I don't get all the blustering on both sides about the stimulus...yet.

It was designed from the beginning to be a kick start to organic growth. How will we know it succeeded? The economy returns to organic growth and we're able to repay the debt incurred for the stimulus.


I've seen predictions across the spectrum of where we might be headed. Those range from the apocryphal to reasonable sustained growth that will have the US growing very slowly in the short term.

A lot of the data points to recovery, some of it doesn't. It's still simply too early to know until we get more data points.

2/18/2010 6:42:03 PM

Dude, the top of page 57 was for tmmercer to explain away his partisan hackery.

2/18/2010 6:43:22 PM

^^Boone, youre wrong. For one thing, read recovery.gov, the 5xx,xxx is the number of jobs currently being funded. So if there were jobs created, not included in that number, they were just created for a matter of months then, which is retarded anyways. Your sources are not credible. They are so credible they completely missed this disaster coming. They are liberal think thanks. Moody has sold out its investors in the passed. They have a vested interested in pumping up the stock market.

2/18/2010 11:35:29 PM

Quote :

"They are so credible they completely missed this disaster coming."

If anyone knew this was coming they would be a millionaire. The best economists in the world, conservative and liberal didn't see this coming, you can't predict the market.

2/19/2010 12:13:21 AM

Well...clearly they weren't the best. And plenty of people got rich seeing this coming.

Goldman was one of them.

2/19/2010 7:22:31 AM

Quote :

"For one thing, read recovery.gov, the 5xx,xxx is the number of jobs currently being funded. "

Dude, I'm going to cut and paste the text from the box you're quoting:

October 1 - December 31, 2009
595,263

What about "October to December" makes you think "current?"

Quote :

"Your sources are not credible. They are so credible they completely missed this disaster coming."

Your economic nihilism must be exhausting.

2/19/2010 7:50:02 AM

are these men the Nazis Walter?

2/19/2010 8:08:38 AM

Quote :

"And P.S. the number you cited was jobs gained from October 1 - December 31, 2009 only."

Lol at Boone. Obviously its current as of December, which is a month and a half ago. But youre wrong about jobs gained...it never says those were jobs gained from October-December, it says jobs created that are currently on a payroll.

Quote :

"Recovery Funded Jobs Reported by Recipients October 1 - December 31, 2009 595,263 Job calculations are based on the number of hours worked in a quarter and funded under the Recovery Act."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125858473074554505.htmlhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB125858473074554505.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/29/business/fi-jobs-stimulus29

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/maps/Bogus-jobs-created-or-saved-by-the-Stimulus.html

The article's go on and on and on. I'm not doubting that some jobs were created by the stimulus, but they are vastly over exaggerated. I believe the stimulus was a waste of fucking money. I'm glad my tax dollars are going to fund even more inefficient government jobs and jobs for companies in the back pockets of politicians. The bottom line is, Obama is not credible. His predictions for the stimulus were wrong. Yes, it created jobs, but any moron could see that.

2/19/2010 9:05:51 AM

Do these articles go on and on into the present?

Because all the ones you cited are four months old.

2/19/2010 10:11:20 AM

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Nearly-900-more-bogus-stimulus-jobs-in-California-79915962.html

However, I'm not going to waste my time hunting down articles when your reading comprehension lacks.



[Edited on February 19, 2010 at 10:36 AM. Reason : .]

2/19/2010 10:21:44 AM

I am reading comprehension lacks?

You've not cited any total numbers.

You've not cited any valid explanation of why October-December = present.

2/19/2010 10:26:30 AM

I clarified, October-December really equals February-December.

2/19/2010 10:37:18 AM

Clearly.

Because you say it does.

2/19/2010 10:41:33 AM

Boone, the only way it wouldnt would be if some jobs ended before October. I'm not trying to be a dick, but do you not see what I'm saying?

2/19/2010 10:43:29 AM

This is a communication breakdown.

You're claiming the data from the following bolded months

Quote :

"2009 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2010 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec"

are representative of these months

Quote :

"2009 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2010 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec"

2/19/2010 10:48:56 AM

Wow. The number equals "Recovery Funded Jobs Reported by Recipients" not "Recovery Funded Jobs Added Reported by Recipients". These are jobs that were on currently on the payroll during the October-December time frame, that were supposedly funded by the stimulus. A job created by the stimulus in Feb-September, should also be included in this number, because I would hope it would still be on the payroll.

2/19/2010 10:51:39 AM

I get your assumption, and I understand why it would make sense to you.

Unfortunately, it's an assumption that flies in the face of all 3rd party numbers that have been presented in this thread.


For good measure, here's another third party analysis that puts the number into the millions:

http://www.recovery.org/estimated_effect_on_jobs.aspx

*note that it's .org, not .gov.

2/19/2010 10:56:09 AM

There is no concrete evidence you have showed me. Those analysis don't take into account the net job loss in the private sector presently and in the future caused by the stimulus. And Obama and his economists lost ALL credibility with this:

http://www.heritage.org/research/labor/images/wm2797_chart1.gif

2/19/2010 1:29:27 PM

Haha, seriously dude stop linking Heritage foundation studies you idiot

2/19/2010 1:34:39 PM

^That is not a heritage foundation study. The data comes from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. Just an aggregate chart put together. I'm sure you can find others.

[Edited on February 19, 2010 at 1:38 PM. Reason : .]

2/19/2010 1:36:17 PM

*posts chart from heritage foundation*

*claims to post an unbiased chart*

2/19/2010 1:37:05 PM

How about this one, from one of your prized sources, economy.com? Written by Obama's economic team.

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

2/19/2010 1:41:15 PM

Well that document cites job gains due to stimulus as 3.6 million in 4Q2010, substantially higher than your earlier statement of .5 million. It also states that the change in GDP was 3.7%, which would have more than paid for the stimulus package by itself. So I'm wondering why the hell you linked that document considering it completely destroys everything you were saying.

2/19/2010 5:55:09 PM

I linked that document because the unemployment projections are so far off, therefore that document loses credibility. How can we trust any other projections made in that document?

2/19/2010 10:33:36 PM

How can we drink from that poisoned well?

2/19/2010 10:41:54 PM

Quote :

"Obama praises Sen. Reid in Nevada trip"

Boy.. if that's not the Kiss of Death for Reid.

[Edited on February 19, 2010 at 10:57 PM. Reason : .]

2/19/2010 10:56:44 PM

^^ not a poisoning of the well. his argument is that the document got at least one thing horribly wrong, thus it should not be trusted

2/20/2010 4:35:15 PM

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/02/21/congressional_democrats_new_agenda_targets_gop/

It looks like they are tackling the obstructionist, politics-as-usual tactics head on. I hope it works out.

2/20/2010 10:50:21 PM

they are attacking politics-as-usual with... politics-as-usual. BRILLIANT

2/20/2010 11:15:49 PM

Quote :

"obstructionist"

MSNBC viewer?

2/21/2010 9:36:08 AM

Quote :

"Exclusive: Major Taliban Operative Captured February 21, 2010 - 2:09 PM | by: Justin Fishel Mulvi Kabir, the former Taliban governor in Afghanistan's Nangahar Province, and a key figure in the Taliban regime was recently captured in Pakistan, two senior US officials tell Fox News. Kabir, considered to be among the top ten most wanted Taliban leaders, was apprehended in the Naw Shera district of Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province by Pakistani police forces. A senior U.S. military official in Afghanistan called Kabir a “significant detention”. The intelligence that led to Kabir's capture was gathered from Mullah Baradar, the Taliban’s second in command, who was picked up roughly two weeks ago in Karachi, Pakistan by a joint CIA and Pakistani intelligence operation. Baradar’s capture has been followed by a series of major detentions within the Taliban’s ranks in recent days, individuals U.S. officials are describing as “shadow governors” who operate from the safety of Pakistan’s frontier and tribal regions. Aside from Kabir, Mullah Salam of Afghanistan’s Kunduz province and Mullah Mohammad, who reportedly controlled the Baghlan province, are two of the most notable captures since Baradar was detained. "

2/21/2010 2:43:42 PM

^^^ because it’s so common for our president to have televised Q/A sessions with congress…?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/21/AR2010022101506.html?hpid=topnews
Republicans 'ready to participate' in Obama's health care summit


[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2010 2:44:07 PM

^^ How on earth are they gathering all this intelligence without torture?


These past couple captures are making Chaney look like a clown after his Valentine's Day interview.

2/21/2010 3:54:17 PM

^ this is not much to go on:

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=capture+of+taliban+leaders&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&scoring=n

But there’s been as much reporting on taliban captures so far this year than half of all of 2006 and 2008, and around 1/3rd of all of 2007 and 2009.

It wouldn’t surprise me though if we’re still torturing, we’re just not bragging about it anymore.

[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 5:30 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2010 5:30:08 PM

Quote :

"Lobbyists for healthcare, energy and financial interests had a banner year in 2009, with the average payout for each reaching as high as $177,000. Despite his push to rein in special interests, President Barack Obama sparked a boom on K Street with major new proposals on healthcare, climate change and financial policies."

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/83021-ambitious-agenda-pushes-k-street-salaries-skyward

2/23/2010 3:36:00 PM

The CBO recently released a report on the effectiveness of the stimulus bill, and the news is pretty good for the Democrats.

After the House GOP voting against it, denouncing it as a waste, and then taking credit for the influx of cash into their districts, this report only makes them look like liars as well as hypocrites.

Link to the PDF: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11044/02-23-ARRA.pdf

The stimulus:

-- Raised real GDP by between 1.5 percent and 3.5 percent

-- Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.5 percentage points and 1.1 percentage points,

-- Increased the number of people employed by between 1.0 million and 2.1 million

-- Increased the number of full-time-equivalent jobs by 1.4 million to 3.0 million compared with what those amounts would have been otherwise.

2/23/2010 9:03:23 PM

And almost all of it in government. As such, no, the stimulus did not work: society is no wealthier today thanks to the stimulus, we are actually poorer, which means we will need even more deflation before we can reach bottom, which means the recession will be longer and deeper, and when we finally do recover, we will continue to be poorer thanks to the costs of sustaining a now larger government on top of a now smaller private sector.

That the stimulus created jobs and spent money is irrelevant, as all the money spent and jobs created simply cannibalized money and jobs from the private sector, unless you can first demonstrate that we were in a liquidity trap and all the deficit spending helped the fed print money. Even if you did demonstrate that, you would still need to show that it did better than otherwise could have been done through temporary tax rebates, which would have allowed the treasury to borrow, allowed the fed to print, and forced the states to get their financial houses in order.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/cornell1/English

[Edited on February 23, 2010 at 10:35 PM. Reason : lnk]

2/23/2010 10:34:16 PM

Quote :

"The CBO recently released a report on the effectiveness of the stimulus bill, and the news is pretty good for the Democrats."

Yes democrat politicians up for election will be cheering in November, right?

2/24/2010 12:28:58 AM

Quote :

"democrat politicians"

2/24/2010 9:02:51 AM

This is SO fucking funny. Apparently Republicans arent the only ones that think democrats dont think for themselves.

http://radio.barackobama.com/

2/25/2010 8:56:09 PM

What?

2/25/2010 9:01:03 PM

it seems they've been given a couple talking points to counter the usual other talking points in an organized fashion

birds regurgitating in other birds ad nauseum

the foundation of popular talk radio (be it sports, political or gardening)

although they did say

Quote :

"These points are only to provide extra information and suggestions. Your personal story will make the most compelling message."

[Edited on February 25, 2010 at 9:19 PM. Reason : +]

2/25/2010 9:17:02 PM

Your leader has posted instruction of where they want you to call and what to say.

-Powered by Hope

2/25/2010 9:19:26 PM

go go gadget tea party

2/25/2010 9:20:38 PM

Wow this must be the first time that's ever been done.

2/25/2010 9:21:14 PM

The personal website of the Democratic party leader is calling on Democrats to spread their party's message?!

2/25/2010 9:32:15 PM

You guys dont forget to report your calls to the evil radio shows directly to the President. Its step three.

Keep it up. Talk radio should be a ton more entertaining this week with these people calling in. I wish I could listen during the day.

2/25/2010 9:46:34 PM

i clicked through a bunch of those shows

"diane rehm" and "talk of the nation" is on there

those probably won't get too hostile, so i'd avoid them

i would suggest tuning into "michael savage" or "the al sharpton show" if you want entertainment

2/25/2010 9:52:52 PM

Honestly Marko, I had a friend who told me to listen to savage. I tried it one day on my drive home, had to turn the channel. My friend the next day said it was a bad show, listen today. Tried it again...same crap. He is kinda like the glen beck of radio... I see/hear him and immediately turn the channel.

2/25/2010 9:54:38 PM

you were right a post above my last one tho about evil radio

i saw diane rehm in the forest playing dice with the devil

she's a silver fox, that's for sure

straight up stole his hooves off his feets

2/25/2010 10:02:34 PM