What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[mercury14]

You guys flooded me with responses. This is going to be easy though.

Under questioning from Congress the CBO already admitted that their figures were based on unsubstantiated estimates and they had no proof. You can tell by the broad range that they used...800,000 to 2.4M...lol...Come up with something that's real.

Rightfield, that figure (the one in bold giant text that you chose to ignore), is not from the CBO. It's from Moody's.

OH SO YOU'RE ATTACKING THE SOURCE!!!!
It's so easy to determine the response...

I gave four sources: The CBO, Moody's IHS, and Macroeconomic advisors. You realize that if you choose to disbelieve one of them, you still have to face the fact that there are three more right? And that Moody's is the most recent - and gives a larger figure for jobs created/saved than the CBO?

So what else was included in your "response"?

- A bunch of shit about European debt that I don't care about.

- You ran off to the NRO and Thinker just as I predicted you would.

- You made a lame argument that we should lower taxes for our companies trying to bring foreign income to America, because it would create jobs. But then your own article mentions that Bush did this once and

"Though the tax break lured them into bringing $312 billion back to the United States, 92 percent of that money was returned to shareholders in the form of dividends and stock buybacks". Hmm no jobs.

Not only that but "this money comes from overseas operations and in some cases accounting maneuvers that shift domestic profits to low-tax countries. The study concluded that the program “did not increase domestic investment, employment or research and development.”

Oh and it gets better! "Indeed, 60 percent of the benefits went to just 15 of the largest United States multinational companies — many of which laid off domestic workers, closed plants and shifted even more of their profits and resources abroad in hopes of cashing in on the next repatriation holiday. Hmm, actual job losses when taxes were lowered.


So in summary let's review what we have here, shall we?

- I posted independent analysis that the stimulus created or saved around 3 million jobs. You said that one of my four sources is suspect and then pretended like my other three sources didn't exist.

- You posted an article that kicked your own ass.

- You pulled an "oh shit, there's a lot of nonpartisan analysis out there that says the stimulus worked!!! RUN BACK TO THE NRO - QUICK!!!"


Your asses are nailed to the post. Give up.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

You guys flooded me with responses. This is going to be easy though.




Rightfield, that figure (the one in bold giant text that you chose to ignore), is not from the CBO. It's from Moody's.




I gave four sources: The CBO, Moody's IHS, and Macroeconomic advisors. You realize that if you choose to disbelieve one of them, you still have to face the fact that there are three more right? And that Moody's is the most recent - and gives a larger figure for jobs created/saved than the CBO?

So what else was included in your "response"?

- A bunch of shit about European debt that I don't care about.

- You ran off to the NRO and Thinker just as I predicted you would.

- You made a lame argument that we should lower taxes for our companies trying to bring foreign income to America, because it would create jobs. But then your own article mentions that Bush did this once and

"Though the tax break lured them into bringing $312 billion back to the United States, 92 percent of that money was returned to shareholders in the form of dividends and stock buybacks". Hmm no jobs.

Not only that but "this money comes from overseas operations and in some cases accounting maneuvers that shift domestic profits to low-tax countries. The study concluded that the program “did not increase domestic investment, employment or research and development.”

Oh and it gets better! "Indeed, 60 percent of the benefits went to just 15 of the largest United States multinational companies — many of which laid off domestic workers, closed plants and shifted even more of their profits and resources abroad in hopes of cashing in on the next repatriation holiday. Hmm, actual job losses when taxes were lowered.


So in summary let's review what we have here, shall we?

- I posted independent analysis that the stimulus created or saved around 3 million jobs. You said that one of my four sources is suspect and then pretended like that was my only source.

- You posted an article that kicked your own ass.

- You pulled an "oh shit, there's a lot of nonpartisan analysis out there that says the stimulus worked!!! RUN BACK TO THE NRO - QUICK!!!"


Your asses are nailed to the post. Give up.

http://i432.photobucket.com/albums/qq49/LucasM06/CanOfWupASS-1.jpg?t=1244045590

 

[cebalrai]

I know, I know. I'm going to send them scurrying back to the NRO.

You called it. If AJ and Rightfield have to face professional, independent analysis instead of their right wing narrative they want to tell, it's like watching roaches scurry off when the lights are flipped on.

Btw, that was AWESOME how they pretended like you didn't cite four different sources. They attacked the CBO while ignoring the Moody's assessment which said that the stimulus had an even greater impact. Nothing like sticking your head in the sandy sahara of the NRO when faced with reality.

 

[cebalrai]

Let me throw another log on the fire.

...Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody's Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. ...

http://www.bullfax.com/?q=node-assessing-stimulus-one-year-view-mainstream

And it looks like Moody's upped their estimate from 2.5 million to 2.7 million.

 

[mercury14]

You called it. If AJ and Rightfield have to face professional, independent analysis instead of their right wing narrative they want to tell, it's like watching roaches scurry off when the lights are flipped on.

Btw, that was AWESOME how they pretended like you didn't cite four different sources. They attacked the CBO while ignoring the Moody's assessment which said that the stimulus had an even greater impact. Nothing like sticking your head in the sandy sahara of the NRO when faced with reality.

AJ and Rightfield don't deal in reality. They have a religion.

Here's the difference between them and myself. I change my position based on what's observed. If these independent economic firms said the stimulus didn't work I would change my mind. I would spin on a fucking dime and say "Goddamit the stimulus didn't work and wasted a lot of money".

These two on the other hand (and Jen, Busy, MeeMie, off2bed, vette, you name it) do not deal in observation. They deal in "faith". And faith is the denial of observation so that belief may be preserved. They believe a certain thing because they want to. And this faith leads them to deny observable, objective analysis (Moody's) so that they can maintain their belief.

They're no different than a Christian denying the fossil record because it threatens their religious beliefs. They're no different than a Jehovah's Witness denying that being inside of a whale is a lethal experience. These guys are the "creationists" of economic debate. The lefties here might as well be trying to convince a church full of Pentecostals that snakes don't talk.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

While Merc deals in Democrat Party talking points, his religion is statism. I do have faith however, I have faith that the American people are going to toss you assholes into the dustbin of history.

Dipshit, my talking points are gleaned from Moody's. You know, the private economic firm whose chief economist worked for Senator McCain for years? The same Moody's that Republicans like to call to testify on the economy in front of congress on a regular basis?

Quit with the baseless accusations. You sound like Jen.

 

[mercury14]

Government jobs?

No, read the damn report. The stimulus worked because it generated economic activity in a time when we were in a downward spiral.

Source: http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/End-of-Great-Recession.pdf

Look how much of a religious zealot you are.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

I did read it, I read all the qualifiers you failed to mention as well. The truth is nobody, with the exception of Moodys, thinks it was anything except a gross waste of money, and a giant payoff to supporters of big government. Millions have last their jobs since it's application.

WHAT???



Want me to dig up similar reports from the rest of the big-three firms? IHS and Macroeconomic Advisors all have strikingly similar assessments of the stimulus. I'll warn you though, there's a good chance that they'll assess might be even better than Moody's.

You're a religious zealot, Vette. You deny objective observation in order for your "belief" to remain unchallenged. Just accept it.

 

[mercury14]

You sound like Obama, hollow and distant from reality...dipshit.

I haven't cited Obama or any democratic lines. Only independent analysis. If I did cite Obama, I'm an Obama parrot. If I cite an independent source that has nothing whatsoever to do with Obama, I still sound like Obama? (huh?)

Go blow smoke somehere else.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Lets be clear, Obama indeed added almost 2 million jobs since taking office, but even so he's still 1.9 million in the hole from where he started February 2009. That is, since Obama took office almost 4 million more people lost their jobs and about 1/2 found new jobs. Most of these folks arent making more money, either.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Lets be clear, Obama indeed added almost 2 million jobs since taking office, but even so he's still 1.9 million in the hole from where he started February 2009. That is, since Obama took office almost 4 million more people lost their jobs and about 1/2 found new jobs. Most of these folks arent making more money, either.

Looking at it like this you might say he's an military surgeon handed a patient who is bleeding out after their leg got blown off. He makes a plan, applies, it, and the patient stops bleeding. You can do the following:

1) Acknowlege that he saved the patient's life, even if he still is in serious condition.

2) Say "but doctor, there's blood all over the floor. You didn't stop his bleeding the instant the stretcher passed through the doors on its way into the room. In fact, you're responsible for the fact that he bled. Therefore you failed and should have just let him bleed out and see if he could recover on his own."

 

[mercury14]

So in real terms he's lost jobs.

Yes if you count the fact that he was sworn in on Jan 20th and ate a -600,000 job loss report on Feb 1st. Do you REALLY think he's responsible for those job reports right after he took office? If McCain was in office would you hold him accountable for job reports that he had no way to impact?

Also, being a religious zealot you will disregard this, but the Moody's report said that without the stimulus we'd be looking at about a 10.6% unemployment rate right now.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Lets be clear, Obama indeed added almost 2 million jobs since taking office, but even so he's still 1.9 million in the hole from where he started February 2009. That is, since Obama took office almost 4 million more people lost their jobs and about 1/2 found new jobs. Most of these folks arent making more money, either.

out of those 1.9 million, how many were not in the government sector?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Yes if you count the fact that he was sworn in on Jan 20th and ate a -600,000 job loss report on Feb 1st. Do you REALLY think he's responsible for those job reports right after he took office? If McCain was in office would you hold him accountable for job reports that he had no way to impact?

Also, being a religious zealot you will disregard this, but the Moody's report said that without the stimulus we'd be looking at about a 10.6% unemployment rate right now.

what I love about this post, is the complete lack and understand of the technology boom and real estate bubbles bursting, and the trust in banking/investments almost unwinding into chaos.

point: it doesn't pay to be a government worker

 

[Sean Renaud]

2) Say "but doctor, there's blood all over the floor. You didn't stop his bleeding the instant the stretcher passed through the doors on its way into the room. In fact, you're responsible for the fact that he bled. Therefore you failed and should have just let him bleed out and see if he could recover on his own."

Can you imagine the super bad ass race of bad asses we'd be if applied this? Everybody who wasn't Wolverine would die!

 

[Liar]

what I love about this post, is the complete lack and understand of the technology boom and real estate bubbles bursting, and the trust in banking/investments almost unwinding into chaos.

point: it doesn't pay to be a government worker

What's up with the non sequi...

Oh, it's you.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

What's up with the non sequi...

Oh, it's you.

I know, its all Bush's fault

 

[mercury14]

out of those 1.9 million, how many were not in the government sector?

If you read the report, you'd see that the jobs created/saved were primarily due to the stimulus increasing economic activity. It's a myth that the stimulus created a significant number of government jobs. And it only (or virtually only since some fed jobs were possibly preserved) preserved government jobs indirectly by giving money to the states - which then often used the money to keep public schools and police departments from closing. No state (that I know of), when faced with the financial crisis, took their federal stimuls money and created whole new sectors of government. Of course local and state governments have had to lay off workers anyway and that's fine. But they were able to avoid 1) draconian cuts in services, and/or 2) tax hikes to pay their bills.

 

[mercury14]

Can you imagine the super bad ass race of bad asses we'd be if applied this? Everybody who wasn't Wolverine would die!

And thus we would all evolve into Wolverines. It would cut health care costs dramatically. Overpopulation would be the next big problem though.