| Author |
Message |
    
Court
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 06:20 pm: | 
|
By the way ..... The stimulus program, to create jobs, saw today ........ For yet another week.....yet more folks on unemployment.
You think ..... If even by chance ....he'd get at least one thing right eventually. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 07:10 pm: |
|
In fact, your second chart seems to allude that the stimulus staunched a tide of job losses in the private sector.
Ding, ding, ding! Give that man a CIGAR!
The core of the "stimulus" was to create "shovel ready" jobs. The bulk of these jobs were government jobs. The problem with this is the fact that in order to provide funding in subsequent years, additional taxes have to be levied.
Business owners adjust.
The result? Stymied economic growth.
Obama and his economic "advisers" simply don't understand economics. It's why they are so puzzled as to why the stimulus has failed. |
Buellkowski
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 07:32 pm: |
|
Obama and his economic "advisers" simply don't understand economics. It's why they are so puzzled as to why the stimulus has failed.
Putting an extra 1 million on the unemployment dole without the stimulus package would be considered a "success" then?
You can't supply-side yourself into healthy employment numbers. Bringing your widgets to market 15% cheaper doesn't quickly create jobs in an economic downturn when those who are employed are reluctant to spend money and those who are unemployed cannot spend money.
But I'll let the supply-side experts among us straighten out my misguided beliefs.
The core of the "stimulus" was to create "shovel ready" jobs.
I disagree. The core of the stimulus (37% of the total) was tax relief, as I stated earlier. Give folks more money to spend so that those who produce for those consumers can keep their jobs. The "shovel-ready" jobs in infrastructure only account for $105 billion of the package. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 07:48 pm: |
|
37% isn't "the core". If I gave you 37% of your own birthday cake, you'd be pissed.
The retort of a failed stimulus is always "what if we'd done nothing".
It's a straw man argument.
The stimulus was touted to prevent unemployment from going above 8%. It did anyway.
The stimulus was touted to drive economic growth. It did just the opposite.
The stimulus was touted to create "green" innovations. It only created well funded campaign donors and failed companies.
There isn't a single successful outcome that can be directly attributed to the stimulus.
That would seem to illustrate it's failure.
Saying "we just haven't given it enough time" has never fixed a bad batch of home brew or proven out a failed big government boondoggle. |
Buellkowski
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 07:56 pm: |
|
In this case, "what if we did nothing" is not a straw-man argument. The initial post of this thread referred to the CBO report that quantified a range of the number of jobs saved as a result of the stimulus. The corrolary of that finding is that if there was no stimulus, those same jobs would not have been saved.
Did the CBO report find that the stimulus results were less than anticipated? It appears so, and I grant you that point. Did the report indicate utter failure? I don't believe so.
What would have been your plan of action? I'd like to know. |
Kenm123t
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 08:34 pm: |
|
Send the stupid proglibdemons to the shovel ready job they can handle. Mucking out the pens at the National Zoo.
Starting with muck they learned at the knee of marxist profs could be start on real personal development.
Did you see congress critter SJ Lee on Cavuto talking about all those trillions companies have that could be spent on jobs for the POOR She means loser Proglibdemon serfs that will reelect her. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 10:16 pm: |
|
My plan of action?
Allow the free market to recover on its own.
There is $8-9T of corporate assets sitting on the side line waiting to see what new wonderful program is going to come out of Washington and there is another $6-7T or individual assets sitting on the sideline waiting to see what the tax rate is going to be.
That's $14-16T that is being held up because neither individuals nor corporations like uncertainty. Doubly so for governmental uncertainty.
Was an $800B+ "stimulus" really worth it to put $16T on hold? |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 10:19 pm: |
|
http://www.11alive.com/news/article/214228/3/Compa ny-Policy-We-are-not-hiring-until-Obama-is-gone |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - 10:34 pm: |
|
Did you see congress critter SJ Lee on Cavuto talking about all those trillions companies have that could be spent on jobs for the POOR She means loser Proglibdemon serfs that will reelect her.
Zactly!!!!
Now if I had $9T of corporate assets (actually belongs to the stockholders) and I am tasked with maximizing profits for those stockholders, do I invest in in the US where the activities are subject to every ill conceived progressive, tax riddled program that comes down the line, OR do I invest those funds overseas and build plants there knowing that I will never be able to repatriate those assets again? |
Gregtonn
| | Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2011 - 12:03 am: |
|
"Consider how much of a drag on our economy an extra 1 million on the unemployment dole would have been."
Given that the maximum unemployment (in AZ) is about $15,000 per year, and an average of about $150,000 per tax payer funded government job the drag on the economy increased by almost ten times.
If you do the basic math that comes out to 1,000,000 x $135,000 or a $135 billion dollar drag on the economy. Then there are the real taxes that would have been paid if those people had gotten private sector jobs instead of being paid with tax payer money.
That is not stimulus by any rational definition.
G |
|
