PDA

View Full Version : The SF Fed Says the Stimulus Didn't work!



llotter
12-06-2010, 08:48 AM
It is almost common knowledge and now restated in a study by the SF Fed, that the stimulus was ineffectual and of the 2 million temporary jobs that were created, have netted to zero by August of this year. What we are left with is an astonishing cost of $400,000 per temp job and a burden to carry for years to come.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(Daniel) Wilson’s study makes an important contribution to this debate by focusing on state-by-state comparisons. A large portion of stimulus funding at the state level was based on criteria that were entirely independent of the economic situation that states faced. For example, the number of existing highway miles was used to calculate additional transportation spending.

The study uses this resulting variation in state-level stimulus funding to determine what impact ARRA funding had on employment — including both the direct impact of workers hired to complete planned projects, as well as any broader spillover effects resulting from greater government spending. Administration economists have repeatedly emphasized the importance of this indirect employment growth in driving economic recovery.

The results suggest that though the program did result in 2 million jobs “created or saved” by March 2010, net job creation was statistically indistinguishable from zero by August of this year. Taken at face value, this would suggest that the stimulus program (with an overall cost of $814 billion) worked only to generate temporary jobs at a cost of over $400,000 per worker. Even if the stimulus had in fact generated this level of employment as a durable outcome, it would still have been an extremely expensive way to generate employment.

Interestingly, federal assistance to state Medicaid programs appears to have decreased local and state government employment. One possibility is that requirements to maintain full Medicaid benefits in order to receive federal aid proved sufficiently expensive that state governments pushed though additional rounds of layoffs in non-health related areas. This finding may suggest a potential pitfall with the Wyden-Brown proposal to decentralize health reform efforts at the state level: if comprehensive insurance requirements are retained, the net effect of reform may only shift safety-net spending towards healthcare and away from other urgent priorities such as education or welfare assistance. </div></div>


Looks like The Moron has his foot on the neck of our economy.

pooltchr
12-06-2010, 09:58 AM
Can the country survive two more years of Obama?

I hope so, but I'm not highly confident.

Steve

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 11:02 AM
Asurd.

The congressional Budget Office, and the Department Of Labor statistics, said the Stimulus worked, and not only that, but created more jobs in hte midst of Bush's Great Recession, than Bush created in eight years.

Do you ever check any documented statistical evidence, from the government?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Funny, when Bush was in there, we didn't have to get on here and make up bad news, there was plenty of it on the news, every night.

G.

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 11:14 AM
Did the Stimulus Create Jobs?
Yes, the stimulus legislation increased employment, despite false Republican claims to the contrary.
September 27, 2010



Summary
The economic stimulus package is a favorite target of Republican candidates and groups, but more than a few ads falsely claim it did not create or save any jobs. Some recent examples:

Republican House candidate Dan Debicella charges that Democratic Rep. Jim Himes failed Connecticut’s families because he voted for a "stimulus package that has done nothing to reduce unemployment."
Rick Scott, the Republican candidate for governor in Florida, says Democrat Alex Sink "backed the failed stimulus bill, which created debt, not jobs."
Similarly, Sink — who never served in Congress and didn’t vote on the bill — is attacked by the Republican Party of Florida in an ad that says the stimulus "gave us big debt and no jobs."
Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group that does not have to disclose its donors, aired an ad against Democratic congressional candidate Denny Heck of Washington that claimed the "$787 billion stimulus … failed to save and create jobs." The group has launched similar ads against other Democrats.
Kristi Noem, a Republican House candidate from South Dakota, calls the measure a "jobless stimulus."
The truth is that the stimulus increased employment by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million people, compared with what employment would have been otherwise. That’s according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Analysis
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, more commonly known as the stimulus bill, has been featured in more than 130 TV ads this year, according to a database maintained by Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group. In many of those ads, Republicans claim the bill has "failed" (a matter of opinion) or state (correctly) that unemployment has gone up since President Barack Obama signed the bill into law on Feb. 17, 2009. The national unemployment rate was 8.2 percent in February 2009, and it now stands at 9.6 percent, having peaked at 10.1 percent in October 2009.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>But it’s just false to say that the stimulus created "no jobs" or "failed to save and create jobs" or "has done nothing to reduce unemployment" – or similar claims that the stimulus did not produce any jobs.

As we have written before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in August that said the stimulus bill has "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points" and "[i]ncreased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million."

Simply put, more people would be unemployed if not for the stimulus bill. The exact number of jobs created and saved is difficult to estimate, but nonpartisan economists say there’s no doubt that the number is positive.</span>Debicella for Congress TV Ad: "Rubber Stamp," aired Sept. 9-10


http://www.factcheck.org/2010/09/did-the-stimulus-create-jobs/

pooltchr
12-06-2010, 11:28 AM
So where have all those "stimulus" created jobs gone? The stimulus money went mostly to states and municipal governments to pay for teachers, policemen, firemen, etc. But the stimulus payments were only for one year. Now that the stimulus money is ending, the states and municipalities are still faced with budget shortfalls, and are forced to eliminate those positions "created" by the stimulus money.

Do you remember the Governor of South Carolina threatening to refuse the stimulus money if he couldn't apply it as he saw fit? This is exactly the reason he did it.

They basically created some temp jobs (at a very high cost, I might add) that are now ending. Did you notice unemployment jumped up again last month?

Stimulus, at best, was a bandaid that did nothing to address the root problem, which is that businesses, faced with higher taxes, and declining profits, are not hiring.

Most hiring that is being done right now, is being done through temp agencies. This allows business to bring in the people they need, for the short term,, and then let them go without having to deal with the unemployment charges they would face if they had hired those people themselves.

The business community is very fearful of what this administration will do to them next.

Back away from the spoon!!!

Steve

llotter
12-06-2010, 11:39 AM
I don't hear anyone, including conservatives, talking about what need to be front and center, the Constitution, if we are ever to get control of our central problem, the federal government. So I am not optimistic and i hate sounding cynical.

sack316
12-06-2010, 12:05 PM
Actually Gayle, the CBO has updated the figures to cover July through September now, and the numbers have improved for this year:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.8 percentage points and 2.0 percentage points,

Increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.6 million, and

Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 2.0 million to 5.2 million compared with what would have occurred otherwise. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers). </div></div>

By this measure alone, the stimulus did "work". But the question all along has been how permanent would the "fix" be? Were we just putting the proverbial band-aid on the problem that we would just have to address again later? The CBO report continues:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The effects of ARRA on output peaked in the first half of 2010 and are now diminishing, CBO estimates. The effects of ARRA on employment and unemployment are estimated to lag slightly behind the effects on output; they are expected to wane gradually beginning in the fourth quarter. <u>CBO projects that the number of FTE jobs resulting from ARRA will drop to between 1.2 million and 3.6 million, on average, during 2011.</u> </div></div>

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/119xx/doc11975/11-24-ARRA.pdf

It's at best a half-truth for either side of the argument to say it worked or didn't work.

On one hand, there were jobs created... even if only temporary it was work created that otherwise would not have been there in all likelihood without it (WIN!)

On the other hand if a high percentage of these jobs are temporary or do not evolve into self-sustaining positions without gov't backing, then we'll find ourselves with a higher spike in unemployment again in 2011... or having to create another (possibly even bigger) stimulus package (LOSE!)

Sack

llotter
12-06-2010, 12:25 PM
The Fed Chairman just yesterday agreed that the stimulus was unsuccessful and at 400,000 per job, such spending will only move us closer to bankruptcy.

FactCheck is not an economics brain trust... they are only repeating what other left wing sources have been spreading in support of a statist agenda. Do you think they generated those numbers through their own independent research or could ever distinguish valid info from propaganda?

Deeman3
12-06-2010, 12:28 PM
I think your pessimism is unfounded as we may have really been in trouble with out the bailout and, of course, the added incentive of raising taxes on the filthy rich making over $250K will provide needed funds that our resourceful government will faithfully apply to paying down the deficit and not waste on other government programs!

Being recently made redundant, I have toyed with the idea of starting a business. Not being in California or other places where no one will even consider a start up, I have been talking to other professionals here. Aside from the very difficult economy, all are telling me to just save myself a lot of misery, money and frustration as even those with established businesses, paid off assets and no rent are struggling on margins of 1 to 4 percent and even that may be eclipsed by their new marginal tax rates. They are planning of layoffs, more hours per worker and additional outsourcing to Mexico and other central American countries just to sustain what they have. With the business death tax after January one has said if he doesn't die before then, his sons will not be able to keep his business going for their generation.

They, many of them, have essentially given up!

I don't think the Republicans have the answer! They may delay the eventuality a few months or years but the fundamental change we have seen in the non financial businesses is no longer reversible, IMO. We all thought they/we were writing checks on our grandchildren's accounts but it is now obvious that only those of us lucky enough to be nearer the end of our lives than the beginning will escape fairly intact.

With the recent Fed action, what $600B?, we have already hit that slippery slop that is so often mis-applied.

As I think it is too late, I think we should all jump in and enjoy the spending party! If, as the left says, it is the right and prerogative of the state to manage all these evil companies and businesses, let the games begin!

If this is all a big poker game, we are all of us, all in anyway....

sack316
12-06-2010, 01:03 PM
if you do start one up... remember your friend Sack who is still one of the underemployed (that doesn't count in the unemployment figures) /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 01:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Fed Chairman just yesterday agreed that the stimulus was unsuccessful and at 400,000 per job, such spending will only move us closer to bankruptcy.

FactCheck is not an economics brain trust... they are only repeating what other left wing sources have been spreading in support of a statist agenda. Do you think they generated those numbers through their own independent research or could ever distinguish valid info from propaganda?
<span style="color: #CC0000">\
Bull!

If you had bothered to check the page fully, you would have seen the links to government sites, which disproved the statements that Republicans have been yelping for the last year or more.

Factcheck.org, is not a Liberal organization.

Another irrational post from you.

G.</span> </div></div>

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 01:32 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually Gayle, the CBO has updated the figures to cover July through September now, and the numbers have improved for this year:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.8 percentage points and 2.0 percentage points,

Increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.6 million, and

Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 2.0 million to 5.2 million compared with what would have occurred otherwise. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers). </div></div>

By this measure alone, the stimulus did "work". But the question all along has been how permanent would the "fix" be? Were we just putting the proverbial band-aid on the problem that we would just have to address again later? The CBO report continues:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The effects of ARRA on output peaked in the first half of 2010 and are now diminishing, CBO estimates. The effects of ARRA on employment and unemployment are estimated to lag slightly behind the effects on output; they are expected to wane gradually beginning in the fourth quarter. <u>CBO projects that the number of FTE jobs resulting from ARRA will drop to between 1.2 million and 3.6 million, on average, during 2011.</u> </div></div>

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/119xx/doc11975/11-24-ARRA.pdf

It's at best a half-truth for either side of the argument to say it worked or didn't work.

On one hand, there were jobs created... even if only temporary it was work created that otherwise would not have been there in all likelihood without it (WIN!)

On the other hand if a high percentage of these jobs are temporary or do not evolve into self-sustaining positions without gov't backing, then we'll find ourselves with a higher spike in unemployment again in 2011... or having to create another (possibly even bigger) stimulus package (LOSE!)

Sack




</div></div>

I agree with you that our economic problems are structural, and won't be easy to turn around. I know of no one who said it would be easy to turn this economic meltdown around.

Additionally, I hope we won't have Presidents in the future, who think they can wage wars, the most costly of which completely un-necessary, cut taxes, subsidize the American job oursourcers, ignore the economic impact of rising prices of foreign oil, ignore the growing threats of monopolized health insurance costs going out of sight, cuasing 62% of federally insured loans of homeowners, to go into foreclosure, ignoring the domino results on our economy, and our people, and stay in office for eight years, ignoring all the residual economic and foreign threats, growing from his policies, while putting it all on a credit card, to foreign countries, while insisting that the fundamentals of the economy are strong, up until the last minute before it all came tumbling down.

Bush didn't leave any easily solvable disasters behind him. They were all no win results. Economists of any credibility, all predicted, before he ever moved his sorry dumb ass out of the White House, that this would be the worst Recession since the Great Depression, if we could avoid a Depression, possibly lasting as long as a decade, and in fact, Bush said that, himself.

witout the TARP, and the Stimulus, we'd be in a Depression, right now.

The stimulus should have been bigger, but Republicans promised to vote against it if it was any bigger, IIRC.

We're in a mess, that's for sure, but the house burned down before Democratic, or this President, ever got into power.

The policy of runninng up debts, was a policy that I was protesting for years, before the Dems, got into power. I can still recall all of the attacks from the right, while I was writing about the stupidity of what Bush was doing to us, and to our kids and grandkids.
G.

eg8r
12-06-2010, 01:33 PM
The stimulus may have created jobs but it was not creating them faster than other jobs were being eliminated. UE has increased to 9.8% and that is not good.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 01:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stimulus may have created jobs but it was not creating them faster than other jobs were being eliminated. UE has increased to 9.8% and that is not good.

eg8r </div></div>
Well yes, it was a Global Depression threatening us, according to Bush, one that could likely last atleast a decade, if he didn't get 800 billion for the Troubled Assets Relief Program, right?

My point is this, we should never have allowed wars raging, while huge tax cuts were in the policy.

We should naver have had a policy of fighting in the Middle East, with boots on the ground.

We should never have subsidized oil corporations, and we should never have left the North American Free Trade Agreement in place, for eight years, with no adjustments, while we were hemmoraging jobs, and China was cheating us on the global market.

We should never have cut taxes, and incured trillion dollar prescription progams, while failing to pay for any of it....

WE should never have put ourselves into war in the Middle East, that we were financing from both sides, pay billions to the very countries who were handing our money over to terrorists.

Wwe should never have had a policy of lowering Cafe' standards, when it was obvious that unlike REagan's shining city of the hill, that didn't have to give a damn about how much oil we were buying from the Middle East, we were actually being the global pigs, who refused to acknowledge what Carter tried to tell us some thirty plus years ago, that if we didn't conserve, if we didn't push cafe' standards higher, if we didn't develop renewable energy, our foreign threats would put us behind the eight ball.

But instead, Reagan sent out the message by ripping the solar panels off the White House, and conned the country into his Voodoo economics, and failed Trickle down BS.

G.

IOW...we should never have followed Republoican Policies.[/color]

cushioncrawler
12-06-2010, 01:54 PM
John Deere are on the way up again.
I bort a JD mower yesterday -- so i hav dunn my bit for usofa employment (i think JD are made by JD, in usofa).

Obama hadta stop USS-Enterprize from sinking -- which he did.
Obama hadta get USS-Enterprize going forward again -- which he allmost did.

But USS-Enterprize iz dragging two anchors.
One iz called krappynomix.
The other iz the GOP.
mac.

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 01:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">John Deere are on the way up again.
I bort a JD mower yesterday -- so i hav dunn my bit for usofa employment (i think JD are made by JD, in usofa).

Obama hadta stop USS-Enterprize from sinking -- which he did.
Obama hadta get USS-Enterprize going forward again -- which he allmost did.

But USS-Enterprize iz dragging two anchors.
One iz called krappynomix.
The other iz the GOP.
mac. </div></div>

Tap Tap Tap!

Half the USS crew threw the pirates off the port side, and the other half of the crew pulled them right back on board, from the starboard side.

Now we're really going to sink!

G.

pooltchr
12-06-2010, 02:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[

Now we're really going to sink!

G. </div></div>
And if we sink on Obama's watch, you will still be blaming Bush!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Steve

cushioncrawler
12-06-2010, 02:54 PM
Pirates.
Storms.
Icebergs.
Mines.
Reefs.
Mutiny.
White Whales.

Who shood play the part of Captain Obama (in the film)????
Humphrey Bogart.
Errol Flynn.
Gregory Peck.
Brian Aherne.
mac.

pooltchr
12-06-2010, 03:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Who shood play the part of Captain Obama (in the film)????
Humphrey Bogart.
Errol Flynn.
Gregory Peck.
Brian Aherne.
mac. </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Alfred E. Neuman!</span>
Steve

Gayle in MD
12-06-2010, 04:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pirates.
Storms.
Icebergs.
Mines.
Reefs.
Mutiny.
White Whales.

Who shood play the part of Captain Obama (in the film)????
Humphrey Bogart.
Errol Flynn.
Gregory Peck.
Brian Aherne.
mac. </div></div>

I'd choose Gregory Peck. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

G.

sack316
12-06-2010, 04:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">John Deere are on the way up again.
I bort a JD mower yesterday -- so i hav dunn my bit for usofa employment (i think JD are made by JD, in usofa).
</div></div>

Nice thought, but you did your part for India (Sanaswadi) /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

Sack

Deeman3
12-06-2010, 04:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pirates.
Storms.
Icebergs.
Mines.
Reefs.
Mutiny.
White Whales.

Who shood play the part of Captain Obama (in the film)????
Humphrey Bogart.
Errol Flynn.
Gregory Peck.
Brian Aherne.
mac. </div></div>

I'd choose Gregory Peck. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

G.
</div></div>

his family may not allow him to be dug up but he but he is certainly prepared for the role!

Qtec
12-07-2010, 04:01 AM
Do you know what a [ hyper ]link is?



Q...........total crap. I don't even have to google.

Qtec
12-07-2010, 04:03 AM
Thank you G. No point though, they will continue to change the subject or the goal posts and deny.

Q

Qtec
12-07-2010, 04:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So where have all those "stimulus" created jobs gone? </div></div>

In the middle of the night the were transported to Syria - just like the WMDs.[ ask a stupid Q]


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u>Do you remember the Governor of South Carolina </u>threatening to refuse the stimulus money if he couldn't apply it as he saw fit? This is exactly the reason he did it. </div></div>

Who is the G of SC? Could that be THIS GUY?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With a take it or leave it deadline looming over South Carolina's portion of the <span style='font-size: 20pt'>federal stimulus package, Governor Mark Sanford filed the necessary paperwork Friday <u>to claim $2.8 billion</u></span> while maintaining his refusal to spend the $700 million at his discretion unless state debt is payed down.

If Sanford did not claim the money it could potentially have been re-distributed to other states or ended up in court battles with South Carolina state lawmakers. Now by certifying the money he has until September 2010 to decide if he wants to use the $700 million he controls or not. </div></div>

Or this guy?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Several months back, Sanford was one of the loudest republican voices on rejecting stimulus money. After discovering he could not stop it from arriving in his state, he decided, for purely political reason, that the money was not going to go to the programs and people it was intended for. He would shift it into paying off the state debt. Good representative of the people, isn't he?

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Well, he was apparently screwing more than just the people of his state</span> - and doing so with complete disregard for proper protocol.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sanford apologized at a press conference to his family, and his staff at a press conference for "the way that I let them down." He said he had a conversation with his father-in-law a few weeks ago about where "my heart was ... laying my cards on the table."

"There are moral absolutes, God's law is indeed there to protect you from yourself. There are consequences if you breach that. This press conference is a consequence."

At first it was not clear what Sanford was referencing.

"I've been unfaithful to my wife and I've developed a relationship with what stared as a dear, dear friend from Argentina," he finally said. The affair has been going on for a year, he later explained </div></div>

That guy who went walk about.


Good reference. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Q

cushioncrawler
12-07-2010, 04:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">John Deere are on the way up again.
I bort a JD mower yesterday -- so i hav dunn my bit for usofa employment (i think JD are made by JD, in usofa).</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nice thought, but you did your part for India (Sanaswadi)Sack</div></div>Its an EZ Track Z425 -- 23hp Briggs -- 54" cut -- cost me $7200.
It woz the dearest mower we looked at -- but madSherie liked the yellow seat.
I think theze are made in the usofa.
Anyhow -- nice looking mower.
I hit two stumps in the bracken today -- but its still going ok.
mac.

cushioncrawler
12-07-2010, 04:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pirates.
Storms.
Icebergs.
Mines.
Reefs.
Mutiny.
White Whales.

Who shood play the part of Captain Obama (in the film)????
Humphrey Bogart.
Errol Flynn.
Gregory Peck.
Brian Aherne.
mac. </div></div>Sorry -- u iz all wrong -- u missed the obvious choice.
Al Johnson.
mac.

Qtec
12-07-2010, 05:42 AM
FACTS (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69923-cbo-stimulus-saved-or-created-as-many-as-16m-jobs)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stimulus bill enacted this year has resulted in as many as 1.6 million jobs saved or created this fall, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Monday evening.

The nonpartisan CBO said in a legally mandated report that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) had resulted in between 600,000 and 1.6 million jobs for the U.S. economy that wouldn't have existed in the absence of the stimulus.

Additionally, the CBO said, gross domestic product (GDP) was as much as 3.2 percent higher than it would have been in the absence of the stimulus.

</div></div>

Q

pooltchr
12-07-2010, 06:10 AM
Q. The stimulus money that was sent to the states was indeed to pay for jobs. However, it was only designed to pay for them for one year. At the end of that year, the money runs out and the local and state governments get stuck with the tab after the first year. Those local and state governments are already facing budget shortfalls (otherwise, they probably would have already hired those people with their own money), so now they have to decide if they are going to lay off those people, eliminate other expenses, or borrow the money to keep them on.

Think about this for a minute. Don't bother with a canned reply...tell me what YOU think the obvious result is going to be.

Steve

Qtec
12-07-2010, 06:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stimulus bill enacted this year has resulted in as many as <span style='font-size: 20pt'>1.6 million jobs saved</span> </div></div>

Keeping ordinary folks in work .............BAD.

Borrowing money from China to give to the richest people in America .........GOOD.



I know where you and the rest of the sheep stand.

Q

llotter
12-07-2010, 07:02 AM
You'll have to show me exactly where in the Constitution where it becomes the job of the federal government to keep ordinary folks in work.

If we have to borrow from China to allow citizens to keep their own money then the government is obviously spending too much.

Qtec
12-07-2010, 07:14 AM
Cut military expenditure in half for 10 years and you will be fine.

Q

Qtec
12-07-2010, 07:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You'll have to show me exactly where in the Constitution where it becomes the job of the federal government to keep ordinary folks in work. </div></div>

A Govt of the people, etc?



If you want to do business in the USA or work there you pay tax. In ANY country! This Anarchist crap that 'tax is theft' don't cut it.

Q

llotter
12-07-2010, 08:04 AM
I was hoping you might site something in the Constitution, the source of government authority.

Wanting our government to be limited to the Constitution is just the opposite of anarchy and most anyone with a wit of common sense would know that.

Gayle in MD
12-07-2010, 08:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was hoping you might site something in the Constitution, the source of government authority.

Wanting our government to be limited to the Constitution is just the opposite of anarchy and most anyone with a wit of common sense would know that. </div></div>

"In order to provide for the commmon good."

The right doesn't understand the Constitution, but then, they're not good with old documents. Twenty percent of them think a man can live inside of a whale. Part a Sea, impregnant a woman, without having sex.

No wonder they don't get the Constitution.

How can you run a country, without taxing it's citizens?

Our problems come whenn government protects the evil pigs in our country, most of them getting payoffs from Repiglicans for stealing, cheating, polluting, exploiting, annd all around piggish behavior.

Repiglicans pay off the most corrupt people in the country, and pretend that it is good for the country.

Insane!

G.

sack316
12-07-2010, 10:06 AM
I'm an Ex-mark man myself.

Sack

Chopstick
12-07-2010, 10:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cut military expenditure in half for 10 years and you will be fine.

Q </div></div>

I agree. Close all of our overseas military bases, bring all our troops home and you can deal with those Russian tanks yourself.

Chopstick
12-07-2010, 10:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Q. The stimulus money that was sent to the states was indeed to pay for jobs. However, it was only designed to pay for them for one year. At the end of that year, the money runs out and the local and state governments get stuck with the tab after the first year. Those local and state governments are already facing budget shortfalls (otherwise, they probably would have already hired those people with their own money), so now they have to decide if they are going to lay off those people, eliminate other expenses, or borrow the money to keep them on.

Think about this for a minute. Don't bother with a canned reply...tell me what YOU think the obvious result is going to be.

Steve </div></div>

The economic stimulus did not work because it had nothing to do with economic stimulus. It was about buying votes for the Democrats and nothing else. Why do you think they released the bulk of the money right before the election?

llotter
12-07-2010, 11:09 AM
Well, you don't quite have the words right but the 'common good' are things that benefit everyone, not some at the expense of other...that is called a 'special interest'. Things like providing a postal system and patient protection and specifically:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and
with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject
of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the
Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin
of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited
Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings
and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and
Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning
Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be
for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union,
suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for
governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United
States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers,
and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline
prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District
(not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and
the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United
States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent
of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of
Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into
Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this
Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or
Officer thereof </div></div>

This is a pretty short list and what the government is authorized to do so let's get back to it and save trillions of wasted dollars.

pooltchr
12-07-2010, 11:43 AM
I'm not surprised that you chose not to answer my question, since the answer doesn't fit on your spoon.

Here's another example. Our local news is reporting today that we will not be able to maintain present levels of law enforcement and firefighters by the year 2012 without raising taxes. The reason? We added 125 positions with the stimulus money that is now being cut off.

So it seems that even if the stimulus did "create jobs", it's going to cost the local taxpayers more to pay for it, not to mention that we need to cover that extra trillion in the federal budget as well.

Now, do you want to answer the question...or will you just try to deflect it again?

Steve

eg8r
12-07-2010, 12:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stimulus bill enacted this year has resulted in as many as 1.6 million jobs saved or created this fall, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Monday evening.

</div></div>The fact is that even more jobs were lost because UE went up another .2%. Was 9.6 now 9.8. Maybe those jobs were saved but that did not save anything else and now we are worse off.

eg8r

eg8r
12-07-2010, 12:56 PM
Why did you ignore the question?

eg8r

eg8r
12-07-2010, 01:00 PM
Are you guys ever going to suggest any cuts in spending other than military? Are you ignorant enough to believe everything else is more important?

Why not cut spending for the arts? How does that help us? How about freeze all new spending whatsoever to Education until they can make the current funds successful?

eg8r

Deeman3
12-07-2010, 03:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you guys ever going to suggest any cuts in spending other than military? Are you ignorant enough to believe everything else is more important?

Why not cut spending for the arts? How does that help us? How about freeze all new spending whatsoever to Education until they can make the current funds successful?

eg8r </div></div>

Ed, I agree that massive cuts in the military could be made along with equally effective cuts in the arts and other areas as well.

The problem is, of course, politicians with the guts to do all of it and be punished by the special interests that pretect them.

If Europe and Asia won't pay their fair share of defense, and they won't as long as we foot the bill, let them go Muslim a couple of decades earlier! This will happen anyway. A new Pew survey says half the MUslims in the world say people who convert to another faith should be killed! Shows you what we face.

Serious budget cuts will only come after the collapse of the US as we know it. Many will be thrilled when all we have must come from Uncle Sam as they will achieve complete power, they think. Of course, the very first they destroy when this happens are the self labeled intellectuals, happens every time.

I paid almost $92K in taxes last year. Now they do not have to deal with that. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif They will make it up with higher salaries for government workers and sell one more bond to the Chinese. if I don't get hit by a truck before December 31, they will attempt to get about half the rest of what I have accumulated and paid taxes on when I do die. All I can do now is spend the remainder of my lifentrying to prevent this theft. I have certainly given up on them spending what they do extort is any wise and useful manner.

I say, screw the cuts and spend like a drunken sailor asnthat is what they are doing, Why fight it? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

LWW
12-07-2010, 03:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stimulus bill enacted this year has resulted in as many as <span style='font-size: 20pt'>1.6 million jobs saved</span> </div></div>

Q </div></div>

Do you realize that the statement you quoted is ridiculous.

Here's one ... the Bush tax cuts saved or created 918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,91 8,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918, 273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,27 3,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273, 654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,65 4,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654, 461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,46 1,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461, 372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,37 2,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372, 985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,98 5,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985, 918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,91 8,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918, 273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,27 3,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273, 654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,65 4,461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654, 461,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,46 1,372,985,918,273,654,461,372,985,918,273,654,461, 372,985
jobs.

My claim is no less valid than the quote from one of the party's stupidonomist.

LWW

ugotda7
12-07-2010, 08:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you guys ever going to suggest any cuts in spending other than military? Are you ignorant enough to believe everything else is more important?

Why not cut spending for the arts? How does that help us? How about freeze all new spending whatsoever to Education until they can make the current funds successful?

eg8r </div></div>

Ed, I agree that massive cuts in the military could be made along with equally effective cuts in the arts and other areas as well.

The problem is, of course, politicians with the guts to do all of it and be punished by the special interests that pretect them.

If Europe and Asia won't pay their fair share of defense, and they won't as long as we foot the bill, let them go Muslim a couple of decades earlier! This will happen anyway. A new Pew survey says half the MUslims in the world say people who convert to another faith should be killed! Shows you what we face.

Serious budget cuts will only come after the collapse of the US as we know it. Many will be thrilled when all we have must come from Uncle Sam as they will achieve complete power, they think. Of course, the very first they destroy when this happens are the self labeled intellectuals, happens every time.

I paid almost $92K in taxes last year. Now they do not have to deal with that. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif They will make it up with higher salaries for government workers and sell one more bond to the Chinese. if I don't get hit by a truck before December 31, they will attempt to get about half the rest of what I have accumulated and paid taxes on when I do die. All I can do now is spend the remainder of my lifentrying to prevent this theft. I have certainly given up on them spending what they do extort is any wise and useful manner.

I say, screw the cuts and spend like a drunken sailor asnthat is what they are doing, Why fight it? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

Explain in detail how you would go about cutting military spending?

cushioncrawler
12-08-2010, 05:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">John Deere are on the way up again.
I bort a JD mower yesterday -- so i hav dunn my bit for usofa employment (i think JD are made by JD, in usofa).</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nice thought, but you did your part for India (Sanaswadi) Sack</div></div>Had a look -- my JD haz a sticker saying Assembled in Horicon, MI.
mac.

"......John Deere recently rolled the five millionth lawn tractor off its assembly line at the Horicon, Wis., manufacturing facility. A model from the Select Series™ X700 Ultimate™ Tractor line-up was manufactured as the five millionth lawn tractor in time for spring and the peak outdoor power equipment selling season....."

eg8r
12-08-2010, 08:34 PM
Thanks for purchasing American. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-09-2010, 09:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Many will be thrilled when all we have must come from Uncle Sam as they will achieve complete power, they think. </div></div>
<span style="color: #CC0000"> I know not one single person, who thinks that way, not one.

If there is any power mongering going on, it is from the Corporations, who own and run this Government and this country.

That's why we're in the mess we're in the first place, only those without conscience, have the power to buy the Representatives they want, to maintain an unsustainable tax structure, for the wealthy, allow them to pollute, make people ill, outsource Americans jobs, while getting subsidies, pay to propagandize an illegal war, American blood and treasure to benefit corporate fascist pig war profiteers, against a country which never attacked us on our shores, spread lies about the scientific facts of climate change, t protect their filthy, unsustainable dirty fuels, block research and development ofr cleaner energy, monopolize every basic, life required need, pushing costs outside the sources of the Middle Class Americans to be able to afford, food, energy, clean water, health care, insurance, medicine, and a clean environment, all of it almost completely provided by corrupted policies, compliments of their Republican pawns, in order to continue their assault on America.


G.

</span>

eg8r
12-09-2010, 09:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know not one single person, who thinks that way, not one.

</div></div>Your actions speak louder than your words.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-10-2010, 10:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know not one single person, who thinks that way, not one.

</div></div>Your actions speak louder than your words.

eg8r </div></div>

So do yours. You obviously don't care about your children's futures on this planet. If you did, you wouldn't vote Republican.

G.