If the stimulus package savad millions of jobs ??

[Mr.Nick]

It doesn't matter either way DontBeStupid

1. Unemployment is still well over what it was when obama took office
2. Our GDP growth is well below what it was when obama took office
3. Our national debt is 30% higher than it was when Obama took office
4. Our Congress has yet to pass an actual budget since obama took office.
5. GDP is growing slower than inflation since obama took office.

It just looks bad for this administration no matter how you spin it.

FYI
our gdp growth rate has increased since obama took office till now.....january 2009 gdp growth rate was what he was left with and had to beat...as far as i can tell?

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/united-states-gdp-growth-rate.png

Wow, and when has it decreased?

Obama just stunted the average growth...

Besides the GDP has always been nothing more than projections...

 

[DontBeStupid]

It doesn't matter either way DontBeStupid

1. Unemployment is still well over what it was when obama took office
2. Our GDP growth is well below what it was when obama took office
3. Our national debt is 30% higher than it was when Obama took office
4. Our Congress has yet to pass an actual budget since obama took office.
5. GDP is growing slower than inflation since obama took office.

It just looks bad for this administration no matter how you spin it.

1) True.
2) False. GDP has been growing since 2009Q2.
3) True.
4) False. Obama submitted a budget in February 2009 and it was passed in July of that year.
5) Neutral. It changes from quarter to quarter, so you could easily show one where this is true and I could show one where it's false.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Besides the GDP has always been nothing more than projections...

Until, you know, it becomes an actual.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Besides the GDP has always been nothing more than projections...

Until, you know, it becomes an actual.

I used to believe that...

When I was 10 I used to believe the CBO was honest too.

We only lost our triple A S&P rating yet we're allegedly a growing nation?

 

[Care4all]

It doesn't matter either way DontBeStupid

1. Unemployment is still well over what it was when obama took office
2. Our GDP growth is well below what it was when obama took office
3. Our national debt is 30% higher than it was when Obama took office
4. Our Congress has yet to pass an actual budget since obama took office.
5. GDP is growing slower than inflation since obama took office.

It just looks bad for this administration no matter how you spin it.

FYI
our gdp growth rate has increased since obama took office till now.....january 2009 gdp growth rate was what he was left with and had to beat...as far as i can tell?

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/united-states-gdp-growth-rate.png

Wow, and when has it decreased?

Obama just stunted the average growth...

Besides the GDP has always been nothing more than projections...

gdp has increased every quarter since 1st qtr 2009

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2011/pdf/gdp2q11_2nd_fax.pdf

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"A new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) increased the number of people employed by between 1.0 million and 2.9 million jobs as of June.

In other words, between 1.0 million and 2.9 million people employed in June owed their jobs to the Recovery Act."

WINNING WITH
OBAMA!!!​

. . . . ​

 

[asterism]

This is interesting:

Table S-8 of the Budget proposed by Obama in February 2009 assumes an average unemployment rate of 8.1%

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/def...2010_new_era/A_New_Era_of_Responsibility2.pdf

 

[Mr.Nick]

FYI
our gdp growth rate has increased since obama took office till now.....january 2009 gdp growth rate was what he was left with and had to beat...as far as i can tell?

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/united-states-gdp-growth-rate.png

Wow, and when has it decreased?

Obama just stunted the average growth...

Besides the GDP has always been nothing more than projections...

gdp has increased every quarter since 1st qtr 2009

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2011/pdf/gdp2q11_2nd_fax.pdf

When did it decrease?

 

[DontBeStupid]

Wow, and when has it decreased?

Obama just stunted the average growth...

Besides the GDP has always been nothing more than projections...

gdp has increased every quarter since 1st qtr 2009

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2011/pdf/gdp2q11_2nd_fax.pdf

When did it decrease?

Asked and answered.

The last time it decreased was in 2009Q1 and before that 2008Q4.

 

[Mr.Nick]

gdp has increased every quarter since 1st qtr 2009

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2011/pdf/gdp2q11_2nd_fax.pdf

When did it decrease?

Asked and answered.

The last time it decreased was in 2009Q1 and before that 2008Q4.

I'm talking about growth...

9 minus 7 is still 2 not negative 1.

Of course I know the economy has NOT grown and cannot grow with a 10% unemployment rate.

However progressives believe that is possible.

 

[DontBeStupid]

When did it decrease?

Asked and answered.

The last time it decreased was in 2009Q1 and before that 2008Q4.

I'm talking about growth...

9 minus 7 is still 2 not negative 1.

Of course I know the economy has NOT grown and cannot grow with a 10% unemployment rate.

However progressives believe that is possible.

/sigh

If the economy grew 4% one quarter and 2% the next quarter, did the size of the economy decrease?

 

[asterism]

I didn't omit the footnotes. They are right there in the report.

Oh! You just omitted them from your post then. Yeah, that's probably best since it proves my point and all.

How? The projection was made.

She didn't articulate the footnotes when she used the graph on TV to convince the public to fund her plan.

She was on TV saying this? Well then, should be easy for you to link to that interview so we can once and for all hear her promise the 8% number!

I await the link.

Thanks.

How can I link to a TV appearance unless someone has posted it somewhere? I watched it live. It was a press conference with her standing in front of that chart.

Regardless, I found something more substantial that you can't refute. Obama himself released a budget that had the average projected unemployment rate for 2009 at 8.1%.

 

[FA_Q2]

And then there is the size, 1 TRILLION dollars is small!!! REALLY!!!! What would you consider large?

The Recovery Act was $787B over 2 years. Using 2005 dollars, that would be an increase of 3% of our GDP per year if every part of the Recovery Act was spending, which we know it wasn't, so the actual percentage is lower. In 2008Q4 GDP had dropped 8% and in 2009Q1 it had dropped 6.7%.

I figure it needed to be twice the size with a lot less tax cuts.

Yes, I would wonder. What is wrong with being independent? You can bash those that are asinine enough to hate Perry without having a reason or simply calling him a Bush III but bashing all independents...

That's no different than what you are complaining about...

 

[FA_Q2]

I didn't omit the footnotes. They are right there in the report.

Oh! You just omitted them from your post then. Yeah, that's probably best since it proves my point and all.

How? The projection was made.

She didn't articulate the footnotes when she used the graph on TV to convince the public to fund her plan.

She was on TV saying this? Well then, should be easy for you to link to that interview so we can once and for all hear her promise the 8% number!

I await the link.

Thanks.

How can I link to a TV appearance unless someone has posted it somewhere? I watched it live. It was a press conference with her standing in front of that chart.

Regardless, I found something more substantial that you can't refute. Obama himself released a budget that had the average projected unemployment rate for 2009 at 8.1%.

You tube anyone....

EVERYTHING that is produced on TV ends up on you tube.

 

[asterism]

Oh! You just omitted them from your post then. Yeah, that's probably best since it proves my point and all.

How? The projection was made.

She was on TV saying this? Well then, should be easy for you to link to that interview so we can once and for all hear her promise the 8% number!

I await the link.

Thanks.

How can I link to a TV appearance unless someone has posted it somewhere? I watched it live. It was a press conference with her standing in front of that chart.

Regardless, I found something more substantial that you can't refute. Obama himself released a budget that had the average projected unemployment rate for 2009 at 8.1%.

You tube anyone....

EVERYTHING that is produced on TV ends up on you tube.

So so you're saying if it's not on YouTube it didn't happen?

 

[FA_Q2]

How? The projection was made.



How can I link to a TV appearance unless someone has posted it somewhere? I watched it live. It was a press conference with her standing in front of that chart.

Regardless, I found something more substantial that you can't refute. Obama himself released a budget that had the average projected unemployment rate for 2009 at 8.1%.

You tube anyone....

EVERYTHING that is produced on TV ends up on you tube.

So so you're saying if it's not on YouTube it didn't happen?

Basically, that's the jist of it. At least it can't be proven that it happened and DontBeStupid seems pretty sure about this. Almost anything of that nature makes it on youtube.


As a side mote, what she said is rather irrelevant to me. It is asinine of the others here to refute the chart that has already been shown as a simple prediction. It may have been but the entire bill was sold on that prediction. Further, it was not simply off. It was completely incorrect. A ballpark is at least expected and it was further off than that. By these same people, the ones that were so far off with the initial predictions, we are told that if the stimulus was not passed we would have been in worse shape. Why am I going to believe them now? When asked about the effects, no proof is given. There is nothing to prove. Nothing that shows any successes from the stimulus. We are simply to belive that 1-3 million jobs were 'saved.' Of course, saving jobs was not the point and was not what the stimulus was supposed to do. It was supposed to create jobs but after it was obvious that was not going to happen the goalposts were moved. Now, even that statistic is bunk. All I get is people returning to the CBO estimates that do not take any real world events into account at all. Just predictions...


It has been years, real effects are not visible.

 

[Neotrotsky]

since libbs like to make the unproven claim that if left had not shoved the the trillion dollar stimulus package down unwilling Americans throats millions of more jobs would have been lost .....can't repubs make the same argument that if we would not have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan millions of American lives would have been lost to terror attacks ??

actually, this is a valid point.

If you recall, many on the right said "thanks to Bush, we were safe for 7 yerars after 9-11.

And the left said "prove it had anything to do with Bush"

So you are correct...typical hypocrisy now as the left takes claim for things "not being worse than they are"

The left is using the "chocolate rations have gone up" approach

A common process by most statists

 

[yidnar]

since libbs like to make the unproven claim that if left had not shoved the the trillion dollar stimulus package down unwilling Americans throats millions of more jobs would have been lost .....can't repubs make the same argument that if we would not have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan millions of American lives would have been lost to terror attacks ??

 

[NYcarbineer]

since libbs like to make the unproven claim that if left had not shoved the the trillion dollar stimulus package down unwilling Americans throats millions of more jobs would have been lost .....can't repubs make the same argument that if we would not have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan millions of American lives would have been lost to terror attacks ??

We invaded Afghanistan because the perpetrators OF an attack were there.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It doesn't matter either way DontBeStupid

1. Unemployment is still well over what it was when obama took office
2. Our GDP growth is well below what it was when obama took office
3. Our national debt is 30% higher than it was when Obama took office
4. Our Congress has yet to pass an actual budget since obama took office.
5. GDP is growing slower than inflation since obama took office.

It just looks bad for this administration no matter how you spin it.

I'm not seeing where our GDP growth is now below where it was when Obama took office.

Why don't you point that out to us: