Why we want stimulus now and worry about deficits later

[ilia25]

The only reason for having a stimulus is reducing a high unemployment.

Based on the results of Porkulus, you think that's a pretty good plan?

I already answered that question 1000 times. High unemployment is the result of the private sector cutting its spending -- and the bad economy compels them to cut even more. Government stepping in and picking up the slack can break that vicious circle.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I already answered that question 1000 times. High unemployment is the result of the private sector cutting its spending -- and the bad economy compels them to cut even more. Government stepping in and picking up the slack can break that vicious circle.

So then, Keynes was full of shit? (By extension, Obama is.)

 

[ilia25]

I already answered that question 1000 times. High unemployment is the result of the private sector cutting its spending -- and the bad economy compels them to cut even more. Government stepping in and picking up the slack can break that vicious circle.

So then, Keynes was full of shit? (By extension, Obama is.)

Why? Keynes reasoning was the same -- deficit spending to reduce the high unemployment, then, after achieveing the full employment, work on reducing the debt to GDP ratio (if necessary).

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why? Keynes reasoning was the same -- deficit spending to reduce the high unemployment, then, after achieveing the full employment, work on reducing the debt to GDP ratio (if necessary).

The deficit spending of Porkulus INCREASED unemployment.

What part of that do you not grasp?

 

[saveliberty]

The only reason for having a stimulus is reducing a high unemployment.

Based on the results of Porkulus, you think that's a pretty good plan?

I already answered that question 1000 times. High unemployment is the result of the private sector cutting its spending -- and the bad economy compels them to cut even more. Government stepping in and picking up the slack can break that vicious circle.

Unemployment can also be the result of productivity gains and loss of jobs to overseas labor. You fail AGAIN.

 

[ilia25]

Why? Keynes reasoning was the same -- deficit spending to reduce the high unemployment, then, after achieveing the full employment, work on reducing the debt to GDP ratio (if necessary).

The deficit spending of Porkulus INCREASED unemployment.

What part of that do you not grasp?

Every part of that is bullshit.

 

[ilia25]

Based on the results of Porkulus, you think that's a pretty good plan?

I already answered that question 1000 times. High unemployment is the result of the private sector cutting its spending -- and the bad economy compels them to cut even more. Government stepping in and picking up the slack can break that vicious circle.

Unemployment can also be the result of productivity gains and loss of jobs to overseas labor. You fail AGAIN.

And when exactly the rising productivity gains that go back for millenia started to cause a rise in unemployment?

You really think that the millions jobs the US economy had shed within 6 months after Leman collapse were lost because of rising productivity?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Every part of that is bullshit.

So, the unemployment rate did not rise from 7.8% before the Porkulus to 9.3% after?

Is that your claim?

 

[ilia25]

Every part of that is bullshit.

So, the unemployment rate did not rise from 7.8% before the Porkulus to 9.3% after?

Is that your claim?

You are deliberately misrepresenting the facts. You are saying you don't know what was happening to the unemployment before it reached 7.8%, is that your claim?

The stimulus did not cause the rise in unemployment. It stopped it from rising further.

 

[hortysir]

Japan never had high unemployment. So maybe their stimulus wasn't really a failure?

Quoting you:

The only reason for having a stimulus is reducing a high unemployment.



What was the reason for Japan's stimulus plan, then?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Every part of that is bullshit.

So, the unemployment rate did not rise from 7.8% before the Porkulus to 9.3% after?

Is that your claim?

You are deliberately misrepresenting the facts. You are saying you don't know what was happening to the unemployment before it reached 7.8%, is that your claim?

The stimulus did not cause the rise in unemployment. It stopped it from rising further.

Yeah..Well that is the popular answer among liberals and Obama followers. Doesn't make it true.
The stimulus did nothing to create jobs. All it did was prolong the inevitable loss of a bunch of municipal and state jobs that are now either funded by the people who should be funding them or they no longer exist.
Nearly one trillion dollars wasted. Thrown down a rat hole for what? Pure politics.
The fact is the stimulus spending sent the private sector into a period of contraction.
Excessive government spending always hurts the private sector.

 

[ilia25]

Japan never had high unemployment. So maybe their stimulus wasn't really a failure?

Quoting you:

The only reason for having a stimulus is reducing a high unemployment.



What was the reason for Japan's stimulus plan, then?

You should ask Japanese -- but my guess they wanted stimulus to prevent the unemployment from rising too high. And it didn't.

So Japanese stimuli could have helped -- and they sure didn't make it worse.

 

[ilia25]

The stimulus did nothing to create jobs. All it did was prolong the inevitable loss of a bunch of municipal and state jobs

How could the stimulus do that?

 

[saveliberty]

The stimulus did nothing to create jobs. All it did was prolong the inevitable loss of a bunch of municipal and state jobs

How could the stimulus do that?

Stimulus paid for the positions to keep going short term. The resources to pay for the jobs long term have not materialized. Therefore, job losses. Your big on fixing symptoms, not so much on underlying causes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You are deliberately misrepresenting the facts.

By stating facts that don't put your party and your Messiah® in a good light?

You are saying you don't know what was happening to the unemployment before it reached 7.8%, is that your claim?

So again you run from the facts;

Your claim was that deficit spending creates jobs, yet the facts show that the trillion dollars Obama wasted resulted in sharply HIGHER unemployment.

The stimulus did not cause the rise in unemployment.

It just did nothing to slow or stop it.

It stopped it from rising further.

False, why lie?

 

[saveliberty]

What failed concept you going to revisit now ilia?

 

[ilia25]

You are deliberately misrepresenting the facts.

By stating facts that don't put your party and your Messiah® in a good light?

You are saying you don't know what was happening to the unemployment before it reached 7.8%, is that your claim?

So again you run from the facts;

Do I? I asked you a simple question -- what was happening to the unemployment before it reached 7.8% in Jan. 2009. Do you, or do you not know the answer?

 

[ilia25]

The stimulus did nothing to create jobs. All it did was prolong the inevitable loss of a bunch of municipal and state jobs

How could the stimulus do that?

Stimulus paid for the positions to keep going short term. The resources to pay for the jobs long term have not materialized. Therefore, job losses. Your big on fixing symptoms, not so much on underlying causes.

So stimulus caused the job loss by delaying it?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Do I? I asked you a simple question -- what was happening to the unemployment before it reached 7.8% in Jan. 2009. Do you, or do you not know the answer?

I should answer your question, but you should duck mine?

“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.” (Jake Tapper, “President Obama Predicts Unemployment Will Hit 10% This Year,” ABC News’ “Political Punch” Blog, 6/16/09)

Was your Messiah® smoking crack?

 

[Uncensored2008]

So stimulus caused the job loss by delaying it?

Porkulus was irrelevant to job loss - it did nothing to create sustainable employment. There is no discernible multiplier from it. Directly funding public employment jobs does nothing to alter the business cycle.