Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
So, how's that "Stimulus" thing working out?
Topic Started: May 12 2009, 03:25 AM (211 Views)
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
In January, we were presented with some data from the Obama administration indicating that, without the "stimulus" the unemployment rate would climb to higher levels than with, and though it would return down to "normal" within 5 years, the peak would be higher.

Posted Image

I guess the crystal ball isn't working out all that well, for here we have the actual numbers for March and April.

Posted Image

So we're a bit worse off than they would have predicted we would be without the "stimulus".

Bad predictions or failed policy?
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
When Bush was in office, the left screamed to high heaven about how he was "mortgaging our children's future". Now that Obama is in office and the debt he's running up is 4 times larger than anything Bush ever did - not a peep out of them. One can only assume that it was crocodile tears, their concern was not about spending, but with who was doing it.

Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
It's not just that, it's what you're getting for it.

I'm not happy about the debt ... but at least we're rebuilding crumbling infrastructure, not pissing it down a rathole in Iraq.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
I can't believe Obama and the Congress (Republicans are wusses) are getting away with running up this debt. The amount is so huge it is mind numbing. The public is, I think, still in such shock that they have been desensitized. Of course, the media is complicit. There is going to be a point down the road when people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually and that we have seriously damaged the nation for decades to come because of the spending that is happening today.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Quote:
 
people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually


How will they know?
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 04:50 AM
It's not just that, it's what you're getting for it.

I'm not happy about the debt ... but at least we're rebuilding crumbling infrastructure, not pissing it down a rathole in Iraq.
I disagree. Reminds me of the man that said his wife's credit card was stolen but he wasn't going to report it because the thief was spending less than his wife. Yep, we are getting something for our money that is more concrete than the nebulous potential benefits from the Iraq war, but the cost is too dear IMO.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 08:57 AM
Quote:
 
people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually


How will they know?
Probably when the media decides to spin it as a bad thing - which will be about six months into the Romney administration.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 08:57 AM
Quote:
 
people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually


How will they know?
How about here, to start with.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Luke's Dad
May 12 2009, 09:11 AM
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 08:57 AM
Quote:
 
people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually


How will they know?
How about here, to start with.
That proves that, without the stimulus, the economy would have righted itself?

Back to economics class for you.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Yep, can't go back in time and try out different scenarios.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 02:18 PM
Luke's Dad
May 12 2009, 09:11 AM
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 08:57 AM
Quote:
 
people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually


How will they know?
How about here, to start with.
That proves that, without the stimulus, the economy would have righted itself?

Back to economics class for you.
Would that be the same economics class that taught you that GDP was sole indicator of a nations wealth? If so, thanks, but I think I'll pass.


With the stimulus program, we are at a higher level of unemployment than what the administration projected we'd be at without it. This means one of two things, either their projection was wrong to start with, or the stimulus has not worked as they projected. If it's the first, then that means they based their respose off of a faulty model.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Luke's Dad
May 12 2009, 04:21 PM
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 02:18 PM
Luke's Dad
May 12 2009, 09:11 AM
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 08:57 AM
Quote:
 
people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually


How will they know?
How about here, to start with.
That proves that, without the stimulus, the economy would have righted itself?

Back to economics class for you.
Would that be the same economics class that taught you that GDP was sole indicator of a nations wealth? If so, thanks, but I think I'll pass.


With the stimulus program, we are at a higher level of unemployment than what the administration projected we'd be at without it. This means one of two things, either their projection was wrong to start with, or the stimulus has not worked as they projected. If it's the first, then that means they based their respose off of a faulty model.
As Kincaid said, you can't go back in time and try out different scenarios.

You can try to talk your way out of it all you like, but it was a really dumb post. Really dumb. Wholly aside from Kincaid's point, showing a graph of how the stimulus is doing with respect to one economic factor, compared to what might have been expected at a time before the stimulus bill, demonstrates exactly nothing about what would have happened if the stimulus bill hadn't passed.

And, of course, we aren't dealing with a single factor model. There are a mind-boggling number of other variables that have changed since the stimulus package was enacted and that can and did impact the effect of the stimulus package, and those same variables would also affect any possible economic recovery without a stimulus package.

In short, you fail. Badly.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brenda
Member Avatar
..............
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 06:37 PM
In short, you fail. Badly.
Quirt, bad day? :chill:

P.S. At least take it one step further and use GDP per capita to compare between national economies.
“Weeds are flowers, too, once you get to know them.”
~A.A. Milne
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 06:37 PM
And, of course, we aren't dealing with a single factor model. There are a mind-boggling number of other variables that have changed since the stimulus package was enacted and that can and did impact the effect of the stimulus package, and those same variables would also affect any possible economic recovery without a stimulus package.

In short, you fail. Badly.


Quote:
 
You can try to talk your way out of it all you like, but it was a really dumb post. Really dumb. Wholly aside from Kincaid's point, showing a graph of how the stimulus is doing with respect to one economic factor, compared to what might have been expected at a time before the stimulus bill, demonstrates exactly nothing about what would have happened if the stimulus bill hadn't passed.


Not quite, Oh Brilliant One. The administration itself was the one to make the projection of the unemployment rates both with and without the stuimulus. I didn't draw the conclusion, they did. I'm just going with their projection. If you want to call it dumb, take it up with them, they developed it.

Quote:
 
And, of course, we aren't dealing with a single factor model. There are a mind-boggling number of other variables that have changed since the stimulus package was enacted and that can and did impact the effect of the stimulus package, and those same variables would also affect any possible economic recovery without a stimulus package.


Please enlighten me as to what these variables were that they could not have predicted at the time of the stimulus package. What did they miss? Because it's obvious they missed something at the time they developed this model to be off so badly. And if that model is off so badly, and their economic battle plan was based off of this model, then the recovery plan is going to be flawed as well.

And back to the original point, yes, the economy would have righted itself eventually, by it's very nature. The problem was that it would have taken too long, and been too painful for the majority of voters out there. Newsflash, I was for a stimulus package, just not the one we got, but I can still acknowledge that eventually it would have sorted itself out.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nobody's Sock
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Kincaid
May 12 2009, 08:55 AM
I can't believe Obama and the Congress (Republicans are wusses) are getting away with running up this debt. The amount is so huge it is mind numbing. The public is, I think, still in such shock that they have been desensitized. Of course, the media is complicit. There is going to be a point down the road when people are going to realize that almost all of this debt was not needed, that the economy would have righted itself eventually and that we have seriously damaged the nation for decades to come because of the spending that is happening today.
that's what I say. they pussed out.

man, how easy it must be to spend other people's money when you have it.
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Luke's Dad
May 12 2009, 07:27 PM
QuirtEvans
May 12 2009, 06:37 PM
And, of course, we aren't dealing with a single factor model. There are a mind-boggling number of other variables that have changed since the stimulus package was enacted and that can and did impact the effect of the stimulus package, and those same variables would also affect any possible economic recovery without a stimulus package.

In short, you fail. Badly.


Quote:
 
You can try to talk your way out of it all you like, but it was a really dumb post. Really dumb. Wholly aside from Kincaid's point, showing a graph of how the stimulus is doing with respect to one economic factor, compared to what might have been expected at a time before the stimulus bill, demonstrates exactly nothing about what would have happened if the stimulus bill hadn't passed.


Not quite, Oh Brilliant One. The administration itself was the one to make the projection of the unemployment rates both with and without the stuimulus. I didn't draw the conclusion, they did. I'm just going with their projection. If you want to call it dumb, take it up with them, they developed it.

Quote:
 
And, of course, we aren't dealing with a single factor model. There are a mind-boggling number of other variables that have changed since the stimulus package was enacted and that can and did impact the effect of the stimulus package, and those same variables would also affect any possible economic recovery without a stimulus package.


Please enlighten me as to what these variables were that they could not have predicted at the time of the stimulus package. What did they miss? Because it's obvious they missed something at the time they developed this model to be off so badly. And if that model is off so badly, and their economic battle plan was based off of this model, then the recovery plan is going to be flawed as well.

And back to the original point, yes, the economy would have righted itself eventually, by it's very nature. The problem was that it would have taken too long, and been too painful for the majority of voters out there. Newsflash, I was for a stimulus package, just not the one we got, but I can still acknowledge that eventually it would have sorted itself out.
Back to the original point, I asked how people would know that the economy would have righted itself without a stimulus, and you linked a graph that had nothing to do with how people would know that the economy would have righted itself without a stimulus.

That would be the point.

Now you're reduced to saying that "the economy would have righted itself eventually, by it's very nature." Well, duh. Of course it would. That's like saying the sun will rise in the morning. Nobody has managed to repeal the business cycle yet. The question is whether the intervening painful period would have been longer and deeper and more painful without the stimulus, or pretty much the same, or shorter and milder. And you have done absolutely nothing to answer that question yet.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Quirt, chill out. You're taking bites out of everyone these days. LD has a point. If they used this graph as part of selling the plan it certainly points to a flaw in the model. How large a flaw is difficult to tell.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
QuirtEvans
May 13 2009, 01:48 AM
And back to the original point, yes, the economy would have righted itself eventually, by it's very nature. The problem was that it would have taken too long, and been too painful for the majority of voters out there. Newsflash, I was for a stimulus package, just not the one we got, but I can still acknowledge that eventually it would have sorted itself out.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/04/cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul/
Quote:
 
President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.

A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
QuirtEvans
May 13 2009, 01:48 AM
Back to the original point, I asked how people would know that the economy would have righted itself without a stimulus, and you linked a graph that had nothing to do with how people would know that the economy would have righted itself without a stimulus.

That would be the point.


Wow, Mom was right. Mental masturbation does make you blind...

Again, employment figures are a huge indicator, effect, and cause for the state of the economy. How can people tell tell that the ship would have righted eventually? The graph represents that even the administration predicted that it would have happened, at least in employment rates. Which would undoubtedly be an indication, cause, and effect for recovery, at least to start with.

Quote:
 
Now you're reduced to saying that "the economy would have righted itself eventually, by it's very nature." Well, duh. Of course it would. That's like saying the sun will rise in the morning. Nobody has managed to repeal the business cycle yet. The question is whether the intervening painful period would have been longer and deeper and more painful without the stimulus, or pretty much the same, or shorter and milder. And you have done absolutely nothing to answer that question yet.



No, the question at hand was whether or not the economy would have righted itself without the stimulus package, and you ask how would they know whether the stimulus was or wasn't necessary. would they know. Now you point out that it's self evident. Then why ask the question in the first place?
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Luke's Dad
May 13 2009, 05:01 AM
No, the question at hand was whether or not the economy would have righted itself without the stimulus package, and you ask how would they know whether the stimulus was or wasn't necessary. would they know. Now you point out that it's self evident. Then why ask the question in the first place?
And the CBO said, it would do so faster without help (see above).
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Luke's Dad
May 13 2009, 05:01 AM
QuirtEvans
May 13 2009, 01:48 AM
Back to the original point, I asked how people would know that the economy would have righted itself without a stimulus, and you linked a graph that had nothing to do with how people would know that the economy would have righted itself without a stimulus.

That would be the point.


Wow, Mom was right. Mental masturbation does make you blind...

Again, employment figures are a huge indicator, effect, and cause for the state of the economy. How can people tell tell that the ship would have righted eventually? The graph represents that even the administration predicted that it would have happened, at least in employment rates. Which would undoubtedly be an indication, cause, and effect for recovery, at least to start with.

Quote:
 
Now you're reduced to saying that "the economy would have righted itself eventually, by it's very nature." Well, duh. Of course it would. That's like saying the sun will rise in the morning. Nobody has managed to repeal the business cycle yet. The question is whether the intervening painful period would have been longer and deeper and more painful without the stimulus, or pretty much the same, or shorter and milder. And you have done absolutely nothing to answer that question yet.



No, the question at hand was whether or not the economy would have righted itself without the stimulus package, and you ask how would they know whether the stimulus was or wasn't necessary. would they know. Now you point out that it's self evident. Then why ask the question in the first place?
Pay attention, Junior.

The question is whether the intervening painful period would have been longer and deeper and more painful without the stimulus, or pretty much the same, or shorter and milder. And you have done absolutely nothing to answer that question yet.

You're so busy bobbing and weaving and trying to justify your stupid post that you can't even focus on the issue. There it is, see if you can try harder this time.

Here's a clue ... George tried to help you.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply