• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

We needs more Stimulus!!! Unemployment at 10.2%

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

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
16,009
1,678
126
Isn't that term an oxymoron?
Not at all. Leading indicators can give us a sense of economic activity in the future, and trailing indicators can give us a sense of economic activity in the past.

Stimulus can only be bankrolled (printed?) for so long. Eventually the rug will be swept out from under this "recovery" and we'll take another, if not bigger, nose dive.

I'll go out on a limb and say this is a fool's recovery.
Hmm, I'll have to remember to bump this thread in a couple of years.
 

Trianon

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2000
1,789
0
71
www.conkurent.com
Business is afraid to spend money because they have no idea what the powers in DC are about to do. The democrats have a lot of radical proposals on the table that will add costs to business and reshape markets. Who the hell is going to spend a lot of money when the market they are investing in will go away at the whims in DC? Or if they invest in the wrong technology deemed bad by the morally enlightened in DC and forced to pay high taxes?

These interventionalists will make this pain last longer than it should.
Never thought I would see eye2eye with Genx87, but I agree with this message.
 

JeepinEd

Senior member
Dec 12, 2005
812
25
91
Business is afraid to spend money because they have no idea what the powers in DC are about to do. The democrats have a lot of radical proposals on the table that will add costs to business and reshape markets. Who the hell is going to spend a lot of money when the market they are investing in will go away at the whims in DC? Or if they invest in the wrong technology deemed bad by the morally enlightened in DC and forced to pay high taxes?

These interventionalists will make this pain last longer than it should.
As someone who runs a small business in CA., I agree with this 100%.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,451
0
0
Never thought I would see eye2eye with Genx87, but I agree with this message.
What exactly are these radical proposals you all are paranoid about? Let's see the WH just backed the neutering of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act accounting requirements for all but the largest firms, isn't doing much of anything to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act, etc.

If anything Obama has been snuggling up to the business community big time.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,563
0
71
www.techinferno.com
It's 8 years of Republican damage that Obama has to fix. That can't be done overnight. You people are ridiculous and it's the usual CON trolls blaming anyone but their failed party. Republican's main policy was that of corporate outsourcing, that really worked out great for the US didn't it? So did their brilliant war strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
Read your link, still didn't see any quote from the admin saying "pass the stimulus and unemployment will not go above 8%". I saw projections, but that's not a promise, it's a projection. Why would someone in the admin make an explicit promise about something as uncontrollable as unemployment? So I view such a claim that they made that promise with skepticism.


EDIT: Appears I was correct.

Politifact rated it "barely true" i.e. mostly bullshit.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/09/eric-cantor/Cantor-and-other-republicans-say-obama-promised-s/

"What we can rule on, however, is whether the Obama administration "promised" that unemployment rates would not rise above 8 percent if the stimulus were passed. We could find no instance of anyone in the administration directly making such a public pledge.

What we saw from the administration in January was a projection, not a promise. And it was a projection that came with heavy disclaimers.

"It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error," the report states. "There is the more fundamental uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."

There's also a footnote that goes along with the chart that states: "Forecasts of the unemployment rate without the recovery plan vary substantially. Some private forecasters anticipate unemployment rates as high as 11% in the absence of action."

That sure doesn't sound like a full-fledged promise to us.

We think it's a big stretch to call an economic projection a "promise." The administration never characterized it that way and included plenty of disclaimers saying the predictions had "significant margins of error" and a higher degree of uncertainty due to a recession that is "unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity." And so we rule the statement by Cantor — and other Republicans who have said the same thing — Barely True."
In other words, you're buying a talking point at face value. Try thinking a little bit next time.
 
Last edited:

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
That wasn't a bright thing to do in hindsight but from what I have read we are slowly recovering and the unemployment numbers should be dropping soon.
It wasn't a bright thing to do, which is why no one did it. It's a republican talking point. See my post above.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,573
126
Read your link, still didn't see any quote from the admin saying "pass the stimulus and unemployment will not go above 8%". I saw projections, but that's not a promise, it's a projection.

Politifact rated it "barely true" i.e. mostly bullshit.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/09/eric-cantor/Cantor-and-other-republicans-say-obama-promised-s/



In other words, you're buying a talking point at face value. Try thinking a little bit next time.
Here is the report and the original chart:

http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf

Looks true to me.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
Here is the report and the original chart:

http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf

Looks true to me.
Really? A projection in a report that states it has a significant margin of error and especially now given the volatile economic climate, in your mind, is the same as the admin making an affirmative statement promising that unemployment will not go above 8% if the stimulus is passed?

Your analysis leaves much to be desired.

If you want to say that "Obama projected unemployment would be markedly lower than it is now if the stimulus were passed, looks like they were incorrect" would be a fairer statement, if you were interested in being fair. Of course the report said it was an estimate with a margin of error so you'd still be mostly wrong, but at least you wouldn't be blindly incoherently claiming they "promised" unemployment wouldn't pass 8%.
 
Last edited:

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,573
126
Well, such way off projections don't inspire confidence...

Besides, the admin used the chart to get the stimulus package passed...

The chart was great for the admin until it became way off, then they wanted to downplay it.
 

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,519
7
91
This indeed sucks major ass. Especially for those out of work. At least their unemployment benefits will get an extension, but still . . .
Cutting the unemployment benefits would be a better move. There is no reason to pay people for sitting around...
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
Well, such way off projections don't inspire confidence...

Besides, the admin used the chart to get the stimulus package passed...

The chart was great for the admin until it became way off, then they wanted to downplay it.
I have no problem with people questioning the chart's accuracy. It's when Rep's start calling the president a "liar" or a "promise breaker" that they start going far afield. One approach attacks his admin's competence or ability to forecast economic indicators, which I see as a fair attack. But attacking his character because a projection is off by a percent or two is simply partisan hackery.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,088
494
126
What exactly are these radical proposals you all are paranoid about? Let's see the WH just backed the neutering of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act accounting requirements for all but the largest firms, isn't doing much of anything to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act, etc.

If anything Obama has been snuggling up to the business community big time.
Obamacare
Cap and Trade
VAT

Those are three big ones. Still on the table is the Employee Protection Act aka Authorized Mafia like tactics for union formation in the private sector. Sin taxes such as fat and sugar taxes. Net neutrality.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,088
494
126
It's 8 years of Republican damage that Obama has to fix. That can't be done overnight. You people are ridiculous and it's the usual CON trolls blaming anyone but their failed party. Republican's main policy was that of corporate outsourcing, that really worked out great for the US didn't it? So did their brilliant war strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And what pray tell have the democrats changed about this that leads you to believe we will have a different outcome? Lets start calling a spade a spade. The Democrat party is just as big corporatist as Republicans.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,088
494
126
I have no problem with people questioning the chart's accuracy. It's when Rep's start calling the president a "liar" or a "promise breaker" that they start going far afield. One approach attacks his admin's competence or ability to forecast economic indicators, which I see as a fair attack. But attacking his character because a projection is off by a percent or two is simply partisan hackery.
Consider this chart Obama's "Mission Accomplished".
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,573
126
You mean Obama is excused here? I don't think so. This is his policy and these are his people. Just because he didn't flat out say it exactly, doesn't let him off the hook.

Wonder if he will continue to blame this on Bush tonight? That excuse isn't going to fly for very much longer if at all anymore.

Bold claims were made by the admin and Obama himself about this recovery package, and Obama himself said we were to hold him to those claims.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,573
126
Obama is clearly implying that the stimulus will stop millions of jobs from being lost in this Feb 5 09 speech, for example. And there are many more like it.

The American people are watching. They did not send us here to get bogged down with the same old delay and distractions. They did not vote for the false theories of the past. They did not vote for the status quo - they sent us here to bring change, and we owe it to them to act. This is the moment for leadership that matches the great test of our time.

If we do not move swiftly to sign the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law, an economy that is in crisis will be faced with catastrophe. Millions more Americans will lose their jobs. Home will be lost. Families will go without health care. Our crippling dependence on foreign oil will continue. That is the price of inaction.

This isn't some abstract debate. Last week, we learned that many of America's largest corporations are planning to layoff tens off tens of thousands of workers. Today, we learned that last week, the number of new unemployment claims jumped to 626,000. And tomorrow, we're expecting another dismal jobs report on top of the 2.6 million jobs we lost last year.

For you, those aren't statistics. They are constituents you know and families that you care about. Now, I believe that legislation of such magnitude deserves the scrutiny that it's received, and you will get another chance to vote for this bill in the days to come. But I urge all of us to not make the perfect the enemy of the absolutely necessary. The scale and scope of this plan is right.

So just as past generations of Americans have done in trying times, we can and must turn this moment of challenge into one of opportunity. The plan that you've passed has at its core a simple idea: let's put Americans to work doing the work that America needs done.

This plan will save or create over three million jobs - almost all of them in the private sector.

This plan will put people to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges; our dangerously deficient dams and levees.

This plan will put people to work modernizing our health care system, not only saving us billions of dollars, but countless lives.

This plan will put people to work renovating more than 10,000 schools, giving millions of children the chance to learn in 21st century classrooms, libraries, and labs - and to all the scientists in the room today, you know what that means for America's future.
 

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
The stimulus money goes to the wrong place, to businesses. Yes they are in the red and having problems but giving them money to balance their sheets then fire people so they show a profit does not help the taxpayer in anyway.

Even after getting stimulus money some of these companies are fiing bankruptcy and others are doing more layoffs. Why not give the money to the taxpayer and you will see over half the stimulus get injected into the US economy from people paying bills and catching up.

Maybe my reasoning is flawed. I am open to better understanding.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,530
271
136
Business is afraid to spend money because they have no idea what the powers in DC are about to do. The democrats have a lot of radical proposals on the table that will add costs to business and reshape markets. Who the hell is going to spend a lot of money when the market they are investing in will go away at the whims in DC? Or if they invest in the wrong technology deemed bad by the morally enlightened in DC and forced to pay high taxes?

These interventionalists will make this pain last longer than it should.
lmao. Sorry, you're out of your element in this discussion kiddo. The panic on Wall Street has almost nothing to do with DC politics. This is ridiculously easy to research for yourself considering firms are polled all the time about their concerns about uncertainty, with healthcare, cap and trade, and VAT (double lmao) uncertainty essentially not showing up at all statistically among firm concerns. Businesses are uncertain about market conditions created well before 2009.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,088
494
126
lmao. Sorry, you're out of your element in this discussion kiddo. The panic on Wall Street has almost nothing to do with DC politics. This is ridiculously easy to research for yourself considering firms are polled all the time about their concerns about uncertainty, with healthcare, cap and trade, and VAT (double lmao) uncertainty essentially not showing up at all statistically among firm concerns. Businesses are uncertain about market conditions created well before 2009.
You may want to re-read what I wrote bucko. I didnt say Wall Street. Why would they be worried? They will get another bailout when they ask for one. I said Business's are delaying capital spending and expansion until all of these proposals get ironed out. There is uncertaintly in the market due to proposed govt policy. You'd have to be damn near blind or in la la land to believe Cap and Trade, Healthcare initiatives, and a VAT wont affect business and their plans in the future.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,670
271
126
Business is afraid to spend money because they have no idea what the powers in DC are about to do. The democrats have a lot of radical proposals on the table that will add costs to business and reshape markets. Who the hell is going to spend a lot of money when the market they are investing in will go away at the whims in DC? Or if they invest in the wrong technology deemed bad by the morally enlightened in DC and forced to pay high taxes?

These interventionalists will make this pain last longer than it should.
Pretty much the point I was trying to make. Well said.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,530
271
136
You may want to re-read what I wrote bucko. I didnt say Wall Street. Why would they be worried? They will get another bailout when they ask for one. I said Business's are delaying capital spending and expansion until all of these proposals get ironed out.
Huh? Hate to break it to you, but the term Wall Street is routinely used to refer to businesses and it's pretty clear that's what I was referring to when you read the sentences that follow in the rest of the post, which actually use your preferred term "business".

There is uncertaintly in the market due to proposed govt policy. You'd have to be damn near blind or in la la land to believe Cap and Trade, Healthcare initiatives, and a VAT wont affect business and their plans in the future.
Good lord. Businesses that are polled don't actually say they are uncertain about their futures because an f'ing VAT tax is going to be implemented in the future. And why the hell would healthcare reform stop businesses from hiring again? At least your cap and trade referencs makes some moderate sense even though it doesn't poll at all. Again, for your argument to hold any water there actually has to be data that shows firms aren't (for example) hiring workers because of uncertainty about healthcare, VAT, and cap and trade. There is no such evidence that is anywhere near significant in aggregate polls.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY