The Stimulus Seems to have failed

Senate Majority Leader (since January 2007) Harry Reid - "I had nothing to do with the massive foreclosures here. You know that I had nothing to do with these unemployment figures."

LIAR.
 
BeAChooser said:
Senate Majority Leader (since January 2007) Harry Reid - "I had nothing to do with the massive foreclosures here. You know that I had nothing to do with these unemployment figures."

LIAR.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010...on-summer-recovery-obama-biden-bush-tax-cuts/

Is Obama Dishonest, Naive or Both When He Talks About Our Economy?
Click to expand...

Or is he just Stuck On Stupid?

Continuing from the above:

The longer President Obama refuses to acknowledge the direction of our nation's economy the greater the impact will be when the looming depression that awaits is named in his honor.

… snip …

In 1929, Yale economist Irving Fisher made note of a number of trends led to the worst economic depression in our nation's history.
Guess how many of these same trends fit into today's scenario:

- Debt liquidation and distress selling

- Contraction of the money supply as bank loans are paid off

- A fall in the level of asset prices

- A still greater fall in the net worths of business, precipitating bankruptcies

- A fall in profits

- A reduction in output, in trade and in employment.

- Pessimism and loss of confidence

- Hoarding of money

- A fall in nominal interest rates and a rise in deflation adjusted interest rates.
​

President Obama is ignoring and misrepresenting the rate of growth (or lack thereof) in the job numbers, and his economic team has laid the groundwork for the harshest attack on small businesses and every family in America that pays taxes effective January 1, 2011.

By every indicator this observer can see, we are poised for tragedy...
Click to expand...

:D
 
Neally said:
"About the Survey-The Wall Street Journal surveys a group of 57 economists throughout the year. Broad surveys on more than 10 major economic indicators are conducted every month. Once a year, economists are ranked on how well their forecasts have fared. For prior installments of the surveys, see: WSJ.com/Economist."

The community organizer turned president is not an economist. His background is law and civil rights attorney, which proves my point that he does not have expertise in economic matters. Assuming he and his advisers are smarter than other economists, just because he is president, certainly is not of a skeptical mindset. Romer, his chair of Council of Economic Advisers was horribly wrong in her prediction of the impact of the stimulus on unemployment. Now explain to me again why Obama's economic policy of more stimulus spending should be followed over the majority of economists in the WSJ survey.

If you don't believe the majority of the economists, do you believe in the presidents position, which has even less expertise? There are only two choice here, more stimulus or no more stimulus.
Click to expand...

I do think there are more than 48 economists around the US...so majority is a bit of a stretch. You also don't know the president has less expertise or less available expertise to draw upon. I have to confess that I don't know which would be better...this economy is uncharted territory with any decision being slammed by the opposing ideology ad nauseum.

glenn
 
This next $50B is not going to be called a stimulus. According to MSNBC the Stimulus was a PR/communication failure.



Do they really think that the voting public is comprised of so many idiots that calling the new stimulus by other names is going to make any difference at all? Or that the first stimulus failed only on a PR level?
 
YoPopa said:
This next $50B is not going to be called a stimulus. According to MSNBC the Stimulus was a PR/communication failure.



Do they really think that the voting public is comprised of so many idiots that calling the new stimulus by other names is going to make any difference at all?
Click to expand...
Judging by past rebranding successes, it is a logical thought.

It's not the estate tax became death tax.
health care reform became death panels.
torture became enhanced interrogation.
 
Last edited:
Hindmost said:
I do think there are more than 48 economists around the US...so majority is a bit of a stretch. You also don't know the president has less expertise or less available expertise to draw upon.
Click to expand...
"Majority" referred to the majority in the survey, not the majority of economists in the world or US.

In fact I do know the president has less expertise. I already posted his education and experience background. As far as less expertise to draw on, I do know his chair of Council of Economic Advisers was horribly wrong in her prediction re: employment. As far as other advisers, I rather doubt that he has 57 different economists that he is taking advice from, but I would be interested in knowing the details of his staff. At this point I'd go with the majority who say "no" to more stimulus.
 
joobz said:
Judging by past rebranding successes, it is a logical thought.

It's not the estate tax became death tax.
health care reform became death panels.
torture became enhanced interrogation.
Click to expand...

So you can't think of any rebranding successes either.

The Stimulus failed on its' merits. It did not fail because it was call "The Stimulus" changing the name isn't going to change the merits and the voters who show up at midterms tend to be a little better informed on issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom