Without the Stimulus? Same Place

[neurosport]

It looks that the unemployment rate is worse with Obama's spending than his administration predicted without the stimulus. To be honest, it is entirely possible that all of the projections were understated, meaning had there been no increased spending unemployment would have been even higher. But what if that's not the case? Then, it would be possible that, had there been no increased spending, unemployment would have been lower. Based on current data, government spending did not solve unemployment. It maybe skew the number downward for a very short time. In this case, it didn't even do that.

it is irrelevant what the effects of the stimulus are in the first year.

if Obama has even a 10% chance of keeping the bubble inflated for another 4 years he has to go for it regardless of how catastrophic the ultimate result will be.

His goal is to postpone Judgement day until after the end of his term.

In fact our standard of living has to go down to that of 3rd world nations like China anyway for long term sustainability and Obama's debasement of our currency will accomplish just that. So maybe his plan is not as misguided as Austrians believe.

 

[Ame®icano]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

 

[neurosport]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

 

[wimpy77]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

what nut job site did that guy get that graph from?

 

[jreeves]

We have had the strongest economy in the history of the world by NOT giving in to socialism.

When the state runs things, it always go south.

The last thing the US should ever do is 'nationalize' ANY industry.

I always kind of like the post office. Mailman came every day and gave us our letters.

It's strange that you would bring up the post office...
The U.S. Postal Service is going broke.

Postmaster General John Potter told the House that the post office may run out of money by the end of the year if it does not get aid.

He said that the post office is "facing losses of historic proportion. Our situation is critical."

The office simply cannot pay all its bills.

The postmaster said he will pay all the salaries, but that other bills might just have to wait. He also asked that mail delivery drop to five days per week.

Last year, the post office lost $2.8 billion, Fox News reported. This year, it is poised for even bigger losses.



Read more: "U.S. Postal Service going broke says Postmaster General John Potter" - U.S. Postal Service going broke says Postmaster General John Potter

Now I wonder who covers those huge loses?

 

[Annie]

We have had the strongest economy in the history of the world by NOT giving in to socialism.

When the state runs things, it always go south.

The last thing the US should ever do is 'nationalize' ANY industry.

I always kind of like the post office. Mailman came every day and gave us our letters.

Isn't the post office nationalized? What would happen if we privatized it alla UPS or FedEx?

Semi-privatized, the worst of both worlds. They can't fire incompetent workers, can't change prices without Congressional approval, can't service on need-rural areas get same coverage as densely populated areas, etc.

 

[editec]

The stimulus was a freaking smoke screen.. a reactionary ploy to get the pet projects they wanted for a long time

So Bush II was in on this plot?

 

[Annie]

The stimulus was a freaking smoke screen.. a reactionary ploy to get the pet projects they wanted for a long time

So Bush II was in on this plot?

Indeed he was, at least regarding the banks. It was under his administration that the forcing of money began.

 

[editec]

Just printing money won't help.

Printing it and getting into the hand of the people who need it might help.

The dollar is going to lose value, though.

The cost of anything that we import is going to get much much more expensive sooner or later.

This might be good for American industrialism in the long run, but the transition period is going to be a real bitch.

 

[Skull Pilot]

We have had the strongest economy in the history of the world by NOT giving in to socialism.

When the state runs things, it always go south.

The last thing the US should ever do is 'nationalize' ANY industry.

I always kind of like the post office. Mailman came every day and gave us our letters.

It's strange that you would bring up the post office...
The U.S. Postal Service is going broke.

Postmaster General John Potter told the House that the post office may run out of money by the end of the year if it does not get aid.

He said that the post office is "facing losses of historic proportion. Our situation is critical."

The office simply cannot pay all its bills.

The postmaster said he will pay all the salaries, but that other bills might just have to wait. He also asked that mail delivery drop to five days per week.

Last year, the post office lost $2.8 billion, Fox News reported. This year, it is poised for even bigger losses.



Read more: "U.S. Postal Service going broke says Postmaster General John Potter" - U.S. Postal Service going broke says Postmaster General John Potter

Now I wonder who covers those huge loses?

The USPS sucks.

I went to mail a certified letter to some deadbeat who bounced a 300 dollar check and the Post office was closed for lunch.

WHAT? Closed so all 6 people could eat lunch at the same time?

Why you ask? because the fucking postal workers union decided that it was unfair to rotate lunch breaks so as to keep a clerk manning the front desk during lunch hour, you know that time when most paying customers run out to the post office.

And you wonder why the post office is losing money.

 

[DiamondDave]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

Oh no.. it is indeed relevant.. for we are supposed to trust the other projections of this administration? We are to assume that if they cannot get this right, that they are supposed to indeed get it right as to how their uber-spending is supposed to effect our country? We are supposed to trust that they are right and all this is needed?


FUCK NO

 

[editec]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

Oh no.. it is indeed relevant.. for we are supposed to trust the other projections of this administration? We are to assume that if they cannot get this right, that they are supposed to indeed get it right as to how their uber-spending is supposed to effect our country? We are supposed to trust that they are right and all this is needed?


FUCK NO

DD, you don't have to trust them, man.

They truly don't give a damn what you or I think.

They're got the hammer and they're gonna nail whatever they hell they want to nail and if you or I get in their way, one of the things that gets hammered will be us.

And it doesn't matter which party is in office for that to be true.

 

[jreeves]

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

Oh no.. it is indeed relevant.. for we are supposed to trust the other projections of this administration? We are to assume that if they cannot get this right, that they are supposed to indeed get it right as to how their uber-spending is supposed to effect our country? We are supposed to trust that they are right and all this is needed?


FUCK NO

DD, you don't have to trust them, man.

They truly don't give a damn what you or I think.

They're got the hammer and they're gonna nail whatever they hell they want to nail and if you or I get in their way, one of the things that gets hammered will be us.

And it doesn't matter which party is in office for that to be true.

Both political parties are bums for the most part...I'll second that.

 

[DiveCon]

The stimulus was a freaking smoke screen.. a reactionary ploy to get the pet projects they wanted for a long time

So Bush II was in on this plot?

YES

sheeesh, how many times does it have to be said, Bush was socially very liberal

 

[Ame®icano]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

what nut job site did that guy get that graph from?

The same graph was shown in the link provided above the graph.

 

[Ame®icano]

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

Maybe you're right. But just maybe... because without the stimulus we might be having the same outcome, AT THE MOMENT.

 

[Ame®icano]

It's strange that you would bring up the post office...
The U.S. Postal Service is going broke.

Postmaster General John Potter told the House that the post office may run out of money by the end of the year if it does not get aid.

He said that the post office is "facing losses of historic proportion. Our situation is critical."

The office simply cannot pay all its bills.

The postmaster said he will pay all the salaries, but that other bills might just have to wait. He also asked that mail delivery drop to five days per week.

Last year, the post office lost $2.8 billion, Fox News reported. This year, it is poised for even bigger losses.



Read more: "U.S. Postal Service going broke says Postmaster General John Potter" - U.S. Postal Service going broke says Postmaster General John Potter

Now I wonder who covers those huge loses?

Of course they are going broke. One of the reasons might be their spending on employee relocations. Post office is buying houses of their employees, even those who wants to move at their own request...

For example, the report cites a home in Indian River Shores, Florida, that was purchased by the Postal Service for $2.8 million in November 2007. The home was sold eight months later for $1.1 million, a $1.7 million loss.

Postal Service to pay less for homes to relocate workers.

 

[neurosport]

You see those red triangles? Those are actual unemployment rates - and they are actually worse than the rates predicted without the stimulus.

yes i got that. that proves only that the forecast was dead wrong. it doesn't tell you whether the stimulus is helping or hurting. but more importantly it is IRRELEVANT whether it is helping or hurting AT THE MOMENT. the question is - what will the effects be down the line ?

Oh no.. it is indeed relevant.. for we are supposed to trust the other projections of this administration? We are to assume that if they cannot get this right, that they are supposed to indeed get it right as to how their uber-spending is supposed to effect our country? We are supposed to trust that they are right and all this is needed?


FUCK NO

there is no real need to listen to what the politicians are saying to know that they're lying.