How Much Credit Should Obama Get For The Recovery?

[Sundial]

And at the same time as people like you continue to parrot the party line that Republicans are "obstructing" President Obama's plans to fix the economy...Democrats in the Senate are refusing to act on a mounting pile of bills sent to them by the House.

Bills that would not create jobs: "most would attack federal regulations or spending and would have long-term impact, analysts say, but they would not spur job creation in the coming year or two."

 

[hortysir]

And at the same time as people like you continue to parrot the party line that Republicans are "obstructing" President Obama's plans to fix the economy...Democrats in the Senate are refusing to act on a mounting pile of bills sent to them by the House.

Bills that would not create jobs: "most would attack federal regulations or spending and would have long-term impact, analysts say, but they would not spur job creation in the coming year or two."

You bolded the wrong part.
The red segment is a good thing.

Funny as hell that you whine when the House doesn't take up just one Senate bill but not a peep when the Senate refuses to vote on several House bills.

Double standard much?

 

[Sundial]

So you "support" a re-do of the original stimulus that didn't work while you have no problem with the Senate sitting on bills that the House has given them?

You guys are complaining about how Obama's not doing enough to improve the economy, while doing everything you can to prevent him from improving the economy.

It's as if you want the economy to suck, but want to avoid responsibility for it's sucking.

I'm afraid the reality here, Sun...is that this President never HAD a real jobs plan. All those promises he made us that he was working on one while he was on vacation? That was all bullshit. What he came back with was a plan that he KNEW wouldn't be passed by either the House or the Senate because it was a repeat of something that already failed.

The Republican proposal

Key elements of the proposed Jobs Through Growth Act include reducing US budget deficits (through a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution), revenue-neutral income-tax reform, and regulatory easing – for example, repealing Obama's health-care and banking reforms and paving the way for more fossil-fuel development. As with Obama's proposals, economists have mixed views on the merits of these ideas...

At the same time, large and sudden cuts in federal spending would hurt growth in the near term, he and other economists warn. A move to balance the federal budget in the next year, for example, "would quickly destroy millions of jobs while creating enormous economic and social upheaval," says a recent analysis by Macroeconomic Advisers, a forecasting firm in St. Louis and Washington.

Setting aside that idea as a political nonstarter, the firm sees the GOP plan as relatively neutral for US job creation next year. By contrast, it sees the Obama plan adding 1.3 million jobs...



Obama jobs plan vs. GOP's: Which ideas will yield most jobs soonest? - CSMonitor.com

The Republican plan is a jobs plan that doesn't actually create jobs... meanwhile, it attempts to eliminate Obamacare, banking regulations, and to amend the Constitution...

Cynicism among Republicans knows no bounds.

 

[Sundial]

I made a mistake.

Actually, the Republican plan would destroy jobs.

I misread the part about setting aside that part of the plan that would destroy millions of jobs.

So, in truth, the Republican plan is a Jobs Destruction plan, not a Job Creation plan.

 

[Oldstyle]

I made a mistake.

Actually, the Republican plan would destroy jobs.

I misread the part about setting aside that part of the plan that would destroy millions of jobs.

So, in truth, the Republican plan is a Jobs Destruction plan, not a Job Creation plan.

Because as we all know cutting governmental regulations that make it more difficult for businesses to operate is a "job killer"...right, Sun? (eye-roll)

Hate to point out the obvious here, Wry but you Progressives are so confused with regards to economics that you think the original Obama Stimulus "worked" to create jobs while bills to cut red tape and regulations will cost jobs.

 

[Chris]

I made a mistake.

Actually, the Republican plan would destroy jobs.

I misread the part about setting aside that part of the plan that would destroy millions of jobs.

So, in truth, the Republican plan is a Jobs Destruction plan, not a Job Creation plan.

Because as we all know cutting governmental regulations that make it more difficult for businesses to operate is a "job killer"...right, Sun? (eye-roll)

Hate to point out the obvious here, Wry but you Progressives are so confused with regards to economics that you think the original Obama Stimulus "worked" to create jobs while bills to cut red tape and regulations will cost jobs.

The stimulus did create jobs.

That's why many Republicans in Congress voted for it.

When an economy is in a deflationary spiral, the government HAS to be the demand of last resort.

And I made all A's in economics in college. You are the one who is confused.

 

[Chris]

 

[Oldstyle]

You guys are complaining about how Obama's not doing enough to improve the economy, while doing everything you can to prevent him from improving the economy.

