Obama Says Economic Stimulus Plan Worked as Intended

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,774
6,167
126
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: Evan
We won't know for sure for another year. But we will know a lot more by the end of this year.

Like I said, Obama promised that unemployment would top out at 8% if it was passed. He also said that it would reach 9% is the government did nothing.

Unemployment is at 10%, higher than it would have been had the government done nothing. According to Obama's own definition, IT DID NOT WORK.

Fine, let Obama cancel the stimulus and send this economy into a tailspin to prove you wrong.
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: retrospooty
Originally posted by: Patranus
President Barack Obama said his $787 billion stimulus bill ?has worked as intended? as he pushed back against Republican criticism that his recovery program has failed to rescue the economy.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/...01087&sid=a0StZd9y2rCY

What's unemployment again? 8%? Can't be above that as Obama promised that it wouldn't if they passed the economic stimulus. How about 9%? Can't be above that as Obama said it would top out at that if they did nothing.

You are absolutely right - I think you shouldnt vote for the guy. Imagine that, he didnt fix the worst economy since the great depression in 6 months in office. and to top it off, he was wrong about how high unemployment would go - OMG what a horrible error.

Definitely you should recind your vote - obviously the man cant be trusted to run the USA.

LOL - what a douchebag.

He is the one who made the claims, not me. Maybe he shouldn't have claimed something, spent 1.6 trillion dollars the USA doesn't have, and then try and rewrite history as to why he was spending that money in the first place.

Maybe this graph will help you understand
http://doctorbulldog.files.wor...nt-may-hockeystick.gif

I dont need help to understand. I get it. I wasn't for the stimulus and I don't think it was a good idea.... but I do understand why Bush and Obama each did it. It's different when you are the most powerful man in the world and everything is riding on your every descision...

The point I was sarcastically making is that you are a partisaned hack. You do absolutely nothing at all here other than post negative articles about Obama and/or the dems. You never post anything neutral, or even bother to try and understand the other side, you arent here for discussion, or to gain perspective or understanding... your sole purpose is to spread your FUD. Anyone on a forum with an agenda - left or right is a total douchebag.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: Evan
We won't know for sure for another year. But we will know a lot more by the end of this year.

Like I said, Obama promised that unemployment would top out at 8% if it was passed. He also said that it would reach 9% is the government did nothing.

Unemployment is at 10%, higher than it would have been had the government done nothing. According to Obama's own definition, IT DID NOT WORK.

Fine, let Obama cancel the stimulus and send this economy into a tailspin to prove you wrong.
the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: retrospooty
Originally posted by: Patranus
President Barack Obama said his $787 billion stimulus bill ?has worked as intended? as he pushed back against Republican criticism that his recovery program has failed to rescue the economy.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/...01087&sid=a0StZd9y2rCY

What's unemployment again? 8%? Can't be above that as Obama promised that it wouldn't if they passed the economic stimulus. How about 9%? Can't be above that as Obama said it would top out at that if they did nothing.

You are absolutely right - I think you shouldnt vote for the guy. Imagine that, he didnt fix the worst economy since the great depression in 6 months in office. and to top it off, he was wrong about how high unemployment would go - OMG what a horrible error.

Definitely you should recind your vote - obviously the man cant be trusted to run the USA.

LOL - what a douchebag.

He is the one who made the claims, not me. Maybe he shouldn't have claimed something, spent 1.6 trillion dollars the USA doesn't have, and then try and rewrite history as to why he was spending that money in the first place.

Maybe this graph will help you understand
http://doctorbulldog.files.wor...nt-may-hockeystick.gif
The graph that won't go away :) It's my fave, though, and obviously Obama is straight fvcking lying if he is pretending it worked as intended. That graph says it hasn't.

 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: ZeGermans
You may wish to fix your spelling/grammar for people to take your posts seriously

I have - space bar does not always activate

 

cubeless

Diamond Member
Sep 17, 2001
4,295
1
81
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Patranus
Topic Title: Obama Says Economic Stimulus Plan Worked as Intended

Banks got money - check

Auto industry got money - check

Politicians got money - check

The citizens of U.S. screwed - check

Yep, worked as intended

Gotta love how Dems haved learned so well from Republicans :thumbsup:

wow, surprised hearing this from you.

the beginning of the shift... "the dems learned it from the repubs"... when we voted them in they were surely noble, but the system did this to them... we couldn't have been wrong...

next they eat their children... it would be funny if it weren't real life...
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,004
5,517
126
Krugman is saying that more is still needed. Given his credentials I'd say he probably is right.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,774
6,167
126
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: Evan
We won't know for sure for another year. But we will know a lot more by the end of this year.

Like I said, Obama promised that unemployment would top out at 8% if it was passed. He also said that it would reach 9% is the government did nothing.

Unemployment is at 10%, higher than it would have been had the government done nothing. According to Obama's own definition, IT DID NOT WORK.

Fine, let Obama cancel the stimulus and send this economy into a tailspin to prove you wrong.
the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

Republicans fought to take those out and replace with tax cuts.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,196
6,529
136
Ah, yes, the republican plan for stimulating the economy back to where it was before Bush & friends cleaned us out....is the same plan that got us into the mess we're faced with now....Brilliant.

The REAL republican plan ---> Stonewall and obstruct as long and as hard as possible to damage Pres. Obama as much as possible so as to regain power. Ideology and Partisan Agenda comes first before the welfare of our Nation - A historical fact that has played itself out for all of Bush's years in offfice and now playing itself out during Pres. Obama's term in office.

It's sad when I see, hear and read all this bitching and moaning about Pres. Obama and his attempts at fixing what the repubs broke, when all along the repubs have not produced a working plan of their own, let alone that they are waging an ideologically driven guerilla war against everything Pres. Obama is doing so as to drag him and the Nation down with them so they can fight him on a playing field at the level they find themselves in.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: Evan
We won't know for sure for another year. But we will know a lot more by the end of this year.

Like I said, Obama promised that unemployment would top out at 8% if it was passed. He also said that it would reach 9% is the government did nothing.

Unemployment is at 10%, higher than it would have been had the government done nothing. According to Obama's own definition, IT DID NOT WORK.

Fine, let Obama cancel the stimulus and send this economy into a tailspin to prove you wrong.
the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

Republicans fought to take those out and replace with tax cuts.

Republicans were pretty much left out of this bill, so your complaints ring pretty hollow. Also such projects even if shovel ready take much time to get rolling. Not exactly a quick way to shock the econmy back to life.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Patranus
Maybe he shouldn't have claimed something, spent 1.6 trillion dollars the USA doesn't have

Did your hero Bush not spend money the USA doesn't have?

Bush has been gone a while.

Is it impossible for you to analyse what is going on in your country today without resorting to pathetic attacks on ex-presidents.

No, not when him and his supporters fucked the country over so royaly.

and only been 6 months. What kind of miracle do you expect Obama to achieve after Bush and the Republicans had 6 years of total domination to ruin the U.S.?
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Patranus
Topic Title: Obama Says Economic Stimulus Plan Worked as Intended

Banks got money - check

Auto industry got money - check

Politicians got money - check

The citizens of U.S. screwed - check

Yep, worked as intended

Gotta love how Dems haved learned so well from Republicans :thumbsup:

Hey, I thought you got banned? Good to see you back. How have milk prices been lately? ;)
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: Genx87
These stimulus packages are short term. Anybody remember the 160 billion stimulus that went out 12 months ago? Yeah, nobody remembers because it didnt do shit except spend 160 billion.

Yeah, eventuallly this may bump the economy but the long term effects will be nill unless we perpetually fund it.

^^^ This. A tax cut for last year (check in the mail) does absolutely nothing for the future of the economy.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Patranus
Maybe he shouldn't have claimed something, spent 1.6 trillion dollars the USA doesn't have

Did your hero Bush not spend money the USA doesn't have?

Bush has been gone a while.

Is it impossible for you to analyse what is going on in your country today without resorting to pathetic attacks on ex-presidents.

No, not when him and his supporters fucked the country over so royaly.

and only been 6 months. What kind of miracle do you expect Obama to achieve after Bush and the Republicans had 6 years of total domination to ruin the U.S.?

My father left my mother and I but it is still up to me to do well in my school and work.
This pass-the-blame attitude is all I see from democrats...
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,145
10
81
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Patranus
Topic Title: Obama Says Economic Stimulus Plan Worked as Intended

Banks got money - check

Auto industry got money - check

Politicians got money - check

The citizens of U.S. screwed - check

Yep, worked as intended

Gotta love how Dems haved learned so well from Republicans :thumbsup:

damn dave you get hit on the head or something?


but you are right. this was not about the avarage US citizen. This was something to help the them get re-elected.

As CC said the money did nto go in the right place. the stimulus could have done wonders if it was put out in the right spots.

I never agreed with the bailouts or the stimulus package. should be interestign when the bill comes due. trouble on it is when?

And why people think Dems or Republicans are so much diffrent? They are there to abuse the system and get rich. not looking out for the US (well some are but very very few).
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
Obviously the way to go would have been to start a bullshit war and give tax cuts to the rich. That'll fix... er wait a minute...

Give it a rest GOP fluffhogs. You caused it now sit back and STFU while others try to fix your problems.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
82,221
44,984
136
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

The whole idea that we should be judging whether it worked or not is silly, considering what a small percentage of the money has been spent. The thing is that we were told up front that the vast majority of the money would not have been spent after 4 months, everyone talked about it at the time, but now everyone is suddenly shocked? I mean you could attack the stimulus for not spending money fast enough, but to say that it did not work is silliness and we all know it. That remains to be seen.

As far as 'infrastructure', we've been over this before. The vast majority of the money went to infrastructure and tax cuts. If you look at the provisions of the act here, you see that. Remember, infrastructure is a LOT more than roads. It's our health care system, our schools, our power grid, our drinking water, etc... etc. Infrastructure isn't measured by if you can drive a truck over it or not.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

The whole idea that we should be judging whether it worked or not is silly, considering what a small percentage of the money has been spent. The thing is that we were told up front that the vast majority of the money would not have been spent after 4 months, everyone talked about it at the time, but now everyone is suddenly shocked? I mean you could attack the stimulus for not spending money fast enough, but to say that it did not work is silliness and we all know it. That remains to be seen.

But of course the package was sold a fix for the economy now, not a fix for the economy later. And if it id id not pass things would get worse soon, yet most of the money is not being spent till later.

This was not stimulus, it was pork to be spent at a later date.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Meanwhile, yet another article about how Obamanomics is fucking us.

"we can't pay for it all." Obama supporter former Secretary of State Colin Powell

this will create a "debt exposion" and will have "horrifying" consequences. Big time Brit economist Tim Congdon

"A country that continuously expands its debt as a percentage of GDP," he said, "and raises much of the money abroad to finance that, at some point, it's going to inflate its way out of the burden of that debt. ... Every country that's denominated its debt in its own currency and has found itself with uncomfortable amounts of debt relative to the rest of the world, in the end they inflate. And that becomes a tax on everybody that has fixed dollar investments." Obama supporter Warren Buffett.

"As markets revive," he said, "fear of inflation will drive up interest rates, which will choke off recovery ." MoveOn.org/George Soros

President Obama and the Democratic Party's congressional supermajority represent nothing less than a grave and gathering threat to that which made America great ? free enterprise, competition, allowing people to keep as much of their own money as possible, and the assumption that people know better how and on what to spend their money than does government.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
82,221
44,984
136
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

The whole idea that we should be judging whether it worked or not is silly, considering what a small percentage of the money has been spent. The thing is that we were told up front that the vast majority of the money would not have been spent after 4 months, everyone talked about it at the time, but now everyone is suddenly shocked? I mean you could attack the stimulus for not spending money fast enough, but to say that it did not work is silliness and we all know it. That remains to be seen.

But of course the package was sold a fix for the economy now, not a fix for the economy later. And if it id id not pass things would get worse soon, yet most of the money is not being spent till later.

This was not stimulus, it was pork to be spent at a later date.

Since the economic difficulties were and are expected to last well into the time when the stimulus will have spent the vast majority of its money, your contention is simply false. That you think it is pork is just you trying to use a loaded term to discredit spending you don't like.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

the stimulus was a feel good/reward package for the democrats.

Very little of the money went into the areas that it should have. Projects that should have been implemented are those that improved job creation and infrastructure rebuilding.

Planting parks, building sidewalks, memorials, etc were normal pork; not stimulus to shock the country out of an economic tailspin.

Bridges, roads, ports, levees - this that made commerce more efficient or had become a safety threat to such was where the funds should have gone.

/edited - space bar issues

The whole idea that we should be judging whether it worked or not is silly, considering what a small percentage of the money has been spent. The thing is that we were told up front that the vast majority of the money would not have been spent after 4 months, everyone talked about it at the time, but now everyone is suddenly shocked? I mean you could attack the stimulus for not spending money fast enough, but to say that it did not work is silliness and we all know it. That remains to be seen.

But of course the package was sold a fix for the economy now, not a fix for the economy later. And if it id id not pass things would get worse soon, yet most of the money is not being spent till later.

This was not stimulus, it was pork to be spent at a later date.

Since the economic difficulties were and are expected to last well into the time when the stimulus will have spent the vast majority of its money, your contention is simply false. That you think it is pork is just you trying to use a loaded term to discredit spending you don't like.

No, Keynesian economic relies on swift stimulus. This is not swift spending by any standard, so it is very difficult to consider it stimulus.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
82,221
44,984
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Meanwhile, yet another article about how Obamanomics is fucking us.

"we can't pay for it all." Obama supporter former Secretary of State Colin Powell

this will create a "debt exposion" and will have "horrifying" consequences. Big time Brit economist Tim Congdon

"A country that continuously expands its debt as a percentage of GDP," he said, "and raises much of the money abroad to finance that, at some point, it's going to inflate its way out of the burden of that debt. ... Every country that's denominated its debt in its own currency and has found itself with uncomfortable amounts of debt relative to the rest of the world, in the end they inflate. And that becomes a tax on everybody that has fixed dollar investments." Obama supporter Warren Buffett.

"As markets revive," he said, "fear of inflation will drive up interest rates, which will choke off recovery ." MoveOn.org/George Soros

President Obama and the Democratic Party's congressional supermajority represent nothing less than a grave and gathering threat to that which made America great ? free enterprise, competition, allowing people to keep as much of their own money as possible, and the assumption that people know better how and on what to spend their money than does government.

Oh jesus. Histrionics much? America's debt to GDP ratio has been way higher before and we were just fine, and shrieking about how the Democrats are a 'grave and gathering threat' to free enterprise, competition, etc... etc... is just fucking stupid.

Aren't you the guy that's always telling people to stop freaking out over nothing? That's what you're doing right now and you know it. I'm not sure why you've bought the OMG COMMIES line of thinking, but it's silly.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy


Oh jesus. Histrionics much? America's debt to GDP ratio has been way higher before and we were just fine, and shrieking about how the Democrats are a 'grave and gathering threat' to free enterprise, competition, etc... etc... is just fucking stupid.
Funny you never saiid that in the last 8 years, when debt to gdp ratios were historically pretty much normal.