Guns and Guts

Growing Government Does Not Stimulate the Economy

January 26th, 2009

From Drudge we get this bit of complete misunderstanding of concepts.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic “stimulus” package, claiming “contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”

Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, “Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a mom,” seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.

The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC’s THIS WEEK.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

Wow, just wow. This is almost unbelievable. It is very illustrative of two facts though. Democrats don’t understand the difference between the private economy of the nation, and the public government. They also don’t understand that the taxpayer’s money does not belong to the government.

This is an incredibly stupid idea. We are going to spend $100 million on rubbers. Of course this idea is central to leftists. They can’t wait to hand you a condom for some reason. How this is going to “save” money is beyond me. I guess less babies equals less welfare, and other entitlement programs? This has to be the logic our vapid Speaker of the House is using to justify spending that kind of money on rubbers.

That probably is not even true. For some reason these people take delight in people having unwed sex randomly with strangers. They encourage it every time they can, and now they are going to use federal tax dollars to do it. It is almost like some kind of legislated immorality.

This bill is supposed to be about stimulating economic growth. Let’s set aside the fact that pumping money into the economy, and taking on another trillion dollars of debt, is not how an economy gets a jump start. It is a recipe for super inflation.

This item is not economic stimulus at all however. Handing out free condoms does not create jobs, or get people to spend money. It simply becomes another bloated government program that serves little purpose, but sucks up plenty of resources.

The states budgets should not be a concern of the federal government, and they surely should not make a bit of difference, when you are trying to stimulate the economy. This Democrat idea of population control being fiscally smart, is asinine on its own. Actually claiming that it will help the economy somehow is just plain stupid.

She doesn’t even mention stimulating economic growth in her answers. The reason for this is simple. This bill has nothing to do with stimulating the economy. It is simply a trillion dollar list of liberal pet projects. It is set to be the largest instance of government largesse and corruption in our nation’s history.

Pelosi is an evil lunatic. Her devious fake smile is alarming when you see it. This woman has no business running a fruit stand, much less our great nation.

Update: Well, after doing a little more research this is worse than it seems.

This is a good start from the Heritage Foundation. RTWT!

Some lowlights:

Contrary to current law, the income of parents or even a spouse may not be counted in determining eligibility. A state would have the option to “consider only the income of the applicant or recipient.” In other words, a child in a family at any income level may be eligible for free family planning services.

So, this is a massive expansion of government, as I had suspected. Now just about anyone can receive family planning service (read contraceptives and probably abortions) on the federal government’s dime.

A child would be able to receive benefits through a “presumptive eligibility period” and beyond without parental knowledge that he or she applied for Medicaid.

End run for parental notification for abortions?

Typically, Medicaid eligibility is restricted to individuals in a family with a dependent child. Section 5004 creates a new eligibility group that would include college students, adults without children, and even adults in a household that has significant income but little or no income for the applicant. Moreover, applicants would not have to prove their citizenship before their “presumptive eligibility” is determined.

Illegals can get in on this too!

The Obama Administration will interpret whether the payment language (”[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law”) may be used as a backdoor means of overturning Hyde Amendment restrictions on federal funding of abortions.

There it is! I knew this was the reason behind this entire thing. This means Eric Holder, the leftie new Attorney General, will be able to decide whether abortions will be part of this or not. Survey says, “Yes”.

So soon we will be stimulating the economy by more taxpayer funded baby slaughtering.

It always comes down to killing children with these people for some reason.

Update 2:Greg Pollowitz put up more of the conversation here

PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy. Food stamps, unemployment insurance, some of the initiatives you just mentioned. What the economists have told us from right to left: There is more bang for the buck, a term they use, by investing in food stamps and in unemployment insurance than in any tax cut.

Nonetheless, we are committed to the tax cuts because they do have a positive impact on the economy, even though not as big as the investments.

Seriously? She really made that claim.

“Economists” say that giving away abortions, and racking up the national debt to do so, is better than just giving the people that money back, and letting them spend it on whatever they want, without any more debt.

This may just be the most completely asinine thing that I have ever heard.

It also illustrates again how Democrats view taxpayer’s money. When she says invest, she is talking about blowing taxpayer’s money. When she says spend, she is talking about letting us keep it for ourselves. You see, she doesn’t understand that letting people have their money, instead of using the government to steal it, does not equal government spending. She sees tax cuts as government spending. This is one of the biggest problems with big government types. They often will say things like, “This is a giveaway to the rich!”, when in fact it is the “rich” keeping more of the money they actually earned. When they are actually spending the “rich” people’s money, it is called investing, even though it never actually comes back to the investor, and is lost entirely down the sinkhole of entitlement.

Categories: Life, Politics | Tags: abortion, socialist stupidity