You're somewhat correct, while statistically off. Current Rassmussen banner headline: "53% (not 59%) Say More Government Spending Hurts the Economy". To parlay this slim stat into a representation of what "the American people" say or think is rather presuming.
We need deficit spending to prop up the economy. This is in the face of a yawning federal debt that is as large as it is because of Reagan and Dubya, who each reduced taxes while increasing spending, thereby running up huge and largely unnecessary deficits. Of course, Conservatives, all of a sudden, have awoken Rip van Winkle-like to discover "fiscal responsibility" - their definition being the same as ever: cut taxes, reduce spending [just not military spending, or in my district, where a "Bridge to Nowhere" would be just fine]. I'll grant you Ron Paul is an exception.
This is not to say that all the stimulus measures taken to date are things of beauty. (AIG should not have been saved, but drowned in a convenient bath tub. Why are TARP-funded execs still benefiting from tons of bonuses and perks?) But to dismiss all federal spending as you have as "pork" is to deny the reality that properly-directed federal stimuli could do the Nation a great deal of good. Given our rickety infrastructure that's in great need of an overhaul, and unemployment figures that are downright scary, how many of the members of Congress now howling for "fiscal responsibility" do you think would oppose a bill that included needed infrastructure improvements in their own district? And how many of the 53% cited in the Rassmussen poll do you think would oppose such stimulus, if a spending bill were to put to work people in their own district? And if Congressmen/women and voters in general were to support such infrastructure expenditures, wouldn't they be right in doing so?
The Rassmussen Poll question (perhaps like most poll questions) was simplistic. We shouldn't rush to place too much credence on the results of black-or-white questions such as "government spending - good or bad?"
6 More Stock Briefs [View article]
We need deficit spending to prop up the economy. This is in the face of a yawning federal debt that is as large as it is because of Reagan and Dubya, who each reduced taxes while increasing spending, thereby running up huge and largely unnecessary deficits. Of course, Conservatives, all of a sudden, have awoken Rip van Winkle-like to discover "fiscal responsibility" - their definition being the same as ever: cut taxes, reduce spending [just not military spending, or in my district, where a "Bridge to Nowhere" would be just fine]. I'll grant you Ron Paul is an exception.
This is not to say that all the stimulus measures taken to date are things of beauty. (AIG should not have been saved, but drowned in a convenient bath tub. Why are TARP-funded execs still benefiting from tons of bonuses and perks?) But to dismiss all federal spending as you have as "pork" is to deny the reality that properly-directed federal stimuli could do the Nation a great deal of good. Given our rickety infrastructure that's in great need of an overhaul, and unemployment figures that are downright scary, how many of the members of Congress now howling for "fiscal responsibility" do you think would oppose a bill that included needed infrastructure improvements in their own district? And how many of the 53% cited in the Rassmussen poll do you think would oppose such stimulus, if a spending bill were to put to work people in their own district? And if Congressmen/women and voters in general were to support such infrastructure expenditures, wouldn't they be right in doing so?
The Rassmussen Poll question (perhaps like most poll questions) was simplistic. We shouldn't rush to place too much credence on the results of black-or-white questions such as "government spending - good or bad?"
6 More Stock Briefs [View article]
Perhaps you haven't heard ... we're in a severe recession.