On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Informally referred to as “the stimulus package,” it’s a monster, running 407 pages and providing for $787 billion to, well, stimulate the economy. As laws go, at almost $2 billion per page, it is probably the most expensive act signed into law.

According to a press release issued by the House Appropriations Committee, all of this spending is focused on the following goals: “clean, efficient, American energy, transforming our economy with science and technology, modernizing roads, bridges, transit, and waterways, education for the 21^st century, tax cuts to make work pay, lowering healthcare costs, helping workers hurt by the economy, and saving public sector jobs.” Many observers feel that the law fundamentally reshapes the U.S. government’s role in the economy, healthcare, energy usage and policies, and financial systems. It is worth noting that it passed without a single GOP vote in the House of Representatives and won the votes of only three out of forty-one GOP senators.

Even before it was signed into law, the stimulus package seemed to offer economic hope to one particularly threatened group: the newspaper industry. Reversing a long downward trend of reduced advertising revenues, alternative groups of economists took out full-page advertisements at first condemning the bill and then praising it. The first advertisement listed two-hundred economists who opposed the legislation and urged the U.S. government to “focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, savings, investment, and production.” Shortly thereafter, another two-hundred economists took out full-page advertisements praising the plan, saying that it “proposes important investments that can start to overcome the nation’s damaging loss of jobs,” and that it would “put the United States back onto a sustainable long-term growth path.” What’s most impressive about these advertisements is that someone (two “someones” actually) was able to get two-hundred economists to agree on something. Twice. Given what most people feel is the seriousness of the current recession, it is not surprising that the stimulus package would attract the attention that it has. Google cites over seventy million references and that excludes all of the references to male stimulants and enhancements. For those readers who might be inclined to believe that seventy million references portends an increase in participatory democracy, this news is less encouraging: a Google search for “Britney Spears” yields almost ninety million references. Still, it’s a start.

But let’s get to the question that you’re most interested in: how will this package affect you? The stimulus package itself will probably have minimal direct effect. However, President Obama’s proposed changes to the tax code—specifically as regards marginal tax rates, capital gains taxes, dividend taxation, and (reduced) allowances for deductions, such as charitable giving—will increase federal income taxes to help pay for the package and increased spending for healthcare, education, et cetera, and likely will impact you, dear reader. While many “who have” feel that this amounts to doing their fair share for the good of all, others disagree, contending this is not the most effective way to solve the nation’s financial woes.

The package itself provides for a number of incentives (none of them likely to much inspire those of you affected by the above-mentioned tax increases, but let’s give a try). Buying your first home? You may qualify for an $8,000 tax credit and cut the cost of your newly purchased townhome on Russian Hill from $2.5 million to $2.492 million. Decided to conserve energy on your new palace by installing $10,000 of double-pane windows? You may qualify for a $1,500 credit. Did you lose your job as head bond trader and Master of the Universe and are now collecting unemployment insurance? The good news is that you now can exclude the first $2,400 from taxable income. Purchased a new Aston Martin? You may be able to include a portion of the sales tax as an itemized expense, but please consult your tax adviser first.

Individually, none of the benefits of the stimulus package will lift the country out of its economic turmoil; actually, collectively, they probably won’t lift the country from recession to growth either.

But, our roads should be smoother. A recent issue of the San Francisco Chronicle featured several stories picturing numerous public officials touting how they would use monies received from the stimulus package. A favorite item was road repair, er, sorry, “infrastructure improvement and enhancement.” Clearly, the road to economic recovery is paved, excuse me, repaved with good intentions (and lots of tax dollars). Over $45 billion has been allocated for roads, bridges, railways, and other transportation. Still, it is more likely that the $1 billion (out of $147 billion for all healthcare categories) that is allocated for “prevention and wellness” will affect you more than all of this infrastructure investment. Imagine how many advertisements, commercials, internet pop-ups extolling you to “wash your hands,” “eat all of your vegetables,” and “cut down on sweets” can be bought for $1 billion.

Oh, and don’t forget the internet. There is over $7 billion allocated for “complete broadband and wireless Internet access.” Wherever you live, by the time this money is spent, you will be able to get good, fast, reliable Internet access. Imagining that somewhere, some recipient of this newly improved coverage won’t appreciate how it will lift our economy back into growth and educate our youth? Not to worry, the stimulus package thought of that too: $250 million has been set aside for “innovative programs to increase and encourage sustainable broadband adoption.” I heard a rumor that $100 million of those funds will be given to teenagers to tutor adults in the joy of sending Twitter messages, and another $100 million will be used to teach children how to increase the number of Facebook “friends.” While both rumors are entirely unsubstantiated, one thing is absolutely predictable: With increased broadband usage, Britney Spears is going to get a lot more attention.

Sandra Stohler is a consultant for Jesup & Lamont Security, Inc. in San Francisco. She recently moved from Switzerland where she was with UBS Wealth Management Consulting in Zurich.