"Toddsterpatriot, post: 15103060, member: 29707"]
While the "Great Recession" was scary, there's a reason it wasn't dubbed a depression: Bernanke's aggressive policy response."
Yeah, Bernanke gets the credit. Not Obama and his stimulus slush fund.
What a surprise. Another con talking point from a con troll.
Untrue as normal. The economy not made up of just financial considerations. There is the whole issue of people working, trying to care for their families. Something that cons do not care about. Here you go, me boy. Do your best to understand:
"Fiscal policy was also more aggressive. Congress eventually approved the $700 billion TARP bank bailout followed by the $831 billion stimulus package in 2009.
"I think that it is fair to say that if the Fed and Treasury had done nothing and there had been no TARP to give them new tools, we could have been looking at a disaster that surpassed 1929-33," said Shafer.
2008 crisis: Worse than the Great Depression?
The major difference between the Wall Street crisis and the Great Depression is the way the Fed reacted.
While central bankers responded to the 1929 crash timidly and even by tightening monetary policy, Bernanke's Fed knew better.
Bernanke slashed rates lower than they've ever been in the U.S. and then pumped enough liquidity into the system to send the Fed's balance sheet swelling north of $4 trillion today, compared with less than $900 billion before the crisis.
The Fed expanded the money supply, instead of allowing it to shrink.
Yes. And helped save us from a depression, me boy.
That's why the recession ended before a major part of the "stimulus" could be spent.
Most of the stimulus money was spent in 2009.
Sorry you are so confused. Or should I say, having to lie like crazy to get your agenda across? The financial crisis of wall street was ended by 2009. The unemployment part of the great republican recession continued on for another 3 years or so. This is a really simple thing, me boy. I know you want to politicize it in favor of republicans, but they did absolutely nothing of import. Just filibustered bills that could have helped main street. And caused millions to be unemployed longer.
Most of the stimulus money was spent in 2009.
Parroting another out right lie? Lmao...
God Damn you are just an ignorant propaganda machine, full of opinions that you just pull out of your ass, huh, libtroll?
The stimulus was a ten-year package, $720 billion, or 91.5%, was budgeted for the first three
fiscal years. It allocated $185 billion in
FY 2009, $400 billion in
FY 2010and $135 billion in
FY 2011.
Obama's Stimulus, Five Years Later
Shortly after the passage of the Recovery Act in 2009, Vice President Joseph Biden urged local politicians not to spend the Shortly after the passage of the Recovery Act in 2009, Vice President Joseph Biden urged local politicians not to spend the money on "stupid things." They ignored his advice, and so did Mr. Biden. The federal government poured billions into the government and education sectors, where unemployment was low, but spent only about 10% on promised infrastructure, though the unemployment rate in construction was running in double digits. And some of the individual projects funded by the law were truly appalling. $783,000 was spent on a study of why young people consume malt liquor and marijuana. $92,000 went to the Army Corps of Engineers for costumes for mascots like Bobber the Water Safety Dog. $219,000 funded a study of college "hookups."
In aggregate, the spending helped drive federal outlays from less than $3 trillion in 2008 to $3.5 trillion in 2009, where federal spending has roughly remained ever since.
The legacy is a slow-growth economy: Growth over the last 18 quarters has averaged just 2.4% -- pretty shoddy compared to better than 4% growth during the Reagan recovery in the 1980s and almost 4% in the 1990s recovery.
The failure of the stimulus was a failure of the neo-Keynesian belief that economies can be jolted into action by a wave of government spending. In fact, people are smart enough to realize that every dollar poured into the economy via government spending must eventually be taken out of the productive economy in the form of taxes. And some of the individual projects funded by the law were truly appalling. $783,000 was spent on a study of why young people consume malt liquor and marijuana. $92,000 went to the Army Corps of Engineers for costumes for mascots like Bobber the Water Safety Dog. $219,000 funded a study of college "hookups."
In aggregate, the spending helped drive federal outlays from less than $3 trillion in 2008 to $3.5 trillion in 2009, where federal spending has roughly remained ever since.
The legacy is a slow-growth economy: Growth over the last 18 quarters has averaged just 2.4% -- pretty shoddy compared to better than 4% growth during the Reagan recovery in the 1980s and almost 4% in the 1990s recovery.
The failure of the stimulus was a failure of the neo-Keynesian belief that economies can be jolted into action by a wave of government spending. In fact, people are smart enough to realize that every dollar poured into the economy via government spending must eventually be taken out of the productive economy in the form of taxes
