A great way to connect the debate on this proposed $900B spending bill is to ask people what they would do with their own finances.
"If times are tight for you, do you address the problem by spending more or less money?"
Judging from the state of the economy, I'd safely say people are spending less money, hence all these layoffs. Fewer people are buying goods and services, so excess capacity gets cut out. Fewer calls, fewer call agents.
The only exception to this rule is if the money is going to be spent with the expectation that it will help you solve your money tightness problem. Things like going back to school or investing in new capital are examples. Spending must be justified. And we know in the household that the bar is high. You really GOT to make your case.
So why don't these rules apply to Congress?