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

[NeverEndingMe]

now, what we need for the economy to kick start and to start growing is more welfare and other entitlements...right?

That is peculiar. Usually Koala is on top of these things and doesn't hesitate to notify us.

Especially when it's falling.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Problem: You're plugged into the FauxNews-Limbaugh lie machine, and they keep spewing bullshit about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse.

Solution: Here are three "reality-based" charts for you. These charts show what actually happened.

Spending:

Government spending increased dramatically under Bush. It has not increased much under Obama. Note that this chart does not reflect any spending cuts resulting from deficit-cutting deals.

Deficits:

Notes, this chart includes Clinton's last budget year for comparison.

The numbers in these two charts come from Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. They are just the amounts that the government spent and borrowed, period, Anyone can go look then up. Peoplewho claim that Obama "tripled the deficit" are either misled or are trying to mislead.

The Stimulus and Jobs

In this chart, the RED lines on the left side -- the ones that keep doing DOWN -- show what happened to jobs under the policies of Bush and the Republicans. We were losing lots and lots of jobs every month, and it was getting worse and worse. The BLUE lines -- the ones that just go UP -- show what happened to jobs when the stimulus was in effect. We stopped losing jobs and started gaining jobs, and it was getting better and better. The leveling off on the right side of the chart shows what happened as the stimulus started to wind down: job creation leveled off at too low a level.

It looks a lot like the stimulus reversed what was going on before the stimulus. In fact, it looks a lot like the stimulus was just a bit too small, which has been the contention of many economists.

Alas, Graphs and charts and meaningful words
Matter not to right-wing birds
They fly in circular patterns each day
To land at the same spot where they pray

"Oh lord, deliver U.S. from evil
From science, altruism and blue boll weevils
Holy father we pray in your name
Ask U.S. not to be progressive, humane

Allow to bask in mythological glory
The wine of superstition to sweeten your story
Forgive U.S. our trespasses, our prejudice then
We'll "bathe" on Sunday and start over...again

 

[RightField]

Did you notice that the dems took over both houses of congress in 2007 and that is a pivot point on the graphs.

 

[koalabear]

Did you notice that the dems took over both houses of congress in 2007 and that is a pivot point on the graphs.

Did he notice 2012 is not here yet.

 

[richard_daily]

Problem: You're plugged into the FauxNews-Limbaugh lie machine, and they keep spewing bullshit about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse.

Solution: Here are three "reality-based" charts for you. These charts show what actually happened.

Spending:

Government spending increased dramatically under Bush. It has not increased much under Obama. Note that this chart does not reflect any spending cuts resulting from deficit-cutting deals.

Deficits:

Notes, this chart includes Clinton's last budget year for comparison.

The numbers in these two charts come from Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. They are just the amounts that the government spent and borrowed, period, Anyone can go look then up. Peoplewho claim that Obama "tripled the deficit" are either misled or are trying to mislead.

The Stimulus and Jobs

In this chart, the RED lines on the left side -- the ones that keep doing DOWN -- show what happened to jobs under the policies of Bush and the Republicans. We were losing lots and lots of jobs every month, and it was getting worse and worse. The BLUE lines -- the ones that just go UP -- show what happened to jobs when the stimulus was in effect. We stopped losing jobs and started gaining jobs, and it was getting better and better. The leveling off on the right side of the chart shows what happened as the stimulus started to wind down: job creation leveled off at too low a level.

It looks a lot like the stimulus reversed what was going on before the stimulus. In fact, it looks a lot like the stimulus was just a bit too small, which has been the contention of many economists.

Alas, Graphs and charts and meaningful words
Matter not to right-wing birds
They fly in circular patterns each day
To land at the same spot where they pray

"Oh lord, deliver U.S. from evil
From science, altruism and blue boll weevils
Holy father we pray in your name
Ask U.S. not to be progressive, humane

Allow to bask in mythological glory
The wine of superstition to sweeten your story
Forgive U.S. our trespasses, our prejudice then
We'll "bathe" on Sunday and start over...again

It won't take long for the side-stepping, deflection, and monkey poo flinging to commence from the wingnuts

 

[IrezumiKiss]

It won't take long for the side-stepping, deflection, and monkey poo flinging to commence from the wingnuts

Hmm...

Did you notice that the dems took over both houses of congress in 2007 and that is a pivot point on the graphs.

Did he notice 2012 is not here yet.

Well, it looks like the side stepping and deflection started. Once BusyShit comes to fling his monkey poo, the circle will be complete.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Did you notice that the dems took over both houses of congress in 2007 and that is a pivot point on the graphs.

Democrats are magic. Before they pass policy the markets adjust.

Did he notice 2012 is not here yet.

Of course, the wailing from the right will be unbearable come 2013 when all the told you sos are raining down around their ears. What's worse is we'd be better off if Obama lost in 2012 simply because he STILL won't put his foot down and the Pubs will punk him around.

 

[mercury14]

Did our resident doom and gloom conservatives forget to mention that consumer spending jumped more than expected this month? And household income increased at a healthy click?

 

[richard_daily]

Well, it looks like the side stepping and deflection started. Once BusyShit comes to fling his monkey poo, the circle will be complete.

"view post" gets boring with that crowd, as they're always predictably boring. I don't think I've ever seen a single koalabear post that was worth reading.

But you're right... have no fear, busybody will be along shortly to say something racist, and then veteman will be along to cup his balls.

 

[RightField]

Did our resident doom and gloom conservatives forget to mention that consumer spending jumped more than expected this month? And household income increased at a healthy click?

Still holding out a little hope that this horrible economy somehow isn't caused by these anti-business democrat policies? There may be glimmers of good news now and then, but the weight of these bad policies is just too much.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Did our resident doom and gloom conservatives forget to mention that consumer spending jumped more than expected this month? And household income increased at a healthy click?

It was "unexpected?" You call THAT healthy?

Jeeeeeze... I call that straw-grasping.

Many in the media are saying how unusual it is for our economy to be so sluggish for so long, after we have officially emerged from a recession. In a sense, they are right. But in another sense, they are profoundly wrong.

The American economy usually rebounds a lot faster than it is today. After a recession passes, consumers usually increase their spending. And when businesses see demand picking up, they usually start hiring workers to produce the additional output required to meet that demand.

Some very sharp downturns in the American economy, such as in the early 1920s, were followed quickly by bouncing back to normal levels or beyond. The government did nothing — and it worked.

In that sense, this is an unusual recovery in how long it is taking and in how slowly the economy is growing — while the government is doing virtually everything imaginable.

Government intervention may look good to the media, but its actual track record — both today and in the 1930s — is far worse than the track record of letting the economy recover on its own.

Americans today are alarmed that unemployment has stayed around 9 percent for so long. But such unemployment rates have been common for years in Western European welfare states that have followed policies similar to those the Obama administration is currently following.

Those European welfare states have not only used the taxpayers’ money to hand out “free” benefits to particular groups, they have mandated that employers do the same. Faced with higher labor costs, employers have hired less labor.

The vast uncertainties created by Obamacare create a special problem. If employers knew that Obamacare would add $1,000 to their costs of hiring an employee, then they could simply reduce the salaries they offer by $1,000 and start hiring.

But, since it will take years to create all the regulations required to carry out Obamacare, employers today don’t know whether the Obamacare costs that will hit them down the road will be $500 per employee or $5,000 per employee. Even businesses that have record amounts of cash on hand are reluctant to gamble it by expanding their hiring under these conditions.

Many businesses work their existing employees overtime or hire temporary workers, rather than get stuck with unknown and unknowable costs for expanding their permanent work force.

As unusual as 9 percent unemployment rates may seem to the current generation of Americans, unemployment rates stayed in double digits for months and years on end during the 1930s. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration followed policies very similar to those of the Obama administration today. He also got away with it politically by blaming his predecessor.

Thomas Sowell
NRO

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Still holding out a little hope that this horrible economy somehow isn't caused by these anti-business democrat policies? There may be glimmers of good news now and then, but the weight of these bad policies is just too much.

Warren Buffett doesnt own any small companies. By now it oughta be obvious that our government and the Fortune 500 wanna get rid of Main Street. Getting rid of Main Street also gets rid of non-union labor.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

U_D

You are admitting that Obama increased spending and then giving us government projections of future government growth and deficit reduction.

That's like asking the Catholic Church to report on future priesthood abuse.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

You need to use Moody's and S&Ps projections, cause they employ some right-wingers making them "impartial."

I mean, if we look at the history of this thread, you have provided a constant stream of good economic indicators and future growth, but alas...

Here we are...

still...


__________________
Sideshow Barry Barker 2012 Says: "It's NOT the economy, Stupid!" It's the Birthers! The Tea Party! SARAH PALIN!
Bad Luck!
RACISM!!!
ATMs, KIOSKs & CORPORATE JETS!!!
TSUNAMIS, TORNADOS, & the ARAB SPRING!!!
EARTHQUAKES, & HURRICANES!!!
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/04/obama-wide-grin80.jpg

 

[busybody..]

U_D

You are admitting that Obama increased spending and then giving us government projections of future government growth and deficit reduction.

That's like asking the Catholic Church to report on future priesthood abuse.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

You need to use Moody's and S&Ps projections, cause they employ some right-wingers making them "impartial."

I mean, if we look at the history of this thread, you have provided a constant stream of good economic indicators and future growth, but alas...

Here we are...

still...


__________________
Sideshow Barry Barker 2012 Says: "It's NOT the economy, Stupid!" It's the Birthers! The Tea Party! SARAH PALIN!
Bad Luck!
RACISM!!!
ATMs, KIOSKs & CORPORATE JETS!!!
TSUNAMIS, TORNADOS, & the ARAB SPRING!!!
EARTHQUAKES, & HURRICANES!!!
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/04/obama-wide-grin80.jpg

Hey O'FENDY

Your sig line is too late

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=38489139#post38489139

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Expect more "Jobs Saved" as President Obama brings on another "professor..."

He has a new set of "formulas."

Obama tells us his stimulus plan was a brilliant success. Yes, it plunged us into economy-destroying debt and deficit. The alternative would have been worse, we are told. All three of my friends and family in financial straits are loyal Democrats, and they believe him. "Obama created 2.5 million jobs," my underemployed friend tells me. "Without his policies, it would have been much worse."
"What are the jobs?" I asked him. Neither one of us had a clue.

We sat down together at the internet and did a Google search, 'stimulus job creation.'
We found out where the number 2.5 million jobs' created or saved' comes from. It comes from a formula. The formula comes from a theory. The formula says that for every dollar the government spends, 1.5 dollars' worth of economic activity is generated, and presto, jobs come out. The economic geniuses working for Obama want us to believe that by definition, since they spent almost a trillion dollars in 'stimulus', they automatically created 2.4 million jobs. This is called the multiplier effect.

The basic idea was that if the federal government prints and borrows money and sends it out, it will be spent, trickle through our economy, saving and creating unknown jobs as it goes. It's trickle-down economics, Obama-style. The benefit is temporary, because the government has to pay back its debt sometime, or collapse. Reagan's trickle-down economics turned on a spigot of private enterprise productivity and wealth creation, while Obama has created an ocean of debt.

If Obama's rationale for the 'stimulus' is that spending money creates economic activity, why do we need the government to take our money, send it to other people and then they spend it? Why don't we get to spend it ourselves?

Once you know about this magic 'multiplier effect' in which any government spending creates jobs, much becomes clear. That's why Nancy Pelosi claimed that unemployment insurance "creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative." The Secretary of Agriculture told us August 16 that Food Stamp are "an economic stimulus," explaining that "every dollar of SNAP (food stamp) benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity."

The government puts a multiplier of 2 on money given to Medicaid, so that every dollar they spend on Medicaid they assume doubles in value and grows our GDP. The Congressional Budget Office reported that through the first quarter of 2011 the stimulus created between 1.6 million and 4.6 million jobs, increased real GDP by 1-3 percent, and reduced unemployment by up to 1.8 percentage points. Where did the CBO get these figures? It made them up! Using multiplier formulas -- how scientific! Payments to state and local governments for infrastructure were estimated to have a multiplier of between 1 and 2.5, whereas the multiplier for unemployment benefits, food stamps to individuals was between 0.8 and 2.1.

That's it. That's the only reality to 2.5 million jobs created or saved.

