Discussion in 'Politics' started by Conservative, Mar 16, 2012.
How Stimulus Fails - Reason Magazine
That's right, it isn't hard. All you have to do is assign to it a mission, and hence a criterion for success, that it never had. Presto, change-o! Instant failure.
It's not only hard, but impossible, to be HONEST while making that case. But making the case, if one is sufficiently dishonest to do so, is indeed easy.
.....Until, of course, REPUBLICANS put THEIR names on those checks.....
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w894xqReOdo]Rachel Maddow Exposes Republican Hypocrisy For What It Is......BS.flv - YouTube[/ame]
You Teabaggers make this toooooooooooooo easy!!
The GOP alternative was a 700+ billion stimulus plan that only differed marginally by its percentage of tax cuts vs. spending -
so you were going to get one no matter who was president.
Most of those premises and arguments are ridiculously fallacious.
If a stimulus puts 100 construction workers to work on an infrastructure project in a certain area, but in the meantime 200 construction workers in the same area are laid off because of the private sector housing bust,
are you going to claim that the stimulus failed because the area lost 100 jobs?
A proper stimulus plan would work as follows:
1. As the economy slows down, UE goes up and workers become available
2. The government borrows money to hire people and buy goods for projects such as infrastructure that need to be done anyway. That accomplishes 2 positive things - keeps people working and gets some worthwhile things done.
3. As the economy recovers, the government must pay back the money it borrowed with tax revenues, to clean up the balance sheet for the next time a stimulus would be appropriate.
Yeah but I'm pretty sure unemployed voters will remember that when Barry & Co. eventually laughed about all the shovel-ready jobs that really didn't exist they weren't overly loud and obnoxious about it. You know, kind of how folks usually laugh about an inside joke.
Ok, Dragon...since you've made the charge...what was the "mission" of the stimulus...other than to stimulate the economy and create jobs?
What's happened SINCE the stimulus was approved is an attempt by progressives to change the criteria from stimulating the economy to "saving" jobs because the stimulus really didn't create many jobs...it just kept an awful lot of public sector union people from getting laid off while it ignored the plight of those in the private sector (other than extending their jobless benefits). Instead of simply looking at whether or not the Obama stimulus created jobs and grew the economy...you progressives have taken a "fall back" position that the stimulus saved us from going into a second Great Depression and saved millions of jobs. Two things that are almost impossible to prove or disprove...in contrast to whether or not it created more jobs. Saying the stimulus prevented a second Great Depression is a stretch...TARP had a much bigger effect on staving off a depression than the Obama stimulus ever did. Now you CAN say that the stimulus "saved" jobs. Perhaps it would have been more aptly named the "Save Public Sector Union Jobs Bill" because those, for the main part are the jobs that it saved. What it DIDN'T do...and why it ultimately has to be seen as a failure of epic proportions...is to create jobs...especially jobs that lasted.
When you really look at where the money went ie failed solar projects, unions, etc., you can see why it didn't work. Its time for new ideas other than more stimuli.
I'm going to make that claim if the project that was "supposed" to put the 100 contruction workers to work was abandoned because it wasn't shovel ready and instead the money that was supposed to be spent on that was used to prop up State and local government payrolls or spent on green energy programs like Solyndra's that resulted in a further LOSS of jobs.
Separate names with a comma.