Obama's Stimulas Package Was an Utter Failure and a Second Stimulas is Unacceptable

I will let my opponent start this debate. I would first like to set up a few ground rules.
No insults
No cussing
and please do not act like you are better than anyone else

First I would like to define the what I mean by Stimulas Package. I am talking about the multibillion dollar spending bill passed a few months ago by the Obama administration.

Please follow these rules and I challenge anyone who wants to take my debate.

Thank you

I am presuming that my opponent refers to this stimulus package: http://socialistworld.net.... If not, a link to the referenced package would be appreciated.

First off, the resolution contains two claims, both of which must be upheld by my opponent. Second, I'm not entirely convinced of the stimulus package's efficacy. However, it is only necessary for me to disprove one of my opponent's two claims. Ergo, I negate: "A Second Stimulas(sic) is Unacceptable".

unacceptable: not pleasing or welcome-Merriam-Webster

1. The Stimulus Package is essentially a gift of money, to states, businesses, and families. It is therefore quite pleasing and welcome. Would you be displeased by a gift of money?

2. The Stimulus package enjoyed widespread public support. A Gallup poll shows 59% in favor of the package, with only 33% opposed. Ergo, the public is pleased by said package, and welcomes it. [1]

[1] http://www.gallup.com...

I thank you for accepting my debate.

I am going to now argue against your two points.

1. The Stimulus Package is certainly NOT a gift of money of any sorts. The money is not free, it will have to be paid back by tax payer money so the money is not a gift. It is an extensive loan taken out by the government in the peoples' name. This stimulus package did nothing to stimulate anything in the economy. The money went straight from the reserves into government run programs. No new jobs were created, no new businesses were opened or stimulated. It is NOT a gift it was government funding for government programs. Not pleasing and unwelcome.

2. The public welcomed it before they saw how useless it turned out to be. They do not welcome it now, more recently it says that it lost major support and is now considered unfavorable.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com...

1. The Stimulus Package may be a loan, but much of the American public perceives it as a gift. The liberal administration shows no intent to lower the deficit during the current recession, and given past U.S. fiscal policy, it is unlikely that most American citizens alive today will be responsible for this financial burden. Though the Stimulus Package may not be fiscally sound, the American public will welcome, and be pleased by, the instant gratification brought by the Stimulus Package.

2. Oddly enough, my study was released after your own, and contains data prior to the others' publication.

1. But the American people are not seeing any of this money! Like I said earlier the money is going back into government programs so the American people as a whole are not seeing the benefits of any of this money. How can you welcome a gift that they are not seeing any part of? It is being spent on road signs in Michigan telling drivers which roads are being funded by Stimulus dollars. It's a big waste, how can you welcome a waste of money that isn't even being wasted on you.

2. That is odd, I'm going to do more research and I'll get back to you next round on that one.

1. Approximately 30% of the stimulus package consisted of direct rebates and tax cuts [2]. My opponent's point is clearly false.

2. For now, consider my argument extended. Also, public opinion aside, the Stimulus Package itself is undoubtedly pleasing. Only its long-term consequences may, or may not be welcome.

[2] http://www.savingtoinvest.com...

1. I have not seen any tax rebates or cuts in the middle class. The only group that got a tax rebate that I can see was the retirement class. People 65 and over got $500 each but that is not the middle class. America is defined by it's middle class which got no stimulus money or tax cuts.

2. How can it be pleasing when 90% of the money can't be spent until after 2010? That can't be pleasing now and today.

I would like to wrap up by saying that the first stimulus package obviously did not work. Barely anyone saw any of the money go anywhere and a second attempt at this is totally unacceptable. The first package can't even be spent until 2010 so why create a second one when the first one hasn't even taken full effect yet? The whole thing seems stupid and I encourage people to vote Pro. Thank you.

1. These tax rebates are occurring, I personally received one [3]. I'm entirely unaware of reasons why you would not have received one.

2. This contention was in no way answered. Please extend: "Public opinion favors the package. Ergo, it is pleasing and welcome".

"2". The expectation of money is certainly pleasing. Also, 100 billion dollars (1/10 of the package) certainly constitutes a pleasing, and welcome tax cut.

My opponent has not presented a case, as Pro. Further, he has not successfully rebutted my points. Thanks for reading, thanks for the debate, and Vote Con.

[3] http://www.usatoday.com...