should U.S. invade mexico

Okay... then the American economy allready broke.
But why? Because all the expensive wars! (And some other influences,too.)

so if something isnt as u want it u just go to war and invide them?
Usa always talks of peace and human rights and liberty but it is very much a militaristic and agressive nation. they went to war in so many coutries and in such small intervals.
btw do u people realise that the so called enemy of america (terrorist group) was actually sponsored by the US when they were resisting the sovet? or that Us supplies the egyption government with with good steady supply of support money?
and yeah egypt is a so called democratic nation which was ruled by the same person who was in power 10 years ago.
as for the illegal immigrants getting those jobs well yeah it is definetly not a good thing. there are strikes in briton i heard for the similar reason (european union memebers come and take away jobs)

Americans did once try to take over Canada. Not only did we beat the shit out of them, we fucking burned the White House as future warning to leave us the fuck alone.

America should stay where the fuck it is. What the hell is wrong with you people, OP? This mentality is exactly why evreybody hates America right now. Don't drown yourself.

I love how everybody blames the wars as the reason that the world economy hit the breaks. The wars may have costs us an equivalent of money equal to the GPA of several smaller countries but, we're sustained these wars for 8 years now. Depending on who you ask the cost in around 1-2 trillion. Everybody bitches about that cost (even though Obama's Faux "stimulus" will cost 1 trillion).

The real reason behind the economy hitting the breaks is that people got greedy, everybody was borrowing on credit and debt was just exchanging hands all the time. The average American has actually been spending more than they make. Combined with the overinflated housing prices. There are estimated to be 2 million more homes than there are families to occupy them. So combined the overspending of the average person, mismanaged lending to anyone (living or dead), the bursting of the housing bubble.
This isn't a case of the straw that broke the camels back.

Lets ignore the fact that the United States is projected to have a $1.2 trillion deficit by the end of this year, even though the "stimulus" is estimated to cost 1 trillion dollars even if I overestimated it a little bit. That is still hundreds of billions of dollars being spent THAT WE DON'T HAVE. Money works the same way no matter who holds it. I can't go into debt and keep spending money and magically get out of debt.

The "stimulus" which is barely doing anything besides funding "pet projects" for senators is as big as the entire federal deficit ($1.2 trillion this year). Money works the same way in my hands as it does in the governments hands. I can't spend my way out of debt and neither can the government. My money was near worthless before the Government decided to print billions more and lower the value.

A lot of the actual "spending" in the "stimulus" is junk that wouldn't help the economy. Whatever, if the economy is going to collapse unless people get their digital converters or get screened for STD's then this place sucks enough that is needs to collapse and start over.

$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.
$650 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.
$88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship).
$448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters.
$248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters.
$600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees.
$400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.
$1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.
$125 million for the Washington sewer system.
$150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.
$1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion.
$75 million for "smoking cessation activities."
$200 million for public computer centers at community colleges.
$75 million for salaries of employees at the FBI.
$25 million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction.
$500 million for flood reduction projects on the Mississippi River.
$10 million to inspect canals in urban areas.
$6 billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.
$500 million for state and local fire stations.
$650 million for wild land fire management on forest service lands.
$1.2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job programs.
$88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.
$412 million for CDC buildings and property.
$500 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.
$160 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
$5.5 million for "energy efficiency initiatives" at the Department of Veterans Affairs National Cemetery Administration.
$850 million for Amtrak.
$100 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.
$75 million to construct a "security training" facility for State Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.
$110 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.
$200 million in funding for the lease of alternative energy vehicles for use on military installations.

It was more than just a swipe at Obama. It was a swipe at the politicians in Washington who claim to be champions for the "little guy" and yet earn 6 figure incomes ($165,000) for their jobs while middle class America gets around 50k a year

Overall, I agree with projects like repairing bridges, making government buildings "green" or more energy efficient which saves money in the long run. Hell, if I had my way every government building would have solar panels (where it would be effective). Tax cuts across the board rather than the government spending. The 500 a head is 'okay' for the moment but, my principals are that Government should only give it's people Protection from force or fraud (Cops, Military, Courts). While the rest should be left up to the individual state governments or in the private sector. A lot of this is just pure junk. The actual paper for the "bill" being passed in the Senate is 900 pages and weights 11lbs. I feel the need to buy a the worlds largest pig and write "Government spending" on the side of it to drive my point.

Aren't they putting up a whole new border with a wall (not a chain link fence) all around the Us/Mexico boarder so its makes hopping the border even harder

i was kidding about invading canada lol.But yeah with all the violence in mexico and them continually coming into our countrie do we really want all that here? i dont. so we should put a stop to i our self is all im sayin.

Well first off the whole thing with Canada was during the revolution...
oh and by the way Canada was within range of US conquest after all the revolution took what is now Maine from Canada...
second i never said anything about winning the war of 1812...
the British ransacked and burned our capital... we lost! but because of our stupid red neck inhabitants we thought the Battle of New Orleans actually counted...

Anyway... I believe both the US and Mexico would benefit... their people would have better health care (well US health care sucks but is still better than theirs) better working conditions, fewer border costs for us, better pay for them. However if w would take Mexico then we have to worry about all the shit below it

If people need to spend money to help the economy, we doesn't the government just spread out a trillion dollars to citizens? Everybody would be able to pay for necessities and have some extra to buy some shiny shit. Isn't that more practical than spending millions of dollars on furniture for buildings or for roads? Don't we have enough roads already? What we need is for people to spend money to help the economy, right?

I'm not making any sort of point. I don't know shit about economics. I am seriously asking a question.

well in a way the governemnt is giving away that money - but instead of just giviing it free it gives out jobs and uses that money as salary to give the economy some fuel to start off. if the people have money they will spend it is the basic idea.

That's what I hear, but they're not making jobs for every profession. They're making roads and building buildings to give people jobs? I, and most of the people I know, wouldn't know how to do that shit. If a construction company in my town wanted a thousand workers, that wouldn't help me at all, even if only five hundred people lived in my town, because I don't know how to do construction, beyond the simplest tasks like carrying stuff in my arms, but I couldn't do that for eight hours a day. I'd die of exhaustion or something. I'm used to being inside a building twenty hours a day.

They might as well make millions of jobs that revolve around web design. That's another thing a lot of people have no clue about.

You are correct, the primary risk of simply giving money to individuals or corporations via tax cuts is that they won't spend the money. Some might have to, but when times become tough, people will often save more when they are able, and the financial corporations got into this whole mess by overaggressive lending and not keeping enough capital on hand, so the environment will likely make them cautious as well. Raising taxes immediately would be a bad idea, but tax cuts may not be efficient here. There is simply too much reason present for people not to spend the money quickly if possible.

Letting the government spend the money will inevitably result in some amount of idiotic spending, but at least the government is actually spending the money. Even if they decide to build a literal "bridge to nowhere", the money is going to hire workers, buy materials, etc, and thus is stimulating the economy.

Of the items that Fiery lists, some of them are not exactly top priority needs, and a few are even stupid, but now seems as good a time as any to build a new NIH HQ. It might not be desperately needed, but it allows the government to create demand for the labor and commodities used in its construction, and the government at least gets something useful out of it.

We can and should try to build a stimulus that spends the money as much as possible on useful products, but even FDR engaged in a good share of spending that would definitely have been wasteful during a time of economic calm. However, it did create jobs, and government action such as this also can help calm some of the irrational behaviors that become more common when the economy goes bad. This was much of the point of the $700 billion bailout of the financial sector. Truthfully, no organization other than the government is capable of a directed effort so large that it can reshape the entire economic landscape via spending, and really, that's the goal during a recession. Staunching the damage and even causing small amounts of recovery are useful for fighting the fears and panics that come with recessions.

As for spending 1.2 trillion, what it really comes down to is this: is it worth the cost considering the alternative? I think yes.

Supporters of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan think it was worth $2 trillion to fight terrorism and hopefully make the US safer. This is relevant not because these wars got us into a recession(they didn't), or that our resources were wasted(we probably could have executed better, even assuming support for both wars in concept), but that the stimulus is an analogous case. I think it is worth spending $1.2 trillion to avoid sinking the US and probably the world deeper into recession.

Of course, Fiery has a point that we should do our best as a nation to spend the money on useful projects. Unfortunately, acting fairly quickly is also important, and this makes it harder to really iron out the inefficiencies of the stimulus.

2nd ed but how did we get on this topic again?

Giving the American people $8 a week isn't going to help anybody (look at the numbers and break them down. You'll see my point). The money won't create jobs, it'll barely do anything for the economy if it does anything at all. As Whitelion has pointed out we should spend the money on better projects since some aren't "pressing" and others are downright stupid. But, as the senators run rampant with our hard earned tax dollars like a teenage girl at the mall with a no-limit credit card. We will eventually have to pay for our irresponsibility. Though, I can understand where people are coming from. The man that gave them "hope" is suddenly telling the American people that the sky is falling. The average idiot played into the mass hysteria so politicians like Chuck schumer, Nancy pelosi and Harry Reid can pass their little pet projects.

I'm starting to not hate Obama, I'm starting to pity him. I'm also beginning to think he was just a puppet for certain politicians.

Edit: I think we had a communication error Blind_assassin. When I said that we didn't have the money. I meant that the money didn't physically exist in the world. The Government actually had to print up money for both "stimulus" bills between Bush & Obama. So our Federal Government just decided to make more money (anybody who stayed awake in their economics class would realize the problem with printing 1 trillion dollars at once).

Is illegal immigrants really a problem?

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/47978

But seriously, Mexico is a mess. Their government is corrupt and American businesses would not want us to invade since they use them for a lot of cheap labor (especially the aircraft industry, they have sent tons of wire bundle jobs to Mexico because of the cheap labor). Besides, why should we invade unless they are a threat to fall to communism and threaten our borders?

"I hate these Mexicans, always coming back here to Mexico from America and taking American jobs from the Mexicans who stayed in Mexico,"

Copy/pasted from a quote in the article above poster linked.

Much lulz was had from me at how situation is reversed.

Why don't Mexico just request to become a state of usa and be over with it?

That way I'd get to visit mexico without hassles.

You guys know that The Onion is fake, right? It's not true.