Stimullus to Pass, But Obama has to learn from this

[LTC]

omg asked for ONE...I gave ONE example...but to carry that ONE further...contractors have bookkeepers...office managers...other office clerks....not just bricklayers, etc. they also have to buy supplies which helps their suppliers, who also employ clerks, sales people, bookkeepers, etc.... also, the state aid will help to keep police, fire and school workers employed...more JOBS! As before...these jobs create demand...which helps to increase the tax base...which allows local gubments, etc. to keep those workers without the stim money.



Please note the SPENDING increases according to Moodys returns an average of $1.58 for every dollar spent.  Also note that your precious tax cuts return....just a hair over 70 cents for every dollar spent.  More bang for the buck by creating those hated "temporary" jobs.........

[Just Win]

Please note the SPENDING increases according to Moodys returns an average of $1.58 for every dollar spent.  Also note that your precious tax cuts return....just a hair over 70 cents for every dollar spent.  More bang for the buck by creating those hated "temporary" jobs.........

is a temporary job anything like a census taking job?

[LTC]

Drinking early again, I see.

[Sasquatch]

The website below gives an excellent summary. I challenge each of you to read it. Click on the links. Discuss.

Many economists note Japan’s failed attempt to borrow and spend its way out of a recession during the 1990s through “repeated stimulus packages. As it is, Japan piled up a massive debt and recovered only modestly, leaving it vulnerable to today’s downturn".

http://www.openmarket.org/2009/01/25/no-consensus-for-stimulus-among-economists/

[LTC]

First of all, the unbiased opinion of this piece was shot to hell in the first paragraph..."the trillion-dollar pork-filled “stimulus” package being crafted by Obama"

And..."The stimulus package is also contributing to the credit-freeze that left some businesses unable to borrow to meet payrolls"....Wasn't there a credit-freeeze BEFORE Obama assumed office?

Even giving that many economists disagree with the stimulus, there are some very credible ones who think it is needed....Moodys Mike Zandi....krugman, a noble winner, joseph stiglitz, a noble prize winner. 

Want a good write up about the stimulus?  Read this:

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Economic_Stimulus_House_Plan_012109.pdf

[TheAngryVoice]

Even giving that many economists disagree with the stimulus, there are some very credible ones who think it is needed....Moodys Mike Zandi....krugman, a noble winner, joseph stiglitz, a noble prize winner. 

And Algore, noble prize winner, says global warming err climate change  errrr global change agenda warming idiot climate change will destroy life as we know it unless we warm and cool our homes with a wind mill......so whats your point VaginaLip?

[Sasquatch]

First of all, the unbiased opinion of this piece was shot to hell in the first paragraph..."the trillion-dollar pork-filled “stimulus” package being crafted by Obama"

So in your unbiased opinion, there is no pork in the stimulus? All I can say to that is "WOW"!

Second, the website is conservative. That is why I said "click on the links". This website "summarizes" multiple opinions on the stimulus. Obviously you didn't see the links to the unbiased   NY Times and Washington Post.

And..."The stimulus package is also contributing to the credit-freeze that left some businesses unable to borrow to meet payrolls"....Wasn't there a credit-freeeze BEFORE Obama assumed office?

Yes, there was a credit freeze BEFORE Obama. But I believe "is also contributing" means an ongoing credit-freeze. In other words, it hasn't stopped.

Even giving that many economists disagree with the stimulus, there are some very credible ones who think it is needed....Moodys Mike Zandi....krugman, a noble winner, joseph stiglitz, a noble prize winner. 

You dare talk about being unbiased, and then you list Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz? Again, I say WOW!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Stiglitz

Look at what the gold standard of examining congressional spending has to say about the stimulus (Congressional Budget Office):

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/04/cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul/

[LTC]

I never said that everything in the package was perfect. There is spending in this bill...or the two passed before the compromise...that could be left out....however, there are no earmarks which is generally what is considered pork.  And to begin a write up by IMMEDIATLY calling it pork-filled undermines any supposed objectiveness.

I never said krugman was unbiased...just mentioned him as a noble winner who supports the stimulus....

As for the credit freeze....BS....the banks would be right where they are today without any talk of a stimulus....

As for the CBO...some good points....but since when has a republican paid any attention to the CBO?

[LTC]

The New Deal was wildly successful, and only faltered when Roosevelt started listening (temporarily) to the same arguments conservatives are spouting now.

Jason Linkins reminded me of this graphic that Rachel Maddow used on the air the other night, which helps drive the point home nicely:

http://washingtonmonthly.com/

[NCVol]

Look at what the gold standard of examining congressional spending has to say about the stimulus (Congressional Budget Office):

I'm not sure when it became OK for republicans to just make shiate up that has no basis in fact, but clearly we're WAY past that point.

The CBO says that the stimulus plan will increase GDP, decrease unemployment, and increase employment.  By the end of 2010, the plan would create between 1.3-3.9 MILLION jobs.  In other words, the stimulus plan UNAMBIGUOUSLY WORKS AS CLAIMED. 

The part about the economy being slightly weaker in the out years is based on the accumulated DEBT crowding out private investment.  Guess what, the SAME FACTORS are at work with tax cuts financed by borrowing trillions of dollars, in W. Bush's case, almost $5 Trillion.  Which is why, of course, the claim that tax cuts increase government revenue because of increases in GDP is, in the long run, total bullshiate.  The CBO has claimed that debt financed tax cuts, because of exactly the same problem that afflicts the stimulus package, cost MORE than the nominal amount because the debt reduces long term growth and GDP.  So not only don't tax cuts "pay for themselves" they cost MORE than the baseline, static estimate in the long term. 

But lo and behold, what a shocker, when the same damn claims are made that debt financed tax (i.e. all of W's tax cuts) cuts REDUCE long term GDP , good republicans ignore the CBO and Treasury and virtually 100% of economists who cite the same damn problem with debt crowding out and continue to claim that the Laffer Curve works magically for tax cuts financed by debt.

BTW, the vaunted tax cuts only plan the GOP voted on would work substantially WORSE than spending per the "gold standard" CBO. 

Table 2.
Policy Multipliers: The Cumulative Impact on GDP over Several Quarters of Various Policy Option
High Low
Purchases of Goods and Services by the Federal Government             2.5 1.0
Transfers to State and Local Governments for Infrastructure              2.5 1.0
Transfers to State and Local Governments Not for Infrastructure        1.9 0.7
Transfers to Persons                                                                  2.2 0.8
Two-Year Tax Cuts for Lower- and Middle-Income People                  1.7 0.5
One-Year Tax Cuts for Higher-Income People                                 0.5 0.1
Tax-Loss Carryback                                                                   0.4 0

So if we want to do ANYTHING, the only option to get the most bang for the buck is SPENDING or "welfare" to low income people.  If we don't want to do that, then the next best option is to do nothing, instead of WASTE hundreds of billions on a tax cut plan that will waste up to 3/4 of the budget cost.  Every tax cut added by the GOP makes it less likely that the plan will do as intended.  But of course, that might be the goal given the GOP.  Hope Obama fails and we get a GOP congress in 2010. 

It's amazing to watch.  Reality and facts just have nothing at all to do with republican arguments anymore.  The hope apparently is repeat a lie often enough and the sheeple will be too busy to notice. 

[NCVol]

I highly encourage people to actually read the letter to Gregg.  They might learn that the GOP spin on what the letter actually says is a joke. 

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/96xx/doc9619/Gregg.pdf

[LTC]

It's amazing to watch.  Reality and facts just have nothing at all to do with republican arguments anymore.