Comments on: Mint Map: Stimulus Job Creation

By: Chase

Chase — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:21:42 +0000

haha gotta love libby’s comments like Brico. the problem is we didn’t spend enough!

lmfao geez please man. the Great OB failed in his dire predictions and as a result we have worse employment, far worse debt and far far worse economic situation.

By: brico

brico — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 07:34:22 +0000

Unfortunately, you are using all your response from Heritage and Cato, which are both extremely conservative and not known for objectivity. And, with the exception of the mention of the fed doubling spending during the 30″s and unemployment remaining above 20% (which still lowers that number from it’s high during the depths of the depression…two of which happened during the ’30’s) and the comment about Japan responding to it’s stagnation by passing 10 stimulus bills in 8 years (all of which were faitly small, if my memory serves, but I could be mistaken), nothing you reference is a fact. They are opinions without solid statistics to back them up.
Which is why I love crushing conservatives arguments. They’re all blather and no facts.

By: jeff

jeff — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:24:13 +0000

Great map!
Sure glad it was green.
Stimulus – Stimulation …… Isn’t that waht an addict gets when he shoots up before the next time he’ll have to?
You people either think we are all stupid – or you are simpletons.

By: elephants and asses

elephants and asses — Wed, 20 May 2009 05:42:40 +0000

So am i financing the 6 guys watching one guy dig a hole?

By: Steve-o

Steve-o — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:37:48 +0000

Update. I forgot to include only the persons eligable to be considered unemployed by the BLS. As such, the number eligable is roughly 238.1 million… puting the unemployment numbers still too low at close 4.4%. The unemplyment numbers should read between 20.24 and 35.72 million persons. That is still a freaking huge diffence.

By: Steve-o

Steve-o — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:14:27 +0000

Where did you get your numbers??. Has anyone else taken the time to tally up the supposed unemployment numbers? I just tallied the unemployed colum and came up with a total of 10,321,737 persons. Based on the July 2008 estimate the current population is around 303,824,640. This means that would put unemployment rate at just shy of 3.4%. Cooking the numbers much? The Bureau of Labour Stats put the unemplyment rate at 8.5% (U3) for march with the broader U6 numbers at over 15%. The unemployment numbers should be between 25.83 and 45.57 Million persons. That is a freaking huge diffence.

1 like

By: Brian

Brian — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:58:17 +0000

Additionally, here is an interactive chart The New York Times published a few months ago regarding fiscal policy and recessions.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/01/26/business/economy/20090126-recessions-graphic.html

By: Brian

Brian — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:53:46 +0000

The Harrisburg Patriot published an article about what Middletown, home of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant is going to do with $189,000 of the stimulus money they are going to receive.

Middletown buys electricity from the utility, then jacks up the price and sells it to people who live in town. They are going to use the stimulus money to reduce electricity bills by $189,000 for the next two years. Then prices return to normal. How many jobs does that create? Your tax dollars at work.

Brian

1 like

By: libcrusher

libcrusher — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:44:41 +0000

This looks like a rerun of Fantasy Island. The response from herwegoagain asks “Cite one specific example where government spending in a recession did not stimulate the economy.” This is why I enjoy debating libs…it’s too easy…like taking candy away from a baby. So, with that out of the way, let’s give herewegoagain the facts…..”Government spending does little to help the economy because, in the budgeting process, political concerns trump economic merit.”…The Heritage Foundation……”Higher taxes on small businesses, higher taxes on investment capital, and a massive new tax regime to finance a risky new program to drive up energy costs and restructure much of the economy according to federal government designs are all policies that would weaken the economy under any circumstances. It is extraordinarily harmful and ill-advised to propose such policies under the present economic conditions.”…The Heritage Foundation……..and this: “During the 1930s, New Deal lawmakers doubled federal spending — and unemployment remained above 20 percent until World War II. More recently, Japan responded to a 1990 recession by passing 10 “stimulus” bills over 8 years (building the largest national debt in the industrialized world) — and their economy remained stagnant. Why do lawmakers believe the same failed approach will succeed for the U.S. today?” The Heritage Foundation. Lastly, we have this…”The idea is that stimulus will revive flagging animal spirits by actually priming consumption. But an ill-designed set of initiatives — a bunch of garbage — may do little more than run up crushing deficits that we’ll pay for in inflation or pass on to our kids.” Will Wilkinson, The Cato Institute.

1 like

By: herewegoagain

herewegoagain — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:32:28 +0000

What a surprise. I was wondering how many comments I would have to read before I saw myoptic righties blasting this.

Cite one specific example where government spending in a recession did not stimulate the economy.

That’s right, you weren’t able to. These comments from dittoheads repeat the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points the same talking points….

1 like