US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Oldstyle]

So TARP wasn't part of the ARRA...and Cash For Clunkers wasn't part of the ARRA...yet you cited them as examples of how the Obama Stimulus "worked"? You're right, Faun...I don't understand what you're saying...do you?

 

[Faun]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

 

[Faun]

So TARP wasn't part of the ARRA...and Cash For Clunkers wasn't part of the ARRA...yet you cited them as examples of how the Obama Stimulus "worked"? You're right, Faun...I don't understand what you're saying...do you?

They all contributed to reviving the economy in that they all contributed in pumping money into an economy that was largely drying up. I don't expect a con tool to understand that nor accept it.

 

[Faun]

No, not because it's just oil. I already explained it to you, but you appear to be too slow to understand.

As far as jobs created and saved by ARRA, the purpose was to keep the economy flowing for 2 years with the hope that the private sector would kick in after being decimated by Bush's Great Recession. And it worked as designed.

I hate to break this to you, Faun but in reality...the economy IS the Private Sector! What the Obama Stimulus did was prop up the Public Sector while for the most part ignoring the Private Sector. So what happened to all those Public Sector jobs as soon as the Stimulus started to run out? There wasn't enough revenue being generated by the Private Sector to keep those Public Sector folks employed at the local level so cities, towns and States started laying off their employees in an attempt to balance their budgets. The Federal Government...which doesn't have to worry about balancing a budget kept right on getting bigger through deficit spending. In the meantime huge numbers of Private Sector workers had been put out of work and even more Private Sector workers were terrified that they would be let go as well and responded by spending as little money as possible. You are right that the Obama Stimulus was built on the "hope" that the Private Sector would "kick in"! Too bad Barry, Harry and Nancy didn't do something to help that cause! Instead they essentially told the Private Sector...you guys are on your own...oh and by the way?...we're going to pass ObamaCare which is going to hit you with added costs and once we get THAT...we'll be going after Cap & Trade legislation that will add even more costs to your bottom line!

Utter nonsense. Typical for you. ARRA was not only funding the creation and saving of jobs, it also provided tax cuts for the private sector. So you're wrong about that. Plus there were additional stimulus' passed to help the private sector, such as cash for clunkers. So you're wrong about that too. The economy cratered. Credit markets locked up and money flowing through the economy, like life blood, was tightening up. Obama's stimulus served as a transfusion until the private sector could stand up again. And it worked as designed. Early in 2010, the private sector began to recover. Had Obama not gotten ARRA passed... had he let the U.S. auto markets dive into total collapse... the economy could have slipped into another Great Depression.

Not that con tools like you would have cared since the worse the economy is while a Democrat, the happier you are.

The ARRA saved the US auto industry? Really, Faun? If memory serves me the GM bailout came from TARP money...which was Bush's baby. Obama simply continued what Bush had started...except he used TARP to reward his pals in the UAW with a much sweeter deal than they ever could have gotten if GM had simply been allowed to file for bankruptcy and restructure. That GM deal ended up costing US tax payers a ton of money...the way that Bush used TARP we ended up getting back all of our money plus interest.

As for Cash For Clunkers? Have you already forgotten what a debacle that was? At a cost to tax payers of 2.8 BILLION dollars, the Obama Administration managed to "save" or create an estimated 2,000 jobs! That works out to a whopping cost of 1.4 million per job "saved" or created! As soon as the two month program ended car sales fell off a cliff so all they accomplished was front loading sales that would have taken place over a longer period of time into a shorter period of time. It didn't do squat for the overall economy! Then there were the side effects of that liberal cluster fuck. Car dealers had to destroy any "clunkers" that they took in trade...which depleted the number of used cars and drove up prices on the remaining used cars so that the poorest people in our society had to pay more to purchase a car. One more example of progressives trying to use government intervention to "fix" something and only managing to screw it up worse than it was before...while incurring huge costs!

This is why there truly is no reason to discuss politics with you. You don't understand what people say and your entire raison d'être is to either criticize any successful policy by Democrats or to credit Republicans for them; and to blame Democrat for any failed policy by Republicans.

This post of yours is a marvelous example. I didn't say ARRA funds were used to pay for cash for clunkers, I said there were additional stimulus' passed besides ARRA, cash for clunkers being one of them. You're too stupid and too focused to criticize, you didn't even notice that. And despite your ineffective criticism, the program accomplished what it was designed to do -- get money flowing through the economy and provide a temporary boost to the struggling auto industry.

What's amazing to me is that you can sit there now, Faun and claim that Cash For Clunkers accomplished what it was designed to do! It absolutely DIDN'T! It was an ill conceived liberal concept that cost tax payers an incredible amount of money, created very few jobs, briefly stimulated the auto industry only to then flat line sales when the program ended and cost the poor more out of pocket money to purchase a cheap used car!

How is my criticism "ineffective"? What was ineffective...was Cash For Clunkers ITSELF!

It's ineffective because you do nothing to dispel the success of the plan, which was to pump money into the economy.

 

[Oldstyle]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

LOL...and what did those 100 million tax payers DO with their $400? Most of them were so nervous about losing their jobs at that point they used that money to pay off some bills and saved the rest. That $400 had almost no affect at all on the economy! It was window dressing...nothing more.

 

[Oldstyle]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

So let me see if I've got this straight...the pumping of that 2.8 Billion dollars into the economy during Cash For Clunkers resulted in an estimated 2000 jobs saved or created for the two months the program ran...caused a spike in auto sales followed by a huge decline in auto sales which basically cancelled each other out...and took most of the cheap used cars off the market that poor people could have afforded to buy in order to get back and forth to their jobs...but you see this all as a success because it "pumped" money through the economy? It's programs like Cash For Clunkers, Faun that illustrate how clueless you liberals are when it comes to economics!

 

[Oldstyle]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

"Con tool" is the sort of mindless rant that liberal idiots like Rshermr, R-Derp and Sallow use when they have no argument. It's intellectually lazy! Or do you think I'm paid to come here and refute what you're putting out? Are you that delusional, Faun?

 

[Rshermr]

I hate to break this to you, Faun but in reality...the economy IS the Private Sector! What the Obama Stimulus did was prop up the Public Sector while for the most part ignoring the Private Sector. So what happened to all those Public Sector jobs as soon as the Stimulus started to run out? There wasn't enough revenue being generated by the Private Sector to keep those Public Sector folks employed at the local level so cities, towns and States started laying off their employees in an attempt to balance their budgets. The Federal Government...which doesn't have to worry about balancing a budget kept right on getting bigger through deficit spending. In the meantime huge numbers of Private Sector workers had been put out of work and even more Private Sector workers were terrified that they would be let go as well and responded by spending as little money as possible. You are right that the Obama Stimulus was built on the "hope" that the Private Sector would "kick in"! Too bad Barry, Harry and Nancy didn't do something to help that cause! Instead they essentially told the Private Sector...you guys are on your own...oh and by the way?...we're going to pass ObamaCare which is going to hit you with added costs and once we get THAT...we'll be going after Cap & Trade legislation that will add even more costs to your bottom line!

Utter nonsense. Typical for you. ARRA was not only funding the creation and saving of jobs, it also provided tax cuts for the private sector. So you're wrong about that. Plus there were additional stimulus' passed to help the private sector, such as cash for clunkers. So you're wrong about that too. The economy cratered. Credit markets locked up and money flowing through the economy, like life blood, was tightening up. Obama's stimulus served as a transfusion until the private sector could stand up again. And it worked as designed. Early in 2010, the private sector began to recover. Had Obama not gotten ARRA passed... had he let the U.S. auto markets dive into total collapse... the economy could have slipped into another Great Depression.

Not that con tools like you would have cared since the worse the economy is while a Democrat, the happier you are.

The ARRA saved the US auto industry? Really, Faun? If memory serves me the GM bailout came from TARP money...which was Bush's baby. Obama simply continued what Bush had started...except he used TARP to reward his pals in the UAW with a much sweeter deal than they ever could have gotten if GM had simply been allowed to file for bankruptcy and restructure. That GM deal ended up costing US tax payers a ton of money...the way that Bush used TARP we ended up getting back all of our money plus interest.

As for Cash For Clunkers? Have you already forgotten what a debacle that was? At a cost to tax payers of 2.8 BILLION dollars, the Obama Administration managed to "save" or create an estimated 2,000 jobs! That works out to a whopping cost of 1.4 million per job "saved" or created! As soon as the two month program ended car sales fell off a cliff so all they accomplished was front loading sales that would have taken place over a longer period of time into a shorter period of time. It didn't do squat for the overall economy! Then there were the side effects of that liberal cluster fuck. Car dealers had to destroy any "clunkers" that they took in trade...which depleted the number of used cars and drove up prices on the remaining used cars so that the poorest people in our society had to pay more to purchase a car. One more example of progressives trying to use government intervention to "fix" something and only managing to screw it up worse than it was before...while incurring huge costs!

This is why there truly is no reason to discuss politics with you. You don't understand what people say and your entire raison d'être is to either criticize any successful policy by Democrats or to credit Republicans for them; and to blame Democrat for any failed policy by Republicans.

This post of yours is a marvelous example. I didn't say ARRA funds were used to pay for cash for clunkers, I said there were additional stimulus' passed besides ARRA, cash for clunkers being one of them. You're too stupid and too focused to criticize, you didn't even notice that. And despite your ineffective criticism, the program accomplished what it was designed to do -- get money flowing through the economy and provide a temporary boost to the struggling auto industry.

What's amazing to me is that you can sit there now, Faun and claim that Cash For Clunkers accomplished what it was designed to do! It absolutely DIDN'T! It was an ill conceived liberal concept that cost tax payers an incredible amount of money, created very few jobs, briefly stimulated the auto industry only to then flat line sales when the program ended and cost the poor more out of pocket money to purchase a cheap used car!

How is my criticism "ineffective"? What was ineffective...was Cash For Clunkers ITSELF!

It's ineffective because you do nothing to dispel the success of the plan, which was to pump money into the economy.

This is why I put OS on ignore. He is indeed a con tool. He has the amounts wrong, and what was going on wrong, just about everything wrong. You can not help him understand anything. What he wants to do is call the obama stimulus a failure, which is what he has been told is the case. But he has huge problems because unemployment has gone to near zero.
There were two parts to the stimulus, originally. One was stimulus spending, the other tax cuts. Stimulus spending worked well, got people employed.
Tax cuts were required by republicans. And they did little, as they typically do. But they made some wealthy folk more wealthy.
In all, had we not had stimulus, we would have had a good chance of another great depression. And the efforts of Bush to hold the auto industry together with bridge loans, and of Obama to provide stimulus money to put the auto makers together and provide a path back to health, was in fact what did the job. Without both of the presidents efforts, there would be no us auto industry, and without obama's efforts, something over 1.5M auto workers would have been without jobs.
Every single republican in congress, tried to stop the auto bailout. Had they not failed, we would have no auto industry today. Even ford would have been gone, according to mulaly of Ford.

 

[Faun]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

LOL...and what did those 100 million tax payers DO with their $400? Most of them were so nervous about losing their jobs at that point they used that money to pay off some bills and saved the rest. That $400 had almost no affect at all on the economy! It was window dressing...nothing more.

Moron.... that's $40,000,000,000.00 dollars. More than a few made it into the economy.

Now you're merely spitting inane con tool denial.

 

[Faun]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

So let me see if I've got this straight...the pumping of that 2.8 Billion dollars into the economy during Cash For Clunkers resulted in an estimated 2000 jobs saved or created for the two months the program ran...caused a spike in auto sales followed by a huge decline in auto sales which basically cancelled each other out...and took most of the cheap used cars off the market that poor people could have afforded to buy in order to get back and forth to their jobs...but you see this all as a success because it "pumped" money through the economy? It's programs like Cash For Clunkers, Faun that illustrate how clueless you liberals are when it comes to economics!

The decline in auto sales was merely returning back to about where sales were prior to the cash for clunkers program. Meanwhile, billions more were being injected into the economy.

And remember, because this is the salient part -- you have no fucking clue what you're talking about; so of course you don't understand how injecting hundreds of billions of dollars into a frozen economy helps thaw it out.

 

[Oldstyle]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

LOL...and what did those 100 million tax payers DO with their $400? Most of them were so nervous about losing their jobs at that point they used that money to pay off some bills and saved the rest. That $400 had almost no affect at all on the economy! It was window dressing...nothing more.

Moron.... that's $40,000,000,000.00 dollars. More than a few made it into the economy.

Now you're merely spitting inane con tool denial.

You're the one who came up with the figure of 100 million tax payers, Sparky...then you call me a moron for using YOUR number? You're almost as pathetic as Georgie Costanza!

My point is that the $400 per person pay out had almost no affect on the economy whatsoever because it's such a small amount and people in the Private Sector were rightfully scared to death about losing their jobs. Once again...that was nothing more than window dressing so that Barack Obama could claim he'd given 95% of Americans a tax cut when he ran for reelection. That's true but it's such a laughably small amount that it's like saying you helped a drowning man by throwing him a 5lb weight instead of a 50lb weight.

 

[Oldstyle]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

So let me see if I've got this straight...the pumping of that 2.8 Billion dollars into the economy during Cash For Clunkers resulted in an estimated 2000 jobs saved or created for the two months the program ran...caused a spike in auto sales followed by a huge decline in auto sales which basically cancelled each other out...and took most of the cheap used cars off the market that poor people could have afforded to buy in order to get back and forth to their jobs...but you see this all as a success because it "pumped" money through the economy? It's programs like Cash For Clunkers, Faun that illustrate how clueless you liberals are when it comes to economics!

The decline in auto sales was merely returning back to about where sales were prior to the cash for clunkers program. Meanwhile, billions more were being injected into the economy.

And remember, because this is the salient part -- you have no fucking clue what you're talking about; so of course you don't understand how injecting hundreds of billions of dollars into a frozen economy helps thaw it out.

No, sales did not return to where sales were prior to the cash for clunkers program...they fell off sharply. Cash for Clunkers didn't inject hundreds of billions into the economy...it wasted 2.8 billion dollars on a badly thought out plan.

 

[Oldstyle]

"A new paper by two economists, one from Berkeley and one from Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago, argue that Cash for Clunkers might not have done as much for the economy as was originally thought. Here’s the paper’s summary paragraph:

We find that the program induced the purchase of an additional 360,000 cars in July and August of 2009. However, almost all of the additional purchases under the program were pulled forward from the very near future; the effect of the program on auto purchases is almost completely reversed by as early as March 2010 – only seven months after the program ended. The effect of the program on auto purchases was significantly more short-lived than previously suggested. We also find no evidence of an effect on employment, house prices, or household default rates in cities with higher exposure to the program."

Was “Cash For Clunkers” a Clunker? | TIME.com

 

[Faun]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

"Con tool" is the sort of mindless rant that liberal idiots like Rshermr, R-Derp and Sallow use when they have no argument. It's intellectually lazy! Or do you think I'm paid to come here and refute what you're putting out? Are you that delusional, Faun?

That is the perfect description of you. You have absolutely zero interest in actually discussing anything honestly and serve only to find the dark cloud amidst the silver lining. The unemployment rate can drop to 2% and you'll cry about the labor force participation rate. The labor force participation rate could skyrocket to 80% and you'll cry about discouraged workers. Discouraged workers could be eliminated entirely and you'll cry about part time jobs. Part time jobs could be eliminated and and you'll cry the unemployment rate is too low. Every economic condition could be perfect and you'll credit Reagan or the next closest conservative.

That's what con tools do. You fit the bill to a tee.

And for the record .... and to repeat myself ... no, I don't believe you are paid to be here. I think you're an imbecile that no one would pay a dime for. Not to mention, you do conservatives no service. You do nothing to promote conservatism and your constant whining serves only to embarrass conservatives who do possess the ability to formulate cogent positions.

 

[Faun]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

LOL...and what did those 100 million tax payers DO with their $400? Most of them were so nervous about losing their jobs at that point they used that money to pay off some bills and saved the rest. That $400 had almost no affect at all on the economy! It was window dressing...nothing more.

Moron.... that's $40,000,000,000.00 dollars. More than a few made it into the economy.

Now you're merely spitting inane con tool denial.

You're the one who came up with the figure of 100 million tax payers, Sparky...then you call me a moron for using YOUR number? You're almost as pathetic as Georgie Costanza!

My point is that the $400 per person pay out had almost no affect on the economy whatsoever because it's such a small amount and people in the Private Sector were rightfully scared to death about losing their jobs. Once again...that was nothing more than window dressing so that Barack Obama could claim he'd given 95% of Americans a tax cut when he ran for reelection. That's true but it's such a laughably small amount that it's like saying you helped a drowning man by throwing him a 5lb weight instead of a 50lb weight.

More con tool idiocy.

No, I don't call you a moron for using the number. I call you a moron for abusing the number. you really are too stupid to discern the distinction. And you're beyond retarded to think handing out $40,000,000,000.00 resulted in people metaphorically stuffing most of that under their mattress.

But again, you're a con tool. So you spit whatever nonsense you can muster you think paints Liberals in a poor light. That's who you are. That's what you do.

 

[Rshermr]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

LOL...and what did those 100 million tax payers DO with their $400? Most of them were so nervous about losing their jobs at that point they used that money to pay off some bills and saved the rest. That $400 had almost no affect at all on the economy! It was window dressing...nothing more.

Moron.... that's $40,000,000,000.00 dollars. More than a few made it into the economy.

Now you're merely spitting inane con tool denial.

You're the one who came up with the figure of 100 million tax payers, Sparky...then you call me a moron for using YOUR number? You're almost as pathetic as Georgie Costanza!

My point is that the $400 per person pay out had almost no affect on the economy whatsoever because it's such a small amount and people in the Private Sector were rightfully scared to death about losing their jobs. Once again...that was nothing more than window dressing so that Barack Obama could claim he'd given 95% of Americans a tax cut when he ran for reelection. That's true but it's such a laughably small amount that it's like saying you helped a drowning man by throwing him a 5lb weight instead of a 50lb weight.

More con tool idiocy.

No, I don't call you a moron for using the number. I call you a moron for abusing the number. you really are too stupid to discern the distinction. And you're beyond retarded to think handing out $40,000,000,000.00 resulted in people metaphorically stuffing most of that under their mattress.

But again, you're a con tool. So you spit whatever nonsense you can muster you think paints Liberals in a poor light. That's who you are. That's what you do.

 

[Faun]

And you also seem to have forgotten what we the American people "got" from the Obama tax cuts in his stimulus! It was $400 for an individual and $800 for a couple! Just how did you expect THAT to stimulate the economy? The truth is...that minute amount of a tax refund let Obama claim to have kept his campaign promise to give everyone a tax cut while really giving them next to nothing!

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

So let me see if I've got this straight...the pumping of that 2.8 Billion dollars into the economy during Cash For Clunkers resulted in an estimated 2000 jobs saved or created for the two months the program ran...caused a spike in auto sales followed by a huge decline in auto sales which basically cancelled each other out...and took most of the cheap used cars off the market that poor people could have afforded to buy in order to get back and forth to their jobs...but you see this all as a success because it "pumped" money through the economy? It's programs like Cash For Clunkers, Faun that illustrate how clueless you liberals are when it comes to economics!

The decline in auto sales was merely returning back to about where sales were prior to the cash for clunkers program. Meanwhile, billions more were being injected into the economy.

And remember, because this is the salient part -- you have no fucking clue what you're talking about; so of course you don't understand how injecting hundreds of billions of dollars into a frozen economy helps thaw it out.

No, sales did not return to where sales were prior to the cash for clunkers program...they fell off sharply. Cash for Clunkers didn't inject hundreds of billions into the economy...it wasted 2.8 billion dollars on a badly thought out plan.

Great, now the con tool thinks he can just lie and nobody will notice. Wrong again, as usual. Despite your lies, sales skyrocketed during the program and then fell sharply to about where they were prior to the program. Then they began growing again....

 

[Rshermr]

You really have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Again, being the con tool Rshermr figured out you to be, you don't give credit even when it's due.

In reality, that $400 reached 100 million tax payers. Many of whom, if not most, turned around and put it directly into the economy.

Again, what you can't understand, a huge detriment to the economy in 2008-2009 was the money flow was drying up. Credit markets were either going under or freezing. The crucial element to counter that was to pump money, and lots of it, into a choking economy. That's what Obama accomplished. And get this -- your acceptance isn't even needed; nor would it ever be forthcoming... you are a con tool. That is the perfect description of you.

