Romney last night: "The stimulus could have been better directed"

Romney last night: "The stimulus could have been better directed"

Really?

Not "it shouldn't have even existed"?

So basically he supports the trillion dollar waste.

Why does this guy keep getting recycled each election?

This is the exact reason why the republican party is really just democrat lite.


Romney is correct. The stimulus could have led to a robust recovery. As annoying as it would have been, Republicans might have had to watch Obama shepherd in a strong rebound from the recession.

Unfortunately for the nation, Obama wasted the stimulus so all we have is anemic growth and all that new debt.

But it COULD have worked.
 
Romney last night: "The stimulus could have been better directed"

Really?

Not "it shouldn't have even existed"?

So basically he supports the trillion dollar waste.

Why does this guy keep getting recycled each election?

This is the exact reason why the republican party is really just democrat lite.


Romney is correct. The stimulus could have led to a robust recovery. As annoying as it would have been, Republicans might have had to watch Obama shepherd in a strong rebound from the recession.

Unfortunately for the nation, Obama wasted the stimulus so all we have is anemic growth and all that new debt.

But it COULD have worked.

Why don't you entertain us with a detailed description of how that could have happened.
 
Romney last night: "The stimulus could have been better directed"

Really?

Not "it shouldn't have even existed"?

So basically he supports the trillion dollar waste.

Why does this guy keep getting recycled each election?

This is the exact reason why the republican party is really just democrat lite.


Romney is correct. The stimulus could have led to a robust recovery. As annoying as it would have been, Republicans might have had to watch Obama shepherd in a strong rebound from the recession.

Unfortunately for the nation, Obama wasted the stimulus so all we have is anemic growth and all that new debt.

But it COULD have worked.

Why don't you entertain us with a detailed description of how that could have happened.


He could have checked to make sure the money was getting to the areas which needed it most. Like public works projects in the most depressed states, such as West Virginia. When he noticed that it wasn't getting to where it could actually help, he could have cut some red tape to expedite projects and get them closer to being shovel ready.

Another thing he could have done if he were paying attention to what needed attention was that he could have made sure that homeowners were actually benefiting from HAMP.

Basically he could have actually made jobs and the recovery his number one priority as he claimed he realized the people wanted.

But instead he effed around with Obamacare and instead of cutting red tape added more regulations during the time when the stimulus had the best chance to light the fuse of the recovery. He took his eye off the ball big time.
 
Romney is correct. The stimulus could have led to a robust recovery. As annoying as it would have been, Republicans might have had to watch Obama shepherd in a strong rebound from the recession.

Unfortunately for the nation, Obama wasted the stimulus so all we have is anemic growth and all that new debt.

But it COULD have worked.

Why don't you entertain us with a detailed description of how that could have happened.


He could have checked to make sure the money was getting to the areas which needed it most. Like public works projects in the most depressed states, such as West Virginia. When he noticed that it wasn't getting to where it could actually help, he could have cut some red tape to expedite projects and get them closer to being shovel ready.

Another thing he could have done if he were paying attention to what needed attention was that he could have made sure that homeowners were actually benefiting from HAMP.

Basically he could have actually made jobs and the recovery his number one priority as he claimed he realized the people wanted.

But instead he effed around with Obamacare and instead of cutting red tape added more regulations during the time when the stimulus had the best chance to light the fuse of the recovery. He took his eye off the ball big time.

How many times must this be said? The stimulus created 2.5 million jobs. That isn't Obama talking - that is economists talking.
 
The stimulus should have been a check made out to the tax paying individuals of this country. That money would have eliminated public debt and would have stengthened our economy in all sorts of ways. Entrepenuership would have exploded, as these people would have had the money to start up their own business. Investment would have increased. Homes would have been payed off deflating the bubble. Each tax paying person in this country getting a check for 100k instead of bailing out banks and businesses, would have benefitted us much better than what actually happened.

before reading the rest of the thread.....I have to stop here and predict that this post was absolutely destoyed by facts and logic. Now......let me see if I am correct...............
 
Why don't you entertain us with a detailed description of how that could have happened.


He could have checked to make sure the money was getting to the areas which needed it most. Like public works projects in the most depressed states, such as West Virginia. When he noticed that it wasn't getting to where it could actually help, he could have cut some red tape to expedite projects and get them closer to being shovel ready.

Another thing he could have done if he were paying attention to what needed attention was that he could have made sure that homeowners were actually benefiting from HAMP.

Basically he could have actually made jobs and the recovery his number one priority as he claimed he realized the people wanted.

But instead he effed around with Obamacare and instead of cutting red tape added more regulations during the time when the stimulus had the best chance to light the fuse of the recovery. He took his eye off the ball big time.

How many times must this be said? The stimulus created 2.5 million jobs. That isn't Obama talking - that is economists talking.


How many times does it have to be said - no matter what numbers you claim, the recovery has been anemic. The great Obama himself admitted that the shovel ready jobs weren't so ready.

IF he had been paying attention, he could have noticed that in time to do something. Maybe the summer of recovery could have actually been what they said it would be.

But it wasn't.

If Obama had made jobs a priority and paid attention to how well the money was being deployed then maybe it would have been. But he didn't. And it wasn't.
 
The stimulus should have been a check made out to the tax paying individuals of this country. That money would have eliminated public debt and would have stengthened our economy in all sorts of ways. Entrepenuership would have exploded, as these people would have had the money to start up their own business. Investment would have increased. Homes would have been payed off deflating the bubble. Each tax paying person in this country getting a check for 100k instead of bailing out banks and businesses, would have benefitted us much better than what actually happened.

before reading the rest of the thread.....I have to stop here and predict that this post was absolutely destoyed by facts and logic. Now......let me see if I am correct...............

You guys are very kind. Very kind.
 
Romney is correct. The stimulus could have led to a robust recovery. As annoying as it would have been, Republicans might have had to watch Obama shepherd in a strong rebound from the recession.

Unfortunately for the nation, Obama wasted the stimulus so all we have is anemic growth and all that new debt.

But it COULD have worked.

Why don't you entertain us with a detailed description of how that could have happened.


He could have checked to make sure the money was getting to the areas which needed it most. Like public works projects in the most depressed states, such as West Virginia. When he noticed that it wasn't getting to where it could actually help, he could have cut some red tape to expedite projects and get them closer to being shovel ready.

Another thing he could have done if he were paying attention to what needed attention was that he could have made sure that homeowners were actually benefiting from HAMP.

Basically he could have actually made jobs and the recovery his number one priority as he claimed he realized the people wanted.

But instead he effed around with Obamacare and instead of cutting red tape added more regulations during the time when the stimulus had the best chance to light the fuse of the recovery. He took his eye off the ball big time.

West Virginia's UE rate has been under the national average since about 2003.
 
Why don't you entertain us with a detailed description of how that could have happened.


He could have checked to make sure the money was getting to the areas which needed it most. Like public works projects in the most depressed states, such as West Virginia. When he noticed that it wasn't getting to where it could actually help, he could have cut some red tape to expedite projects and get them closer to being shovel ready.

Another thing he could have done if he were paying attention to what needed attention was that he could have made sure that homeowners were actually benefiting from HAMP.

Basically he could have actually made jobs and the recovery his number one priority as he claimed he realized the people wanted.

But instead he effed around with Obamacare and instead of cutting red tape added more regulations during the time when the stimulus had the best chance to light the fuse of the recovery. He took his eye off the ball big time.

West Virginia's UE rate has been under the national average since about 2003.



Perhaps I am misremembering a detail. Or perhaps I am thinking of a particularly depressed portion of WV.

I did not have any notes at the ready in anticipation of your question. Which portion of my original post here do you object to? Me saying that the stimulus could have helped? Or me saying it could have helped more than it did?
 
Call me cynical, but IMO, as long as political offices are decided by democratic election, no politician is going to make the tough choices until the situation is so dire that there is no alternative...and by then it will be too late.

It's the catch-22 of freely elected representative government.

You see, that's where I disagree.

Ronald Reagan was the kind of leader who actually lead.

I take when he addressed the Social Security problem. He had to make a lot of tough choices and did a lot of things that were unpopular, but it was necessary to save the system for another few decades. He faced folks on the right who think the government shouldn't be in the pension business and folks on the left that thought we shouldn't touch any entitlement, and somewhere got to a comprimise. People who shouldn't have been on it (like college students) were kicked off and taxes were increased to pay for it.

Could I see "reversable Mittens" doing the same? Nope. Or Obama? Nope.


If Reagan had made the tough choices, he would have fixed social security once and for all...and yet, three decades later, we are still kicking the can and robbing the
quoties.gif
"lockbox"
quoties.gif
.

I think the thing is, you can't really 'fix it" once and for all. Reagan fixed it in 1983 in such a way that it would not run out of money until 2043. Giving it sixty years of life is hardly a bad fix.
 
The stimulus could have been better directed?

That's what his wife said.
 
If only 10% of workers are union, and so much money was thrown at union projects, then it would stand to reason that the primary beneficiaries were the union bosses.

Don't you guys ever provide links to anything you say? Ever?
You need a link to tell you that 1/3 of the stimulus expenditures went to state and local governments, where unions reign supreme?

Seriously?

I know that well over a hundred Republicans who voted against the stimulus took hundreds of millions of dollars to create thousands of jobs. I know 30 to 40% was tax breaks. We have seen many links proving these.

About huge amounts of money going to such a small number in unions? Haven't seen that. I would appreciate a link. Unless you don't have any.
 

Forum List

Back
Top