Obama Stimulus had zero impact

[Flopper]

Column in the WSJ today by two prominent economists examined the Keynesian idea of gov't spending filling the gap in private demand in regards to the stimulus. What they found was government grants to states and localities merely substituted for local borrowing. IOW, there was no stimulus achieved at all. Aggregate demand was the same as before. The Obama stimulus was, again, proof that Keynesianism is simply wrong.
John F. Cogan and John B. Taylor: The Obama Stimulus Impact? Zero - WSJ.com

Most of the stimulus to the states and local government was used to pay worker salaries. Without the stimulus there would have been massive layoffs of both both government employees and contractors. Borrowing money to pay workers is not an option in most states.

The stimulus saved jobs and created jobs, but it was not large enough to overcome the number jobs being lost. The stimulus would have had to be in the order of 1.5 trillion to have the impact that the Democrats projected. Congress would not have approved a stimulus of this size.

Go read the article, dumbass.
And how many jobs were lost because of anticipated higher taxes and debt to pay for the "stimulus"?

Post the complete article if want anyone to read it.

RECOVERY FUNDED JOBS REPORTED BY RECIPIENTS
July 1 - September 30, 2010
675,841
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

 

[The Rabbi]

Most of the stimulus to the states and local government was used to pay worker salaries. Without the stimulus there would have been massive layoffs of both both government employees and contractors. Borrowing money to pay workers is not an option in most states.

The stimulus saved jobs and created jobs, but it was not large enough to overcome the number jobs being lost. The stimulus would have had to be in the order of 1.5 trillion to have the impact that the Democrats projected. Congress would not have approved a stimulus of this size.

Go read the article, dumbass.
And how many jobs were lost because of anticipated higher taxes and debt to pay for the "stimulus"?

Post the complete article if want anyone to read it.

RECOVERY FUNDED JOBS REPORTED BY RECIPIENTS
July 1 - September 30, 2010
675,841
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

John F. Cogan and John B. Taylor: The Obama Stimulus Impact? Zero - WSJ.com

Now read the article.

 

[Flopper]

I can just keep adding them...

"In a report released on Jan. 13, 2010, the president's Council of Economic Advisers estimated that between 1.77 million jobs and 2.07 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus through the fourth quarter of 2009.

Separately, the council's report cited four independent analyses of the same question. These estimates were by the Congressional Budget Office, Congress' nonpartisan number-crunching arm, as well by three private-sector economic-analysis firms. Here's what those groups found:
• CBO: Between 800,000 jobs (low estimate) and 2.4 million jobs (high estimate) saved or created.
• IHS/Global Insight: 1.25 million jobs saved or created.
• Macroeconomic Advisers: 1.06 million jobs saved or created.
• Moody's economy.com: 1.59 million jobs saved or created.

.....With the notable exception of conservatives, the independent economists who have produced studies agree that the stimulus has saved or created upwards of 1 million jobs, and that the bill will likely create another million or so jobs in 2010. These numbers are based on a "counterfactual" study that is an estimate subject to some professional disagreement...."

PolitiFact | Obama says stimulus is responsible for 2 million jobs saved or created

Three times zero is still zero. You can keep posting the adminsitration's crappy "created or saved" estimates but you cannot deny the original research in the article. Which you haven't read.

I read every word of the article. Nowhere did the author say jobs were not created or saved by the stimulus. The entire point of the article is to explore the range of estimates which were between 800,000 and 2.4 million and to point out that the job increase is not a net gain. If you research the 800,000 figure you will find it was a CBO estimate of at least 800,000. So the difference in the estimates are not as great as the article says. I suggest you read your article again.

The administration claimed that the stimulus added or saved jobs. They did not claim a net gain in jobs since jobs were being lost through out the country. One can claim that the continued job loses were due to uncertainty of taxes or deficits or uncertainty of the return of consumer spending or whatever, but this is all superstition, but the fact remains jobs were created or saved by the stimulus package.

 

[The Rabbi]

If the administration claimed jobs were added and there was a net loss of jobs then the administration is lying. The same administration also claimed if we passed the stimulus the UE rate would not go above 8%.
And I still dont think you read the article.

 

[Flopper]

If the administration claimed jobs were added and there was a net loss of jobs then the administration is lying. The same administration also claimed if we passed the stimulus the UE rate would not go above 8%.
And I still dont think you read the article.

The administration claimed the stimulus packaged saved or created jobs. They did not claim that net job loss in the country decreased. Read my post.

RECOVERY FUNDED JOBS REPORTED BY RECIPIENTS
July 1 - September 30, 2010
675,841
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

 

[Common Sense]

If the administration claimed jobs were added and there was a net loss of jobs then the administration is lying. The same administration also claimed if we passed the stimulus the UE rate would not go above 8%.
And I still dont think you read the article.

The administration claimed the stimulus packaged saved or created jobs. They did not claim that net job loss in the country decreased. Read my post.

RECOVERY FUNDED JOBS REPORTED BY RECIPIENTS
July 1 - September 30, 2010
675,841
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

told you he hadnt read the article. thus he cant even defend it

 

[The Rabbi]

If the administration claimed jobs were added and there was a net loss of jobs then the administration is lying. The same administration also claimed if we passed the stimulus the UE rate would not go above 8%.
And I still dont think you read the article.

The administration claimed the stimulus packaged saved or created jobs. They did not claim that net job loss in the country decreased. Read my post.

RECOVERY FUNDED JOBS REPORTED BY RECIPIENTS
July 1 - September 30, 2010
675,841
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

told you he hadnt read the article. thus he cant even defend it

Read the article, dipshit.

 

[Common Sense]

The administration claimed the stimulus packaged saved or created jobs. They did not claim that net job loss in the country decreased. Read my post.

RECOVERY FUNDED JOBS REPORTED BY RECIPIENTS
July 1 - September 30, 2010
675,841
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

told you he hadnt read the article. thus he cant even defend it

Read the article, dipshit.

answer the question ass fuck