"Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject"

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Groups of people have no less freedom of speech than individuals.

Actually I completely and utterly disagree. The group does not assume the rights of the individuals. That's fucking stupid. Rights are individual rights, individual liberties and one of those is the right to form groups etc. That doesn't mean the group gets all the rights of a human. No one is a group and a group is no one. Groupthink and group identification imo are some of the fucking stupidest and most horrible things humans do with themselves. People allow themselves not to think freely and be led like lemmings by whomever created the group. Pathetic individuals.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Corporations are groups of people. Being in a group abridges no rights. This applies to unions too.
LOLOLOLOL

Yeah, tell that to the judges and lawyers.

Corporations should be limited in their "rights", but in some cases, they have more rights than real people. If a corporation caused a person's death, they just pay a fine or settle out of court. If a person did it, you think they can just pay a fine or settle?
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
LOLOLOLOL

Yeah, tell that to the judges and lawyers.

Corporations should be limited in their "rights", but in some cases, they have more rights than real people. If a corporation caused a person's death, they just pay a fine or settle out of court. If a person did it, you think they can just pay a fine or settle?

If an individual in a corporation committed a criminal act that led to a persons death they go to jail like anyone else.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
If an individual in a corporation committed a criminal act that led to a persons death they go to jail like anyone else.

Then why isn't Wall Street going to jail for the Death of my 401K? ;)
 
Last edited:

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,504
2
81
so Jaskalas, and apparently Nik, think they understand economics better than Paul Krugman does - got it....

/facepalm
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
349
126
Exxon has (as of a couple years ago) $40 billion in cash.

How many people have that?

And the people that do, have different agendas than corporations.

Exxon spends many millions to fund hundreds of climate change denier groups.

Bill Gates spends money to cure global diseases.

Corporations have fortunes to spend to ensure people who serve them and not the public are elected.

That is a corruption of our democracy. It is a loss of our democracy.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Paul Krugman is nothing but a big-government, big-spending shill.

I like how he is considered the ace-in-the-hole for liberals. Whenever you argue that printing money out of thin air hurts the economy, you hear: "But Paul Krugman says" as if that is supposed to be some sort of I-Win button.

Hint: Its not.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I think this whole thing misses the point: Did the Stimulus as enacted give us the best bang for the dollar?

These studies don't even address that question.

It's fugging impossible to blow about a trillion dollars and get no economic benefits whatsoever (notwithstanding any economic negatives from increased debt and govt sucking up all that money).

Another very important question IMO is does this Stimulus have long lasting effects? You spend govt money on a govt job and when that money runs out you lose the job. OTOH, if you create a private sector job, if successful that job create enough profit to continue on practically indefinitely. I believe this stimulus primarily (if not almost exclusively) just allowed for some state/local jobs to continue. Surely the state/local govts would have been harder hit by layoffs. But now that the money has run out, the jobs will be lost anyway.

Fern
Those are good points. There wasn't really time to design the best possible stimulus, and anyway a lot of it is politics, paying off the right people who got him elected. At best, a stimulus program only works while the government gravy keeps flowing. But it was important in stopping the bleeding, keeping some liquidity in the market while people have a chance to cool down and think rather than just reacting. That's a nontrivial thing.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
First, they aren't a valuable business if they can't stay afloat without our tax dollars. They are a valueless business. If those businesses could not keep those jobs, then those jobs are valueless jobs as well. How can they be valuable when they cannot produce anything to break even? lols are your logic.

lulz, woosh goes the point straight over your head (a frequent occurrence with you of course). A once-in-a-generation financial crisis that caused GM's competitive products and decades-long profitability from temporarily making payroll is a pretty straight and bullet-proof argument for the GM bailout that saved about a million jobs, particularly the perfectly profitable and legitimate non-GM businesses that relied on those parts orders. This is why people much, much smarter than you went through with it, on both sides of the aisle.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,103
1,550
126
What criminal act was committed?

In this case if an individual caused stuff like this instead of a corporation, the charge would most likely be criminally negligent homicide or reckless endangerment. Pretty much anything where a preventable death occurred due to the actions of another, a criminal charge can be applied. There's probably other charges I'm not aware of, I'm not a prosecuter.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
I think most of the money got wasted on the government and the banks and never went to the people. If all the money does is prolong the misery and pain or prop up the bad economies in places like California (Which caused the problems to begin with), then it was money from other states that earned it, and it was better to not spend the money to begin with.
 
Last edited:

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
If you borrow money on a house and you cant pay it, you must plan on moving. Maybe variable rate loans for real estate should be illegal.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Who should we trust? Douche234 or FDRs treasury secretary who practiced Keyensian economics in the real world?

I am conflicted!

FDR couldn't been that bad he was President for damn near 4 terms.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
349
126
We can't afford predatory capitalism.

We can afford enslaving high wage earners to the needs of the unskilled though, just ask a liberal.

Every post I am seeing from you is nothing but a straw man. Pretty sad.