Obama on Stimulus spending

[delldude]

I know they were 2 separate programs. The examples I used were not meant to conflate them, but 2 point out Ryan's hypocrisy. He claims to be for "small government," then goes and advocates for a gigantic government bailout.

Separately, he claims to have a jobs plan for the nation, but can't even do it in his home district.

He did what most other pols did to help their districts.
You would have done different?

 

[xUT]

He did what most other pols did to help their districts.
You would have done different?

That's the conundrum. Every polito-rats speaks out of both sides of their mouth. Over promise, under deliver then blame the other side for the failures and claim victory for their successes.
Just read their 'agenda' (I can not call the platforms as they are to vague and moving targets).
http://www.mittromney.com/
http://www.barackobama.com/?source=action-bar

IMHO, this will be just another ugly campaign and they will give each other a hug at the end.
JMHO,
B) xUT

 

[Kev3188]

He did what most other pols did to help their districts.
You would have done different?

Yes.

I also would not charge my constituents admission to see me.

That's the conundrum. Every polito-rats speaks out of both sides of their mouth. Over promise, under deliver then blame the other side for the failures and claim victory for their successes.

True.

 

[Knotbuyinit]

How much worse would it have been without the stimulus?

Maybe maintaining 8.3% was a victory, compared to what might have been. Maybe more stimulus was what was really needed... not less/none.

Alex, I'll take "unemployment rate without the Stimulus" for 16 trillion dollars.

 

[Ms Tree]

How much worse would it have been without the stimulus?

That is one of the big unknowns. Odds are it would have been worse. If no money is going into the economy then the government needs to step in. Looking at historical events, I tend to agree with economists that had more money been spent we probably would have been better off now. I would have liked to see more of the money go to the middle class rather than wall street because the middle class is what pushes our economy. The loony tune argument that the republicans keep pushing about the 'job creators is just that. BS. No one will add jobs till there is demand. Once demand picks up, then jobs get added. Perhaps if Romney or Ryan actually had a real job they might know that.

 

[Ifly2]

Alex, I'll take "unemployment rate without the Stimulus" for 16 trillion dollars.

Again, Nothing...

The CBO says teh stimulus created, or saved, ~2.5 to 3 million jobs, in the private sector. That's on top of and separate from the jobs saved at teh state and local government level due to stimulus money that went to the states' general funds. The states were able to avoid laying off teachers, law enforcement, and other employees, and maintain other essential services that would have had to be reduced or eliminated. Those people kept spending thier salaries, helping to keep even more otehr people employed.

It certainly would have been worse without the stimulus, and, even with a few notable and much ballyhooed "failures" (Solyndra, eg., which failed primarily because the Chinese government pumped multiples of what we did into solar, driving the price way below what we could produce the product for...) it would have been better with even more stimulus, as the effects either way feed upon themselves, like snowballs.

As to the missed projections. The Economist, a non partisan, British source of well written news and commentary, and hardly liberal, names several factors that contributed to the jobs rate not improving more, or faster. Among them, uncertainty about oil due to the "Arab Spring", the budget standoff, and the looming "fiscal cliff", even supply problems due to the typhoon in Japan. I don't think The Economist is in the business of making excuses for anyone, so don't even go there.

You got nothin' knot...

Where's the beef?

 

[SparrowHawk]

BOTTOM LINE:

Median Family Income is down over $2,500.00
Gas is nearing record prices in the US
45 months of an"official" unemployment rate over 8% with real (DoL U-6) unemployment at almost 14%
Food prices up 57%, Clothing up 30+ percent.
Then we have the debt which is now at $51,000 for every man, woman and child in the US.

So tell us how's that hope & change working for you?

 

[Ms Tree]

You are right. Four years is plenty of time to undue decades of mismanagement and screw ups.

I know we are a hell of a lot better off than we were 4 years ago. And I think we will be a.little better off in four more. If Romney gets in I am.sure I will be OK but I am pretty sure the working poor and lower middle.class will be screwed.

 

[SparrowHawk]

You are right. Four years is plenty of time to undue decades of mismanagement and screw ups.

I know we are a hell of a lot better off than we were 4 years ago. And I think we will be a.little better off in four more. If Romney gets in I am.sure I will be OK but I am pretty sure the working poor and lower middle.class will be screwed.

Let's parse your comment shall we?

Decades of screw-up?? So that means that not only Bush II is a screw-up but Bill Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter and Ford. Leaving Nixon as the last great President? The one who took us off the Gold Standard? Just trying get this clear in my head.

Not to break the news to you so harshly but the working poor and lower middle.class have already been screwed by the current ding bat. More families on Food Stamps then any other time in history would seem to indicate that if they get anymore "Help" from Mr Hope & Change they'll be living in a cardboard box by the Interstate.

Finally the numbers posted above PROVE we are not as a nation better off then 4 years ago.

 

[Ms Tree]

Nixon a great Prez?

We were losing close to 800,000 jobs a month in 08. Auto industry was on the brink and ready to damp who knows how many.more jobs on the market.

Have we recovered? Not even close. Are we better off. Yes. With out a doubt. Could it be better. Probably. Given the political system we have that is a difficult task.

 

[xUT]

I don't know about you guys, but Mitt and his son Ryan scare the bejeezers out of me.
I can't see how digressing back to the trickle down economics will work in today's economy.
But hey, that's just me.
One Man - One Vote
B) xUT

 

[SparrowHawk]

Nixon a great Prez?

We were losing close to 800,000 jobs a month in 08. Auto industry was on the brink and ready to damp who knows how many.more jobs on the market.

Have we recovered? Not even close. Are we better off. Yes. With out a doubt. Could it be better. Probably. Given the political system we have that is a difficult task.

Crony Capitalism- TARP & GM/Chrysler is just corporate welfare. Obama had to bail out the banks and the auto industry as they funded his campaign. This alone makes us worse off.

 

[Ms Tree]

I can think of quite a few other reasons that they had to be baled out. What's another half million or more jobs on the market right? So what if there is a loss of confidence in the banks and there is a run on them.

Pssssstttt. You forgot to mention fiat money and Ron Paul. You're slippng. I am betting that were your boy friend in the WH back in 09 he would have done nearly the same thing. He would not have liked it but I am pretty sure he would not have wanted to be resonsible for the collaps of two auto manufactures and several banks with a possible run on his watch. Don't forget, he can say he wants to do anything he wants, but unless he can convince the boys accross the street to play nice with him, it ain't gonna happen.

A huge part of me wishes that Paul would have won this time around just to show what would happen.

 

[SparrowHawk]

I can think of quite a few other reasons that they had to be baled out. What's another half million or more jobs on the market right? So what if there is a loss of confidence in the banks and there is a run on them.

Pssssstttt. You forgot to mention fiat money and Ron Paul. You're slippng. I am betting that were your boy friend in the WH back in 09 he would have done nearly the same thing. He would not have liked it but I am pretty sure he would not have wanted to be resonsible for the collaps of two auto manufactures and several banks with a possible run on his watch. Don't forget, he can say he wants to do anything he wants, but unless he can convince the boys accross the street to play nice with him, it ain't gonna happen.

A huge part of me wishes that Paul would have won this time around just to show what would happen.

Not slipping, just tired of preaching to economic illiterates who have no concept of how money works. He would have allowed them to fail, he is on record on that issue. The BK of the 2 auto companies would likely have allowed them to come back very strong but without some of UAW craziness. But AFL-CIO contributed to his campaign so that wasn't happening either. If we allowed the banks to fail the Fed would be gone and we would have sound money and less debt straggling our economy, not to mention the wars and empire building.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Sparrowhawk:

"Not slipping, just tired of preaching to economic illiterates who have no concept of how money works."

I see that in addition to being a drama queen, you are also a narcissist.