S&P Downgrades US Debt Rating

[Bodhisattva]

Have a second look at the numbers because most economists disagree with you.

The accounting for the "jobs saved or created" is typical DC-speak. Much of these numbers are just made up. That the CBO can't get anything more specific than a range of 1.4 million to 3.3 million shows the numbers are fuzzy.

Los Angeles spent $111 million to create 55 jobs. Good deal? Or a waste of resources?

Los Angeles Stimulus | Two L.A. agencies get $111 million in stimulus funds but have created only 55 jobs - Los Angeles Times

The fact is much of the stimulus money was spent on crap.

 

[Bodhisattva]

And, as I've said before, the stimulus limited the downside of the recession to some exent ...... at the cost of a recovery. It's a trade-off only a politician would make.

We should be in a booming economy right now. Instead, we have sectors like housing which have been in a funk more than five years with no relief in sight. Thank you, statists, for all the poison you've injected into the economy.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Dow down more than 600 points (5.5%).

 

[RollTide2U]

Have a second look at the numbers because most economists disagree with you.

Did the Stimulus Create Jobs? | FactCheck.org



The political failure of Obama’s stimulus package : The New Yorker



Wait, Did the Stimulus Work? - NYTimes.com

sigh..... another one...

What the hell does "most" economists even mean? It seems there are more economists than there are lawyers out there. What's up with that? Can you prove that "most" economists say that? Or is it "most" that YOU'VE read?

I guess you left THESE economists out. Small wonder. They refute everything you just said :

Economists say the stimulus didn't help - Apr. 26, 2010

The Economics Behind Obama's Stimulus Plan (and why it didn't work) | The Intelligent Right

A Verdict on Obama’s “Stimulus” Plan | Power Line

Economists Timothy Conley and Bill Dupor have studied the effects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the purported stimulus bill) with great rigor. Earlier this week, they reported their findings in a paper titled “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Public Sector Jobs Saved, Private Sector Jobs Forestalled.” The paper is dense and rather lengthy, and requires considerable study. Here, however, is the bottom line:

Our benchmark results suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs. State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment. The majority of destroyed/forestalled jobs were in growth industries including health, education, professional and business services.
​

So the American people borrowed and spent close to a trillion dollars to destroy a net of more than one-half million jobs. Does President Obama understand this? I very much doubt it. When he expressed puzzlement at the idea that the stimulus money may not have been well-spent, and said that “spending equals stimulus,” he betrayed a shocking level of economic ignorance.

We've discussed this ad nauseum in other threads.

 

[RollTide2U]

Dow down more than 600 points (5.5%).

How low do you think it's gonna go, Bodhi?

 

[CrimsonChuck]

The accounting for the "jobs saved or created" is typical DC-speak. Much of these numbers are just made up. That the CBO can't get anything more specific than a range of 1.4 million to 3.3 million shows the numbers are fuzzy.

Los Angeles spent $111 million to create 55 jobs. Good deal? Or a waste of resources?

Los Angeles Stimulus | Two L.A. agencies get $111 million in stimulus funds but have created only 55 jobs - Los Angeles Times

Not exactly...this is almost a year old. And also

The reports conclude that the agencies, Public Works and Transportation, moved too slowly in spending the federal money, in part because of the time it takes to secure approval of government contracts. The two agencies plan to create or retain a combined 264 jobs once all the money is spent, according to the reports.

I tried to search for a more up to date status, but couldn't find one.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Not exactly...this is almost a year old. And also



I tried to search for a more up to date status, but couldn't find one.

$420,000 / job - now that's what I call government efficiency!

 

[CrimsonChuck]

$420,000 / job - now that's what I call government efficiency!

It is not just that...it also includes materials too...buses, traffic lights, etc. Not to mention the private sector jobs created by purchasing those things.

 

[CrimsonChuck]

From that article...for the entire city,

Santana's report said that in June, stimulus dollars helped the city create or retain 936 jobs. "And we've only spent 13% of what we've received," he said.

Greuel said in response that she spoke with Santana on Thursday and that he did not disagree with the data contained in her audit.

The controller's audits found that as of March 31, the city had secured $594 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which was created to invigorate the economy by spending money on infrastructure projects.

So the city received $594 million and spent 13% of that. That is a total of $77 million. Divide that by 936 and that is a much more reasonable $82,500 per job. Not $420,000. Again, that includes materials too...I would assume.

 

[Bamaro]

As far as who got us into all of this debt, YES, there is enough blame to go around in both parties. Bush deserves his share for adding another entitlement and costly regulations to our education system and the Iraq war was badly managed and ill-conceived in many ways. So he has his share of blame in this.

Obama came in with his Keynesian views and thought that gov't spending could create demand, create jobs and spur growth. It hasn't worked, and all he KNOWS is spending. All he knows is taking money OUT of the private sector to create gov't jobs. The only return we have on that investment is skyrocketing debt. But that's not all. Obamacare is NOT a savings bill. It's a coverage bill, and costs to implement it will make the debt go up even more. It's the Democrat's wet dream to be on the path to a single payer system, and they know that all they have to do is break the insurance industry. It was NEVER about healthcare savings and it's one of the worst things they've ever done to us.

We already had enough debt, and we have the largest generation in our history retiring. Then he came in and is spending in the trillions, which is the tipping point. Through his failed policies, we have NOW tipped the scales.

But to blame the Tea Party for this is 3rd grade elementary school mentality. Wow - if those guys just hadn't been elected and taken a month to rangle over spending MORE MONEY WE DON'T HAVE! They simply didn't want to raise taxes on anyone in such a weak, sick economy - especially some who are running small businesses and hanging by a thread.

We have a bloated gov't which does nothing but waste money and lies to us, but let's blame a small group of people who were elected to try to stop some of it.

Yeah, that makes a hell of a lot of sense. If that becomes the prevailing opinion, we're screwed.

You are cherry picking 'facts' again. You conveniently left out O's Keynesian actions of allowing W's tax cuts to continue and his reduction in the payroll tax.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

You are cherry picking 'facts' again. You conveniently left out O's Keynesian actions of allowing W's tax cuts to continue and his reduction in the payroll tax.

I think to be fair a lot of people are cherry pickin' a lot questionable "facts" to support an overall effed up government. How ANYBODY can support either side at this moment in time is beyond me. What we're dealing with ain't brain surgery. Its basic principles of money. Don't spend more than you make. When the outgoing exceeds the incoming you've got problems. And yes, it is that simple. What ain't simple though is prying the hands of the "leaders" of this country off of the taxpayer's money so they can spend it at every turn without any accountability. Nobody wants to sacrifice, nobody wants to participate in the "cuts" and everybody wants "somebody else" to take the any spending cuts.

The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil and it is being played out in government everyday.

 

[RollTide2U]

You are cherry picking 'facts' again. You conveniently left out O's Keynesian actions of allowing W's tax cuts to continue and his reduction in the payroll tax.

Did I say that EVERY position he has taken was Keynesian? Overall, that's how you can characterize it. The things you mentioned haven't had a negative effect on the economy. In fact, if history is any indicator, if he had let the Bush tax rates expire, this economy would have contracted further. He said it himself - it was no time to raise taxes on anybody, especially the middle class. They payroll tax deduction has eased some of the pain small businesses are going through, but is by no means a great success. He's playing prevent defense when he does stuff like that. It's a very small measure and it hasn't exactly made a big impact, now has it???

Just because he's forced into some decisions based upon the dire political mood at the time DOES NOT make it his idealogy.

 

[Bamaro]

The real conundrum still remains, whats good for reducing the deficit is bad for creating jobs and visa versa

 

[RollTide2U]

I think to be fair a lot of people are cherry pickin' a lot questionable "facts" to support an overall effed up government. How ANYBODY can support either side at this moment in time is beyond me. What we're dealing with ain't brain surgery. Its basic principles of money. Don't spend more than you make. When the outgoing exceeds the incoming you've got problems. And yes, it is that simple. What ain't simple though is prying the hands of the "leaders" of this country off of the taxpayer's money so they can spend it at every turn without any accountability. Nobody wants to sacrifice, nobody wants to participate in the "cuts" and everybody wants "somebody else" to take the any spending cuts.

The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil and it is being played out in government everyday.

Neither party has showed much interest in following sound economic principles. However, when a group like the Tea Party comes along and that's their top priority (fiscal responsibility) they're vilified and the left's "useful idiots" just parrot the left's criticism of the Tea Party's efforts. I don't see much hope for us. I'm being very sincere in saying that.

I see people defending the spending of this gov't and I know good and well they don't treat their own personal finances the same way they're advocating when it comes to the gov't. Sound money principles are the same whether it's your checkbook or the gov't's.

 

[RollTide2U]

The real conundrum still remains, whats good for reducing the deficit is bad for creating jobs and visa versa

Well what caused the conundrum?? We're between a rock and a hard place for what reason? out of control SPENDING.

 

[Bama_Dawg]

A Verdict on Obama’s “Stimulus” Plan | Power Line

Economists Timothy Conley and Bill Dupor have studied the effects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the purported stimulus bill) with great rigor. Earlier this week, they reported their findings in a paper titled “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Public Sector Jobs Saved, Private Sector Jobs Forestalled.” The paper is dense and rather lengthy, and requires considerable study. Here, however, is the bottom line:
Our benchmark results suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs. State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment. The majority of destroyed/forestalled jobs were in growth industries including health, education, professional and business services.
So the American people borrowed and spent close to a trillion dollars to destroy a net of more than one-half million jobs. Does President Obama understand this? I very much doubt it. When he expressed puzzlement at the idea that the stimulus money may not have been well-spent, and said that “spending equals stimulus,” he betrayed a shocking level of economic ignorance.

Thanks for the links. I'll visit each (seriously) as I attempt to figure out what the hell is going on with our economy. I am familiar, however, with the Conley and Dupor study and you should have a second look at it. They ran a state-by-state regression on stimulus funds vs. employment growth and came up with the lost jobs figure. Unfortunately, they had to drop their confidence interval down to 90% (standard is 95%) to get those figures. Otherwise, their results would have been statistically insignificant. It doesn't mean they're wrong; but it does mean their study was flawed.

 

[Bama_Dawg]

out of control SPENDING without sufficient tax revenue.

Fixed it for you

 

[RollTide2U]

Fixed it for you

Like I said, we've discussed this ad nauseum on other threads and we've provided links and stats from the U.S. Treasury and everything. We've proven that after 2005, revenues to the gov't INCREASED to a point which dwarfed the record set in 2000. We've established that revenues as a percentage of GDP have remained in the 17% - 20% range for the past 50 years, regardless of taxes.

The fact that you've come along recently to this discussion with your economically retarded liberal/Democrat talking points doesn't change that, neither does it make me inclined to re-hash all of those stats and links. You're set in your beliefs as it is. You're not worth the time and effort it would take to drag all those links up again because you're like Bamaro. No matter how many facts and stats we bring forward from credible sources, you're gonna believe what you're gonna believe.

So have at it. Continue to be fooled in your own confusionand continue to believe rhetoric which can easily be debunked. It's where you want to be, and it's not worth anyone's time here to argue with you.

 

[swoop10]

The real conundrum still remains, whats good for reducing the deficit is bad for creating jobs and visa versa

What part of creating jobs means creating new tax payers don't you seem to get? You and most libs seem so fixated on taxing the rich that you don't see what needs to be done. The new tax payers will give more revenue to the government.

 

[Bamaro]

What part of creating jobs means creating new tax payers don't you seem to get? You and most libs seem so fixated on taxing the rich that you don't see what needs to be done. The new tax payers will give more revenue to the government.

Well duh :rolleye2: