The Obama Stimulus was directed towards bettering the economy and creating more jobs. The purpose was also to strengthen the dollar and increase the fiscal stimulus. The public disbelieved it created more jobs and due to great debts, the help of the government turned out to be not significant enough to change anything. The Act did create more jobs in the number of about 2.5 million and also added between 2.1% and 3.8% to the gross domestic product. But the dollar bill became somewhat weaker, as the problem cannot be solved by simply giving money for help, the policies must be changed also. So, it is thought that it was a waste, as the unemployment in general increased.
The Community Reinvestment Act’s purpose is to provide more lending opportunities to those who have lower incomes. It is a great idea because it could aid in the crisis and raise the economy. In reality, it is unclear if this caused the crisis or advanced it. An opposing view relates to the fact that how can this sort of act help, while those with lower income have less credibility and thus are not reliable to lend to. It seems as if it was a deliberate act because these facts were known before the passage of the Act. Even though the lending possibilities increased, they still did not help those below the poverty line. The question posed is, how can the economy rise when the real problem is not dealt with? There were also some unexpected turns when some minority groups were outcasted by the real estate industry. It has divided more and less successful neighborhoods sharper. Overall, the act seems one-sided, aiding those with higher income and completely disregarding those with minimal opportunities.
This article talks about letting the Bush cuts expire. The wealthy are the ones who are reaping all the benefits when compared to the middle class and working families. But that would also mean cuts to very important social programs like Social Security and Medicare. One proposition is to cut the spending on several government programs, particularly including defense spending. Social programs must be protected, as they strengthen society and thus the economy. The contributions to social welfare have been non-existent, as it is funded independently by the payroll tax. The bottom line is that tax cuts should not be given to the wealthiest of the world, while social programs dwindle.
The opposing views of liberals and conservatives are as follows: Conservatives say that it is the government that must be there for the people. The free market and business run best when the government does not have to intervene in its matters. As people must help themselves, the government should focus on the general economy. Those with the most wealth and power will be the ones who create workplaces and opportunities for the rest. The liberal view focuses on the government, helping the people in the crisis. According to statistics, the wealthiest of American society own most of its wealth while the poor are left with nothing. The tax dollars are there for a purpose and it is to help those in need and not provide more opportunities for the rich to get richer and gain more control over businesses and the economy in general.
References
Grunwald, M. (2012). Five myths about Obama’s stimulus. Web.
Horan, C. (2009). An analysis of the community reinvestment act. Web.
Liberal vs. conservative values. (2013). Web.
Sanders, B. (2012). Let the bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire already. Web.