The Stimulus Seems to have failed

http://redmeatconservative.blogspot.com/2010/09/md-gov-omalley-caught-lying-about.html

If anyone wants to know why we don't trust the wolves (government statists) to guard the hen house (our economic prosperity) look no farther than the [Democrat Governor] O'Malley administration. Martin O'Malley has been campaigning all over the state and lying to everyone about a non-existent economic recovery in Maryland. As it turns out, O'Malley's Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation (DLLR) was hiding an internal report all along that showed that economic growth has "stalled." One young staffer mistakenly posted the report on the DLLR website, but was told to immediately remove it before people would discover the truth about O'Malley's economic policies. Fortunately, they were caught in the act. The Washington Post Reports:
Click to expand...

Oh dear. Outed by the Washington Post, no less. :D
 
BeAChooser said:
LOL! The NBER stated quite clearly and unambiguously that "The recession lasted 18 months" and that the recession "began in December 2007". Do you dispute this?

In your desperation to get yourself out of the hole you dug, you want to muddy the water by bringing in YOUR *interpretation* of what "trough" means. I'll just stick with what the NBER actually said in very clear English, and let the math/calendar skills that I learned long before I went to first grade complete the picture:

December 2007 - month 1
January 2008 - month 2
February 2008 - month 3
March 2008 - month 4
April 2008 - month 5
May 2008 - month 6
June 2008 - month 7
July 2008 - month 8
August 2008 - month 9
September 2008 - month 10
October 2008 - month 11
November 2008 - month 12
December 2008 - month 13
January 2009 - month 14
February 2009 - month 15
March 2009 - month 16
April 2009 - month 17
May 2009 - month 18

Clearly the NBER dates MAY as the last month of recession (assuming the NBER knows what they are doing in the first place).

:D
Click to expand...
I only did the calendar thing to demonstrate to you how poor your math and reading comprehension skills were.The article doesn't date May 09 as the last month of the recession. The article specifically says the recession ended in June 09, quite clearly and unambiguously. The article that YOU LINKED TO.

Do you dispute this?

Fall began in September 2010. Has it lasted for a month? No. It began on the 22nd, and so from 22 September to 22 October is one month. See how that works? Or do you lack calendar skills and logic as well?
 
BeAChooser said:
LOL! If you want to keep beating a dead horse, lomiller, be my guest. It's your credibility. :D
Click to expand...
Getting you to see reason and develop critical thinking skills IS a lot like beating a dead horse, isn't it. But you just keep up your pattern of [moronic statement][lean on smilie] in every post.
 
Dorian Gray said:
BAC and JohnnyG: The autumnal equinox marks the end of summer and the beginning of fall. This year, it happened at Sept. 22, 2010, 11:09 P.M. By your same twisted ignorant logic, summer ended in August because September was part summer, part fall.

Either you're both that stupid, or you're both that dishonest.

As has been pointed out nearly everywhere, the recession ended in June 09. January 09 to June 09 is 5 months, speaking of people who cannot count OR read.
Click to expand...

You're starting to catch on, let's see if we can get past your ad-homs and hand-hold you for the last mile.

Yes, August was indeed the last full month of summer. However, when rounding off to the nearest month it is resonable to include September as it has a considerable number of days in summer. Do we say the Fourth of July is seven months after New Years Day? Most people would not.

Given that we don't know how much of June was recession and how much was recovery, it just as valid to count June as part of the recovery as it is to count is as part of the recession. Therefore saying it is 4 months is just as valid as saying it is 5 months.
 
You don’t make choice of rounding based on whichever fits your belief system better, nor do you use different rounding rules for different pieces of information. These things should be obvious yet you do them anyway.

Cash for Clunkers kicked off on June first while the recession ended *in June*, but you are deliberately “rounding the end of the recession to the end of may” then claiming it ended before CfC became, which is clearly unequivocally false. Similarly you are rounding to the End of May and claiming the Stimulus money spent in June came after the end of the recession. Again clearly unequivocally false.

Pointing these deliberate ideologically driven lies is not an ad-hom it’s an observation based on what’s been posted.
 
Puppycow said:
http://factcheck.org/2010/09/did-the-stimulus-create-jobs/
Click to expand...

Ah yes, FactCheck … "A PROJECTS OF THE ANNENBERG PUBLIC POLICY CENTER". Now where have I encounted that organization before? :rolleyes:

And by the way, I haven't claimed that the stimulus created NO jobs, as FactCheck debunks.

I only claim that it's created far less jobs than would been created had the government not interferred in such a major way.

And history seems to prove me right over and over and over. :D
 
Oh Oh … this sort of runs counter to the thinking behind the Stimulus ...

