Brown: Stimulus Did Not Create One Job

[Yurt]

lmao....nycarb would have you believe that losing $1000 a day is ok, so long as you at least make $1 dollar a day

its actually not funny, it is partisan politics bullshit....i highly doubt nycarb or other libs tried to give bush credit for saving or creatign jobs when jobs were diminishing by the hundreds of thousands under his watch....oh no, bush actually gets the blame for losing those jobs......while the messiah gets the credit, a full year later, for merely "saving or creating" jobs....

the partisan hackery on this is beyond comprehension

 

[Titanic Sailor]

Oh geez, don't take it personal. Some people's mission in life is to be a complete ass hole. See RW for reference information.

Scott Brown baby!!!!

 

[rdean]

It created Scott Brown's job.

Hey, you know something really funny? One of the big reasons Brown was elected was because of "jobs, jobs, jobs". You know he is going to vote AGAINST the new "jobs" package?

So which month has the nation seen job growth since and including february 2009? Just wondering

Jobs are always a lagging indicator. Historically, it goes like this:

Democrats in office - Budget surplus

Republicans voted into office - enormous deficit - tax cuts for rich - jobs moved overseas

Democrats voted back into office - American impatient - Democrats work to fix the economy - jobs start to come back but slowly

A few Republicans voted back in - Republicans block fixing Republican mess - nation understands - vote in more Democrats

Democrats once again create a budget surplus - nation becomes complacent

Republcians once again voted back in - immediately begin to ruin the economy - history repeats.

 

[beowolfe]

hmmm...I have two more employees than I had before the stimulus and it is quite possible the stimulus made that possible.

So, IMO, Brown is incorrect, naive, or a liar.

Siince he was a state legislator and has probably voted to spend state funds on economic development projects with the express purpose of creating jobs in his home state; I'd say he's the latter; a liar.

And why republicans choose to support people who tell them bald faced lies about policies is beyond me!!

 

[potter 58]

and on his first day in a new job, way to go Scotty , you lying asshole

 

[Yurt]

hmmm...I have two more employees than I had before the stimulus and it is quite possible the stimulus made that possible.

So, IMO, Brown is incorrect, naive, or a liar.

private or public? and when did this business start and why do you think the so called stimulus money helped?

thank you ravi.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

If the market didn't create a job then there's a reason for that, and government "creating" that job will destroy other jobs and misallocate resources.

Not necessarily. The 'free market' as the term is oft used might not create create a market for a new Humvee, a new rocket, or new body armour, but the State can create the market by announcing its need for the military. The military also pays soldiers, drivers, and others within its ranks, thereby creating jobs, but careers, as well as a market for good that would not otherwise be in demand in significant quantity.

None of which is beneficial to the private market. What do private citizens need rockets, body armor, or a humvee for? There is no market for it, therefore it doesn't help the economy.

Does not the money go to company? Does it not then pay the workers there? Do those workers not then take their money and put it back into the private market when they buy milk, eggs, and bread for their family?

So long as the company and its workers are in the US, the money goes back into the US economy and cycles through like any other wealth.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

What does that mean , exactly, 'saved or created'?

How, after the first month or so, do they estimate what job losses would have been if the stimulus hadn't been passed?

anyone?

Anyone at all?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Not necessarily. The 'free market' as the term is oft used might not create create a market for a new Humvee, a new rocket, or new body armour, but the State can create the market by announcing its need for the military. The military also pays soldiers, drivers, and others within its ranks, thereby creating jobs, but careers, as well as a market for good that would not otherwise be in demand in significant quantity.

None of which is beneficial to the private market. What do private citizens need rockets, body armor, or a humvee for? There is no market for it, therefore it doesn't help the economy.

Does not the money go to company? Does it not then pay the workers there? Do those workers not then take their money and put it back into the private market when they buy milk, eggs, and bread for their family?

So long as the company and its workers are in the US, the money goes back into the US economy and cycles through like any other wealth.

Government taking money out of the private sector and then redistributing it where it doesn't belong hurts the economy. I'm sure you're aware of the broken window fallacy?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Government taking money out of the private sector and then redistributing it where it doesn't belong hurts the economy

And you are the god to determine where money 'belongs' in the market?

Whether a State, another corporation, or an individual buys a product makes no difference. Is not the State merely the People taken collectively, much as the Market itself is?

I've demonstrated how the money returns to the market and how employees can benefit in the meantime. Merely repeating your assertions is not a rebuttal.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Government taking money out of the private sector and then redistributing it where it doesn't belong hurts the economy

And you are the god to determine where money 'belongs' in the market?

Whether a State, another corporation, or an individual buys a product makes no difference. Is not the State merely the People taken collectively, much as the Market itself is?

I've demonstrated how the money returns to the market and how employees can benefit in the meantime. Merely repeating your assertions is not a rebuttal.

No, I'm not, but neither is the government. Only the market can decide where that money belongs, and government taking that money and putting it somewhere it wouldn't ordinarily go is not the market at work.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

If the gov't is purchasing things from companies, it is but another part of the market- another consumer.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

What does that mean , exactly, 'saved or created'?

How, after the first month or so, do they estimate what job losses would have been if the stimulus hadn't been passed?

anyone?

Anyone at all?

Nobody?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If the gov't is purchasing things from companies, it is but another part of the market- another consumer.

No, because the government doesn't act within the market. It doesn't provide a service or product and then receive payment, it collects its revenue by taking it through force from those who do provide services or products.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

If the gov't is purchasing things from companies, it is but another part of the market- another consumer.

No, because the government doesn't act within the market. It doesn't provide a service or product and then receive payment, it collects its revenue by taking it through force from those who do provide services or products.

It does provide services: the military, police, fire and medical emergency response, and other services are provided by government agencies. It is 'paid' in that the funds needed are provided by the People. Unless you're telling us you haven't been paying your taxes, Kev.


You're trying to change the issue, btw. Whether you approve of the govt's actions is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You said the Fed cannot create jobs. I've shown that everyone who works for the Fed disproves your statement. You claimed the Fed is a blackhole from which no money ever returns to the market. I showed that to be false. Why do you change the subject everytime I refute your assertions, instead of ever rebutting my case?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Everything I'm saying ties back to the same point. Government spending doesn't help the economy in any way shape or form, you claim to be an Austrian adherent but somehow miss this critical point. No where did I say that the government is a black hole where no money ever returns to the market. I've simply and consistently pointed out that taking money out of the private sector and then spending it somewhere else is harmful to the economy. As for not creating jobs, the government can't create jobs. To "create" a job the government must take money out of the private sector, which is where real wealth and real jobs are created, and use that money to create a job that the market was not calling for and thus misallocate resources.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Everything I'm saying ties back to the same point. Government spending doesn't help the economy in any way shape or form,

The military has never benefited the people it was defending?

 

[SwingVoter]

White House says

Robert Gibbs and the Obamabot PR machine thank you for actually referencing their data and choosing not to think for yourself

 

[rightwinger]

White House says

Robert Gibbs and the Obamabot PR machine thank you for actually referencing their data and choosing not to think for yourself

You are welcome to present data that shows no jobs were created..

Its a free country...I'll wait

 

[SwingVoter]

It was a government bailout bill.

Exactly, Obama wanted to do something for the unions after it became clear card check had no chance.