Obama's stimulus plan

OK, so this isn't a post on LOST - it's a reaction to Obama's stimulus package. You're probably thinking "wtf, this has nothing to do with the island. Where is this coming from?" To answer your question, I'm so disappointed by Obama's economic plan that I felt compelled to write about it. Passed today, the $825 billion plan will spend $275 billion on tax cuts, $87 billion on Medicaid, $79 billion on a state fiscal stabilization fund, upwards of $30 billion on infrastructure, $140 billion on education, $20 billion on school renovations, $20 billion on food stamps, and $43 billion on unemployment benefits.
My dissatisfaction stems primarily from the tax cuts, which make up 1/3 of the bill. First, what good are these cuts going to bring? The tax cuts will manifest in the form of stimulus checks much like those Bush administered last year. The plan provides a tax cut of $500 for individuals earning up to $75,000 and $1,000 for families earning up to $150,000. $500 is nice, but how far will it go? It's a temporary sense of security. There are many things that I need that cost far beyond $500 and haven't amassed any credit card debt, nor do I have a mortgage or car note to pay off. The way I see it, these tax cuts are a band-aid solution that give people false hope and comfort. Secondly, where's the change? Tax cuts are a Bush era "solution." The last stimulus checks only raised spending and GDP by a small fraction of a percentage. People were afraid about the future of the economy and their ability to support themselves. By and large they held onto their money instead of investing it on things we need.
It's here that I take the greatest issue with the stimulus package. So we're spending $275 billion (holy shit) on tax cuts that may not do any long-term good, whereas we're only spending $30 billion on infrastructure. This country's infrastructure is falling apart and seriously in need of funding. We could all greatly benefit from more, cleaner, and faster public transportation (e.g. High Speed Rails); even though I'm anti-driving, our highways are in need of repair; we should probably check out our bridges so that we don't see another collapse like that in Minnesota last year. I think people would be OK with not getting $500 or $1000 if it meant greater security and peace of mind when driving their kids to school. How about reducing the impacts of global warming through public transportation? What about creating jobs through these infrastructural projects to give people more than $500?
What about education? I know education is a local expenditure, but that system terribly needs reform. I also believe it's an area that could greatly benefit from national standards. No Child Left Behind was an utter disaster, but that's because it was poorly structured. By all means we should have national standards of achievement, but those places that don't meet the standards should not lose funding to reward those that do. The reason there are such high levels of underachievement across the country is because many school districts lack the funding to hire good teachers. Numerous studies have shown that highly qualified teachers are the key to student achievement. (I have interesting stories to back up my point but I realize I'm starting to carry on a bit...) If we spend our money on education and enact a plan that helps those in need instead of rewarding the wealthy then we could very easily begin to narrow the achievement gap across the country.
Anyway, there are a lot of things we could do with 275 BILLION DOLLARS, but giving out tax cuts is one of the least productive. That money is going to disappear and there is going to be little to nothing to show for it. Obama won the hearts of many people this past election. We all looked forward to the promise of change (for the better) and expected him to make tough decisions that would pull us out of sink hole we fell in in 2001. Unfortunately, it looks like we'll have to struggle to stay afloat even longer.