Republicans have a poor understanding of economics. They should have no place in making policy

[Dad2three]

That 11+ million PRIVATE sector jobs in less than 5 years created under Obama,

actually dear Obama is a libcommie so does not create jobs. If you think he does please tell us a libcommie policy that would create rather than destroy jobs or admit you lack the IQ to be here.

The stimulus.

dear how can taking money from some so they cant spend it and giving it to others so they can spend it help? Would you fill a swimming pool by taking water from one side and putting in the other?

See why we are 100% positive that liberallism is based in pure ignorance?

'job creators' don't spend it Bubba, they park it off shore to attempt to bring it back at ANOTHER 5% GOP (Dubya's, 2004) tax giveaway!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

That 11+ million PRIVATE sector jobs in less than 5 years created under Obama,

actually dear Obama is a libcommie so does not create jobs. If you think he does please tell us a libcommie policy that would create rather than destroy jobs or admit you lack the IQ to be here.

The stimulus.

dear how can taking money from some so they cant spend it and giving it to others so they can spend it help? Would you fill a swimming pool by taking water from one side and putting in the other?

See why we are 100% positive that liberallism is based in pure ignorance?

'job creators' don't spend it Bubba, they park it off shore to attempt to bring it back at ANOTHER 5% GOP (Dubya's, 2004) tax giveaway!

dear they park some offshore because stupid liberals incentivise them to do so.

 

[Paperman299]

That 11+ million PRIVATE sector jobs in less than 5 years created under Obama,

actually dear Obama is a libcommie so does not create jobs. If you think he does please tell us a libcommie policy that would create rather than destroy jobs or admit you lack the IQ to be here.

The stimulus.

dear how can taking money from some so they cant spend it and giving it to others so they can spend it help? Would you fill a swimming pool by taking water from one side and putting in the other?

See why we are 100% positive that liberallism is based in pure ignorance?

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

 

[Dad2three]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

 

[Paperman299]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

dear CBO survey of economists showed most thought stimulus did not work. Do you get it now??

 

[Dad2three]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

dear CBO survey of economists showed most thought stimulus did not work. Do you get it now??

LIAR


CBO

Recently each of these eminent economists was asked whether the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill. Of the 44 economists surveyed, 37 responded, yielding a healthy response rate of 84 percent.

Among those who responded, 36 agreed that the stimulus bill had lowered the unemployment rate, while one disagreed.


That lone disagreeing economist, Harvard’s Alberto Alesina (who was one of my thesis advisers), has been a virulent opponent of the stimulus, although the research that he’s based this upon has come under sustained criticism, particularly from the International Monetary Fund, which views the study as flawed.

These responses are remarkably similar to those from an earlier survey taken in 2012; not a single economist has substantially changed views since that earlier survey.

Economists Believe the Stimulus Bill Reduced Unemployment

A follow-up question posed to the same expert panel asked whether the total benefits of the stimulus bill will end up exceeding the costs. The idea was to take account of all of the consequences, both positive and negative. On this question, there’s greater modesty, but still no raging debate. Of the 37 respondents, 25 agreed that the benefits exceeded the costs, while 10 were uncertain. Only 2 disagreed that the stimulus was worth it.


These data paint a picture of a professional consensus, tempered by a degree of modesty that there’s much we don’t know. Indeed, the best research into the views of economists finds that this consensus is pervasive across a range of issues. Call it the hidden consensus in economics.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/u...s-lifted-the-economy.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

 

[Dad2three]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

dear CBO survey of economists showed most thought stimulus did not work. Do you get it now??

CBO Director Demolishes GOP's Stimulus Myth

Under questioning from skeptical Republicans, the director of the nonpartisan (and widely respected) Congressional Budget Office was emphatic about the value of the 2009 stimulus. And, he said, the vast majority of economists agree.


In a survey conducted by the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, 80 percent of economic experts agreed that, because of the stimulus, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been otherwise.

"Only 4 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed," CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told the House Budget Committee. "That," he added, "is a distinct minority."

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

dear CBO survey of economists showed most thought stimulus did not work. Do you get it now??

LIAR


CBO

Recently each of these eminent economists was asked whether the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill. Of the 44 economists surveyed, 37 responded, yielding a healthy response rate of 84 percent.

Among those who responded, 36 agreed that the stimulus bill had lowered the unemployment rate, while one disagreed.


That lone disagreeing economist, Harvard’s Alberto Alesina (who was one of my thesis advisers), has been a virulent opponent of the stimulus, although the research that he’s based this upon has come under sustained criticism, particularly from the International Monetary Fund, which views the study as flawed.

These responses are remarkably similar to those from an earlier survey taken in 2012; not a single economist has substantially changed views since that earlier survey.

Economists Believe the Stimulus Bill Reduced Unemployment

A follow-up question posed to the same expert panel asked whether the total benefits of the stimulus bill will end up exceeding the costs. The idea was to take account of all of the consequences, both positive and negative. On this question, there’s greater modesty, but still no raging debate. Of the 37 respondents, 25 agreed that the benefits exceeded the costs, while 10 were uncertain. Only 2 disagreed that the stimulus was worth it.


These data paint a picture of a professional consensus, tempered by a degree of modesty that there’s much we don’t know. Indeed, the best research into the views of economists finds that this consensus is pervasive across a range of issues. Call it the hidden consensus in economics.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/u...s-lifted-the-economy.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

40 or so economists surveyed agreed with the Congressional Budget Office, known as the CBO, that the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus law. The survey asked a second question about whether—accounting for future costs arising from financing the stimulus with debt—its benefits would end up exceeding its costs. Here, 46 percent thought that they would and another 27 percent were uncertain, leaving only a small percentage that did not.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Just think what a 50.00$ minimum wage could do for the economy.... The spending alone ! Lol

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Just think what a 50.00$ minimum wage could do for the economy.... The spending alone ! Lol

yes why not just give everyone a $1 million a year raise!! Then you'd have a real consumer driven economy.

 

[Dad2three]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

dear CBO survey of economists showed most thought stimulus did not work. Do you get it now??

LIAR


CBO

Recently each of these eminent economists was asked whether the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill. Of the 44 economists surveyed, 37 responded, yielding a healthy response rate of 84 percent.

Among those who responded, 36 agreed that the stimulus bill had lowered the unemployment rate, while one disagreed.


That lone disagreeing economist, Harvard’s Alberto Alesina (who was one of my thesis advisers), has been a virulent opponent of the stimulus, although the research that he’s based this upon has come under sustained criticism, particularly from the International Monetary Fund, which views the study as flawed.

These responses are remarkably similar to those from an earlier survey taken in 2012; not a single economist has substantially changed views since that earlier survey.

Economists Believe the Stimulus Bill Reduced Unemployment

A follow-up question posed to the same expert panel asked whether the total benefits of the stimulus bill will end up exceeding the costs. The idea was to take account of all of the consequences, both positive and negative. On this question, there’s greater modesty, but still no raging debate. Of the 37 respondents, 25 agreed that the benefits exceeded the costs, while 10 were uncertain. Only 2 disagreed that the stimulus was worth it.


These data paint a picture of a professional consensus, tempered by a degree of modesty that there’s much we don’t know. Indeed, the best research into the views of economists finds that this consensus is pervasive across a range of issues. Call it the hidden consensus in economics.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/u...s-lifted-the-economy.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

40 or so economists surveyed agreed with the Congressional Budget Office, known as the CBO, that the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus law. The survey asked a second question about whether—accounting for future costs arising from financing the stimulus with debt—its benefits would end up exceeding its costs. Here, 46 percent thought that they would and another 27 percent were uncertain, leaving only a small percentage that did not.

DUMBASS

A follow-up question posed to the same expert panel asked whether the total benefits of the stimulus bill will end up exceeding the costs. The idea was to take account of all of the consequences, both positive and negative. On this question, there’s greater modesty, but still no raging debate. Of the 37 respondents, 25 agreed that the benefits exceeded the costs, while 10 were uncertain. Only 2 disagreed that the stimulus was worth it.


These data paint a picture of a professional consensus, tempered by a degree of modesty that there’s much we don’t know. Indeed, the best research into the views of economists finds that this consensus is pervasive across a range of issues. Call it the hidden consensus in economics.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/u...s-lifted-the-economy.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

 

[Dad2three]

Just think what a 50.00$ minimum wage could do for the economy.... The spending alone ! Lol

Or a 1% tax rate?

 

[Dad2three]

I'm starting to believe that the chief qualification to be a Republican besides incompetence is the ability to mis-inform, distort, and out and out lie.

 

[Dad2three]

REAGAN UNEMPLOYMENT RATE

JAN 1981 7.5%

NOV 1984 7.2%


01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


AVG ANNUAL U-RATE


1978 6.1
1979 5.8
1980 7.1
1981 7.6

1982 9.7

1983 9.6

1984 7.5

1985 7.2

1986 7.0


PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS


JAN 2001 111,859,000

Jan 2008 11,5977,000 (DUBYA'S HIGH POINT 4.1 million jobs created in 7 years)


JAN 2009 111,397,000

FEB 2010 107,187,000 (DUBYA'S GREAT RECESSION LOW POINT)

Dec 2014 118,402,000

Since hitting Dubya's bottom, more than 11 million private sector jobs


Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Yes, we've seen this maybe 200 times already.

Somehow, you think this proves a point.

Reagan not only inherited high unemployment, he also got interest rates that would kill today's economy.

Uhhh....Duhhhh...what do I do with that ?????? You'll figure it out.

He got things going and he gave people hope (and for good reason).

Wiped out Mondale....almost pitched a shutout....

But, I know...that doesn't count.

LOL

"Reagan not only inherited high unemployment"


REALLY????




Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.


Supply Side Economics


supply side did not work under reagan nor bush.the worse recession happened under REAGAN not carter.sure he picked up the economy after he trashed it.


Carter 1977

Jan 7.5%
Feb 7.6
March 7.4
April 7.2
May 7.0
June 7.2
July 6.9
Aug 7.0
Sept 6.8
Oct 6.8
Nov 6.8
Dec 6.4

1978
Jan 6.4
Feb 6.3
March 6.3
Apr 6.1
May 6.0
Jun 5.9
July 6.2
Aug 5.9
Sep 6.0
Oct 5.8
Nov 5.9
Dec 6.0

1979
Jan 5.9
Feb 5.9
Mar 5.8
Apr 5.8
May 5.6
Jun 5.7
Jul 5.7
Aug 6.0
Sept 5.9
Oct 6.0
Nov 5.9
Dec 6.0

1980
Jan 6.3
Feb 6.3
Mar 6.3
Apr 6.9
May 7.5
Jun 7.6
Jul 7.8
Aug 7.7
Sept 7.5
Oct 7.5
Nov 7.5
Dec 7.2

01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


AGAIN, CARTER HAD 9+ MILLION PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS GROWTH IN 4 YEARS VERSUS 14 MILLION FOR REAGAN'S 8

Jan 1979 65,636,000
Jan 1981 74,677,000

INCREASE OF 9,041,000 Total private IN 4 YEARS

Jan 1981 74,677,000
Jan 1989 89,394,000

14,717,00 Total private IN 8 YEARS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


I THOUGH CARTER WAS HORRIBLE? LOL

Yes, we keep seeing this same stuff.

Somehow you think it proves something.

It doesn't. But you have not figured that out yet.

Or do you really think an economy can be described by a single independent and dependent variable.

lol.

Carter was a terrible president.

He handed Reagan huge interest rates. Everyone knew we were headed for tough times.

But in four years, things were going in the right direction. Everyone saw that. Hence his massive re-election in 1984.

Or did you forget we kicked Carter's ass out of office after four years ? Now why would that be ?

Hhhhmmmmmm......

And would you shut the **** up about 1982.

You want to blame all of Obama's ills on Bush (which many agree with) but you somehow think Reagan has to eat the shitstorm that Carter handed him.

Grow the **** up.

Want me to explain why the American people are stupid and have continually voted against their best interests, including electing Ronnie twice????

Good you didn't even TRY to dispute Carter had 9+ million jobs in 4 years to Ronnie's 14 in 8 years in the private sector, ALL while tripling he debt

BUT WHEN WILL YOU DECIDE TO BE A MAN AND ACTUALLY KEEP ME ON IGNORE AS YOU'VE PROMISED (keep your promises), INSTEAD OF COMING IN A LITTLE AT A TIME AND SWIPING WITH YOUR OPINION, WITHOUT ANYTHING ELSE, THEN RUNNING AWAY? lol

I've provided plenty to dispell your spamshit attacks.

I don't need to dispute Carter had 9+ million jobs. The records show it. At the end of 4 years, u

That 11+ million PRIVATE sector jobs in less than 5 years created under Obama,

actually dear Obama is a libcommie so does not create jobs. If you think he does please tell us a libcommie policy that would create rather than destroy jobs or admit you lack the IQ to be here.

The stimulus. We covered this already. Don't make me trot out the survey of top economists again, since you clearly didn't understand it the first time.

Who gives a **** what they say. They've mostly been wrong and this is no different.

They have to support it...because it alligns with their one variable view of the world.

The Klown who PROMISED to put me on ignore but keeps choosing to only sporadically, responds to posts, lol



Sure Bubba, you give PLENTY of opinions.

Mostly been wrong? Like conservatives 'Gov't IS the problem' and Banksters don't need oversight, they'll self regulate? lol

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there’s much we don’t know.

dear half the economists are university liberals or Marxists so why does it matter if they say taking money and giving money is somehow stimulative?

We know liberals will be stupid. Does being an economist make them less liberal and Marxist?

 

[Listening]

Mondale was a weak and ineffective candidate, and didn't come across well on TV. But most importantly, Ronnie's great debt-fuelled spending spree, made it seem like the US was prospering. The stock market hadn't crashed so everyone was euphoric over the great economy, and the lower taxes. It was in Reagan's second term that the negative effects of his tax cuts came home to roost.

Much like no Republican wanted to run against Clinton (and hence you got Dole), nobody in the democratic party wanted to run against Reagan.

The Market crashed in 1987 because of computer issues (or so they say) but was back in three months.

I believe the market tripled under Reagan (from memory).

There were no negative effects from his tax cuts in his second term.

That is simply a fairy tale.

No, it's Clinton you're thinking of. That's when the market tripled. What Reagan tripled was the national debt.

No, it was Reagan....and I could be wrong.....

Takes over at 824

Finishes at 2180.

You are right, he didn't triple it. It only went up by...... 2.65

Clinton takes over at 3300

Ends at 11722. He almost quadrupled it.....

Reagan takes over a shitstorm economy and does pretty good.

Clinton gets much better and does good with it.

 

[Listening]

That 11+ million PRIVATE sector jobs in less than 5 years created under Obama,

actually dear Obama is a libcommie so does not create jobs. If you think he does please tell us a libcommie policy that would create rather than destroy jobs or admit you lack the IQ to be here.

The stimulus. We covered this already. Don't make me trot out the survey of top economists again, since you clearly didn't understand it the first time.

Who gives a **** what they say. They've mostly been wrong and this is no different.

They have to support it...because it alligns with their one variable view of the world.

 

[Faun]

So the economic experts are wrong? Poll Results IGM Forum

now that would be a first!!

See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance??

Why is it that the far-right position is so often in opposition to the experts? Sorry, but we use military experts for advice on the military, and we use scientific experts for information on the environment, medicine and technology. For the economy, it's essential we rely on...guess who?

But keep relying on folky chestnuts of "wisdom" and catchphrases to trap yourself in wrong positions.

dear CBO survey of economists showed most thought stimulus did not work. Do you get it now??

LIAR


CBO

Recently each of these eminent economists was asked whether the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill. Of the 44 economists surveyed, 37 responded, yielding a healthy response rate of 84 percent.

Among those who responded, 36 agreed that the stimulus bill had lowered the unemployment rate, while one disagreed.


That lone disagreeing economist, Harvard’s Alberto Alesina (who was one of my thesis advisers), has been a virulent opponent of the stimulus, although the research that he’s based this upon has come under sustained criticism, particularly from the International Monetary Fund, which views the study as flawed.

These responses are remarkably similar to those from an earlier survey taken in 2012; not a single economist has substantially changed views since that earlier survey.

Economists Believe the Stimulus Bill Reduced Unemployment

A follow-up question posed to the same expert panel asked whether the total benefits of the stimulus bill will end up exceeding the costs. The idea was to take account of all of the consequences, both positive and negative. On this question, there’s greater modesty, but still no raging debate. Of the 37 respondents, 25 agreed that the benefits exceeded the costs, while 10 were uncertain. Only 2 disagreed that the stimulus was worth it.


These data paint a picture of a professional consensus, tempered by a degree of modesty that there’s much we don’t know. Indeed, the best research into the views of economists finds that this consensus is pervasive across a range of issues. Call it the hidden consensus in economics.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/u...s-lifted-the-economy.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

40 or so economists surveyed agreed with the Congressional Budget Office, known as the CBO, that the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus law. The survey asked a second question about whether—accounting for future costs arising from financing the stimulus with debt—its benefits would end up exceeding its costs. Here, 46 percent thought that they would and another 27 percent were uncertain, leaving only a small percentage that did not.

Sounds like they said it was a success, proving Dad2three was accurate when he called you a liar for stating most economists said the stimulus did not work.

A majority thought it lowered unemployment and only 12% thought the benefits did not exceed the costs.

What do your lies reveal to the forum?