LOL...and what did those 100 million tax payers DO with their $400? Most of them were so nervous about losing their jobs at that point they used that money to pay off some bills and saved the rest. That $400 had almost no affect at all on the economy! It was window dressing...nothing more.

Moron.... that's $40,000,000,000.00 dollars. More than a few made it into the economy.

Now you're merely spitting inane con tool denial.

You're the one who came up with the figure of 100 million tax payers, Sparky...then you call me a moron for using YOUR number? You're almost as pathetic as Georgie Costanza!

My point is that the $400 per person pay out had almost no affect on the economy whatsoever because it's such a small amount and people in the Private Sector were rightfully scared to death about losing their jobs. Once again...that was nothing more than window dressing so that Barack Obama could claim he'd given 95% of Americans a tax cut when he ran for reelection. That's true but it's such a laughably small amount that it's like saying you helped a drowning man by throwing him a 5lb weight instead of a 50lb weight.

More con tool idiocy.

No, I don't call you a moron for using the number. I call you a moron for abusing the number. you really are too stupid to discern the distinction. And you're beyond retarded to think handing out $40,000,000,000.00 resulted in people metaphorically stuffing most of that under their mattress.

But again, you're a con tool. So you spit whatever nonsense you can muster you think paints Liberals in a poor light. That's who you are. That's what you do.

The thing is, Faun, there are a few con tools on the board who seem to like to monopolize threads to the point of boring people to tears, causing them to move on. Then the thread dies. And I suspect for trolls like OS, that is victory. Because as with pretty much all cons, he is incapable of conversation. In fact, cons do not appear to want anything at all to do with conversation. Nor debate. By living in the con world of fox and bat shit crazy con web sites and talking points in their email, they have ready made responses to EVERYTHING that they are told to dislike. And to attack.
All of which makes them dishonest, and extremely boring.

 

[Faun]

"A new paper by two economists, one from Berkeley and one from Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago, argue that Cash for Clunkers might not have done as much for the economy as was originally thought. Here’s the paper’s summary paragraph:

We find that the program induced the purchase of an additional 360,000 cars in July and August of 2009. However, almost all of the additional purchases under the program were pulled forward from the very near future; the effect of the program on auto purchases is almost completely reversed by as early as March 2010 – only seven months after the program ended. The effect of the program on auto purchases was significantly more short-lived than previously suggested. We also find no evidence of an effect on employment, house prices, or household default rates in cities with higher exposure to the program."

Was “Cash For Clunkers” a Clunker? | TIME.com

This is a wonderful example demonstrating your the con tool folks here point out you to be.

There is no consensus of the success/failure among economists. Yet you idiotically think if all you do is find who agrees with you, that means you're right. I could just as easily link articles which quote economists who posited it was a success

Meanwhile, you're sooo fucking retarded, you didn't even bother to read your own link, which takes both sides of the debate.

 

[Oldstyle]

"A new paper by two economists, one from Berkeley and one from Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago, argue that Cash for Clunkers might not have done as much for the economy as was originally thought. Here’s the paper’s summary paragraph:

We find that the program induced the purchase of an additional 360,000 cars in July and August of 2009. However, almost all of the additional purchases under the program were pulled forward from the very near future; the effect of the program on auto purchases is almost completely reversed by as early as March 2010 – only seven months after the program ended. The effect of the program on auto purchases was significantly more short-lived than previously suggested. We also find no evidence of an effect on employment, house prices, or household default rates in cities with higher exposure to the program."

Was “Cash For Clunkers” a Clunker? | TIME.com

This is a wonderful example demonstrating your the con tool folks here point out you to be.

There is no consensus of the success/failure among economists. Yet you idiotically think if all you do is find who agrees with you, that means you're right. I could just as easily link articles which quote economists who posited it was a success

Meanwhile, you're sooo fucking retarded, you didn't even bother to read your own link, which takes both sides of the debate.

Of course it takes both sides of the debate...it's from TIME which is heavily slanted to the left! My point is that even THEY point out that the Cash For Clunkers program was a failure! If I'd gone to a conservative site (which you and Georgie always whine I'm doing!) then I'm quite sure they wouldn't even try to present the Administration's view of what happened...as TIME did!