Yet again the experts say the stimulus worked

Why is it Obama is saving us money ten years from now and not in the present?
Because Obama can't go back in time and implement policies in 2008. Furthermore the money is saved over the course of 10 yeras of which this year has savings

2008? Oh you mean policies enacted when the DNC controlled both houses of Congress? Here ya go!

A graph of unemployment vs party in control of Congress.
I'd appreciate comments from you and TDM.
 

Attachments

  • $GOP_vs_DNC-unemployment-january-2012-data.jpg
    $GOP_vs_DNC-unemployment-january-2012-data.jpg
    23.8 KB · Views: 54
Why is it Obama is saving us money ten years from now and not in the present?
Because Obama can't go back in time and implement policies in 2008. Furthermore the money is saved over the course of 10 yeras of which this year has savings

2008? Oh you mean policies enacted when the DNC controlled both houses of Congress? Here ya go!

A graph of unemployment vs party in control of Congress.
I'd appreciate comments from you and TDM.

Lovely of you tob eso stupid to blame Democrats who took control in 2007 for a housing bubble/banking panic that started in 2002
Id appreciate some intelligence from yu but that is too much to ask
 
They do. But they don't support tax cuts that eh GOP wants because the GOP wants to give tax cuts to international corporations and billionaires
so plz come back when you have a clue

We have the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Obviously, the way to grow the economy is to make them even higher. Obviously. :cuckoo:

See this is the problem. You are so ignorant that you think the earth is flat and yet you call anyone who says the earth isn't flat that they are cuckoo

Two-Thirds of Corporations Pay No Taxes, But McCain Still Wants To Lower the Corporate Tax Rate | ThinkProgress
Error - washingtonpost.com
^United states corporate tax revenue is half that of the OCED average.
You would have to increase USA corporate taxes by 100% in America for the USA to have corporate taxes equal to the OCED average.

Reality Check: Effective U.S. Corporate Tax Rate Much Lower Than Most Other Developed Nations | ThinkProgress
^United states has one of the lower corporate tax rates in the 1st world

26 Major Corporations Paid No Taxes For The Last Four Years
^From 2008-2011 the 30 largest corporations paid a negative income taxes despite having 205billion in profits

Funny thing, the federal government is not in the habit of giving corporations refunds unless then pay taxes in the first place. Showing a chart of the companies that got refunds from overpaying taxes, which often takes years to work through the bureaucracy of the IRS, and then claiming this proves they did not pay taxes on the profits, only makes people look stupid. It makes for great soundbites on the campaign trail, but only an idiot would actually believe it.
 
We have the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Obviously, the way to grow the economy is to make them even higher. Obviously. :cuckoo:

See this is the problem. You are so ignorant that you think the earth is flat and yet you call anyone who says the earth isn't flat that they are cuckoo

Two-Thirds of Corporations Pay No Taxes, But McCain Still Wants To Lower the Corporate Tax Rate | ThinkProgress
Error - washingtonpost.com
^United states corporate tax revenue is half that of the OCED average.
You would have to increase USA corporate taxes by 100% in America for the USA to have corporate taxes equal to the OCED average.

Reality Check: Effective U.S. Corporate Tax Rate Much Lower Than Most Other Developed Nations | ThinkProgress
^United states has one of the lower corporate tax rates in the 1st world

26 Major Corporations Paid No Taxes For The Last Four Years
^From 2008-2011 the 30 largest corporations paid a negative income taxes despite having 205billion in profits

Funny thing, the federal government is not in the habit of giving corporations refunds unless then pay taxes in the first place. Showing a chart of the companies that got refunds from overpaying taxes, which often takes years to work through the bureaucracy of the IRS, and then claiming this proves they did not pay taxes on the profits, only makes people look stupid. It makes for great soundbites on the campaign trail, but only an idiot would actually believe it.

Yes showing that corporations get more money from the government then they paid it taxes is totally stupid
THe problem with you is that youa re ignranot and to pathedic to accept reality
 
post one study or anaylsisi that shows the stimulus did nothing. GIvent hat there are zero I await your non-response..

Want to bet?

No Such Thing as Shovel Ready | Mercatus
Did Stimulus Dollars Hire the Unemployed? | Mercatus

See this is part of the problem you think a survey that shows that the stimulus that states "hiring workers isn't creating jobs" is a valid source. You think a survey that states "unemployment raised from 2008-2009 is a reflection on the stimulus act.
So come back when you have an actually study on the effects of the stimulus

You said I couldn't find a single study that said that the stimulus did not work, I found two, I have a lot more, all of them just as full of assumptions as the ones you can find that prove it did work. The simple fact is that no one can conclusively prove that the stimulus worked or failed unless we can do controlled experiments in isolated environments where the only change is the presence, or absence, of a stimulus and see which way works better. Since that is not possible, all anyone can actually do is guess.

Trot out all the studies you like, the fact will remain they are based on assumptions, and that they can never actually be tested. The difference between us is I know that, and you will prefer to believe your position because you think you are right.
 

See this is part of the problem you think a survey that shows that the stimulus that states "hiring workers isn't creating jobs" is a valid source. You think a survey that states "unemployment raised from 2008-2009 is a reflection on the stimulus act.
So come back when you have an actually study on the effects of the stimulus

You said I couldn't find a single study that said that the stimulus did not work, I found two, I have a lot more, all of them just as full of assumptions as the ones you can find that prove it did work
Bring me a study that doesn't state "hiring workers doesn't create jobs"

. The simple fact is that no one can conclusively prove that the stimulus worked or failed
Like always you're wrong

Trot out all the studies you like, the fact will remain they are based on assumptions, and that they can never actually be tested. The difference between us is I know that, and you will prefer to believe your position because you think you are right.
This is the problem you hold ignorance and things like "hiring people does not create jobs" is equal to assumptions based on statistics and reality
 
Economist's View: "Gauging the Benefits, Costs, and Sustainability of U.S. Stimulus"


Did the stimulus work? According to a collaboration between Fitch Ratings and Oxford economics, the answer is yes:

Government stimulus moves may have ended recession, by Jim Puzzanghera, Los Angeles Times: Without the unprecedented stimulus actions by the federal government triggered by the 2008 financial crisis, the Great Recession might still be going on, according to a study by Fitch Ratings. ...

The boost from those policies helped the nation's gross domestic product increase 3% in 2010 and 1.7% last year; absent the stimulus, the U.S. "might still be mired in a recession," according to the study, done in conjunction with Oxford Economics.

The U.S. economy would have seen little or no growth the last two years without the policies, the report says, and those actions appear "to have significantly softened the severity of the decline" in GDP in the year immediately after the recession ended in mid-2009.

Though the Fed's monetary policy actions were helpful, fiscal stimulus by Congress and the White House "had the strongest positive impact on consumption during the recent recovery," the study found.

And some still wonder why we stand on the abyss of financial ruin. You just don't get it and can't do the math can you. Basic economic pronciples escape your ideologically twisted mind don't they. Have another glass of Cool Aid, help is on the way.
 
Why is it Obama is saving us money ten years from now and not in the present?
Because Obama can't go back in time and implement policies in 2008. Furthermore the money is saved over the course of 10 yeras of which this year has savings

Well then, you should be aboe to produce a link showing debt reduction. I'll wait.

See this is apart of the problem you are so stupid that you do not know the difference between saving money and debt
 
, fiscal stimulus by Congress and the White House "had the strongest positive impact on consumption during the recent recovery," the study found.

a child knows Congress can only spend tax revenue. They take money out of one side of the lake (taxing) and pour into the other side( spending) and invite liberals to watch only the spending so the idiots will run around claiming the water level is rising.

See why we are positive liberalism is the default position when you are very very slow.
 

Forum List

Back
Top