the trillion dollar ‘Stimulus’ bill which is widely considered a colossal failure and waste of US tax dollars as well.
by whom?
Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.
The U.S. Economic Policy Debate Is a Sham
The real economy also responded to the massive stimulus but remained heavily dependent on it. In the United States, growth during the second half of 2009 probably averaged about 3 percent. Absent temporary fiscal stimulus and inventory rebuilding, which taken together added about 4 percentage points to U.S. growth, the economy would have contracted at about a 1 percent annual rate during the second half of 2009.
The Year Ahead
These are the opinions of ECONOMISTS.....what does Hoft do for a living? Shears sheep from the looks of it..
This is why Hoft is a ******* imbecile....if it "failed" then what "kicked in"?
in Obama’s first year leading to Obama’s first year deficit of $1.4 trillion.
Please pass the word to all your fellow morons...
FY2009 began Oct 1, 2008.....DO YOU THINK YOU PEOPLE CAN REMEMBER THIS?
Uh....no.....the Debt doubled, but the vast bulk of that increase is the Legacy of Supply Side Idiocy, Part Deux....It is something economists call "Structural Deficit"...They wouldn't have had reason to cover it in your Home Ec courses...
and set records for highest deficits
No....the highest deficit was that of FY 2009.....do you remember what you were told a few seconds ago about who submitted the WH budget proposal for FY 2009?
and the largest debt increase by any President ever...
EVERY president establishes that record.......nominally....
on a RELATIVE basis, Reagan's TRIPLING remains the outlier....
Please take note of what is being compared in your little example.
The Reduction in Unemployment vs The Reduction in unemployment RATE!
Do you realize that they are two separate things? The rate is the change from the base. The Unemployed is an actual head count.
A careful reading of the rest of what you posted shows similar misdirecting of information for the purpose of promoting an ideology over truth.
Your little factless diatribe also ignores the massive amounts of stimulus that went to crony's as payback for political favors.
Now, Trump is in no way responsible for a reduction of anything just yet as he hasn't been responsible for any budget and very little in the way of spending (almost all of which has been predetermined by the previous administration).
I'm not even sure I believe there has been a reduction in the debt. The debt clock, as far as I know, hasn't once in the past 40 years, gone backward. It currently is climbing from 19.9 Trillion.
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
Look, I'm gonna cut you a huge solid....
It's quite clear that you picture yourself some kind of Arbiter of Reason, or American Centrist. Allow me to disabuse you of that conceit.
You are an imbecile.....
The Reduction in Unemployment vs The Reduction in unemployment RATE!
The Unemployed is an actual head count.
Let me first point out that you are bitching about the words of my source - an economist - describing in a mass media forum the result of a specific poll (to which he links).
The "substance" of your complaint is that "Unemployment" is a nominal concept, while "Unemployment Rate" is relative. This kind of thing might earn you a pat on your flat head in grade school, but in the REAL WORLD, EVERYONE knows that BLS doesn't track "Nominal Unemployed" in a discreet fashion.
(I could go into great detail about why they are likely to refrain from doing so, but you aren't equipped to understand.)
When denizens of the REAL WORLD talk about "Unemployment" in any MEASURABLE fashion, they are, in fact, referring to the Unemployment Rate....
But that this was the limit of the idiocy you managed to cram into one post.....
A careful reading of the rest of what you posted shows similar misdirecting of information for the purpose of promoting an ideology over truth.
Even granting the false distinction you labor, how does this "misdirect"?
BLS DOES track Nominal EMployment......now, disregarding (for the nonce) new entrants into the labor force, what MUST happen to Nominal Unemployment if Nominal Employment rises?
Further, if you believe that the signal from U3 diverged from the signal of the non-existent Nominal Unemployment number, can you cite, oh.....let's pick private economists like IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers, and Moody's Analytics......add the non-partisan CBO, on the subject of the effect of Stimulus on Employment (given that we know it is the Complement of Unemployment)?
I understand that it has been rough so far, but I'm not quite done yet...but first, as an aside
Your little factless diatribe also ignores the massive amounts of stimulus that went to crony's as payback for political favors.
Do you understand what a fact is? How about a citation?
Now let me show you "factless".....
ignores the massive amounts of stimulus that went to crony's as payback for political favors.
I ignore it with good reason.....It's reich wing media bullshit....only an idiot would buy it....
wait.....this is awkward....
Maybe not..
I'm not even sure I believe there has been a reduction in the debt. The debt clock, as far as I know, hasn't once in the past 40 years, gone backward.
I'll skip all the stuff in this that screams "Irredeemable Moron" in favor of informing you that
a) You can get monthly treasury reports which allow you to find any month's contribution to the debt
b) had you clicked on the link provided, you would see that it offers a DAILY debt calculation
c) only to a credulous douche is this even newsworthy.