It's as if you want the economy to suck, but want to avoid responsibility for it's sucking.

I'm afraid the reality here, Sun...is that this President never HAD a real jobs plan. All those promises he made us that he was working on one while he was on vacation? That was all bullshit. What he came back with was a plan that he KNEW wouldn't be passed by either the House or the Senate because it was a repeat of something that already failed.

The Republican proposal

Key elements of the proposed Jobs Through Growth Act include reducing US budget deficits (through a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution), revenue-neutral income-tax reform, and regulatory easing – for example, repealing Obama's health-care and banking reforms and paving the way for more fossil-fuel development. As with Obama's proposals, economists have mixed views on the merits of these ideas...

At the same time, large and sudden cuts in federal spending would hurt growth in the near term, he and other economists warn. A move to balance the federal budget in the next year, for example, "would quickly destroy millions of jobs while creating enormous economic and social upheaval," says a recent analysis by Macroeconomic Advisers, a forecasting firm in St. Louis and Washington.

Setting aside that idea as a political nonstarter, the firm sees the GOP plan as relatively neutral for US job creation next year. By contrast, it sees the Obama plan adding 1.3 million jobs...



Obama jobs plan vs. GOP's: Which ideas will yield most jobs soonest? - CSMonitor.com

The Republican plan is a jobs plan that doesn't actually create jobs... meanwhile, it attempts to eliminate Obamacare, banking regulations, and to amend the Constitution...

Cynicism among Republicans knows no bounds.

And what happens when this latest "stimulus" runs out? The jobs that have been "saved" will once again be lost...just as they did following the first "stimulus". So what do we do then, Wry? Stimulus 3? Then Stimulus 4? 5? 6?

Meanwhile the Republicans are proposing things that will be good for the US in THE LONG RUN but you focus on the pain those proposals will cost in the short term. There is actually a SOLUTION to the problems we face in the Republican proposals...in the joke of a "jobs bill" that Obama submitted there is no solution to any of our problems. It's simply asking us to continue to borrow trillions to prop up a system that's failed.

 

[Oldstyle]

I made a mistake.

Actually, the Republican plan would destroy jobs.

I misread the part about setting aside that part of the plan that would destroy millions of jobs.

So, in truth, the Republican plan is a Jobs Destruction plan, not a Job Creation plan.

Because as we all know cutting governmental regulations that make it more difficult for businesses to operate is a "job killer"...right, Sun? (eye-roll)

Hate to point out the obvious here, Wry but you Progressives are so confused with regards to economics that you think the original Obama Stimulus "worked" to create jobs while bills to cut red tape and regulations will cost jobs.

The stimulus did create jobs.

That's why many Republicans in Congress voted for it.

When an economy is in a deflationary spiral, the government HAS to be the demand of last resort.

And I made all A's in economics in college. You are the one who is confused.

If in fact you made all A's in economics, Chris then you should be all too aware that your Keynesian solution to the problems we face is not the only solution out there, nor has Keynesian policy been shown to have been effective in the past. There is a REASON why Keynesian proponents Christina Romer and Larry Summers have left the Obama Administration and run back to the safety of their tenured positions at Berkeley and Harvard. To be quite blunt...we tried that and it failed miserably. Romer and Summers seem to have gotten that message...you on the other hand are still a "true believer".

 

[Chris]

Because as we all know cutting governmental regulations that make it more difficult for businesses to operate is a "job killer"...right, Sun? (eye-roll)

Hate to point out the obvious here, Wry but you Progressives are so confused with regards to economics that you think the original Obama Stimulus "worked" to create jobs while bills to cut red tape and regulations will cost jobs.

The stimulus did create jobs.

That's why many Republicans in Congress voted for it.

When an economy is in a deflationary spiral, the government HAS to be the demand of last resort.

And I made all A's in economics in college. You are the one who is confused.

If in fact you made all A's in economics, Chris then you should be all too aware that your Keynesian solution to the problems we face is not the only solution out there, nor has Keynesian policy been shown to have been effective in the past. There is a REASON why Keynesian proponents Christina Romer and Larry Summers have left the Obama Administration and run back to the safety of their tenured positions at Berkeley and Harvard. To be quite blunt...we tried that and it failed miserably. Romer and Summers seem to have gotten that message...you on the other hand are still a "true believer".

It did not fail.

It saved us from another Great Depression.

When an economy is in a deflationary spiral, the government HAS to be the demand of last resort.

And it worked by creating 1.6 million private sector jobs.

I know for a fact that it saved my job.

 

[keee keee]

credit for fudging the numbers!!!!! create some real jobs not these make believe green jobs.

 

[Chris]

credit for fudging the numbers!!!!! create some real jobs not these make believe green jobs.

Link?

 

[Oldstyle]

The House has declined to take up Mr. Obama’s jobs package, while Senate Democrats could not muster the 60 votes needed to block a Republican filibuster against either the full $447 billion package or a $35 billion piece providing state aid, mostly for teachers’ pay. With White House support, Senate Democrats have broken the measure into its main parts to force Republicans to take a series of tough votes on proposals, each of which has broad public support, according to polls.

“The American people are with me with this,” Mr. Obama said. “And it’s time for folks running around spending all their time talking about what’s wrong with America to spend some time rolling up their sleeves to help us make it right. There’s nothing wrong in this country that we can’t fix.”

The outcome in the Senate on the infrastructure spending provision, however, is not expected to be any different from the previous two votes.

Mr. Obama’s transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, a former Republican congressman from Illinois, appeared with him at the Key Bridge and then went to the Capitol to meet with lawmakers.

In response to Mr. Obama, House Republicans said the Democratic-controlled Senate should take up some 16 House-passed measures; most would attack federal regulations or spending and would have long-term impact, analysts say, but they would not spur job creation in the coming year or two.

What I find most amusing, Wry...is that you know as well as I do that President Obama's "Jobs Bill" was never a serious attempt at passing legislation to create jobs...all along it's been a reelection strategy...something to use against the Republicans when they refused to waste billions more of borrowed money on a repeat of the same stimulus plan that failed two years ago.

That the "stimulus plan" "failed" is wishful thinking on your part.

If you do something, and it works, it's unreasonable to say that it failed.

On what do you base your conviction that it was Obama's stimulus that brought about the results you show in your graph, Sun? One could make the argument that we would have had the same result if we hadn't spent the trillion dollars on Stimulus 1. I would also make the argument that if we had spent more to stimulate the Private Sector instead of propping up the Public Sector that the numbers on your graph would be MUCH better and that there wouldn't be the need for "Stimulus 2".

 

[Oldstyle]

credit for fudging the numbers!!!!! create some real jobs not these make believe green jobs.

Link?

You need a "link" to know that the so called Green Jobs creation promised in the first stimulus hasn't materialized? Come on, Chris...did you NOT get the Solyndra and Beacon memos?

 

[Liability]

I usually don't either blame or credit presidents for the economic situation. Mainly what happens is beyond their control. But this time I think it may be a little different. Obama's taken some steps some other presidents would be afraid to go. He's taken some political risks, in other words, which appear to be paying off. Should he get more than normal credit for the recovery?

If there is ever an actual recovery, he might get some credit.

Whether he will be deserving of any is another matter.

 

[Oldstyle]

The stimulus did create jobs.

That's why many Republicans in Congress voted for it.

When an economy is in a deflationary spiral, the government HAS to be the demand of last resort.

And I made all A's in economics in college. You are the one who is confused.

If in fact you made all A's in economics, Chris then you should be all too aware that your Keynesian solution to the problems we face is not the only solution out there, nor has Keynesian policy been shown to have been effective in the past. There is a REASON why Keynesian proponents Christina Romer and Larry Summers have left the Obama Administration and run back to the safety of their tenured positions at Berkeley and Harvard. To be quite blunt...we tried that and it failed miserably. Romer and Summers seem to have gotten that message...you on the other hand are still a "true believer".

It did not fail.

It saved us from another Great Depression.

When an economy is in a deflationary spiral, the government HAS to be the demand of last resort.

And it worked by creating 1.6 million private sector jobs.

I know for a fact that it saved my job.

I would make the argument that it was TARP that saved us from another Great Depression, Chris. The Obama Stimulus essentially wasted a trillion dollars propping up Public Sector jobs and paying unemployment benefits to the States...the reason this Administration is back looking for "Stimulus 2" is that the original stimulus didn't create long term jobs. I'm curious to know what your job is that you think the Obama Stimulus "saved" it.

 

[Chris]

What I find most amusing, Wry...is that you know as well as I do that President Obama's "Jobs Bill" was never a serious attempt at passing legislation to create jobs...all along it's been a reelection strategy...something to use against the Republicans when they refused to waste billions more of borrowed money on a repeat of the same stimulus plan that failed two years ago.

That the "stimulus plan" "failed" is wishful thinking on your part.

If you do something, and it works, it's unreasonable to say that it failed.

On what do you base your conviction that it was Obama's stimulus that brought about the results you show in your graph, Sun? One could make the argument that we would have had the same result if we hadn't spent the trillion dollars on Stimulus 1. I would also make the argument that if we had spent more to stimulate the Private Sector instead of propping up the Public Sector that the numbers on your graph would be MUCH better and that there wouldn't be the need for "Stimulus 2".

It would be economically impossible for a stimulus not to create jobs.

And half the stimulus was tax cuts which is not "proping up the public sector."

And might I remind you that in the public sector are firemen, police, teachers, and other valuable members of society. And when they have jobs and spend money it stimulates the entire economy.

You don't seem to know much about economics.

 

[Oldstyle]

That the "stimulus plan" "failed" is wishful thinking on your part.

If you do something, and it works, it's unreasonable to say that it failed.

On what do you base your conviction that it was Obama's stimulus that brought about the results you show in your graph, Sun? One could make the argument that we would have had the same result if we hadn't spent the trillion dollars on Stimulus 1. I would also make the argument that if we had spent more to stimulate the Private Sector instead of propping up the Public Sector that the numbers on your graph would be MUCH better and that there wouldn't be the need for "Stimulus 2".

It would be economically impossible for a stimulus not to create jobs.

And half the stimulus was tax cuts which is not "proping up the public sector."

And might I remind you that in the public sector are firemen, police, teachers, and other valuable members of society. And when they have jobs and spend money it stimulates the entire economy.

You don't seem to know much about economics.

I didn't say the Obama stimulus didn't create jobs...what I said is that it didn't create long term jobs. Those firemen, police and teacher's jobs that you mention were "saved" yet as soon as the stimulus ran out then those jobs were once again in danger of being cut...hence the need for Stimulus 2 AKA the Obama Jobs Bill. Quite obviously that isn't job "creation". Did you not want to share with us what your job was that was "saved" by the Obama stimulus?

 

[Chris]

On what do you base your conviction that it was Obama's stimulus that brought about the results you show in your graph, Sun? One could make the argument that we would have had the same result if we hadn't spent the trillion dollars on Stimulus 1. I would also make the argument that if we had spent more to stimulate the Private Sector instead of propping up the Public Sector that the numbers on your graph would be MUCH better and that there wouldn't be the need for "Stimulus 2".

It would be economically impossible for a stimulus not to create jobs.

And half the stimulus was tax cuts which is not "proping up the public sector."

And might I remind you that in the public sector are firemen, police, teachers, and other valuable members of society. And when they have jobs and spend money it stimulates the entire economy.

You don't seem to know much about economics.

I didn't say the Obama stimulus didn't create jobs...what I said is that it didn't create long term jobs. Those firemen, police and teacher's jobs that you mention were "saved" yet as soon as the stimulus ran out then those jobs were once again in danger of being cut...hence the need for Stimulus 2 AKA the Obama Jobs Bill. Quite obviously that isn't job "creation". Did you not want to share with us what your job was that was "saved" by the Obama stimulus?

I'm a realtor.

And reversing a deflationary spiral not only created jobs, it saved the entire economy.

 

[Oldstyle]

It would be economically impossible for a stimulus not to create jobs.

And half the stimulus was tax cuts which is not "proping up the public sector."

And might I remind you that in the public sector are firemen, police, teachers, and other valuable members of society. And when they have jobs and spend money it stimulates the entire economy.

You don't seem to know much about economics.

I didn't say the Obama stimulus didn't create jobs...what I said is that it didn't create long term jobs. Those firemen, police and teacher's jobs that you mention were "saved" yet as soon as the stimulus ran out then those jobs were once again in danger of being cut...hence the need for Stimulus 2 AKA the Obama Jobs Bill. Quite obviously that isn't job "creation". Did you not want to share with us what your job was that was "saved" by the Obama stimulus?

I'm a realtor.

And reversing a deflationary spiral not only created jobs, it saved the entire economy.

I just about fell off my chair here, Chris. You're a Realtor and you think something in the Obama stimulus "saved" your job? Quite a concept. Down here in Florida the biggest job loses were tied into the housing market. Builders, bankers and real estate professionals lost jobs like no other job sector. What part of the Obama Stimulus do you think "saved" your job? What's rather amusing, Chris is the large number of German's who were here buying up property because they were in much better shape financially than we were because Merkel resisted Obama's calls for huge stimulus spending by the German government like he proposed for the US and the German economy rebounded much quicker than ours.