Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
When the money is paid back with interest, you will have the total equation. It is only then that you can debate it's merits.
Bush's tax cuts were more expensive than the Recovery Act. When will see that money back?
The private sector can't do everything and when you're talking about cities you do need a public sector.
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
When the money is paid back with interest, you will have the total equation. It is only then that you can debate it's merits.
Bush's tax cuts were more expensive than the Recovery Act. When will see that money back?
Tax cuts don't cost anything.
The problem is government didn't reduce spending
And are you implying that it is more expensive to let people keep their own money than to fund trillion dollar stimulus packages?
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
Well Pelosi did say that 7% unemployment was the new norm and Obama claimed that 5.6% unemployment udder Bush was "immoral".
Not sure what anyone expects from the far left except hypocrisy.
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
Well Pelosi did say that 7% unemployment was the new norm and Obama claimed that 5.6% unemployment udder Bush was "immoral".
Not sure what anyone expects from the far left except hypocrisy.
Do you have a quote of Obama saying that?
It's cute how you answer your own question -- and you get it wrong!Either way, it's a valid assertion. You probably don't really understand GDP if you don't understand how printing money inherently boosts GDP. You're like a neanderthal who thinks 'Rise in GDP - Economy must be do good!'
Then demonstrate the cause and effect .... shouldn't be hard to do if it's a "valid assertion." GDP represents the dollar amount of goods and services produced during a period of time. Demonstrate how the printing of money either increases peoples' incomes or provides people with more money to spend.....
GDP is basically a measure of monetary asset growth. If you print money is your monetary assets increasing or decreasing? Increasing. Thus, to return to the original point, bragging that the so-called recovery act increased GDP is stupid.
Actual number of negative years of GDP since 1935 ... 14All too many laymen (and hack pretend economists (like [MENTION=2926]Toro[/MENTION])) think that GDP is an absolute function of economic progression. If that were true, then we would have had more than two negative GDP years since 1935.
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
Well Pelosi did say that 7% unemployment was the new norm and Obama claimed that 5.6% unemployment udder Bush was "immoral".
Not sure what anyone expects from the far left except hypocrisy.
Do you have a quote of Obama saying that?
Oh my the far left is reaching these days, yes then senator Obama said it.
Next you will want a link to Pelosi's infamous quote of "We must pass the bill to find out what's in it."
Do you have a quote of Obama saying that?
Oh my the far left is reaching these days, yes then senator Obama said it.
Next you will want a link to Pelosi's infamous quote of "We must pass the bill to find out what's in it."
Perhaps he did, but I'm certainly not going to take your word for it. You could be wrong, or worse, you could be lying. That you wouldn't just quote him leads me to believe it's for one of those reasons.
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
If you knew how the stimulus worked you would know the money generated demand. A ripple effect. It wasn't zero sum.
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
If you knew how the stimulus worked you would know the money generated demand. A ripple effect. It wasn't zero sum.
No it was a legal money laundering scheme designed to line the pockets of the far left donors, especially the unions.
Another idiot whoi believes in the multiplier effect.Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
If you knew how the stimulus worked you would know the money generated demand. A ripple effect. It wasn't zero sum.
Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
If you knew how the stimulus worked you would know the money generated demand. A ripple effect. It wasn't zero sum.
No it was a legal money laundering scheme designed to line the pockets of the far left donors, especially the unions.
Another idiot whoi believes in the multiplier effect.Obama could of given that 800 billion dollars back to every citizen in the country and they could of used to pay bills, buy a car, etc etc and STIMULATE the economy that way, but instead he took it and we have no frikken idea where it went and how it was spent and we STILL have over 7% unemployment after 5 frikken years of this failure
the Op is determined to make Obama out to be some brilliant hero when nearly 60% who disapprove of him disagree
petty pathetic if you ask me
If you knew how the stimulus worked you would know the money generated demand. A ripple effect. It wasn't zero sum.
