Get E-Mail Updates

The Best Thing for the Economy, the Right Thing for the Poor

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

The economy and the nation are at a crossroads. Unemployment, poverty, and hardship are on the rise. For many years, official Washington has said, "It is not the time to deal with poverty," whether in good or bad economic times. The stars have now aligned in the midst of this economic crisis, and it is precisely the time to address the urgent issues of poverty in America.

First, economists across the political spectrum agree that the economy desperately needs to be stimulated by federal investment in things that will generate immediate economic activity and jobs. Second, the same analysts also agree that benefits to low-income families will result in immediate economic stimulation as people in distress will spend the money they receive because they have no other choice. In other words, directly helping vulnerable people works because it will quickly help stimulate the economy, and it's right because it will immediately help poor and vulnerable people. How often do we get to do what works and what's right at the same time?

At the heart of our religious traditions is the command to help the vulnerable and to have a bias for the poorest among us. The compromise the economic stimulus package agreed to in Congress yesterday takes some important steps in directly assisting poor and low-income people and stimulating the economy at the same time. Helping those who have fallen on hard times -- and helping states avert cuts in a range of critical services -- will do more to help the economy and create jobs than poorly targeted tax cuts.

The package includes some significant funding increases for food stamps, increasing and extending unemployment benefits, health insurance for unemployed workers, Medicaid, Head Start, the Child Care Development Block Grant, and fiscal relief for states to assist them in meeting their budget deficits without cutting needed social services. It expands the Earned Income Tax Credit, including marriage penalty relief, and considerably expands the Child Tax Credit. While not all of these were funded at the levels we might have hoped for, taken together they do represent significant assistance to those in need.

The economic forecasts are bleak and if unemployment reaches 9 percent, as many predict, the increases in poverty could be stunning. These provisions in the stimulus package all push against the rising tide of poverty and hardship. Economists have also concluded that they are among the most effective mechanisms for shoring up the flagging economy.

The final stimulus package takes an important step toward doing the best thing for the economy and the right thing for the poor.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 3:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:03am

"It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP."

By whose standard? Try it personally, and then start printing more money yourself to cover for your deficits. See how long that lasts.

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:13am

Anything relating to lowering or negating taxes, Ron Paul will stand for. He actually believes in principled politics, and ends up being the most consistent.

But apply your logic, "No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses" a bit further. Why medical? How about food? How about clothes? Some states don't tax food and/or clothes, but why? Leisure is an essential beneficial part of life, why should we be taxing leisure items or vacations? Automobiles are a vital part of American life, why should that money be taxed?

Taken to its logical conclusion, just about everything we do could have a very legitimate reason to not be taxed. Ron Paul thinks that "tips" earned by servers in restaurants shouldn't be taxed. I think that's a great idea.

by: finduk escorts

08-04-2011 @ 1:11pm

Cti Escorts...

Cti Escorts, 4TH Floor, 50 Hans Crescent, London, Greater London, SW1X 0NB, 020 3011 2657...

by: Irrigation Drip System

08-10-2011 @ 10:18am

Irrigation Drip Systems...

Terrific info, thought I could insert a few not related posts, but still worth taking a look....

by: Irrigation Drip System

08-10-2011 @ 10:18am

Irrigation Drip Systems...

Terrific info, thought I could insert a few not related posts, but still worth taking a look....

by: Flat Stomach

08-16-2011 @ 4:30pm

Loosing Fat Belly...

Howdy! Would you mind if I share your blog with my myspace group? There's a lot of folks that I think would really appreciate your content. Please let me know. Many thanks...

by: WaveTossed

02-13-2009 @ 5:20pm

I would love to give tax deductions not only for medical expenses but also for food, housing, and essential living expenses. I started out with the medical expenses deduction because, being a bit more pragmatic, we need to start somewhere. And also Ron Paul specifically mentioned the medical deductions on his plan for health care.

I also emphatically agree that tips should not be subject to tax. I was traveling in Japan a few months ago. Do you know that people don't tip in Japan. They don't need to because in Japan, waitpeople, cabdrivers, other servers get regular wages. Whereas in the US, tips are calculated to be part of the wages that servers receive. Which only enforces the entire tipping system. I've worked in tipping professions in past year. On one hand, servers, cab drivers, etc. feel the need to be unctuously polite to receive a tip. On the other hand, customers feel a bit extorted because most realize that tips are considered part of a server's wages.

I also emphatically oppose charging sales taxes for living expenses. Right now -- not being a complete anarchist; I am more of a "minimalist". Taxes are necessary for essential government services, such as defense of the country (which does NOT include invading other countries to "spread freedom"). Essential judicial and police functions designated by the US Constitutution and state constitutions. Right now, I believe that a flat-rate income tax is more fair than a national sales tax. However, taxes could be GREATLY reduced if the government would stop all of their unnecessary spending.

I believe in social justice spending. However, I would prefer that private organizations do this spending and that the government give out tax deductions for this spending. If the government actually spends the money: remember the old saying, "those who pay the piper call out the tune."

by: Get Abs

07-22-2011 @ 10:33am

How To Get Abs...

I'm really enjoying the design and layout of your blog. It's a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more enjoyable for me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a designer to create your theme? Outstanding work!...

by: Eric77

02-12-2009 @ 4:34pm

Andrew Bacevich writes on the New Republic blog:

When it comes to economics, faux conservatives--Ronald Reagan in the vanguard--collaborated with liberals in abandoning even the pretense of prudent fiscal management. The blindingly obvious result: debt and dependency. "Today," writes Niall Ferguson in a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed, "America is Argentina." Just so. We can't pay our bills so we pretend we'll never have to. Those in power pay lip service to our collective obligation to future generations and then cynically ignore that obligation, appropriating trillions in the hope that somehow or other we can spend our way out of the hole that we've dug for ourselves. The only obligation with which the present generation is likely to keep faith is a self-assigned one: to binge, vainly trying to satisfy its own appetite for consumption.

We cannot afford to continue on as we have in the past. Passing on another $1trillion in debt to future generations may in the short term, be stimulative, but it will, in the long run, only help to ruin us. When will this spending and borrowing stop? If Obama wants to end politics as usual, this is where he should start.

by: WitnessforPeace

02-13-2009 @ 6:15pm

.....particularly on the idea of social justic spending being primarily subsidized by generous tax deductions [or even tax credits]. I think the gov't ought to be the "safety net" of last resort, not the "first responder". How to get from here to there is a bit baffling, but with you and I apparently agreeing on the basic idea, anything is possible!
Blessings,

by: registry cleaners

07-04-2011 @ 10:02am

registry cleaners...

Hello! Would you mind if I share your blog with my twitter group? There's a lot of people that I think would really enjoy your content. Please let me know. Cheers...

by: bielizna damska

07-19-2011 @ 4:31pm

bielizna damska...

Howdy! This is kind of off topic but I need some guidance from an established blog. Is it hard to set up your own blog? I'm not very techincal but I can figure things out pretty quick. I'm thinking about creating my own but I'm not sure where to sta...

by: nuclearferret

02-12-2009 @ 5:44pm

There is an important distinction in "passing on debt." Capital debt, which creates a return on investment on an ongoing basis, is justifiably passed on, in part to future generations. They should also pay for the bridges and roads that will be built and fixed for their use in the future. Taking on tremendous debt for current operations is, in my opinion, a violation of social justice. People not even yet born are being asked to pay for current expenses of our government. Unless, even more ominously, the government intends to not repay at all the debt or to devalue the currency and repay the debt with worthless money.

Poverty, particularly American poverty, is relative. In the long-run, the goal of equal outcomes for people as advocated at the site will be achieved: everyone will be poor, but then it will be so much harder to determine who are the virtuous "voluntary poverty" folks are and who doesn't have any choice.

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-12-2009 @ 5:48pm

We would have been better off entering taxpayers names in a lottery and awarding 800,000 lucky Americans $1 million apiece. This stimulus bill is a total crock and the best thing that can be said for it is there's no question who is at fault for it: President Obama and Congressional Democrats.

LV

by: Bump

07-31-2011 @ 9:15pm

Biling...

[

by: JamesM

02-12-2009 @ 6:00pm

Thank you, Jim for this post. You are so right.

by: judithod

02-12-2009 @ 6:55pm

Too many generalizations about this stimulus package. What Jim Wallis ignores is the enormous debt created by the plan, a debt that will burden future generations, because we don't want to tolerate any pain right now. He also ignores the fact that this plan was rushed through without consideration given to thoughtful discussion of the opinions of many respected economists who disagree with aspects of the plan, the findings of the CBO that pointed out the plan offered no immediate stimulus, and the fact that "earmarks" are rampant in the plan (e.g., Pelosi's $30 million for San Francisco wetlands). The recessions of 1973-75 and 1981-82 had unemployment of 9.0% and 10.8%, worse than the current 7.6%. Did the nation capitulate into unprecedented debt because of a president's "doom and gloom" predictions in those times? No. Perhaps Americans of the 1970s and 1980s were less susceptible to entitlement and victim mentalities.

by: weiwentg

02-12-2009 @ 7:05pm

The US will - presumably - continue to exist in perpetuity. The US government can depend on a perpetual stream of income that grows as GDP grows. From that perspective, it's not wrong for the government to take on debt to ameliorate this recession and pass it on to future generations. It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP. The alternative to borrowing for the stimulus plan is likely to be a long period of stagnation, like Japan experienced.

by: meurig

02-12-2009 @ 7:26pm

Empires rise and fall, and the US will no doubt cease to exist at some point in the future. More to the point, at some point it will lose the global status that enables it to have the world's reserve currency and so get away with rather more enormous debt loads than other countries can.

And GDP will not be able to grow forever either. Not all GDP is tied to exhaustion of resources, but much is, so there are natural limits to growth.

I can't blame Jim Wallis for using the current crisis as an opportunity to push for long-overdue anti-poverty measures, and there are other things in Obama's package that I welcome (investment in more sustainable energy options, for example). But I would have liked to see some analysis of how the expectation of endless increase in material wealth got us (all of us in the western world) into this mess in the first place. So far as I'm aware, covetousness is the only sin directly and specifically equated with idolatry in the New Testament.

Borrowing from future generations isn't necessarily always wrong, But I don't think its morality should be assumed just because economics say it's the best thing to do.

by: WaveTossed

02-12-2009 @ 7:39pm

I hope that one of the overall goals of the Obama administration will be to end our seemingly-endless involvement in foreign military ventures. Sending our troops all over the world in attempts to be the Morality Thought Police of the World costs endless millions, not just in dollars but in the lives of American soldiers and civilians in many countries.

This was one of Reagan's problems -- he wanted to spend zillions of dollars in sending our troops all over the place. Not only in overt operations but in covert operations such as the Iran-Contra operation.

Then when it came to cutting taxes, he cut taxes for the rich, not for the common working people. I believe that it was under his new tax code when Unemployment Benefits began to be taxed, which constituted a tax raise for the poor.

I tend to be libertarian and fiscally conservative. I originally supported Ron Paul for president because he wanted not only to cut taxes domestically but pull out of all of the policing that the US was doing around the world. I ended up voting for Obama in a large part because of his pledges to get us out of the Black Hole in Bagdhad also known as the Great Bush Misadventure in Iraq. You can't cut taxes when spending is going way off the deep end in foreign military misadventures.

I'm concerned about some of the domestic spending in this stimulus package. But I'm far more concerned about cutting spending in foreign ventures.

As for health care, Ron Paul had exactly the right idea: 100% tax breaks for all medical expenses, including insurance premiums. I would also like to see 100% tax deductions for any contributions to any medical clinics or hospitals that give care to those who cannot afford to pay the fees. No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses. I remember that McCain wanted to RAISE taxes by charging tax to employees who (like myself) have employer-supplied medical insurance plans. The employers who supply these benefits should be able to deduct the costs of these, not have their employees get taxed for them.

by: Kevin Wayne

02-12-2009 @ 9:42pm

I don't have that much quibble with the Stimulus plan itself, I have issues with the problems in our economy that are NOT being adressed:

1. NAFTA -please repeal and encourage more investment at home. Also maybe we can fix the problem we caused when we crapped on Mexico's Corn industry - some investments in that direction- if any foregin investments are to be made at all.

2. Dependence on Foreign Oil - We need to move much faster and more decisively. I support Japan-like initiatyes that they used to get to the top of the Auto industry. Get us going Green ASAP.

3. Punish employers who hire people under the table to keep from having to pay benefits. This and adressing NAFTA should go a long way to take care of the Immigration problem.

4. End the war in Iraq AND Afghanistan- that will free up resources that have been commited overseas, and thereby cause gas prices to drop futher. Meanwhile we keep working on Green Energy Alternatives.

Otherwise, we can pass Stimulus bills all day long & it won't amount to diddly.

And why isn't Sojouners bringing these things up instead of just being toadies for Obama? Tsk, tsk, you guys are losing your independent voice.

by: ando

02-12-2009 @ 9:43pm

We should help those are truly poor, have lost their jobs, or are in otherwise desparate straits (sp?). However, if we look at this as business as usual, where we keep up this obsession with materialism, we'll be back to square one.

The problem isn't that people don't have enough things in their lives. Many make wrong or unwise choices, whether it's to decide to buy an oh too large TV, bigger vehicle than necessary, or buy drugs or go on a bender. Throwing more money at one problem won't solve a deeper problem, which is fundamentally a spiritual issue. I've been in enough developing nations enough times to know the difference between poverty in the US and poverty in Guatemala, Honduras, Ethiopia or..... you name the country.

by: Nut

08-11-2011 @ 7:30pm

Knife...

[

by: JamesM

02-13-2009 @ 12:08am

You are absolutely right!

by: Eric77

02-13-2009 @ 12:45am

Do you mean to say that they should hold Obama to his campaign promises to "renegotiate NAFTA", bring all troops home from Iraq in 16 months, and make the U.S. energy independent in ten years?

by: Ing

08-04-2011 @ 10:07pm

Mantors...

[

by: BuckeyeDon

02-13-2009 @ 3:03am

Good comments, Meurig.

I'm not convinced that the stimulus will work. Nor am I convinced that just spending more money is the answer we need. We need more than a quick fix. We need a complete reassessment and reinvention of the foundation of our economic system, based as it is on exploitation of resources and not on conservation and stewardship of same.

But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:03am

"It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP."

By whose standard? Try it personally, and then start printing more money yourself to cover for your deficits. See how long that lasts.

by: littleroundtop

02-14-2009 @ 6:31pm

"But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?"

Don I am never amzed anymore by the comments by those who speak sometimes, articulately and with the most awesome facts to back them , yet with their idealogical blinders on .
A blast from the past from soujournrs , similiar problem with a different political party attempting a smaller attempt to stop the hurting ..

TAX REBATE MATCHING GRANT THROUGH GIVEFORCHANGE.COM

Is your check from George W. Bush (or from the
Social Security trust fund, depending how you look
at it) in the mail? We have a great idea for how to
use this money. Show your opposition to Bush
administration policies that punish the poor and
endanger the environment by making a donation to
Sojourners - Working Assets and GiveForChange will
match contributions (up to $1 million).

Here's How It Works:
Just donate exactly $300 or $600 to Sojourners in one
transaction through GiveForChange.com before November
1, 2001, and your donation will be matched. Please
note: Your individual contribution will be matched up
to $600 only.

You can even send President Bush a gift card to thank
him for the rebate and to let him know about your
donation. Just enter "President Bush, 1600 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500" in the gift card fields.

As always, your online transaction is fast, easy,
and tax-deductible - simply click to donate. Thank
you for your generous support!

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:13am

Anything relating to lowering or negating taxes, Ron Paul will stand for. He actually believes in principled politics, and ends up being the most consistent.

But apply your logic, "No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses" a bit further. Why medical? How about food? How about clothes? Some states don't tax food and/or clothes, but why? Leisure is an essential beneficial part of life, why should we be taxing leisure items or vacations? Automobiles are a vital part of American life, why should that money be taxed?

Taken to its logical conclusion, just about everything we do could have a very legitimate reason to not be taxed. Ron Paul thinks that "tips" earned by servers in restaurants shouldn't be taxed. I think that's a great idea.

by: Scab

08-15-2011 @ 11:32am

Eat...

[

by: nissan france

07-19-2011 @ 2:26am

nissan juke 0-60...

Awesome post, I've linked back to your blog here http://www.vwsuv.net/sites-we-like/ return the favor if you can, thanks!...

by: WaveTossed

02-13-2009 @ 5:20pm

I would love to give tax deductions not only for medical expenses but also for food, housing, and essential living expenses. I started out with the medical expenses deduction because, being a bit more pragmatic, we need to start somewhere. And also Ron Paul specifically mentioned the medical deductions on his plan for health care.

I also emphatically agree that tips should not be subject to tax. I was traveling in Japan a few months ago. Do you know that people don't tip in Japan. They don't need to because in Japan, waitpeople, cabdrivers, other servers get regular wages. Whereas in the US, tips are calculated to be part of the wages that servers receive. Which only enforces the entire tipping system. I've worked in tipping professions in past year. On one hand, servers, cab drivers, etc. feel the need to be unctuously polite to receive a tip. On the other hand, customers feel a bit extorted because most realize that tips are considered part of a server's wages.

I also emphatically oppose charging sales taxes for living expenses. Right now -- not being a complete anarchist; I am more of a "minimalist". Taxes are necessary for essential government services, such as defense of the country (which does NOT include invading other countries to "spread freedom"). Essential judicial and police functions designated by the US Constitutution and state constitutions. Right now, I believe that a flat-rate income tax is more fair than a national sales tax. However, taxes could be GREATLY reduced if the government would stop all of their unnecessary spending.

I believe in social justice spending. However, I would prefer that private organizations do this spending and that the government give out tax deductions for this spending. If the government actually spends the money: remember the old saying, "those who pay the piper call out the tune."

by: WitnessforPeace

02-13-2009 @ 6:15pm

.....particularly on the idea of social justic spending being primarily subsidized by generous tax deductions [or even tax credits]. I think the gov't ought to be the "safety net" of last resort, not the "first responder". How to get from here to there is a bit baffling, but with you and I apparently agreeing on the basic idea, anything is possible!
Blessings,

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 3:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 5:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: Fin

07-29-2011 @ 6:14pm

Brush...

[

by: Taylor Lautner Workout

05-15-2011 @ 7:54am

Taylor Lautner Workout...

Also you might wanna' check out this blog I found here......

by: Flash Factory

06-14-2011 @ 3:11am

Online Website Builder Tells You Its An Incredible Posting Well Done!...

Terrific story thought I might include some unrelated posts, yet really worthwhile looking moreover have anyone learn concerning Middle East have much more difficulties as well ....

by: Butler Auto Auction

07-29-2011 @ 3:48pm

Butler Auto Auction...

I was wondering if you ever considered changing the page layout of your blog? Its very well written; I love what youve got to say. But maybe you could a little more in the way of content so people could connect with it better. Youve got an awful lot of...

by: How To Reduce Chest Fat

06-20-2011 @ 4:55pm

For Your Information...

Im brand-new to websites and just learnt about trackbacks, which I guess is a way for me to recognize your site through a linkback through my site. I came across your internet site in the "currently buzzing" section of one of the bookmarking sites t...

by: littleroundtop

02-14-2009 @ 6:31pm

"But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?"

Don I am never amzed anymore by the comments by those who speak sometimes, articulately and with the most awesome facts to back them , yet with their idealogical blinders on .
A blast from the past from soujournrs , similiar problem with a different political party attempting a smaller attempt to stop the hurting ..

TAX REBATE MATCHING GRANT THROUGH GIVEFORCHANGE.COM

Is your check from George W. Bush (or from the
Social Security trust fund, depending how you look
at it) in the mail? We have a great idea for how to
use this money. Show your opposition to Bush
administration policies that punish the poor and
endanger the environment by making a donation to
Sojourners - Working Assets and GiveForChange will
match contributions (up to $1 million).

Here's How It Works:
Just donate exactly $300 or $600 to Sojourners in one
transaction through GiveForChange.com before November
1, 2001, and your donation will be matched. Please
note: Your individual contribution will be matched up
to $600 only.

You can even send President Bush a gift card to thank
him for the rebate and to let him know about your
donation. Just enter "President Bush, 1600 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500" in the gift card fields.

As always, your online transaction is fast, easy,
and tax-deductible - simply click to donate. Thank
you for your generous support!

by: Sok Noni

07-24-2011 @ 12:27pm

Noni...

Hello, i read your blog from time to time and i own a similar one and i was just wondering if you get a lot of spam feedback? If so how do you prevent it, any plugin or anything you can recommend? I get so much lately it's driving me mad so any suppor...

by: Hope

08-12-2011 @ 7:39pm

Nip...

[

by: Police Car Auctions

06-27-2011 @ 4:28pm

Car Auctions...

Howdy! Quick question that's entirely off topic. Do you know how to make your site mobile friendly? My web site looks weird when viewing from my apple iphone. I'm trying to find a template or plugin that might be able to correct this issue. If you ha...

by: Police Auctions

07-25-2011 @ 10:57am

Police Car Auctions...

Howdy! I could have sworn I've been to this website before but after browsing through some of the post I realized it's new to me. Anyways, I'm definitely happy I found it and I'll be bookmarking and checking back often!...

by: Quinn Car Insurance

08-16-2011 @ 12:54pm

Quinn Car Insurance...

I'm really enjoying the design and layout of your website. It's a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more enjoyable for me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a designer to create your theme? Outstanding work!...

by: Eric77

02-12-2009 @ 4:34pm

Andrew Bacevich writes on the New Republic blog:

When it comes to economics, faux conservatives--Ronald Reagan in the vanguard--collaborated with liberals in abandoning even the pretense of prudent fiscal management. The blindingly obvious result: debt and dependency. "Today," writes Niall Ferguson in a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed, "America is Argentina." Just so. We can't pay our bills so we pretend we'll never have to. Those in power pay lip service to our collective obligation to future generations and then cynically ignore that obligation, appropriating trillions in the hope that somehow or other we can spend our way out of the hole that we've dug for ourselves. The only obligation with which the present generation is likely to keep faith is a self-assigned one: to binge, vainly trying to satisfy its own appetite for consumption.

We cannot afford to continue on as we have in the past. Passing on another $1trillion in debt to future generations may in the short term, be stimulative, but it will, in the long run, only help to ruin us. When will this spending and borrowing stop? If Obama wants to end politics as usual, this is where he should start.

by: nuclearferret

02-12-2009 @ 5:44pm

There is an important distinction in "passing on debt." Capital debt, which creates a return on investment on an ongoing basis, is justifiably passed on, in part to future generations. They should also pay for the bridges and roads that will be built and fixed for their use in the future. Taking on tremendous debt for current operations is, in my opinion, a violation of social justice. People not even yet born are being asked to pay for current expenses of our government. Unless, even more ominously, the government intends to not repay at all the debt or to devalue the currency and repay the debt with worthless money.

Poverty, particularly American poverty, is relative. In the long-run, the goal of equal outcomes for people as advocated at the site will be achieved: everyone will be poor, but then it will be so much harder to determine who are the virtuous "voluntary poverty" folks are and who doesn't have any choice.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: Eric77

02-12-2009 @ 4:34pm

Andrew Bacevich writes on the New Republic blog:

When it comes to economics, faux conservatives--Ronald Reagan in the vanguard--collaborated with liberals in abandoning even the pretense of prudent fiscal management. The blindingly obvious result: debt and dependency. "Today," writes Niall Ferguson in a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed, "America is Argentina." Just so. We can't pay our bills so we pretend we'll never have to. Those in power pay lip service to our collective obligation to future generations and then cynically ignore that obligation, appropriating trillions in the hope that somehow or other we can spend our way out of the hole that we've dug for ourselves. The only obligation with which the present generation is likely to keep faith is a self-assigned one: to binge, vainly trying to satisfy its own appetite for consumption.

We cannot afford to continue on as we have in the past. Passing on another $1trillion in debt to future generations may in the short term, be stimulative, but it will, in the long run, only help to ruin us. When will this spending and borrowing stop? If Obama wants to end politics as usual, this is where he should start.

by: Eric77

02-12-2009 @ 4:34pm

Andrew Bacevich writes on the New Republic blog:

When it comes to economics, faux conservatives--Ronald Reagan in the vanguard--collaborated with liberals in abandoning even the pretense of prudent fiscal management. The blindingly obvious result: debt and dependency. "Today," writes Niall Ferguson in a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed, "America is Argentina." Just so. We can't pay our bills so we pretend we'll never have to. Those in power pay lip service to our collective obligation to future generations and then cynically ignore that obligation, appropriating trillions in the hope that somehow or other we can spend our way out of the hole that we've dug for ourselves. The only obligation with which the present generation is likely to keep faith is a self-assigned one: to binge, vainly trying to satisfy its own appetite for consumption.

We cannot afford to continue on as we have in the past. Passing on another $1trillion in debt to future generations may in the short term, be stimulative, but it will, in the long run, only help to ruin us. When will this spending and borrowing stop? If Obama wants to end politics as usual, this is where he should start.

by: nuclearferret

02-12-2009 @ 5:44pm

There is an important distinction in "passing on debt." Capital debt, which creates a return on investment on an ongoing basis, is justifiably passed on, in part to future generations. They should also pay for the bridges and roads that will be built and fixed for their use in the future. Taking on tremendous debt for current operations is, in my opinion, a violation of social justice. People not even yet born are being asked to pay for current expenses of our government. Unless, even more ominously, the government intends to not repay at all the debt or to devalue the currency and repay the debt with worthless money.

Poverty, particularly American poverty, is relative. In the long-run, the goal of equal outcomes for people as advocated at the site will be achieved: everyone will be poor, but then it will be so much harder to determine who are the virtuous "voluntary poverty" folks are and who doesn't have any choice.

by: nuclearferret

02-12-2009 @ 5:44pm

There is an important distinction in "passing on debt." Capital debt, which creates a return on investment on an ongoing basis, is justifiably passed on, in part to future generations. They should also pay for the bridges and roads that will be built and fixed for their use in the future. Taking on tremendous debt for current operations is, in my opinion, a violation of social justice. People not even yet born are being asked to pay for current expenses of our government. Unless, even more ominously, the government intends to not repay at all the debt or to devalue the currency and repay the debt with worthless money.

Poverty, particularly American poverty, is relative. In the long-run, the goal of equal outcomes for people as advocated at the site will be achieved: everyone will be poor, but then it will be so much harder to determine who are the virtuous "voluntary poverty" folks are and who doesn't have any choice.

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-12-2009 @ 5:48pm

We would have been better off entering taxpayers names in a lottery and awarding 800,000 lucky Americans $1 million apiece. This stimulus bill is a total crock and the best thing that can be said for it is there's no question who is at fault for it: President Obama and Congressional Democrats.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-12-2009 @ 5:48pm

We would have been better off entering taxpayers names in a lottery and awarding 800,000 lucky Americans $1 million apiece. This stimulus bill is a total crock and the best thing that can be said for it is there's no question who is at fault for it: President Obama and Congressional Democrats.

LV

by: JamesM

02-12-2009 @ 6:00pm

Thank you, Jim for this post. You are so right.

by: JamesM

02-12-2009 @ 6:00pm

Thank you, Jim for this post. You are so right.

by: judithod

02-12-2009 @ 6:55pm

Too many generalizations about this stimulus package. What Jim Wallis ignores is the enormous debt created by the plan, a debt that will burden future generations, because we don't want to tolerate any pain right now. He also ignores the fact that this plan was rushed through without consideration given to thoughtful discussion of the opinions of many respected economists who disagree with aspects of the plan, the findings of the CBO that pointed out the plan offered no immediate stimulus, and the fact that "earmarks" are rampant in the plan (e.g., Pelosi's $30 million for San Francisco wetlands). The recessions of 1973-75 and 1981-82 had unemployment of 9.0% and 10.8%, worse than the current 7.6%. Did the nation capitulate into unprecedented debt because of a president's "doom and gloom" predictions in those times? No. Perhaps Americans of the 1970s and 1980s were less susceptible to entitlement and victim mentalities.

by: judithod

02-12-2009 @ 6:55pm

Too many generalizations about this stimulus package. What Jim Wallis ignores is the enormous debt created by the plan, a debt that will burden future generations, because we don't want to tolerate any pain right now. He also ignores the fact that this plan was rushed through without consideration given to thoughtful discussion of the opinions of many respected economists who disagree with aspects of the plan, the findings of the CBO that pointed out the plan offered no immediate stimulus, and the fact that "earmarks" are rampant in the plan (e.g., Pelosi's $30 million for San Francisco wetlands). The recessions of 1973-75 and 1981-82 had unemployment of 9.0% and 10.8%, worse than the current 7.6%. Did the nation capitulate into unprecedented debt because of a president's "doom and gloom" predictions in those times? No. Perhaps Americans of the 1970s and 1980s were less susceptible to entitlement and victim mentalities.

by: weiwentg

02-12-2009 @ 7:05pm

The US will - presumably - continue to exist in perpetuity. The US government can depend on a perpetual stream of income that grows as GDP grows. From that perspective, it's not wrong for the government to take on debt to ameliorate this recession and pass it on to future generations. It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP. The alternative to borrowing for the stimulus plan is likely to be a long period of stagnation, like Japan experienced.

by: weiwentg

02-12-2009 @ 7:05pm

The US will - presumably - continue to exist in perpetuity. The US government can depend on a perpetual stream of income that grows as GDP grows. From that perspective, it's not wrong for the government to take on debt to ameliorate this recession and pass it on to future generations. It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP. The alternative to borrowing for the stimulus plan is likely to be a long period of stagnation, like Japan experienced.

by: meurig

02-12-2009 @ 7:26pm

Empires rise and fall, and the US will no doubt cease to exist at some point in the future. More to the point, at some point it will lose the global status that enables it to have the world's reserve currency and so get away with rather more enormous debt loads than other countries can.

And GDP will not be able to grow forever either. Not all GDP is tied to exhaustion of resources, but much is, so there are natural limits to growth.

I can't blame Jim Wallis for using the current crisis as an opportunity to push for long-overdue anti-poverty measures, and there are other things in Obama's package that I welcome (investment in more sustainable energy options, for example). But I would have liked to see some analysis of how the expectation of endless increase in material wealth got us (all of us in the western world) into this mess in the first place. So far as I'm aware, covetousness is the only sin directly and specifically equated with idolatry in the New Testament.

Borrowing from future generations isn't necessarily always wrong, But I don't think its morality should be assumed just because economics say it's the best thing to do.

by: meurig

02-12-2009 @ 7:26pm

Empires rise and fall, and the US will no doubt cease to exist at some point in the future. More to the point, at some point it will lose the global status that enables it to have the world's reserve currency and so get away with rather more enormous debt loads than other countries can.

And GDP will not be able to grow forever either. Not all GDP is tied to exhaustion of resources, but much is, so there are natural limits to growth.

I can't blame Jim Wallis for using the current crisis as an opportunity to push for long-overdue anti-poverty measures, and there are other things in Obama's package that I welcome (investment in more sustainable energy options, for example). But I would have liked to see some analysis of how the expectation of endless increase in material wealth got us (all of us in the western world) into this mess in the first place. So far as I'm aware, covetousness is the only sin directly and specifically equated with idolatry in the New Testament.

Borrowing from future generations isn't necessarily always wrong, But I don't think its morality should be assumed just because economics say it's the best thing to do.

by: WaveTossed

02-12-2009 @ 7:39pm

I hope that one of the overall goals of the Obama administration will be to end our seemingly-endless involvement in foreign military ventures. Sending our troops all over the world in attempts to be the Morality Thought Police of the World costs endless millions, not just in dollars but in the lives of American soldiers and civilians in many countries.

This was one of Reagan's problems -- he wanted to spend zillions of dollars in sending our troops all over the place. Not only in overt operations but in covert operations such as the Iran-Contra operation.

Then when it came to cutting taxes, he cut taxes for the rich, not for the common working people. I believe that it was under his new tax code when Unemployment Benefits began to be taxed, which constituted a tax raise for the poor.

I tend to be libertarian and fiscally conservative. I originally supported Ron Paul for president because he wanted not only to cut taxes domestically but pull out of all of the policing that the US was doing around the world. I ended up voting for Obama in a large part because of his pledges to get us out of the Black Hole in Bagdhad also known as the Great Bush Misadventure in Iraq. You can't cut taxes when spending is going way off the deep end in foreign military misadventures.

I'm concerned about some of the domestic spending in this stimulus package. But I'm far more concerned about cutting spending in foreign ventures.

As for health care, Ron Paul had exactly the right idea: 100% tax breaks for all medical expenses, including insurance premiums. I would also like to see 100% tax deductions for any contributions to any medical clinics or hospitals that give care to those who cannot afford to pay the fees. No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses. I remember that McCain wanted to RAISE taxes by charging tax to employees who (like myself) have employer-supplied medical insurance plans. The employers who supply these benefits should be able to deduct the costs of these, not have their employees get taxed for them.

by: WaveTossed

02-12-2009 @ 7:39pm

I hope that one of the overall goals of the Obama administration will be to end our seemingly-endless involvement in foreign military ventures. Sending our troops all over the world in attempts to be the Morality Thought Police of the World costs endless millions, not just in dollars but in the lives of American soldiers and civilians in many countries.

This was one of Reagan's problems -- he wanted to spend zillions of dollars in sending our troops all over the place. Not only in overt operations but in covert operations such as the Iran-Contra operation.

Then when it came to cutting taxes, he cut taxes for the rich, not for the common working people. I believe that it was under his new tax code when Unemployment Benefits began to be taxed, which constituted a tax raise for the poor.

I tend to be libertarian and fiscally conservative. I originally supported Ron Paul for president because he wanted not only to cut taxes domestically but pull out of all of the policing that the US was doing around the world. I ended up voting for Obama in a large part because of his pledges to get us out of the Black Hole in Bagdhad also known as the Great Bush Misadventure in Iraq. You can't cut taxes when spending is going way off the deep end in foreign military misadventures.

I'm concerned about some of the domestic spending in this stimulus package. But I'm far more concerned about cutting spending in foreign ventures.

As for health care, Ron Paul had exactly the right idea: 100% tax breaks for all medical expenses, including insurance premiums. I would also like to see 100% tax deductions for any contributions to any medical clinics or hospitals that give care to those who cannot afford to pay the fees. No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses. I remember that McCain wanted to RAISE taxes by charging tax to employees who (like myself) have employer-supplied medical insurance plans. The employers who supply these benefits should be able to deduct the costs of these, not have their employees get taxed for them.

by: Kevin Wayne

02-12-2009 @ 9:42pm

I don't have that much quibble with the Stimulus plan itself, I have issues with the problems in our economy that are NOT being adressed:

1. NAFTA -please repeal and encourage more investment at home. Also maybe we can fix the problem we caused when we crapped on Mexico's Corn industry - some investments in that direction- if any foregin investments are to be made at all.

2. Dependence on Foreign Oil - We need to move much faster and more decisively. I support Japan-like initiatyes that they used to get to the top of the Auto industry. Get us going Green ASAP.

3. Punish employers who hire people under the table to keep from having to pay benefits. This and adressing NAFTA should go a long way to take care of the Immigration problem.

4. End the war in Iraq AND Afghanistan- that will free up resources that have been commited overseas, and thereby cause gas prices to drop futher. Meanwhile we keep working on Green Energy Alternatives.

Otherwise, we can pass Stimulus bills all day long & it won't amount to diddly.

And why isn't Sojouners bringing these things up instead of just being toadies for Obama? Tsk, tsk, you guys are losing your independent voice.

by: Kevin Wayne

02-12-2009 @ 9:42pm

I don't have that much quibble with the Stimulus plan itself, I have issues with the problems in our economy that are NOT being adressed:

1. NAFTA -please repeal and encourage more investment at home. Also maybe we can fix the problem we caused when we crapped on Mexico's Corn industry - some investments in that direction- if any foregin investments are to be made at all.

2. Dependence on Foreign Oil - We need to move much faster and more decisively. I support Japan-like initiatyes that they used to get to the top of the Auto industry. Get us going Green ASAP.

3. Punish employers who hire people under the table to keep from having to pay benefits. This and adressing NAFTA should go a long way to take care of the Immigration problem.

4. End the war in Iraq AND Afghanistan- that will free up resources that have been commited overseas, and thereby cause gas prices to drop futher. Meanwhile we keep working on Green Energy Alternatives.

Otherwise, we can pass Stimulus bills all day long & it won't amount to diddly.

And why isn't Sojouners bringing these things up instead of just being toadies for Obama? Tsk, tsk, you guys are losing your independent voice.

by: ando

02-12-2009 @ 9:43pm

We should help those are truly poor, have lost their jobs, or are in otherwise desparate straits (sp?). However, if we look at this as business as usual, where we keep up this obsession with materialism, we'll be back to square one.

The problem isn't that people don't have enough things in their lives. Many make wrong or unwise choices, whether it's to decide to buy an oh too large TV, bigger vehicle than necessary, or buy drugs or go on a bender. Throwing more money at one problem won't solve a deeper problem, which is fundamentally a spiritual issue. I've been in enough developing nations enough times to know the difference between poverty in the US and poverty in Guatemala, Honduras, Ethiopia or..... you name the country.

by: ando

02-12-2009 @ 9:43pm

We should help those are truly poor, have lost their jobs, or are in otherwise desparate straits (sp?). However, if we look at this as business as usual, where we keep up this obsession with materialism, we'll be back to square one.

The problem isn't that people don't have enough things in their lives. Many make wrong or unwise choices, whether it's to decide to buy an oh too large TV, bigger vehicle than necessary, or buy drugs or go on a bender. Throwing more money at one problem won't solve a deeper problem, which is fundamentally a spiritual issue. I've been in enough developing nations enough times to know the difference between poverty in the US and poverty in Guatemala, Honduras, Ethiopia or..... you name the country.

by: JamesM

02-13-2009 @ 12:08am

You are absolutely right!

by: JamesM

02-13-2009 @ 12:08am

You are absolutely right!

by: Eric77

02-13-2009 @ 12:45am

Do you mean to say that they should hold Obama to his campaign promises to "renegotiate NAFTA", bring all troops home from Iraq in 16 months, and make the U.S. energy independent in ten years?

by: Eric77

02-13-2009 @ 12:45am

Do you mean to say that they should hold Obama to his campaign promises to "renegotiate NAFTA", bring all troops home from Iraq in 16 months, and make the U.S. energy independent in ten years?

by: BuckeyeDon

02-13-2009 @ 3:03am

Good comments, Meurig.

I'm not convinced that the stimulus will work. Nor am I convinced that just spending more money is the answer we need. We need more than a quick fix. We need a complete reassessment and reinvention of the foundation of our economic system, based as it is on exploitation of resources and not on conservation and stewardship of same.

But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?

by: BuckeyeDon

02-13-2009 @ 3:03am

Good comments, Meurig.

I'm not convinced that the stimulus will work. Nor am I convinced that just spending more money is the answer we need. We need more than a quick fix. We need a complete reassessment and reinvention of the foundation of our economic system, based as it is on exploitation of resources and not on conservation and stewardship of same.

But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:03am

"It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP."

By whose standard? Try it personally, and then start printing more money yourself to cover for your deficits. See how long that lasts.

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:03am

"It's not wrong for a nation to have an increasing amount of debt - as long as it stays a low percentage of GDP."

By whose standard? Try it personally, and then start printing more money yourself to cover for your deficits. See how long that lasts.

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:13am

Anything relating to lowering or negating taxes, Ron Paul will stand for. He actually believes in principled politics, and ends up being the most consistent.

But apply your logic, "No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses" a bit further. Why medical? How about food? How about clothes? Some states don't tax food and/or clothes, but why? Leisure is an essential beneficial part of life, why should we be taxing leisure items or vacations? Automobiles are a vital part of American life, why should that money be taxed?

Taken to its logical conclusion, just about everything we do could have a very legitimate reason to not be taxed. Ron Paul thinks that "tips" earned by servers in restaurants shouldn't be taxed. I think that's a great idea.

by: xfree9

02-13-2009 @ 4:13am

Anything relating to lowering or negating taxes, Ron Paul will stand for. He actually believes in principled politics, and ends up being the most consistent.

But apply your logic, "No one should have to pay taxes on money used for medical expenses" a bit further. Why medical? How about food? How about clothes? Some states don't tax food and/or clothes, but why? Leisure is an essential beneficial part of life, why should we be taxing leisure items or vacations? Automobiles are a vital part of American life, why should that money be taxed?

Taken to its logical conclusion, just about everything we do could have a very legitimate reason to not be taxed. Ron Paul thinks that "tips" earned by servers in restaurants shouldn't be taxed. I think that's a great idea.

by: WaveTossed

02-13-2009 @ 5:20pm

I would love to give tax deductions not only for medical expenses but also for food, housing, and essential living expenses. I started out with the medical expenses deduction because, being a bit more pragmatic, we need to start somewhere. And also Ron Paul specifically mentioned the medical deductions on his plan for health care.

I also emphatically agree that tips should not be subject to tax. I was traveling in Japan a few months ago. Do you know that people don't tip in Japan. They don't need to because in Japan, waitpeople, cabdrivers, other servers get regular wages. Whereas in the US, tips are calculated to be part of the wages that servers receive. Which only enforces the entire tipping system. I've worked in tipping professions in past year. On one hand, servers, cab drivers, etc. feel the need to be unctuously polite to receive a tip. On the other hand, customers feel a bit extorted because most realize that tips are considered part of a server's wages.

I also emphatically oppose charging sales taxes for living expenses. Right now -- not being a complete anarchist; I am more of a "minimalist". Taxes are necessary for essential government services, such as defense of the country (which does NOT include invading other countries to "spread freedom"). Essential judicial and police functions designated by the US Constitutution and state constitutions. Right now, I believe that a flat-rate income tax is more fair than a national sales tax. However, taxes could be GREATLY reduced if the government would stop all of their unnecessary spending.

I believe in social justice spending. However, I would prefer that private organizations do this spending and that the government give out tax deductions for this spending. If the government actually spends the money: remember the old saying, "those who pay the piper call out the tune."

by: WaveTossed

02-13-2009 @ 5:20pm

I would love to give tax deductions not only for medical expenses but also for food, housing, and essential living expenses. I started out with the medical expenses deduction because, being a bit more pragmatic, we need to start somewhere. And also Ron Paul specifically mentioned the medical deductions on his plan for health care.

I also emphatically agree that tips should not be subject to tax. I was traveling in Japan a few months ago. Do you know that people don't tip in Japan. They don't need to because in Japan, waitpeople, cabdrivers, other servers get regular wages. Whereas in the US, tips are calculated to be part of the wages that servers receive. Which only enforces the entire tipping system. I've worked in tipping professions in past year. On one hand, servers, cab drivers, etc. feel the need to be unctuously polite to receive a tip. On the other hand, customers feel a bit extorted because most realize that tips are considered part of a server's wages.

I also emphatically oppose charging sales taxes for living expenses. Right now -- not being a complete anarchist; I am more of a "minimalist". Taxes are necessary for essential government services, such as defense of the country (which does NOT include invading other countries to "spread freedom"). Essential judicial and police functions designated by the US Constitutution and state constitutions. Right now, I believe that a flat-rate income tax is more fair than a national sales tax. However, taxes could be GREATLY reduced if the government would stop all of their unnecessary spending.

I believe in social justice spending. However, I would prefer that private organizations do this spending and that the government give out tax deductions for this spending. If the government actually spends the money: remember the old saying, "those who pay the piper call out the tune."

by: WitnessforPeace

02-13-2009 @ 6:15pm

.....particularly on the idea of social justic spending being primarily subsidized by generous tax deductions [or even tax credits]. I think the gov't ought to be the "safety net" of last resort, not the "first responder". How to get from here to there is a bit baffling, but with you and I apparently agreeing on the basic idea, anything is possible!
Blessings,

by: WitnessforPeace

02-13-2009 @ 6:15pm

.....particularly on the idea of social justic spending being primarily subsidized by generous tax deductions [or even tax credits]. I think the gov't ought to be the "safety net" of last resort, not the "first responder". How to get from here to there is a bit baffling, but with you and I apparently agreeing on the basic idea, anything is possible!
Blessings,

by: littleroundtop

02-14-2009 @ 6:31pm

"But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?"

Don I am never amzed anymore by the comments by those who speak sometimes, articulately and with the most awesome facts to back them , yet with their idealogical blinders on .
A blast from the past from soujournrs , similiar problem with a different political party attempting a smaller attempt to stop the hurting ..

TAX REBATE MATCHING GRANT THROUGH GIVEFORCHANGE.COM

Is your check from George W. Bush (or from the
Social Security trust fund, depending how you look
at it) in the mail? We have a great idea for how to
use this money. Show your opposition to Bush
administration policies that punish the poor and
endanger the environment by making a donation to
Sojourners - Working Assets and GiveForChange will
match contributions (up to $1 million).

Here's How It Works:
Just donate exactly $300 or $600 to Sojourners in one
transaction through GiveForChange.com before November
1, 2001, and your donation will be matched. Please
note: Your individual contribution will be matched up
to $600 only.

You can even send President Bush a gift card to thank
him for the rebate and to let him know about your
donation. Just enter "President Bush, 1600 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500" in the gift card fields.

As always, your online transaction is fast, easy,
and tax-deductible - simply click to donate. Thank
you for your generous support!

by: littleroundtop

02-14-2009 @ 6:31pm

"But I'm totally amazed at the conviction of some who are so sure it will NOT work. If none can say for sure that it will work, how can anyone know for sure that it won't?"

Don I am never amzed anymore by the comments by those who speak sometimes, articulately and with the most awesome facts to back them , yet with their idealogical blinders on .
A blast from the past from soujournrs , similiar problem with a different political party attempting a smaller attempt to stop the hurting ..

TAX REBATE MATCHING GRANT THROUGH GIVEFORCHANGE.COM

Is your check from George W. Bush (or from the
Social Security trust fund, depending how you look
at it) in the mail? We have a great idea for how to
use this money. Show your opposition to Bush
administration policies that punish the poor and
endanger the environment by making a donation to
Sojourners - Working Assets and GiveForChange will
match contributions (up to $1 million).

Here's How It Works:
Just donate exactly $300 or $600 to Sojourners in one
transaction through GiveForChange.com before November
1, 2001, and your donation will be matched. Please
note: Your individual contribution will be matched up
to $600 only.

You can even send President Bush a gift card to thank
him for the rebate and to let him know about your
donation. Just enter "President Bush, 1600 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500" in the gift card fields.

As always, your online transaction is fast, easy,
and tax-deductible - simply click to donate. Thank
you for your generous support!

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 3:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 3:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 5:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: jonabark

02-15-2009 @ 5:19am

So you voted for Ron Paul or John McCain?

by: Taylor Lautner Workout

05-15-2011 @ 7:54am

Taylor Lautner Workout...

Also you might wanna' check out this blog I found here......

by: Flash Factory

06-14-2011 @ 3:11am

Online Website Builder Tells You Its An Incredible Posting Well Done!...

Terrific story thought I might include some unrelated posts, yet really worthwhile looking moreover have anyone learn concerning Middle East have much more difficulties as well ....

by: How To Reduce Chest Fat

06-20-2011 @ 4:55pm

For Your Information...

Im brand-new to websites and just learnt about trackbacks, which I guess is a way for me to recognize your site through a linkback through my site. I came across your internet site in the "currently buzzing" section of one of the bookmarking sites t...

by: Police Car Auctions

06-27-2011 @ 4:28pm

Car Auctions...

Howdy! Quick question that's entirely off topic. Do you know how to make your site mobile friendly? My web site looks weird when viewing from my apple iphone. I'm trying to find a template or plugin that might be able to correct this issue. If you ha...

by: registry cleaners

07-04-2011 @ 10:02am

registry cleaners...

Hello! Would you mind if I share your blog with my twitter group? There's a lot of people that I think would really enjoy your content. Please let me know. Cheers...

by: job in jacksonville nc

07-05-2011 @ 9:27pm

Please Click Approve...

I Have went ahead and linked your site on Digg site so my friends can also see it too. Please accept this if this is alright by you....

by: nissan france

07-19-2011 @ 2:26am

nissan juke 0-60...

Awesome post, I've linked back to your blog here http://www.vwsuv.net/sites-we-like/ return the favor if you can, thanks!...

by: bielizna damska

07-19-2011 @ 4:31pm

bielizna damska...

Howdy! This is kind of off topic but I need some guidance from an established blog. Is it hard to set up your own blog? I'm not very techincal but I can figure things out pretty quick. I'm thinking about creating my own but I'm not sure where to sta...

by: Get Abs

07-22-2011 @ 10:33am

How To Get Abs...

I'm really enjoying the design and layout of your blog. It's a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more enjoyable for me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a designer to create your theme? Outstanding work!...

by: Sok Noni

07-24-2011 @ 12:27pm

Noni...

Hello, i read your blog from time to time and i own a similar one and i was just wondering if you get a lot of spam feedback? If so how do you prevent it, any plugin or anything you can recommend? I get so much lately it's driving me mad so any suppor...