Stimulus Plan Stimulates the Economy

Yea, that wasn't a help at all. Thanks.

He is blamed for a lot of the economic short comings right now. I'm surprised any source would give him much credit. Many people are actually quite surprised he wasn't fired, yet.

1- I would research his role in the AIG scandal.

2- Both progressives and Republicans later accused him of being incompetent and unable to help Main Street (such as unemployment).

3- He is a known tax cheat.
 
So would you have preferred 0.7% to -2.1% growth instead of the 2.4% that is estimated?
No.

Would you have preferred unemployment to be 0.7% to 1.8% higher?
No.

Because the way I read it that is where we would have been without the plan.
No. If we know the stimulus money worked, then do we also know what money worked and what didn't? What about the lost opportunity cost incurred in spending this money?
 
BSmith, I hate to break it to you, but conservatives haven't "moved past the debate" on the New Deal. I don't think it's gonna happen with the stimulus.

The question is, if you recall all of the claims being made by both sides during the debate over stimulus; Have any of them been truly realized? The stimulus plan was not the shock to the heart of the economy that supporters had claimed and it was not the death-stroke that its detractors had claimed. It just proves, yet again, that politicians on both sides of the debate are incompetent.

Yes, in a particular way. It shows that "bipartisanship" and "centrism" don't work if the two parties have vastly different opinions as to what policies ought to be enacted. It's analogous to two people coming to a "compromise" as to whether they should go due East or due West to get to their destination. They don't end up anywhere.

In fact, continuing this analogy, the stimulus debate was between the liberals, who wanted to go East to a place that exists in reality, and the conservatives, who wanted to go West off a cliff overlooking an ocean filled with deadly sharks. (The free market fairies give you wiiiiiiings!)

Cleo
 
BSmith, I hate to break it to you, but conservatives haven't "moved past the debate" on the New Deal. I don't think it's gonna happen with the stimulus.

Yeah.... I think you are right here.
 
But the New Deal wasn't stimulatory on output -- and this is from that bastion of conservative thought: Christina Romer, who isn't the chair of Obama's CEA or anything.
 
You missed the point. Regardless of of what political point you're trying to make, he was talking in economic terms.

It hurts the economy, too.
 
Not sure why you like to blame Obama... especially when he has alot to deal with.
 
Economies tend to do that, regardless.
Not always. Look at the economy of the Weimar Republic. Down the crapper it went because of government austerity measures.
 
Really? Cause the economy actually expanded output.
Removing water from one end of a swimming pool and dumping it in the other end will not raise the overall water level.

In other words, taking money from the private economy to finance the public economy will not expand the economy. That stimulus simply took money away from productive private activities and fed resources to poorly thought out stimulus activities (IE cash for clunkers and home tax credits).
 
The economy still relies on a transfer of money right? So using the swimming pool analogy, its not the amount of water that is there, but whether it is moving. Still water lets algae grow on it, moving water doesn't.
 
The economy still relies on a transfer of money right? So using the swimming pool analogy, its not the amount of water that is there, but whether it is moving. Still water lets algae grow on it, moving water doesn't.
I see so people would not have bought a car if they needed one? All that policy did is delay the pain as we're seeing recently with the housing market. So moving the water was stimulative how? Very questionable on a short term basis and undisputed on a long term basis.
 
I see so people would not have bought a car if they needed one? All that policy did is delay the pain as we're seeing recently with the housing market. So moving the water was stimulative how? Very questionable on a short term basis and undisputed on a long term basis.
Unfortunately, it seems like there is a lot of this one-dimensional thinking; if a stimulus package to entices people to buy cars, there is the impression that the program "worked." But how did it work? People that had money and intended to spend it elsewhere were now buying cars subsidized by the government, so the program helped Chrysler but hurt Sony, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, or whoever. And at what cost did it come at? The government paid out $3 billion to people that were going to spend money anyway.
 
In other words, taking money from the private economy to finance the public economy will not expand the economy.

But taking money from the future private economy to finance the present public economy (by deficit spending) can expand the economy.
 
Back
Top Bottom