Personal tools

Argument: Stimulus is better than consequences of no stimulus

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Scot Lehigh. "A large stimulus bill for large problems". The Boston Globe. February 6, 2009 - No one is going to get exactly what they want, but getting nothing is a far, far worse outcome. It would be an act of extreme national stupidity not to enact a big stimulus bill at this point.

Arlene Specter. "Why I Support the Stimulus". Washington Post. February 9, 2009 - I am supporting the economic stimulus package for one simple reason: The country cannot afford not to take action.

The unemployment figures announced Friday, the latest earnings reports and the continuing crisis in banking make it clear that failure to act will leave the United States facing a far deeper crisis in three or six months. By then the cost of action will be much greater -- or it may be too late.

Wave after wave of bad economic news has created its own psychology of fear and lowered expectations. As in the old Movietone News, the eyes and ears of the world are upon the United States. Failure to act would be devastating not just for Wall Street and Main Street but for much of the rest of the world, which is looking to our country for leadership in this crisis.

Eugene Robinson. "Roll over the Republicans". Real Clear Politics. February 10, 2009 - The most respected economic wise men and women of both parties believe a huge stimulus is needed quickly to keep a dire economic situation from sinking into catastrophe. Even most of the Republican senators who've been working so hard to sabotage the Democrats' stimulus package acknowledge that the nation needs one, just not this stimulus. Their position is either ignorant or disingenuous, and in either case has been given far more consideration than it merits.

Normally, it would be insane to spend upward of $800 billion so fast. Given the hole we're in, however, it's insane not to.

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits