Yet again the experts say the stimulus worked

[editec]

It's like somebody was drowning and then Obama threw those folks a life preserver, but the detractors of the O-man are complaining that the people still got wet.


You will never convince those who choose not to believe, that anything Obama has done was a good thing.


In part this debate is entirely pointless because proving such a thing is impossible.

There's just no way to know what might have happened to a macroeconomy if something other than what was done had been done instead.

This problem doesn't merely apply to debates about this POTUS or this economy, this unprovablity problem applies to EVERY POTUS and every policy that is done in a macro-economy.

 

[starcraftzzz]

You ignore dozens of reports saying the stimulus did nothing, and cherry pick the one that said what you wanted to hear.

The stimulus did do one thing though, it helped obama add 5 trillion dollars to the deficit.

post one study or anaylsisi that shows the stimulus did nothing. GIvent hat there are zero I await your non-response..

 

[starcraftzzz]

Obama admitted those "shovel ready jobs" were not so shovel ready.
Besides filling the pockets of the unions and other supporters he needed to pay off, the stimulus did NOTHING.

So according to you creating 4 million jobs, keeping 12 million people out of poverty, building roads, providing people with education, modernizing health care records, modernizing the electricity grid, producing energy, making homes more energy efficient is equal to nothing.
The fact is that you are a cluless dumbass

 

[starcraftzzz]

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.

are they referring to the $300 billion in tax cuts that were a huge part of the Stimulus?? If so then lets elect Romney and go for more tax cuts.

The 300billiuon in tax cuts in the stimulus went to small businesses and people making under 100,000. Romney s tax cuts go to millionaires large international corporations

 

[Truthmatters]

they live on a a steady diet of lies

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama admitted those "shovel ready jobs" were not so shovel ready.
Besides filling the pockets of the unions and other supporters he needed to pay off, the stimulus did NOTHING.

So according to you creating 4 million jobs, keeping 12 million people out of poverty, building roads, providing people with education, modernizing health care records, modernizing the electricity grid, producing energy, making homes more energy efficient is equal to nothing.
The fact is that you are a cluless dumbass

Praise be his Holy Name

Obama admits Stimulus failed
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4-vPrcDBo]Obama: Shovel Ready jobs not shovel ready - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Oldstyle]

The goal of the stimulus was to create jobs.

When you create so few new jobs that you have to invent a new statistic "jobs saved" then it's painfully obvious that your stimulus was an expensive failure.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It was supposed to keep unemployment below 8% too.

OOpsies

 

[starcraftzzz]

REpublicans response "creating jobs is bad because unemployment was high"
"Saving jobs was bad because its a new term that I'm to stupid to understand"
"4million jobs is bad because its not 10million"
"poining out that the stimuls did things means you view Obama as your god"
when will republcians ever get a clue or an IQ above 60? Never sadly

 

[CrusaderFrank]

REpublicans response "creating jobs is bad because unemployment was high"
"Saving jobs was bad because its a new term that I'm to stupid to understand"
"4million jobs is bad because its not 10million"
"poining out that the stimuls did things means you view Obama as your god"
when will republcians ever get a clue or an IQ above 60? Never sadly

Um, lemme see.

Stimulus $800B

Jobs "Created" 4MM

um, that's $200K/job

That's what you're calling a success?

 

[Avorysuds]

And how did the people feel about that election in retrospect?

They fucking hate your party

And how do people feel about your party... Obama is the biggest buyers remorse President in US history. As of currently I know only 1 person in real life that still “believes” in Obama. Now, you were talking about congress so lets stick with that… People were so overwhelmingly happy with Democrats that gave them historic losses after they gave them historic wins.

Both parties are dying because they are both the same, and they happen to both be Progressive. The rejection of ideology is clear.

 

[Oldstyle]

REpublicans response "creating jobs is bad because unemployment was high"
"Saving jobs was bad because its a new term that I'm to stupid to understand"
"4million jobs is bad because its not 10million"
"poining out that the stimuls did things means you view Obama as your god"
when will republcians ever get a clue or an IQ above 60? Never sadly

The problem with your little rant, Star...is that if you look at it closer...it's all bluster with nothing to back it up.

The stimulus was supposed to create jobs. That was its FUNCTION. The whole "jobs saved" thing isn't difficult to understand...it's entire premise was to invent a statistic that was impossible to quantify yet sounded good. It's what this Administration did when the stimulus failed to create jobs. They understood that they hadn't created even close to the jobs they said that they would and so they invented a phony statistic to make themselves look better. It's amusing, actually...unless of course you happen to be one of the millions of Americans who are out of work...then it's not so funny.

Creating 4 million jobs SOUNDS so amazing until you examine that number and realize that to keep pace with population growth you need to create around 225,000 jobs per month. So if you take the three and a half years that Obama has been in office and multiply those 42 months by 225,000 you get the number 9,450,000 which is the number of jobs we needed to create to keep pace. That means that Barry "created" less than HALF the jobs that he needed to. Not so amazing now...is it?

 

[Avorysuds]

REpublicans response "creating jobs is bad because unemployment was high"
"Saving jobs was bad because its a new term that I'm to stupid to understand"
"4million jobs is bad because its not 10million"
"poining out that the stimuls did things means you view Obama as your god"
when will republcians ever get a clue or an IQ above 60? Never sadly

The problem with your little rant, Star...is that if you look at it closer...it's all bluster with nothing to back it up.

The stimulus was supposed to create jobs. That was its FUNCTION. The whole "jobs saved" thing isn't difficult to understand...it's entire premise was to invent a statistic that was impossible to quantify yet sounded good. It's what this Administration did when the stimulus failed to create jobs. They understood that they hadn't created even close to the jobs they said that they would and so they invented a phony statistic to make themselves look better. It's amusing, actually...unless of course you happen to be one of the millions of Americans who are out of work...then it's not so funny.

Creating 4 million jobs SOUNDS so amazing until you examine that number and realize that to keep pace with population growth you need to create around 225,000 jobs per month. So if you take the three and a half years that Obama has been in office and multiply those 42 months by 225,000 you get the number 9,450,000 which is the number of jobs we needed to create to keep pace. That means that Barry "created" less than HALF the jobs that he needed to. Not so amazing now...is it?

Every "benchmark" that was set for the stimulus, every claim that Obama and his admin made that the stimulus would achieve failed. That’s why the benchmarks changed, when the stimulus failed to create real jobs it *saved* jobs, that’s why when the stimulus failed to stabilize the economy it *saved* us from an imaginary depression.

If Obama and his genius admin couldn’t even see the economy being as bad as it was then what are the odds that their plans were thought through? Why is it Austrian economics predicted every single thing that has happens prior to the stimulus and what happened after because of the stimulus but it gets no credit?


TM talks about Republicans re-writting history, then TM, Obama and Dems re-write what the entire point of the stimulus, what it was about and what it was supposed to do.

 

[Oldstyle]

TM keeps trying to trot out this dead horse every few weeks...takes a beating on it and then lays low for awhile before trying to trot it out again.

The Obama Stimulus was NOT a success. It was based on faulty economic principles championed by two liberal Keynesian economists, Larry Summers and Christina Romer...then given to two liberal power brokers, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to work out the details. Is it any wonder that it turned into a bail out for government unions and payback for the bundling efforts by green energy folks like Solyndra? $200,000 per job created. That's what's viewed as successful by this Administration. Seriously...

 

[theHawk]

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.

If we had a dime for every time an "expert" claimed the economy is good, we'd have our national debt paid off.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Stimulus was half tax cuts. If it worked then why don't libs want more tax cuts??

 

[starcraftzzz]

REpublicans response "creating jobs is bad because unemployment was high"
"Saving jobs was bad because its a new term that I'm to stupid to understand"
"4million jobs is bad because its not 10million"
"poining out that the stimuls did things means you view Obama as your god"
when will republcians ever get a clue or an IQ above 60? Never sadly

Um, lemme see.

Stimulus $800B

Jobs "Created" 4MM

um, that's $200K/job

That's what you're calling a success?

Considering investments in the stimulus over 10 years will save at least 1.6 trillion dollars yes I'd call it a success but then again I am not a retard like you who has no clue about anything

 

[starcraftzzz]

Stimulus was half tax cuts. If it worked then why don't libs want more tax cuts??

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

 

[starcraftzzz]

REpublicans response "creating jobs is bad because unemployment was high"
"Saving jobs was bad because its a new term that I'm to stupid to understand"
"4million jobs is bad because its not 10million"
"poining out that the stimuls did things means you view Obama as your god"
when will republcians ever get a clue or an IQ above 60? Never sadly

The problem with your little rant, Star...is that if you look at it closer...it's all bluster with nothing to back it up.

The stimulus was supposed to create jobs. That was its FUNCTION. The whole "jobs saved" thing isn't difficult to understand...it's entire premise was to invent a statistic that was impossible to quantify yet sounded good.

Yes you being so stupid that you can't calculate that x jobs would be saved means its impossible to quantify. Yes it is impossible for you to quantify but that is because you are a retard.

It's what this Administration did when the stimulus failed to create jobs.

See this is your problem you think creating 4million jobs means it failed to create jobs....
The problem here is that you ignore reality becaues you are a retard.

They understood that they hadn't created even close to the jobs they said that they would and so they invented a phony statistic to make themselves look better.

See this is also your problem is that you think right wing republicans opinions are equal to that of actually analysis and research. If Obama said the earth was round you'd follow the GOP it saying he is a liar because the earth is spherical

It's amusing, actually...unless of course you happen to be one of the millions of Americans who are out of work...then it's not so funny.

Yes it is amazing that with so many millions out of work you attack a policy that kept 4million out of unemployment...

Creating 4 million jobs SOUNDS so amazing until you examine that number and realize that to keep pace with population growth you need to create around 225,000 jobs per month.

ROTFL i see so according to you creating 4million jobs is bad because in 20 years we need to create more...

So if you take the three and a half years that Obama has been in office and multiply those 42 months by 225,000 you get the number 9,450,000 which is the number of jobs we needed to create to keep pace. That means that Barry "created" less than HALF the jobs that he needed to. Not so amazing now...is it?

See this is also your problem. You are so stupid that you think the stimulus was the only thing that effected job growth. So plz come back when you actually have a grtasp on reality

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

The boost from those policies helped the nation's gross domestic product increase 3% in 2010 and 1.7% last year

Helped?
LOL!
So we spent (wasted) $800 billion to help(!) add less than $700 billion to GDP.
How much can you actually credit to the stimulus? 0.7%, 0.5%, less?
What a joke.