Hard to believe? The White House report of July 3, 2011 makes it explicit:

The report was written by the White House's Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the "stimulus" in adding or saving jobs. The council reports that, using "mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus" (which it describes as a "natural way to estimate the effects of" the legislation), the "stimulus" has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs - whether private or public - at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That's a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.

In other words, the government could simply have cut a $100,000 check to everyone whose employment was allegedly made possible by the "stimulus," and taxpayers would have come out $427 billion ahead.

Of the over $800 billion in stimulus funds, over $450 billion was given to people as tax rebates, food stamps, unemployment checks, Social Security and health insurance. Pro-Democrat liberal media spread White House claims: "Economists say all of those eventually lead to jobs as families spend more at the grocery store, the health clinic or the shopping mall." At the first anniversary of the stimulus in 2009,
Jared Bernstein, the Vice President's chief economist, emphasized that the 640,000 count (of jobs created or saved) represents an incomplete tally of the total jobs added or saved as a result of the stimulus package. It ignores, for example, the jobs created or saved as a result of personal tax cuts or hikes in unemployment compensation checks. We cannot collect anecdotes from Wal-Mart, Safeway, or Disney World telling us how many jobs have been produced by higher consumer spending induced by the stimulus package.

No jobs have to be directly created to claim he saved America with 2.5 million jobs!
The only private sector jobs Obama attempted to stimulate were green jobs. The $2 billion dollars of taxpayer money spent so far has been an economic disaster.

(August 23, 2011) On Friday, the Times printed a harsh assessment of the state of the "green" economy-including a conclusion that the President's promise to create five million green jobs over 10 years has proven to be nothing more than "a pipe dream," with California's Bay Area providing a particularly poignant example of how "green" jobs have actually been lost, not gained.

In Seattle, $20 million in taxpayer money was donated to a company that weatherizes homes, a greenly virtuous activity.

More than a year later, Seattle's numbers are lackluster. As of last week, only three homes had been retrofitted and just 14 new jobs have emerged from the program.

In Oak Park, Michigan, a state-government-funded hybrid bus company sits dormant, out of business just two years after it drew acclaim for being part of Michigan's green future, despite millions in state taxpayer funding and a contract to sell buses to be purchased with federal taxpayer dollars.

80% of the money for green jobs has been used to buy Chinese products, as this example from a solar energy firm receiving government largess in San Jose exemplifies:

... the solar panels themselves will continue being made in China. Mayor Reed said he continued to hope that San Jose would attract manufacturing and assembly jobs, but Ms. Hartsoch said that was unlikely because "taxes and labor rates" were too high to merit investment in a factory in Northern California.

This very month, on his Midwest bus tour Obama pledged 2.4 billion more dollars for green jobs, mostly for batteries for electric cars. We already know how that will turn out. We gave $300 million of taxpayer money to a private firm, Johnson Controls, which manufactures batteries. According to the White House, the firm added 150 jobs - that means we spent $2 million per job.

Private firms with strong marketing and business plans and strong growth sell stock - they don't need government handouts. The market for green products is anemic, a bad investment for anybody, including taxpayers. Obama focuses on green jobs as a purely political calculus. It works for his re-election because it pleases liberal voters. It has a negative economic rationale and a negative economic result. Our president cares about election results, not economic results.

The 2.5 million jobs are invisible because they don't exist. The suffering of my relatives and friends and that of 25 million unemployed Americans is real, and increasingly desperate. It's time to follow the success in job creation of Republican states such as Wisconsin and Texas, and drop the unsuccessful ideas of this wastrel White House. Please, Mr. President, we can't afford another 2.5 million of your phoney jobs.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/where_are_the_25_million_jobs_mr_president.html

According to the magic of million-man math multipliers, if we all quit working and went on the government dole, the government and the nation would be awash in jobs and revenue...

The multipliers are off by a factor of -.1 (The hidden costs of the fixed window).

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Hey O'FENDY

Your sig line is too late

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=38489139#post38489139

No, I'm always timely, I've been using it for months now.

Originally:

__________________
Sideshow Barry Barker 2012 Says: "It's NOT the economy, Stupid!" It's the Birthers! The Tea Party! SARAH PALIN!
RACISM!!!
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/04/obama-wide-grin80.jpg

Like your sigline, it just grows...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I wonder what the multipliers are on a thing like this?

