The Stimulus Seems to have failed

As a lagging indicator, how soon did you expect the job numbers to increase?
Click to expand...

Considering the urgency expressed in the passing of the thing, I would think it would have been fairly soon, certainly a year out is a bit on the long side.
 
Chris L said:
Considering the urgency expressed in the passing of the thing, I would think it would have been fairly soon, certainly a year out is a bit on the long side.
Click to expand...

Normally if I know something takes longer I try to allow more time, not less.
 
ChrisL,

Shall I assume that you have no plans on admitting you (just like BAC) were wrong about Obama's statement regarding the severity of the recession?
 
I am arguing that when you contemplate spending nearly a trillion dollars (that you don't actually have), rushing head long into "we need to do it now!" mode is not a very good idea, especially if you know that the effects of such spending aren't going to yield any results for a year or two anyway. Are you really suggesting that the stimulus was a carefully crafted and considered piece of legislation that only had the most rational and logical elements designed to help the economy in it?
 
Malerin said:
How does lack of stimulus translate to businesses not hiring people? It's not like corporations are broke. What are they sitting on? Almost two trillion in reserves?
Click to expand...

Doesn't that indicate that things like "tax breaks" aren't going to help?

Businesses (now) have money to invest in product. However, no one is buying it. Therefore, the business sit on their cash and wait for customers.
 
Chris L said:
Measure twice, cut once. Common sense.
Click to expand...

Is it common sense to wait 6 months to fix a hole in you roof that is letting water ruin your living room? Or perhaps if you have a gas leak you should wait a month just to be sure you are doing the right thing?
 
Chris, it is hard to have a discussion when you run from point to point without actually resolving previously made arguments. This is called a gish gallop and isn't a very useful form of discussion.
 
pgwenthold said:
Doesn't that indicate that things like "tax breaks" aren't going to help?

Businesses (now) have money to invest in product. However, no one is buying it. Therefore, the business sit on their cash and wait for customers.
Click to expand...

And they don't get customers because the people they don't hire cannot afford to buy.
 
Hazel said:
And they don't get customers because the people they don't hire cannot afford to buy.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, yeah.

So give them a tax cut, so they won't have to pay as much taxes on income that they don't make.
 
I don't pretend to understand economics but, to me, the basic problem is to whom they gave the money in the first place. All of that cash makes end-of-year reports look good but they mean nothing. Just that they have more money in the banks which also have more money in their banks.
 
Hazel said:
I don't pretend to understand economics but, to me, the basic problem is to whom they gave the money in the first place. All of that cash makes end-of-year reports look good but they mean nothing. Just that they have more money in the banks which also have more money in their banks.
Click to expand...

Did they really "give" anyone money?

I know a large intent of the stimulus package was to fund projects for companies to do to earn money. Like construction on infrastructure.

And the extent to which organizations or whatever were "given money" it was to pay for projects that needed to be done. Lots of schools got money to do things like buy computers. Or do renovation.

Also, don't confuse TARP funds (which went to banks to provide lending) with stimulus funding.
 
pgwenthold said:
Did they really "give" anyone money?

I know a large intent of the stimulus package was to fund projects for companies to do to earn money. Like construction on infrastructure.

And the extent to which organizations or whatever were "given money" it was to pay for projects that needed to be done. Lots of schools got money to do things like buy computers. Or do renovation.

Also, don't confuse TARP funds (which went to banks to provide lending) with stimulus funding.
Click to expand...

You are right, of course. But, the way it ended up, it was almost "given". Are they doing the rebuilding and improving that it was intended for? I believe it was hoped that these renovations and constructions would create more jobs. Instead, aren't they just sitting on the money rather than put it to use? So I have read anyway.

It is the same with schools. I got a shock a few weeks ago when I saw what parents are now required to buy at the beginning of the year. Some lists even included janitor supplies! If you don't have children in school, find a neighbor who can show you his/her list. Missouri's aren't too bad. One school in Texas called for the parent to buy his/her child 19 dozen pencils. 19 dozen pencils? Really?

I'd better stop.
 
Is it common sense to wait 6 months to fix a hole in you roof that is letting water ruin your living room?
Click to expand...

If the leak is going to take 2 years to fix anyway, a few more weeks thinking about how you want to fix it can't hurt. The whole "well it takes a long time" thing just doesn't jive with the "we need it now or people will die!" thing.
 
Chris L said:
If the leak is going to take 2 years to fix anyway, a few more weeks thinking about how you want to fix it can't hurt. The whole "well it takes a long time" thing just doesn't jive with the "we need it now or people will die!" thing.
Click to expand...
If we are going to go through with this analogy (as I can tell you will avoid admitting previous errors), Please explain what does the leak equal in the recession? Job losses? reduced commerce? reduced production? freezing of banking markets? increased bankruptcies? ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom