How's that stimulus package working out?

[alan1]

President Obama Predicts Unemployment Will Hit 10% This Year - Political Punch
snip,

In January, the incoming administration predicted in a white paper study that without a huge stimulus package, unemployment would reach just over 8%, and would be contained at under 8% with a stimulus package.

Here is the "White Paper Study", http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf
One of the principle authors is none other than Christina Romer, who has now said,

Unemployment will remain high, at or above 9.6 percent, through the end of 2010, Romer predicted.

Romer: Impact of stimulus will level off next year
In the same article,

Romer, testifying before Congress' Joint Economic Committee, said that as of August the stimulus had created or saved 600,000 to 1.5 million jobs.

However, in that very same "White Paper" linked above, Ms Romer stated this,

...we expect the plan to more than meet the goal of creating or saving 3 million jobs...

Ms Romer cannot prove that 600,000 to 1.5 million jobs have been created or saved, she is merely spewing out numbers. Notice that there is a 900,000 difference between her her low and high end claimed numbers. That's because the administration is full of shit, and they know it.
It seems that the stimulus package hasn't contained unemployment at under 8%. I grow weary of these politicians lying to me, then telling me more lies to try and obfuscate the previous lies they told.

Let's put this into a simple analogy------
An automobile has thousands of working parts on it. I can pay the best damn transmission mechanic in the world to work on my car and make sure the transmission is in perfect working order. That doesn't mean my car will start if the spark plugs are fouled, if the starter is broken, if the battery is dead, if the distributor is shot, etc, etc.
The economy has millions of working parts to it. The government can't fix the economy by simply spending money. We can achieve 100% employment by paying half the unemployed people to dig holes in the street and pay the other half to fill the holes back up. It wouldn't fix a broken economy though, would it?

 

[xsited1]

Obama has saved over 1 billion jobs in less than 1 year. 50% were saved in the private sector, 50% were saved in the public sector and 50% were saved because Obama is the Messiah.

 

[dilloduck]

President Obama Predicts Unemployment Will Hit 10% This Year - Political Punch
snip,

In January, the incoming administration predicted in a white paper study that without a huge stimulus package, unemployment would reach just over 8%, and would be contained at under 8% with a stimulus package.

Here is the "White Paper Study", http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf
One of the principle authors is none other than Christina Romer, who has now said,

Unemployment will remain high, at or above 9.6 percent, through the end of 2010, Romer predicted.

Romer: Impact of stimulus will level off next year
In the same article,

Romer, testifying before Congress' Joint Economic Committee, said that as of August the stimulus had created or saved 600,000 to 1.5 million jobs.

However, in that very same "White Paper" linked above, Ms Romer stated this,

...we expect the plan to more than meet the goal of creating or saving 3 million jobs...

Ms Romer cannot prove that 600,000 to 1.5 million jobs have been created or saved, she is merely spewing out numbers. Notice that there is a 900,000 difference between her her low and high end claimed numbers. That's because the administration is full of shit, and they know it.
It seems that the stimulus package hasn't contained unemployment at under 8%. I grow weary of these politicians lying to me, then telling me more lies to try and obfuscate the previous lies they told.

Let's put this into a simple analogy------
An automobile has thousands of working parts on it. I can pay the best damn transmission mechanic in the world to work on my car and make sure the transmission is in perfect working order. That doesn't mean my car will start if the spark plugs are fouled, if the starter is broken, if the battery is dead, if the distributor is shot, etc, etc.
The economy has millions of working parts to it. The government can't fix the economy by simply spending money. We can achieve 100% employment by paying half the unemployed people to dig holes in the street and pay the other half to fill the holes back up. It wouldn't fix a broken economy though, would it?

Speaking of jobs--How many private sector jobs will be lost to the government sector if the health bill passes ?

 

[chanel]

Does Mountain Man need a stimulus for his package? Have you tried this?

 

[alan1]

Does Mountain Man need a stimulus for his package? Have you tried this?

Quit hitting on me.

 

[dilloduck]

Does Mountain Man need a stimulus for his package? Have you tried this?

Quit hitting on me.

seriously Chanel----that was pretty blatant

 

[alan1]

seriously Chanel----that was pretty blatant

In a completely serious thread even.
Who knew politics was so stimulating?

 

[dilloduck]

seriously Chanel----that was pretty blatant

In a completely serious thread even.
Who knew politics was so stimulating?

That's how ugly politicians can end up with hot chicks--the power is an aphrodesiac.

 

[Rozman]

Obama has saved over 1 billion jobs in less than 1 year. 50% were saved in the private sector, 50% were saved in the public sector and 50% were saved because Obama is the Messiah.

I thought he saved over 3 billion jobs,rebuilt the way Wall Street and the Banks operate,took over the auto industry,will take over Health Care and the insurance industry,will eventually
run the energy companies and rewrite our constitution. Being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize after being in office 12 days was small potatoes compared to what this guy will do the remaining 3 years in office. We all now know that America is a bad and evil place and Americans are bad and evil people.Barack and Michelle will fix all that.

 

[Polk]

Again with the 8% meme.

 

[alan1]

Again with the 8% meme.

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

 

[Polk]

Again with the 8% meme.

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

 

[The Rabbi]

Again with the 8% meme.

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

Wasn't it Buffet who said the role of economists is to make fortune tellers look good?

Anyway, if the White House with accesss to the best economists in the world cannot make accurate predictions even 6 months down the road, why should we trust them on any prediction they make, including figures for the health care and climate change bills??

 

[alan1]

Again with the 8% meme.

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

But wasn't the whole concept of the stimulus package built around that very clairvoyance?
Why yes, Mountainman, yes it was.

The reality is, you were sold a pig in a gunny sack and when you opened it up you found a cat. You can still insist it is a pig, and that someday you will be eating ham, but it's still a cat.

 

[Polk]

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

Wasn't it Buffet who said the role of economists is to make fortune tellers look good?

Anyway, if the White House with accesss to the best economists in the world cannot make accurate predictions even 6 months down the road, why should we trust them on any prediction they make, including figures for the health care and climate change bills??

The problem here was one of baseline. At the time the projections were made, all of the forecast said that the economy contracted at a 3.8 percent rate in the fourth quarter of 2008. What was the real rate of decline? 6.2 percent. It's pretty hard to make effective predictions when the background data you have is off. It's even more challenging when your background data is off by such a huge margin.

 

[alan1]

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

Wasn't it Buffet who said the role of economists is to make fortune tellers look good?

Anyway, if the White House with accesss to the best economists in the world cannot make accurate predictions even 6 months down the road, why should we trust them on any prediction they make, including figures for the health care and climate change bills??

The problem here was one of baseline. At the time the projections were made, all of the forecast said that the economy contracted at a 3.8 percent rate in the fourth quarter of 2008. What was the real rate of decline? 6.2 percent. It's pretty hard to make effective predictions when the background data you have is off. It's even more challenging when your background data is off by such a huge margin.

Post mortem caveats are your best friend, aren't they?

 

[Polk]

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

But wasn't the whole concept of the stimulus package built around that very clairvoyance?
Why yes, Mountainman, yes it was.

The reality is, you were sold a pig in a gunny sack and when you opened it up you found a cat. You can still insist it is a pig, and that someday you will be eating ham, but it's still a cat.

No, it wasn't. It was build on the idea that when you have a massive decline in private spending, an increase in public spending can jumpstart production. Notice that the effects on that front are pretty clearly positive. The economy grew in the third quarter lead by tax credits which encouraged the purchase of automobiles and housing. Will those sales keep up once the tax preferences are removed? That is something that can't be answered with certainty. The fact of that matter is, however, that you'd have a hard time arguing that the stimulus is harming the economy (you guys were claiming six months ago that the stimulus would cause the economy to contract at an even faster rate), so instead you've moved to picking statistical nits.

 

[Polk]

Wasn't it Buffet who said the role of economists is to make fortune tellers look good?

Anyway, if the White House with accesss to the best economists in the world cannot make accurate predictions even 6 months down the road, why should we trust them on any prediction they make, including figures for the health care and climate change bills??

The problem here was one of baseline. At the time the projections were made, all of the forecast said that the economy contracted at a 3.8 percent rate in the fourth quarter of 2008. What was the real rate of decline? 6.2 percent. It's pretty hard to make effective predictions when the background data you have is off. It's even more challenging when your background data is off by such a huge margin.

Post mortem caveats are your best friend, aren't they?

This gets back to the idea that you think economists have a crystal ball.

 

[The Rabbi]

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

Wasn't it Buffet who said the role of economists is to make fortune tellers look good?

Anyway, if the White House with accesss to the best economists in the world cannot make accurate predictions even 6 months down the road, why should we trust them on any prediction they make, including figures for the health care and climate change bills??

The problem here was one of baseline. At the time the projections were made, all of the forecast said that the economy contracted at a 3.8 percent rate in the fourth quarter of 2008. What was the real rate of decline? 6.2 percent. It's pretty hard to make effective predictions when the background data you have is off. It's even more challenging when your background data is off by such a huge margin.

But they revealed none of that, of course.
Again, if they can be off that many measures, why should they be trusted in the future to make accurate predicitions??

 

[The Rabbi]

The entire point is that line of attack isn't built on fact, unless you're assuming clairvoyance on the part of economists.

But wasn't the whole concept of the stimulus package built around that very clairvoyance?
Why yes, Mountainman, yes it was.

The reality is, you were sold a pig in a gunny sack and when you opened it up you found a cat. You can still insist it is a pig, and that someday you will be eating ham, but it's still a cat.

No, it wasn't. It was build on the idea that when you have a massive decline in private spending, an increase in public spending can jumpstart production. Notice that the effects on that front are pretty clearly positive. The economy grew in the third quarter lead by tax credits which encouraged the purchase of automobiles and housing. Will those sales keep up once the tax preferences are removed? That is something that can't be answered with certainty. The fact of that matter is, however, that you'd have a hard time arguing that the stimulus is harming the economy (you guys were claiming six months ago that the stimulus would cause the economy to contract at an even faster rate), so instead you've moved to picking statistical nits.

No, the stimulus did not have a positive effect. It simply postponed the negative to later. The cash for clunkers fiasco is a great example. Once the incentive stopped, the buying stopped too. All the incentive did was rob demand from the future and push it to the present. Meanwhile, it built up a huge debt to finance the whole thing. Who in his right mind thinks we can get wealthy by destroying goods??
The government cannot create wealth. It can only redistribute it. How many mechanics and auto parts makers, wholesalers and retailers were hurt by the cash for clunkers nonsense? It is hard to track those numbers. That is why those people are the invisible man of this situation.