The latest CBO report says the stimulus saved or created 1.4 to 3.3 million jobs*

[sandorski]

But to what end?

Is the point to temporarily (and at great expense) prop things up till businesses ride in to save us?

Just like governments', businesses get hamered by a recession too. It strikes me as having an awful lot of confidence, whether intentionally or not, in (small) businesses to rely on their rescuing us without giving them the help to do so.

Fern

Yes.

 

[shira]

Tell me where I'm going wrong.


The point of the stimulus was job creation.

No jobs were created, instead more jobs were lost.

Seeing this, the administration refused to admit defeat and instead moved the goal posts. Their message was no longer that the stimulus will create jobs, rather it just saved some.

Y = number of jobs that the U.S. economy would have lost from the start of the economic melt-down if nothing had been done to stimulate the economy.

Z = number of jobs created in the U.S. economy because of the stimulus.


According to you, the stimulus is a failure unless Z > Y.

I know you're feeble-minded, but try really hard to understand the flaw in your reasoning.

 

[xj0hnx]

If a wildfire is expanding would you say that the firefighters aren't fighting fires?

Very poor analogy, of course they are fighting it, but just because they're fighting it doesn't mean it's going to stop the fire, and just because they're fighting it doesn't mean it wouldn't have gone out on it's own. Sometimes you even have to start a fire to control a bigger fire, it happens that you have to lose some of the trees to save the forest.

 

[Throckmorton]

But to what end?

Is the point to temporarily (and at great expense) prop things up till businesses ride in to save us?

Just like governments', businesses get hamered by a recession too. It strikes me as having an awful lot of confidence, whether intentionally or not, in (small) businesses to rely on their rescuing us without giving them the help to do so.

Fern

Wait... Are you saying the government should help small business?

 

[Throckmorton]

Very poor analogy, of course they are fighting it, but just because they're fighting it doesn't mean it's going to stop the fire, and just because they're fighting it doesn't mean it wouldn't have gone out on it's own. Sometimes you even have to start a fire to control a bigger fire, it happens that you have to lose some of the trees to save the forest.

Nick is saying that stimulus doesn't work and he's basing that on the fact that unemployment has been increasing. That's like saying that water doesn't put out fires because the wildfire is expanding.

 

[nick1985]

Y = number of jobs that the U.S. economy would have lost from the start of the economic melt-down if nothing had been done to stimulate the economy.

Z = number of jobs created in the U.S. economy because of the stimulus.


According to you, the stimulus is a failure unless Z > Y.

I know you're feeble-minded, but try really hard to understand the flaw in your reasoning.

Hey listen, you name calling fuck. You dont understand my position at all, and I wouldnt expect someone as dumb as you to understand something so simple

 

[Throckmorton]

So nick1985, what is your position on the Bush tax cuts? That we should get rid of them because they didn't prevent unemployment from reaching 10%?

 

[nick1985]

So nick1985, what is your position on the Bush tax cuts? That we should get rid of them because they didn't prevent unemployment from reaching 10%?

Sure get rid of them now, if you want to strangle small business even more.

Do you feel repealing the tax cuts will stimulate small business?

 

[Throckmorton]

Sure get rid of them now, if you want to strangle small business even more.

Do you feel repealing the tax cuts will stimulate small business?

I didn't say we should let the Bush tax cuts expire.

You're the one arguing that because unemployment rose, the stimulus didn't do anything. So why don't you apply that logic to the Bush tax cuts?

If you were to be consistent, you'd say that the Bush tax cuts didn't do anything to help unemployment, because unemployment has been rising, therefore ending them wouldn't negatively affect the economy.

See how that makes no sense? It's just as stupid when you rightwingers use that logic as when liberals do.

 

[hal2kilo]

It goes to giving monkey's cocaine.

http://www.redstate.com/brian_d/2010/08/03/obama-stimulus-money-to-study-monkey-cocaine-use/


Thinking that the government will spend hard-earned tax dollars efficeintly is naieve at best.

Yet another person clueless about what basic scientific research is for. Are you also a member of the Patranus club? Couldn't possibly have anything to do with figuring out how to get humans off a cocaine habit. Which is still a significant problem in this country.

Of course we could just send more people to jail. It's working so well and it's dirt cheap.

 

[nick1985]

I didn't say we should let the Bush tax cuts expire.

You're the one arguing that because unemployment rose, the stimulus didn't do anything. So why don't you apply that logic to the Bush tax cuts?

If you were to be consistent, you'd say that the Bush tax cuts didn't do anything to help unemployment, because unemployment has been rising, therefore ending them wouldn't negatively affect the economy.

See how that makes no sense? It's just as stupid when you rightwingers use that logic as when liberals do.

I'm not saying it didn't do anything, I'm saying we didnt get our monies worth

 

[Throckmorton]

I'm not saying it didn't do anything, I'm saying we didnt get our monies worth

Considering only half of the 60% that isn't tax cuts has been spent, I'd say we got exactly our money's worth. Remember when economists were saying the stimulus needed to be bigger?

 

[nick1985]

Considering only half of the 60% that isn't tax cuts has been spent, I'd say we got exactly our money's worth. Remember when economists were saying the stimulus needed to be bigger?

Give me a price per saved job.

 

[Throckmorton]

Give me a price per saved job.

$139bil spent so far on contracts, loans, grants / 3.3mil jobs = $42k per job

$139bil / 1.4mil jobs = $100k per job

 

[Acanthus]

Nick, i have a challenge for you (and im being sincere).

I would like you to point out how taxes on the highest bracket effect the economy.

I have actually done projects on this topic and i have failed to find a link between taxes, capital gains tax, and corporate tax rates in relation to GDP growth, or private investment (which drives growth), or unemployment (the lagging indicator of growth).

I leveraged non-partisan data like the CBO and the IRS and used data straddling from the great depression to current.

I could not find a statistical link between lowering taxes on the rich and growth or a change in the 1st or 2nd derivative that i could attribute to taxes.

This is using 80 years of data.