2009 Atlasian Economic Relief and Recovery Bill (Law'd)

[Purple State]

Christ almighty. Can we do these things on days when I can use a freaking computer? That way I don't have to come back to a ton of reading after a long day.

I will review as much as possible tonight and try to post something competent later or tomorrow morning.

[Purple State]

Internal investment is best, but we need to make sure we are getting the most for our money with this package. Spending far too much just so we can pay an inefficient American contractor doesn't allow the bad companies to die. So, rather than simply repealing the "Buy America" clause, how is this?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

Internal investment is best, but we need to make sure we are getting the most for our money with this package. Spending far too much just so we can pay an inefficient American contractor doesn't allow the bad companies to die. So, rather than simply repealing the "Buy America" clause, how is this?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think this is acceptable.

I am leaning towards accepting this and withdrawing mine, however I shall need to ponder it for a short while. In the mean time, Marokai, would you be willing add a section dealing with the credit crisis or would prefer to do that in a separate bill?

Compromise ain't so bad, eh?

I think a separate bill for the credit crisis would be in order.

I do think that this bill is far too small. I would like to see it reach closer to $1 trillion, with the added expenditures all placed in the Infrastructure Investment section.

[Purple State]

I agree with the spending proposed by NC Yank, in addition to a massive alternative energy construction funding.

[Purple State]

I agree with the spending proposed by NC Yank, in addition to a massive alternative energy construction funding.

And should we build massive wind farms and arrays of solar panels throughout the deserts, who would get ownership of these things and the electricity they produce? I would prefer the creation of government-owned utilities..

I think partnerships would be appropriate. What is the incentive for private organizations to establish these things if they don't profit? It would also, long-run, greatly expand the government's expenses to run these things. We need to promote private innovation and construction, but possibly in a joint venture with the government until our share is bought out.

[Purple State]

I agree with the spending proposed by NC Yank, in addition to a massive alternative energy construction funding.

And should we build massive wind farms and arrays of solar panels throughout the deserts, who would get ownership of these things and the electricity they produce? I would prefer the creation of government-owned utilities..

I think partnerships would be appropriate. What is the incentive for private organizations to establish these things if they don't profit? It would also, long-run, greatly expand the government's expenses to run these things. We need to promote private innovation and construction, but possibly in a joint venture with the government until our share is bought out.

I see your point, but we still retain things like the Tennessee Valley Authority, which has remained a fair and competitive government owned power company, and there are other renewable examples to look at, like Hydro-Quebec, as successful programs that are incredibly innovative.

Yes, I can read your sig well enough on my own.

While those examples are nice, they are not nearly on the scale that the renewable energy projects would be. There are also people (T. Boone Pickens) that are ready and willing to tap into their vast networks to build these things cheaply and effectively. We are far better off going into partnership with these guys and promoting private investment. Otherwise, these costs will not be stimulative, but rather permanent debt that we will continue to pay forever.

It would also, long-run, greatly expand the government's expenses to run these things.

Long-run, government would make money from those utilities. We must see that as a new revenue source for Atlasia. Joint ventures often cause money loss for the government. We must choose the better way to use the taxpayer's money.

I'm not sure what your source for the joint-venture claim is, but it is also best that we not put all our eggs in one basket. What if the initiative is a relative failure? Should we take the brunt of it on our own? The private sector should be involved.

[Purple State]

As for my amendment on the "Buy Atlasian" provisions  I have decided to..................persue a vote on it. Should it fail I will vote for PS amendment and be done with it.

I'll be voting against that in favor of what I hope is my more sensible, efficient amendment.

[Purple State]

Nay. My compromise is far superior to simply cutting this.

[Purple State]

I propose the following amendment to be added to the queue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

I propose the following amendment to be added to the queue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would probably support this. It brings the total to about one Trillion and deals with some of my pet causes. Though, shouldn't we include language allowing for those Public and Private partnerships. Cause the grid needed to transport the power from the Wind and Solar in the Southwest and Midwest to the Coasts costs about $100 Billion. Plus you have to clear the corridors on which to build them which means buying property from people and tearing down existing structures. So a few billion for that has to come from the Gov't share and I don't believe it counts toward the overall $100 Billion. So you probably have to raise about $55 Billion to $60 Billion from private investment to get the job done on top of the $50 Billion appropriated as part of your amendment. This is according to what T Boone Pickens told a Congressional hearing last July or August on this issue.

Because of the sensitivity of that proposal, I would rather that be done in a separate amendment, rather than jeopardize the other spending proposals put forth. Feel free to write up what you believe would be appropriate and present it as a separate amendment.

[Purple State]

That certainly has my complete support. Clause J, especially, as that will include purchases from Atlasian auto-makers.

Thats why I intially suggested it, but I never thought I could get you guys to go along with it.

I have a suggestion, how about squeezing in a few billion more for light Rail and modernising the power grid. Another one I could suggest but I can guess your reaction is a few billion for replacing or repairing military equiptment.

Why would I have a problem with necessary military spending? I included it because you proposed it.

[Purple State]

Let me just point out that we are currently tied at 4-4 because afleitch is away and Fritz is not yet sworn in (can someone explain why that is? is the election not yet closed by the SoFA?). Wouldn't a proxy vote system have helped us a lot in such a situation? Hmm...

[Purple State]

I'd like to applaud the Senate for really debating this bill in depth and offering constructive amendments. I worked with Senators Marokai Blue and MaxQue to write a bill that would provide the foundation for an economy recovery, by giving much needed relief to struggling families and regional/local governments and getting the economy moving again, by employing out of work Atlasians in projects that won't just put them back to work but lead to a stronger economy and a stronger country in the long run.

I fully support Senators Purple State's and North Carolina Yankee's amendments to increase infrastructure spending, and I hope that the Senate adds them to the bill.

I thank the President for his support.

As do I and I will continue to work on this legislation to ensure that we properly stimulate the economy and ensure a proper economic recovery.

[Purple State]

As my first act as Senator: Nay to the current amendment, in favor of the Purple State alternative.

Bravo! Good to have the Senate full again finally.

[Purple State]

I believe the queue for amendments is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

Aye ftr.

I believe this one is next:

I propose the following amendment to be added to the queue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Purple State, a few words please as to your intent with this amendment?

I don't think the stimulus, as written, is large enough to result in the desired speedy job recovery. We need to make sure that the massive reductions in private investments as a result of the downturn are replaced by government expenditures in the short run.

[Purple State]

Aye on my amendment ftr.

[Purple State]

I would like the automakers to have the option of asking for a government assisted takeover and bankruptcy. $5 billion isn't nearly enough for them.

[Purple State]

I'll agree to raising the amount to $10 billion, as proposed by Marokai.....but I'm not open to any form of nationalization.

If we can't guarantee that a bankruptcy will not result in some surviving company it could further exacerbate the economic situation. The best option is to stay out until bankruptcy is necessary, but if/when they enter into court proceedings the government should step in and ensure the company emerges leaner, more competitive, but intact.

[Purple State]

My only problem with letting carmakers fail in the current economic environment is that weakness during such a major recession does not necessarily indicate general weakness. Few could have predicted the need to weather such a storm and the crisis wasn't started in the auto companies. People who may want cars are scared or can't get a loan to buy a car simply because of the troubles in the loan markets. So the current demand for cars does not reflect what it would be if people could get proper funds. They don't deserve to fail in such a climate.

[Purple State]

Aye

My only problem with letting carmakers fail in the current economic environment is that weakness during such a major recession does not necessarily indicate general weakness. Few could have predicted the need to weather such a storm and the crisis wasn't started in the auto companies. People who may want cars are scared or can't get a loan to buy a car simply because of the troubles in the loan markets. So the current demand for cars does not reflect what it would be if people could get proper funds. They don't deserve to fail in such a climate.

Seems pretty clear actually....Ford made good economic decisions, and is now able to sell products that are up to international standards, and GM made poor economic decisions, clinging for too long to gas guzzling cars (like the Hummer).

I think GM clearly does deserve to fail in such a climate.

I understand that and I applaud Ford for its success, but I don't think that these companies should all be liquidated because they couldn't prepare for economic catastrophe. This is why I don't support a government bailout for these companies, but rather a government-assisted bankruptcy that allows the companies to be acquired by others or lean down to a more bare-bones but viable company.

[Purple State]

Aye

We can raise it to 10 billion in another amendment.

[Purple State]

Where in the world is Carmen Master San ahem Jedi.

EDIT: Although really, where are 5 senators who still need to vote?

[Purple State]

What is the amendment queue on this bill? Do we have any more pending?

[Purple State]

Aye