can spend money on really fast. Mass transit and new electrical grids take years to plan and build. There are worthwhile programs you can fund right away, but the list runs dry after a few hundred billion dollars. So the stimulus is less than half the size of the projected drop in output. It might be enough to stave off disaster, but then again, it might not.Second, by emphasizing the worthiness of his spending proposals, Obama has allowed the debate to revolve around the merits of each project. Normal spending is judged on those terms--whether the goods or services justify their cost. The point of stimulus spending, by contrast, is simply to spend money--on something useful if possible, wasteful if necessary. Keynes proposed burying money in mineshafts, so that workers would be hired to dig it out. (Imagine what the GOP could do with material like that.) World War II was an effective stimulus that, economically speaking, consisted of 100 percent waste. If war hadn't broken out, we could have enjoyed the same economic benefit by building all those tanks and planes and dumping them into the ocean.I suggest everyone take a look
A stimulus can shock the economy back to life if it happens quickly, but there are only so many useful projects you can spend money on really fast. Mass transit and new electrical grids take years to plan and build. There are worthwhile programs you can fund right away, but the list runs dry after a few hundred billion dollars. So the stimulus is less than half the size of the projected drop in output. It might be enough to stave off disaster, but then again, it might not.Second, by emphasizing the worthiness of his spending proposals, Obama has allowed the debate to revolve around the merits of each project. Normal spending is judged on those terms--whether the goods or services justify their cost. The point of stimulus spending, by contrast, is simply to spend money--on something useful if possible, wasteful if necessary. Keynes proposed burying money in mineshafts, so that workers would be hired to dig it out. (Imagine what the GOP could do with material like that.) World War II was an effective stimulus that, economically speaking, consisted of 100 percent waste. If war hadn't broken out, we could have enjoyed the same economic benefit by building all those tanks and planes and dumping them into the ocean.
Quote from: Frank M on 02-11-2009, 02:58pmQuote from: Soshin on 02-11-2009, 01:52pmThe $650 million for people ot get digital cable boxes rather than analog is a big fucking waste of money, that I definitely agree with. Maybe I got this wrong. It's my understanding that all analog broadcasts will be terminated, whether transmitted over the air or via cable. Every television set will require some kind of digital-to-analog conversion, which can be built-in to the TV or performed by a standalone unit. Either way, it's important that as many people as who currently receive a television signal continue to do so in the future. Programming isn't the issue, that's not the purpose of television. More importantly, what happens when so many are no longer subjected to television advertising, and how many millions of dollars is that worth? Hmmm….There is no analog cable out there any more that I know of, your cable box is already a D > A converter. If you have an old TV and are watching the output of the cable box with a big thick coax cable going into the back of your TV then you are watching the analog output of a digital box already. The converters are for people who watch free-to-air TV.You are right about the advertising revenue, however the paranoid tin foil hat wearing fucknut in me sometimes thinks that there is a more sinister motive afoot. TV is an important instrument of control. If the government loses the ability to talk to the masses easily then people start to form their own ideas and the next thing you know you have rioting in the streets. (I can hear you guffawng bdlaw ).The government knows this, just look at the televised James Brown concert in Boston in 1968 that helped prevent the rioting that had broken out across the country.Okay, there ends my paranoia attack for the day. If anyone needs me I'll be vacationing in Bohemian Grove until the summer....
Quote from: Soshin on 02-11-2009, 01:52pmThe $650 million for people ot get digital cable boxes rather than analog is a big fucking waste of money, that I definitely agree with. Maybe I got this wrong. It's my understanding that all analog broadcasts will be terminated, whether transmitted over the air or via cable. Every television set will require some kind of digital-to-analog conversion, which can be built-in to the TV or performed by a standalone unit. Either way, it's important that as many people as who currently receive a television signal continue to do so in the future. Programming isn't the issue, that's not the purpose of television. More importantly, what happens when so many are no longer subjected to television advertising, and how many millions of dollars is that worth? Hmmm….
The $650 million for people ot get digital cable boxes rather than analog is a big fucking waste of money, that I definitely agree with.
So, although I have no problem with spending money on education, a hazily defined "summer youth program" sounds like a license to pour money down a hole. A municipal government, Jeremiah Haly shaped hole.
Author
Topic: The Stimulus Package (Read 5329 times)
