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

[Faun]

I shouldn't stand by what was in the bill??

You're suggesting I should take your word over the legislation itself?

If you really need to stand by the bill...be my guest.

It did little of what it said....on all accounts.

But then you can explain how it stabalized anything and how it did it.

If you like...I, frankly, don't care.

You'd be talking to an empty house.

You have presented nothing. You have no data, no facts. You just keep asserting that the stimulus was a very-bad-no-good stimulus with nothing to back it up. If you want to cling to that position, fine, but you can abandon all pretense that it's based on rationality.

Are you going to argue with the 266,000 per job or not.

Those are the assertions that your "enemy" is putting out there. If you have something to back it up...go ahead.

That or make the case the 266,000 per job was acceptable.

Either way, the numbers he quoted are your own. So if those are not facts, then you should have no problem.

Keep your ******* lectures for someone who cares.

The $266,000 figure has been refuted. Your acceptance of such is not required. The fact of the matter, whether you accept it or not, is that 100% of ARRA was not for job creation.

I don't recall seeing it being refuted.

Please point me the way.

Poll Results IGM Forum

 

[Listening]

If you really need to stand by the bill...be my guest.

It did little of what it said....on all accounts.

But then you can explain how it stabalized anything and how it did it.

If you like...I, frankly, don't care.

You'd be talking to an empty house.

Most economists disagree with you.

Do you mean academics ?

The ones in industry I know all pretty much agree it was a total disaster. That, of course, is purely anecdotal.

So post a link confirming your claim.....

Now just why do you think I said it was anecdotal ?

Translation .... you can't prove your opinion.

How do you prove an opinion ?

 

[Faun]

Most economists disagree with you.

Do you mean academics ?

The ones in industry I know all pretty much agree it was a total disaster. That, of course, is purely anecdotal.

So post a link confirming your claim.....

Now just why do you think I said it was anecdotal ?

Translation .... you can't prove your opinion.

How do you prove an opinion ?

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

 

[Listening]

Do you mean academics ?

The ones in industry I know all pretty much agree it was a total disaster. That, of course, is purely anecdotal.

So post a link confirming your claim.....

Now just why do you think I said it was anecdotal ?

Translation .... you can't prove your opinion.

How do you prove an opinion ?

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

An opinion isn't an argument......

 

[Faun]

So post a link confirming your claim.....

Now just why do you think I said it was anecdotal ?

Translation .... you can't prove your opinion.

How do you prove an opinion ?

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

An opinion isn't an argument......

An opinion is still based on something. Yours appears to be based on nothing tangible.

 

[Listening]

Now just why do you think I said it was anecdotal ?

Translation .... you can't prove your opinion.

How do you prove an opinion ?

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

An opinion isn't an argument......

An opinion is still based on something. Yours appears to be based on nothing tangible.

As I stated...only anecdotal conversations with people who are economists for private firms.

 

[Faun]

Translation .... you can't prove your opinion.

How do you prove an opinion ?

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

An opinion isn't an argument......

An opinion is still based on something. Yours appears to be based on nothing tangible.

As I stated...only anecdotal conversations with people who are economists for private firms.

Did those purported people also misinform you that 100% of ARRA went to job creation?

Meanwhile, you have zero to offer as evidence to confirm your opinion, I have economic professors from some of America's highest educational institutions to confirm mine.

 

[Listening]

How do you prove an opinion ?

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

An opinion isn't an argument......

An opinion is still based on something. Yours appears to be based on nothing tangible.

As I stated...only anecdotal conversations with people who are economists for private firms.

Did those purported people also misinform you that 100% of ARRA went to job creation?

Meanwhile, you have zero to offer as evidence to confirm your opinion, I have economic professors from some of America's highest educational institutions to confirm mine.

By all means...hold to that....it makes my job easier.

Academics are always so "useful". Those who live in the real world have a slightly different (and more realistic) POV.

But you keep quoting those "professors" Like Paul Krugman.......

 

[Paperman299]

With contributing evidence to support your opinion isn't baseless.

An opinion isn't an argument......

An opinion is still based on something. Yours appears to be based on nothing tangible.

As I stated...only anecdotal conversations with people who are economists for private firms.

Did those purported people also misinform you that 100% of ARRA went to job creation?

Meanwhile, you have zero to offer as evidence to confirm your opinion, I have economic professors from some of America's highest educational institutions to confirm mine.

By all means...hold to that....it makes my job easier.

Academics are always so "useful". Those who live in the real world have a slightly different (and more realistic) POV.

But you keep quoting those "professors" Like Paul Krugman.......

Krugman is actually not part of the IGM survey. If you have a real response to any of the data that's actually been presented to you, please, let's have it. Otherwise, you've pretty much failed at your "job"...

 

[Faun]

An opinion isn't an argument......

An opinion is still based on something. Yours appears to be based on nothing tangible.

As I stated...only anecdotal conversations with people who are economists for private firms.

Did those purported people also misinform you that 100% of ARRA went to job creation?

Meanwhile, you have zero to offer as evidence to confirm your opinion, I have economic professors from some of America's highest educational institutions to confirm mine.

By all means...hold to that....it makes my job easier.

Academics are always so "useful". Those who live in the real world have a slightly different (and more realistic) POV.

But you keep quoting those "professors" Like Paul Krugman.......

Krugman is actually not part of the IGM survey. If you have a real response to any of the data that's actually been presented to you, please, let's have it. Otherwise, you've pretty much failed at your "job"...

He clearly has no response other than to insinuate economists from America's highest institutions of learning are not as qualified as he is.

 

[Dad2three]

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009


Dean Baker commented: [T]he revised data ... showed that the economy was plunging even more rapidly than we had previously recognised in the two quarters following the collapse of Lehman. Yet, the plunge stopped in the second quarter of 2009 — just as the stimulus came on line. This was followed by respectable growth over the next four quarters. Growth then weakened again as the impact of the stimulus began to fade at the end of 2010 and the start of this year. In other words, the growth pattern shown by the revised data sure makes it appear that the stimulus worked. The main problem would seem to be that the stimulus was not big enough and it wasn't left in place long enough to lift the economy to anywhere near potential output

US debt deal how Washington lost the plot Dean Baker US news The Guardian


The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee established a "Hypocrisy Hall of Fame" to list Republican Representatives who had voted against ARRA but who then sought or took credit for ARRA programs in their districts. As of September 2011, the DCCC was listing 128 House Republicans in this category.



Newsweek reported that many of the Republican legislators who publicly argued that the stimulus would not create jobs were writing letters seeking stimulus programs for their districts on the grounds that the spending would create jobs.


In July 2010, the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) estimated that the stimulus had "saved or created between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs as of the second quarter of 2010". At that point, spending outlays under the stimulus totaled $257 billion and tax cuts totaled $223 billion. In July 2011, the CEA estimated that as of the first quarter of 2011,[95] the ARRA raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been by between 2.4 and 3.6 million. The sum of outlays and tax cuts up to this point was $666 billion. Using a straight mathematical calculation, critics reported that the ARRA cost taxpayers between $185,000 to $278,000 per job that was created, though this computation does not include the permanent infrastructure that resulted.

 

[Dragonlady]

Are you going to argue with the 266,000 per job or not.

Those are the assertions that your "enemy" is putting out there. If you have something to back it up...go ahead.

That or make the case the 266,000 per job was acceptable.

Either way, the numbers he quoted are your own. So if those are not facts, then you should have no problem.

Keep your ******* lectures for someone who cares.

There is no point in arguing a false premise. There was much more to the stimulus than job creation, so you can't just divide the cost by the jobs created and say it cost X per job. What about the capital value of the infrastructure created? There's the cost of the materials they worked with. Or the cost saving to the unemployment insurance program, or welfare? Then there's the taxes paid to the Feds by the workers and the companies they worked for.

If you contract with 5 people for $500,000 to build you a house, do you think each guy gets $100,000? Or do you think that they likely spent $200,000 on materials, another chunk on equipment rentals and sub trades, had bookkeeping and administration costs, taxes on their profit, and each pocketed about $35,000 for the job?

 

[KissMy]

Gasoline prices were falling until Republicans took the House & Senate. Gasoline prices have been rising every since. Enjoy paying their inflation tax.

 

[Oldstyle]

Are you going to argue with the 266,000 per job or not.

Those are the assertions that your "enemy" is putting out there. If you have something to back it up...go ahead.

That or make the case the 266,000 per job was acceptable.

Either way, the numbers he quoted are your own. So if those are not facts, then you should have no problem.

Keep your ******* lectures for someone who cares.

There is no point in arguing a false premise. There was much more to the stimulus than job creation, so you can't just divide the cost by the jobs created and say it cost X per job. What about the capital value of the infrastructure created? There's the cost of the materials they worked with. Or the cost saving to the unemployment insurance program, or welfare? Then there's the taxes paid to the Feds by the workers and the companies they worked for.

If you contract with 5 people for $500,000 to build you a house, do you think each guy gets $100,000? Or do you think that they likely spent $200,000 on materials, another chunk on equipment rentals and sub trades, had bookkeeping and administration costs, taxes on their profit, and each pocketed about $35,000 for the job?

That's an amusing statement, Dragonlady! Since the Stimulus was supposed to create jobs...how many it really created would obviously be the issue. The "false premise" was created when the Obama Administration started playing fast and loose with the truth...creating a new economic statistic "jobs created or saved" to hide how few jobs they actually HAD created after spending nearly eight hundred billion dollars in tax payer money.

 

[Oldstyle]

Gasoline prices were falling until Republicans took the House & Senate. Gasoline prices have been rising every since. Enjoy paying their inflation tax.

Where do you live that you consider gas prices to be excessive at the moment, Kiss? There has been a slight increase from where gas prices bottomed out but considering the unrest in the Middle East it's a damn miracle that prices haven't spiked drastically lately.

Oh wait...that could be because Republicans in States you liberals didn't control passed legislation allowing US companies to produce record amounts of oil and natural gas so that we aren't as dependent on foreign supplies as we would have been! Enjoy THAT the next time you're filling up at the pump!

 

[regent]

The role of the Republican party is to start recessions and depressions, and the role of the Democratic party is to end them. It may be in the Constitution.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Krugman, Stiglitz, Piketty, Reich......

The Peoples economists !!!! Lol

 

[Uncensored2008]

Where do you live that you consider gas prices to be excessive at the moment, Kiss? There has been a slight increase from where gas prices bottomed out but considering the unrest in the Middle East it's a damn miracle that prices haven't spiked drastically lately.

Oh wait...that could be because Republicans in States you liberals didn't control passed legislation allowing US companies to produce record amounts of oil and natural gas so that we aren't as dependent on foreign supplies as we would have been! Enjoy THAT the next time you're filling up at the pump!

Gas prices are on a roller coaster ride in California. In the OC/LA area they shot up to $4 a gallon in February, dropped back down to $2.75 in March, and are back to about $3.50. Games are afoot.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The role of the Republican party is to start recessions and depressions, and the role of the Democratic party is to end them. It may be in the Constitution.

Is that what you read on your colon wall?

 

[Oldstyle]

Where do you live that you consider gas prices to be excessive at the moment, Kiss? There has been a slight increase from where gas prices bottomed out but considering the unrest in the Middle East it's a damn miracle that prices haven't spiked drastically lately.

Oh wait...that could be because Republicans in States you liberals didn't control passed legislation allowing US companies to produce record amounts of oil and natural gas so that we aren't as dependent on foreign supplies as we would have been! Enjoy THAT the next time you're filling up at the pump!

Gas prices are on a roller coaster ride in California. In the OC/LA area they shot up to $4 a gallon in February, dropped back down to $2.75 in March, and are back to about $3.50. Games are afoot.

I haven't seen anything close to that in Florida. Unleaded regular is going for $2.31 a gallon when I filled up last night.