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0910/Obama_government_cant_create_jobs.html

September 28, 2010

At the signing of a small-business-related bill on Monday, President Barack Obama made a surprising declaration about the things the government can and can't do to try to jump start the economy.

"Government can’t replace -- can’t create jobs to replace the millions that we lost in the recession, but it can create the conditions for small businesses to hire more people, through steps like tax breaks," Obama said.
Click to expand...

:D
 
yeah...
replacing all the jobs lost in the recession isn't even close to the point of fiscal stimulus but hey why let facts stand in the way of a good link spam right?
 
lomiller said:
You don’t make choice of rounding based on whichever fits your belief system better, nor do you use different rounding rules for different pieces of information. These things should be obvious yet you do them anyway.
Click to expand...
I agree, that's why you can't count June as both recovery and recession - it is one or the other unless you want to use fractions.

lomiller said:
Cash for Clunkers kicked off on June first while the recession ended *in June*, but you are deliberately “rounding the end of the recession to the end of may” then claiming it ended before CfC became, which is clearly unequivocally false. Similarly you are rounding to the End of May and claiming the Stimulus money spent in June came after the end of the recession. Again clearly unequivocally false.
Click to expand...
I never mentioned CFC nor did I mention Stimulus money - you have no idea my views on them so you can't possibly call them "false".

lomiller said:
Pointing these deliberate ideologically driven lies is not an ad-hom it’s an observation based on what’s been posted.
Click to expand...
I'm not driven by any ideology. I'm simply pointing out that that 4 months is just as accurate as 5 months based on a nebulus "June" as both the end of recession and beginning of recovery. However calling people "stupid" and "dishonest" are ad-hom attacks - I'm sure you know that, but I don't know why you choose to ignore it.
 
JohnnyG said:
You're starting to catch on, let's see if we can get past your ad-homs and hand-hold you for the last mile.

Yes, August was indeed the last full month of summer. However, when rounding off to the nearest month it is resonable to include September as it has a considerable number of days in summer. Do we say the Fourth of July is seven months after New Years Day? Most people would not.

Given that we don't know how much of June was recession and how much was recovery, it just as valid to count June as part of the recovery as it is to count is as part of the recession. Therefore saying it is 4 months is just as valid as saying it is 5 months.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. It's inaccurate to say 04 July is seven months after 01 January because they have specific dates. However, when an article doesn't list a specific day, you choose one and use it for every month. No matter which one you choose, you must use the same one for each month in order to remain intellectually honest and logically consistent. For some reason, January 20 (and therefore June 20) is popping in my head, for no particular reason... unless...
How many months do you think there are between the end of January (Jan 20th) and the end of May (last month of recession)?
Click to expand...
So THAT'S where I got it.... But WAIT! NOW you're saying this:
Given that we don't know how much of June was recession and how much was recovery, it just as valid to count June as part of the recovery as it is to count is as part of the recession.
Click to expand...
Funny thing about forums - it's easy to see you moving goalposts and backpedaling in real time, JohnnyG. How about you work out what your position is before giving ME advice about "catching on" and "handholding".
 
JohnnyG said:
I agree, that's why you can't count June as both recovery and recession - it is one or the other unless you want to use fractions.
Click to expand...
LOL! YOU were the only one counting June as both - except when you weren't counting June at all - so who do you think you're lecturing here?
 
Dorian Gray said:
Wrong again. It's inaccurate to say 04 July is seven months after 01 January because they have specific dates. However, when an article doesn't list a specific day, you choose one and use it for every month. No matter which one you choose, you must use the same one for each month in order to remain intellectually honest and logically consistent. For some reason, January 20 (and therefore June 20) is popping in my head, for no particular reason... unless...
Click to expand...
Where does the article mention June 20?

Dorian Gray said:
So THAT'S where I got it.... But WAIT! NOW you're saying this: Funny thing about forums - it's easy to see you moving goalposts and backpedaling in real time, JohnnyG. How about you work out what your position is before giving ME advice about "catching on" and "handholding".
Click to expand...
No moving of goal posts here. May was the last "month" of recession and since we don't have a specific day of turnaround it is just as valid to say 4 months as 5 months.
 
Dorian Gray said:
LOL! YOU were the only one counting June as both - except when you weren't counting June at all - so who do you think you're lecturing here?
Click to expand...

I never counted June as anything but recovery. Maybe I'm just more optimistic than you.
 
JohnnyG said:
I agree, that's why you can't count June as both recovery and recession - it is one or the other unless you want to use fractions.
Click to expand...

The recession ended in June. The recovery started in June. These are not mutually exclusive statements in fact one implies the other. As for the rest, yes you are trying to rewrite history and say the recession ended before the Stimulus and CfC or you wouldn't be in the conversation because that is the very point we are discussing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom