I don't know how many times this must be explained.
You'll need to post actual studies, done by people who have no agenda to even get My attention. A blog won't cut it.
TARP passed under Dubya? WHY would we charge him for that?
FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
As we have written twice before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the fiscal year 2009 deficit at $1.2 trillion two weeks before Obama took office. That fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2008. The fiscal year was already nearly one-third over when Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009.
Romney is wrong to characterize the amount repaid so far as a "small share." The Department of Treasury provides a "Daily TARP Update" that provides data on how much money was spent under the Troubled Assets Relief Program. The June 6 report, which came out the day that Romney was interviewed on CNN, showed that TARP's Automotive Industry Financing Program provided a total of $79.69 billion to the auto companies. Of that, $39.61 billion has been repaid — roughly half. That's not a "small share."
Romney Wrong on Deficits Auto Bailout
GET HONEST BUBBA
EVERY OTHER US PREZ IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAST F/Y BUDGET, EXCEPT DUBYA IN CONS WORLD *SHAKING HEAD*
How Much Did Obama Add?
Economist Daniel J. Mitchell of the libertarian CATO Institute — who once served on the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee — has put the figure at $140 billion. Ordinarily, an incoming president has little or no influence over spending that was approved under his predecessor. So in normal circumstances, all spending for fiscal year 2009 would have been rightly tied to Bush, and fiscal 2010 would be the first year for which Obama would have prepared a budget and signed the major spending bills.
Obama 8217 s Spending 8216 Inferno 8217 or Not
TARP F/Y 2009 SPENDING
Spending on the TARP program turned out to be much less than the $700 billion originally authorized. Congress later reduced the authorization to $475 billion in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that Obama signed on July 21, 2010. And not all was spent in 2009.
Actual outlays for TARP in fiscal 2009 totaled $154 billion, according to the CBO.
Obama 8217 s Spending 8216 Inferno 8217 or Not
Read carefully.
In other words you can't give me ONE example of austerity EVER working in ANY recession. Got it
Demand Drives An Economy
Here's the deal. In a slowdown consumers and businesses are not bringing enough "demand" to an economy. This lack of customers causes businesses to lay off workers and those workers stop being consumers, so businesses have to cut back even more. So they lay off workers and those workers stop being consumers, so businesses have to cut back even more. You get the picture: "Death spiral."
This is when government (We the People) should step in. In the 20th century we learned a way out of recessions and depressions. During slowdowns government can spend, and this boosts the demand in the economy to make up for the demand shortfall from consumers and businesses. Government can invest in infrastructure, causing construction workers to be hired and suppliers of equipment and materials to thrive. Government can spend on things it needs like equipment and cars, etc. Government can hire to get things done that need to be done like teaching kids, daycare, adding police and firefighters ... so many things.
And all of those thing help make the lives of We the People better in the long run. Good, modern infrastructure, schools and teachers, universities, police, firefighters, parks, libraries, courts, scientific research, environmental protection, food inspectors, job-safety inspectors and all the rest of the things government does make our lives better – and boost our economy in the long term.
Stimulus Helped The U.S. Economy, Deficit-Cutting Hurt
Just after President Obama took office there were enough Democrats in the House and Senate to pass the "stimulus." This was the result:
Unfortunately Republicans gained seats in the Senate and have filibustered every single attempt to help the economy since. The post Three Updated Charts to Email to Your Right-Wing Brother-In-Law explains how this has hurt us,
Government spending does not “take money out of the economy.” In fact it puts money into the economy, creates jobs and lays the foundation for future prosperity. ... this chart from The Atlantic, “The Incredible Shrinking U.S. Government,” shows how government spending to create government jobs helped us get out of the 1981, 1990 and 2001 recessions. But since the 2007 “Great Recession,” we instead have laid off hundreds of thousands of government employees, obviously making unemployment even worse.
Austerity Has Made Europe s Depression Longer Than In 30s Crooks and Liars
21 August 2014
Eurozone austerity a 'disastrous failure' claim Nobel economists as dismal data raises fears it's backsliding into crisis
Eurozone austerity a disastrous failure claim Nobel economists This is Money
this chart from Ben Wolcott at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Consider it an elegant tombstone for the austerity adventures of the past few years. The bottom axis measures how much each government cut spending and raised taxes after 2010. The left axis measures how the employment rate changed.
As Wolcott puts it: “This image very crisply suggests what Keynesians have been arguing in more nuanced ways for four years, namely that many countries cut fiscal spending too soon, prolonging the negative impacts of the Great Recession for workers.”
Economic austerity How it failed in one chart
IMF admits: we failed to realise the damage austerity would do to Greece
IMF admits we failed to realise the damage austerity would do to Greece Business The Guardian
It’s Official: Austerity Economics Doesn’t Work
It 8217 s Official Austerity Economics Doesn 8217 t Work - The New Yorker
TARP passed under Dubya? WHY would we charge him for that?
FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
As we have written twice before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the fiscal year 2009 deficit at $1.2 trillion two weeks before Obama took office. That fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2008. The fiscal year was already nearly one-third over when Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009.
Romney is wrong to characterize the amount repaid so far as a "small share." The Department of Treasury provides a "Daily TARP Update" that provides data on how much money was spent under the Troubled Assets Relief Program. The June 6 report, which came out the day that Romney was interviewed on CNN, showed that TARP's Automotive Industry Financing Program provided a total of $79.69 billion to the auto companies. Of that, $39.61 billion has been repaid — roughly half. That's not a "small share."
Romney Wrong on Deficits Auto Bailout
GET HONEST BUBBA
EVERY OTHER US PREZ IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAST F/Y BUDGET, EXCEPT DUBYA IN CONS WORLD *SHAKING HEAD*
How Much Did Obama Add?
Economist Daniel J. Mitchell of the libertarian CATO Institute — who once served on the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee — has put the figure at $140 billion. Ordinarily, an incoming president has little or no influence over spending that was approved under his predecessor. So in normal circumstances, all spending for fiscal year 2009 would have been rightly tied to Bush, and fiscal 2010 would be the first year for which Obama would have prepared a budget and signed the major spending bills.
Obama 8217 s Spending 8216 Inferno 8217 or Not
TARP F/Y 2009 SPENDING
Spending on the TARP program turned out to be much less than the $700 billion originally authorized. Congress later reduced the authorization to $475 billion in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that Obama signed on July 21, 2010. And not all was spent in 2009.
Actual outlays for TARP in fiscal 2009 totaled $154 billion, according to the CBO.
Obama 8217 s Spending 8216 Inferno 8217 or Not
TARP passed under Dubya? WHY would we charge him for that?
Charge Bush for every dollar of TARP he spent that wasn't paid back.
Do the same for Obama.
TARP passed under Dubya? WHY would we charge him for that?
FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
As we have written twice before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the fiscal year 2009 deficit at $1.2 trillion two weeks before Obama took office. That fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2008. The fiscal year was already nearly one-third over when Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009.
Romney is wrong to characterize the amount repaid so far as a "small share." The Department of Treasury provides a "Daily TARP Update" that provides data on how much money was spent under the Troubled Assets Relief Program. The June 6 report, which came out the day that Romney was interviewed on CNN, showed that TARP's Automotive Industry Financing Program provided a total of $79.69 billion to the auto companies. Of that, $39.61 billion has been repaid — roughly half. That's not a "small share."
Romney Wrong on Deficits Auto Bailout
GET HONEST BUBBA
EVERY OTHER US PREZ IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAST F/Y BUDGET, EXCEPT DUBYA IN CONS WORLD *SHAKING HEAD*
How Much Did Obama Add?
Economist Daniel J. Mitchell of the libertarian CATO Institute — who once served on the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee — has put the figure at $140 billion. Ordinarily, an incoming president has little or no influence over spending that was approved under his predecessor. So in normal circumstances, all spending for fiscal year 2009 would have been rightly tied to Bush, and fiscal 2010 would be the first year for which Obama would have prepared a budget and signed the major spending bills.
Obama 8217 s Spending 8216 Inferno 8217 or Not
TARP F/Y 2009 SPENDING
Spending on the TARP program turned out to be much less than the $700 billion originally authorized. Congress later reduced the authorization to $475 billion in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that Obama signed on July 21, 2010. And not all was spent in 2009.
Actual outlays for TARP in fiscal 2009 totaled $154 billion, according to the CBO.
Obama 8217 s Spending 8216 Inferno 8217 or Not
TARP passed under Dubya? WHY would we charge him for that?
Charge Bush for every dollar of TARP he spent that wasn't paid back.
Do the same for Obama.
Thanks for admitting you don't have a clue on how F/Y budgets work. AGAIN, Jan 8, 2009 CBO said there was a $1.2+ trillion deficit
Read carefully.
In other words you can't give me ONE example of austerity EVER working in ANY recession. Got it
Demand Drives An Economy
Here's the deal. In a slowdown consumers and businesses are not bringing enough "demand" to an economy. This lack of customers causes businesses to lay off workers and those workers stop being consumers, so businesses have to cut back even more. So they lay off workers and those workers stop being consumers, so businesses have to cut back even more. You get the picture: "Death spiral."
This is when government (We the People) should step in. In the 20th century we learned a way out of recessions and depressions. During slowdowns government can spend, and this boosts the demand in the economy to make up for the demand shortfall from consumers and businesses. Government can invest in infrastructure, causing construction workers to be hired and suppliers of equipment and materials to thrive. Government can spend on things it needs like equipment and cars, etc. Government can hire to get things done that need to be done like teaching kids, daycare, adding police and firefighters ... so many things.
And all of those thing help make the lives of We the People better in the long run. Good, modern infrastructure, schools and teachers, universities, police, firefighters, parks, libraries, courts, scientific research, environmental protection, food inspectors, job-safety inspectors and all the rest of the things government does make our lives better – and boost our economy in the long term.
Stimulus Helped The U.S. Economy, Deficit-Cutting Hurt
Just after President Obama took office there were enough Democrats in the House and Senate to pass the "stimulus." This was the result:
Unfortunately Republicans gained seats in the Senate and have filibustered every single attempt to help the economy since. The post Three Updated Charts to Email to Your Right-Wing Brother-In-Law explains how this has hurt us,
Government spending does not “take money out of the economy.” In fact it puts money into the economy, creates jobs and lays the foundation for future prosperity. ... this chart from The Atlantic, “The Incredible Shrinking U.S. Government,” shows how government spending to create government jobs helped us get out of the 1981, 1990 and 2001 recessions. But since the 2007 “Great Recession,” we instead have laid off hundreds of thousands of government employees, obviously making unemployment even worse.
Austerity Has Made Europe s Depression Longer Than In 30s Crooks and Liars
21 August 2014
Eurozone austerity a 'disastrous failure' claim Nobel economists as dismal data raises fears it's backsliding into crisis
Eurozone austerity a disastrous failure claim Nobel economists This is Money
this chart from Ben Wolcott at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Consider it an elegant tombstone for the austerity adventures of the past few years. The bottom axis measures how much each government cut spending and raised taxes after 2010. The left axis measures how the employment rate changed.
As Wolcott puts it: “This image very crisply suggests what Keynesians have been arguing in more nuanced ways for four years, namely that many countries cut fiscal spending too soon, prolonging the negative impacts of the Great Recession for workers.”
Economic austerity How it failed in one chart
IMF admits: we failed to realise the damage austerity would do to Greece
IMF admits we failed to realise the damage austerity would do to Greece Business The Guardian
It’s Official: Austerity Economics Doesn’t Work
It 8217 s Official Austerity Economics Doesn 8217 t Work - The New Yorker
Austerity has never been tried. I know you posted links, but if you look very, very carefully, you will see that not once, in any example you provided, did those government actually reduce spending.
Not once.
I posted a review of this a few years back.
You simply don't have an understanding of what is going on economically. You just regurgitate what others tell you. Say goodbye.
