It’s not hard to make the case that Obama’s $840 billion stimulus was a failure

[OohPooPahDoo]

Unemployment average 19% and never dipped below 14% from FDR's inauguration until Hitler conquered France 7 years later, when exactly did this government stimulus work?

It didn't work that well. The government stimulus before Hitler conquered France wasn't big enough. It was the one that happened after Pearl Harbor that was big enough to give everyone jobs and result in lasting growth within a few years.

They waited SIX FUCKING MONTHS BEFORE THEY STARTED SPENDING.

They then spent for TWELEVE FUCKING YEARS and things never got better.

Then they spent a ton more and things got better. Sorry, but the spending during WW II dwarfed the New Deal, any casual look at basic factual history will reveal this to you.

History. Sorry it doesn't jive with you.

Holy fucking shit... Like I said, ZERO accountability. Makes you wonder how Coolidge and Harding had a booming economy for 10 years that they had to pull out of a depression when they came into office... By NOT SPENDING. Ohhh, there are reasons, so many reasons.... But a 12 year depression under a Democrat and it's alllllll Small Government/low taxes fault. LOL, you can't make this shit up.

OMG!

BTW, they cut taxes and spending after the king FDR's 3 terms were over and we recovered... Something most forget, because that would destroy the entire theroy that spending and FDR saved America from the Depression that only last all 3 of his terms as President.

The top tax bracket during the booming 50's was 90%.

But hey - the boom during the late 40's and 50's I'm sure had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that every American who was willing to work had a big fat paycheck in their pocket. We all know its about the SUPPLY side, right?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The stimulus never met a single benchmark it set, not 1... Yet we still have to debate if it worked or not, fucking amazing. What did you people call Bush's stimulus? The X-box check... When Obama does a stimulus on a larger scale than Bush and fails to a degree that has never been seen before in the history of the world some people want to "debate" if the stimulus worked or not...

It didn't, it was never meant to.. It was there to make the rich richer and buy votes, the 2 "hidden" benchmarks that it actually did manage to meet in excess.

How come liberals can bash “trickle down economics” and call it a failure but Government printing money, borrowing it or stealing it from people who actually work to pay people that don’t work or make incredibly bad investments for near the WHOLE amount that the stimulus was is somehow up for debate? All it did was everything you claim the evil Reagan and Bush did with trickle down economics only in fast fucking forward because they literally just handed the money to who they wanted to have it rather than let it “trickle” there over years.

But this is the internet, everything I said is fact and never has to be accounted for in conversation, you get to jump to your next thought with zero accountabiluty for the stupid crap you said abd I and many others answered.

What were the benchmarks?

Are you kidding me? Were you 14 when it was pasted and not paying attention to politics?

OMG, sorry I wasn't paying attention to your arguments the past 20 years. its like, my fault that I'm asking you to provide evidence to back your claims, OMG, my bad!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

What were the benchmarks?

Are you kidding me? Were you 14 when it was pasted and not paying attention to politics?

This is just for starters, on topic and I never read it before I just used google at lightning speed.


The Obama Stimulus: Predictions vs. Reality « Political Math

1) You are good at providing links.
2) You are bad at formulating your own arguments and stating specifically which evidence backs them.

Therefore, I suggest you shut the fuck up and let righties with far better looking blogs than yours supply the links we all crave!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The stimulus was too small, as it was thought the economy retracted 3%, while it turned out to be 9%. The Dems thought they could always get more stimulus money- Scott Brown was a disaster, 2/2010, but at least it was enough to turn the economy around to a slow recovery, no thanks to Pubs...

**** Dems only had filibusterproof majority for 6 months- seems like a big secret in this Pub propaganda/cowardly corporate media era...

*** taxes and spending stayed high until Kennedy tax cuts...by the time FDR got in there was little to be done, just gave the afflicted SOME work/food/hope till WWII. Pubs CAUSED foolish 20's boom and BUST, made it worse with tariffs, their isolationism let German/Japan militarists run wild....ALWAYS dumbazz thieves...

Liar

Total Fucking liar.

Best thing now is even the Left is starting to admit that the New Deal was an Epic Fail

Stated with no evidence.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The stimulus never met a single benchmark it set, not 1... Yet we still have to debate if it worked or not, fucking amazing. What did you people call Bush's stimulus? The X-box check... When Obama does a stimulus on a larger scale than Bush and fails to a degree that has never been seen before in the history of the world some people want to "debate" if the stimulus worked or not...

It didn't, it was never meant to.. It was there to make the rich richer and buy votes, the 2 "hidden" benchmarks that it actually did manage to meet in excess.

How come liberals can bash “trickle down economics” and call it a failure but Government printing money, borrowing it or stealing it from people who actually work to pay people that don’t work or make incredibly bad investments for near the WHOLE amount that the stimulus was is somehow up for debate? All it did was everything you claim the evil Reagan and Bush did with trickle down economics only in fast fucking forward because they literally just handed the money to who they wanted to have it rather than let it “trickle” there over years.

But this is the internet, everything I said is fact and never has to be accounted for in conversation, you get to jump to your next thought with zero accountabiluty for the stupid crap you said abd I and many others answered.

What were the benchmarks?

That we'll never go above 8 percent unemployment if passed. Lol!!

According to who? You?


"Some private forecasters anticipate unemployment rates as high as 11% in the absence of action."

Wow - sounds like a hard and fast PROMISE to me.

You are so full of shit. Obama never said unployment would not rise about 8% if the stimulus was passed. This is something RIGHT wingers thought up post facto.

 

[Clementine]

Obama said the stimulus bill would jump start the economy. But, alas, he redefined the meaning of jump start and fooled us all. The new meaning of jump start up shoring up the union coffers while the econony continues to tank and unemployment doesn't budge. New jobs meant more bureaucrats and a couple temp jobs for the private sector.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Obama said the stimulus bill would jump start the economy. But, alas, he redefined the meaning of jump start and fooled us all. The new meaning of jump start up shoring up the union coffers while the econony continues to tank and unemployment doesn't budge. New jobs meant more bureaucrats and a couple temp jobs for the private sector.

Please show us where he defined the meaning of "jump start" at all.

Thanks.

 

[editec]

The fact that we can post on this board and the trains are still running more or less on time, suggests that the economic policiies of the past two presidents prevented something much more catastrophic.

Proving that is, of course, impossible.

Just as proving that the stimulus was a complete failure (as this thread set out to do) is likewise impossible.

And that is just in the nature of this science called macro-economics.

We can posit our theories, we can make our logical intuitions about the economy that might have been, but PROVING our theories is entirely beyond anyone's ability.

There is no CONTROL GROUP economy to test our hypothesis against, kiddies.

 

[Cammmpbell]

How Stimulus Fails - Reason Magazine

It’s not hard to make the case that President Barack Obama’s $840 billion stimulus was a failure. The economy, which was supposed to recover as a result of the massive spending, has largely remained in the doldrums.

The ground rules for stimulus dollars, as laid out by Obama’s top economic adviser at the time, Larry Summers, were based on the insights of legendary 20th-century economist John Maynard Keynes. The funds were to be “targeted” at resources idled by the recession, and the interventions were to be “temporary” and “timely,” injected quickly into the economy.

None of that turned out to be true. “Even if you were to believe that government spending can trigger economic growth,” says reason columnist Veronique de Rugy, a senior research fellow at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center, “the money is never spent in a way that’s consistent with the conditions laid out by the Keynesians for it to be efficient.”

“We’re going to weatherize homes,” Obama said in an interview with CBS on February 4, 2009. “That immediately puts people back to work.…What would be a more effective stimulus package than that?”

According to Keynesian theory, stimulus funds must be spent quickly to be effective. By the president’s own account, one of the most “shovel-ready” programs in the package was supposed to be a $5 billion initiative to weatherize 590,000 homes around the country. But according to a February 2010 report by the Department of Energy’s inspector general, only 8 percent of the weatherization money was tapped in the program’s first year.

“The main lesson of the stimulus is that creating jobs is a very complex process,” says De Rugy. “And certainly it can’t be directed by a top-down institution that pretty much fails at everything it does.”

Just like the meltdown in 1929 and 1930 the Republicans did it and now all they've done is critici e any effort to straighten it out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The stimulus never met a single benchmark it set, not 1... Yet we still have to debate if it worked or not, fucking amazing. What did you people call Bush's stimulus? The X-box check... When Obama does a stimulus on a larger scale than Bush and fails to a degree that has never been seen before in the history of the world some people want to "debate" if the stimulus worked or not...

It didn't, it was never meant to.. It was there to make the rich richer and buy votes, the 2 "hidden" benchmarks that it actually did manage to meet in excess.

How come liberals can bash “trickle down economics” and call it a failure but Government printing money, borrowing it or stealing it from people who actually work to pay people that don’t work or make incredibly bad investments for near the WHOLE amount that the stimulus was is somehow up for debate? All it did was everything you claim the evil Reagan and Bush did with trickle down economics only in fast fucking forward because they literally just handed the money to who they wanted to have it rather than let it “trickle” there over years.

But this is the internet, everything I said is fact and never has to be accounted for in conversation, you get to jump to your next thought with zero accountabiluty for the stupid crap you said abd I and many others answered.

What were the benchmarks?

That we'll never go above 8 percent unemployment if passed. Lol!!

Except that estimate was based on a GDP estimate that turned out to be several points too optimistic.

 

[Oldstyle]

What were the benchmarks?

That we'll never go above 8 percent unemployment if passed. Lol!!

Except that estimate was based on a GDP estimate that turned out to be several points too optimistic.

So you're giving the Obama Administration a pass on blame because they were so far off on their estimates? It's not their fault that their policy didn't work because the assumptions that policy was based on were so badly made? Is that what you're trying to sell, Carbineer? Now THAT is amusing!

There is a reason why Larry Summers and Christina Romer tucked tail and ran back to the safety of their tenured positions at Harvard and Berkeley...they were given a whole lot of money to play out a Keynesian wet dream of a stimulus package and they botched it SO badly that they had to invent a whole new economic measurement "jobs saved" just so their numbers wouldn't look so bad.

 

[NYcarbineer]

That we'll never go above 8 percent unemployment if passed. Lol!!

Except that estimate was based on a GDP estimate that turned out to be several points too optimistic.

So you're giving the Obama Administration a pass on blame because they were so far off on their estimates? It's not their fault that their policy didn't work because the assumptions that policy was based on were so badly made? Is that what you're trying to sell, Carbineer? Now THAT is amusing!

There is a reason why Larry Summers and Christina Romer tucked tail and ran back to the safety of their tenured positions at Harvard and Berkeley...they were given a whole lot of money to play out a Keynesian wet dream of a stimulus package and they botched it SO badly that they had to invent a whole new economic measurement "jobs saved" just so their numbers wouldn't look so bad.

The Romer report elaborately explains the forecasts and estimates that were made, and includes all the appropriate caveats related to the possible variations of the baselines that were predicted by the CBO etc.

It was the rightwing propaganda machine that plucked from all that the LIE that Obama promised 8% UE if the stimulus passed.

Why do you give the rightwing propaganda machine a pass on that?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Was supposed to keep unemployment under 8% too

 

[Cammmpbell]

What were the benchmarks?

That we'll never go above 8 percent unemployment if passed. Lol!!

Except that estimate was based on a GDP estimate that turned out to be several points too optimistic.

It wasn't just that. The people who made the estimates used other recessions and the data from those to estimate. They never have reali ed how close we came to another depression like the 1930's because even after receiving nearly a trillion dollars in the bail out the banks tightened credit even in the face of the worst economic status and we nearly caved in. In the 30's it took ten years and we still had astronomical unemployment right up to the second world war. We're at least on the right track. If the Republicans get in and hand their rich friends another big tax cut we might still see what an old fashioned depression is like.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Was supposed to keep unemployment under 8% too

Incorrect.

 

[Cammmpbell]

Was supposed to keep unemployment under 8% too

Incorrect.

Yes..........Obama never said that. His chairwoman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers said that in 2009.

The Republicans have sure made hay with it but it never happened.