President Obama's constant refrain about the government's unprecedented levels of red ink points to "millionaires and billionaires" as the problem, not the massive amounts of waste, fraud, and inefficiency in government operations.

Remember when a million per mile seemed like a crazy price for a new road? Now it's a billion per mile for a transportation project and the politicians are just fine with it, even if the project is totally unnecessary, even if we're already broke.

To make it allegedly easier for people in San Francisco to get in and out of Chinatown in a hurry, a new 1.7 mile subway line is in the works.

The original projected cost was $647 million. Now it's $1.6 billion, and growing.

There's already bus and light-rail service that covers the same route -- plus roads for cars if you're still the un-green and independent type who enjoys riding alone and listening to the radio and maybe even downing a good hoagie while driving between points A and B.

The 1.7 mile subway line "misses connections with 25 of the 30 light-rail and bus lines that it crosses, and there's no direct connection to the 104-mile Bay Area Transit line or to the ferry," stated the Wall Street Journal in a recent editorial.

There's also the problem of going eight stories underground to get to the new super-short subway -- not a good underground place to be during an earthquake, or during a terrorist attack.

And then there's the red ink, of course, simply because there's no money to pay for it. San Francisco's metro system already loses $500,000 a day.

So they're coming after all our wallets, seeking nearly a billion dollars from the Federal Transit Administration.

They'll probably get it, even with the feds already over a trillion a year in the hole, because there's a big soft spot among the central planners for anything that promises to get some cars off the road.

The Journal quotes a January 2010 statement by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. "Everywhere" he goes, he said, people tell him they "want the opportunity to leave their cars behind" and want "to enjoy clean, greener neighborhoods."

And "everywhere" includes Detroit? I'd guess that jobless auto workers would tell LaHood that they're more important than a slightly quicker ride to Chinatown.
Either way, if getting rid of cars is the goal, adding more buses would be millions cheaper than this $1.6 billion boondoggle.

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/30/a-billion-per-mile

 

[busybody..]

To think, that O'FENDY is upset at ME for calling em NIGGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Congressional Black Caucus Declares “War” On Racist Tea Party, Claims Republicans Want To See Blacks “Hanging From A Tree”…

It’s almost like the CBC wants to start a race war.

 

[koalabear]

Did our resident doom and gloom conservatives forget to mention that consumer spending jumped more than expected this month? And household income increased at a healthy click?

Stocks slip ahead of confidence data
Wall Street anticipates further weakness in consumer sentiment
DOW 11,429.39 -109.86

 

[NeverEndingMe]

God, you are such a simpleton. what did you say you did again, VP of sales?

Problem: You're plugged into the FauxNews-Limbaugh lie machine, and they keep spewing bullshit about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse.

Solution: Here are three "reality-based" charts for you. These charts show what actually happened.

Spending:

Government spending increased dramatically under Bush. It has not increased much under Obama. Note that this chart does not reflect any spending cuts resulting from deficit-cutting deals.

Deficits:

Notes, this chart includes Clinton's last budget year for comparison.

The numbers in these two charts come from Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. They are just the amounts that the government spent and borrowed, period, Anyone can go look then up. Peoplewho claim that Obama "tripled the deficit" are either misled or are trying to mislead.

The Stimulus and Jobs

In this chart, the RED lines on the left side -- the ones that keep doing DOWN -- show what happened to jobs under the policies of Bush and the Republicans. We were losing lots and lots of jobs every month, and it was getting worse and worse. The BLUE lines -- the ones that just go UP -- show what happened to jobs when the stimulus was in effect. We stopped losing jobs and started gaining jobs, and it was getting better and better. The leveling off on the right side of the chart shows what happened as the stimulus started to wind down: job creation leveled off at too low a level.

It looks a lot like the stimulus reversed what was going on before the stimulus. In fact, it looks a lot like the stimulus was just a bit too small, which has been the contention of many economists.

Alas, Graphs and charts and meaningful words
Matter not to right-wing birds
They fly in circular patterns each day
To land at the same spot where they pray

"Oh lord, deliver U.S. from evil
From science, altruism and blue boll weevils
Holy father we pray in your name
Ask U.S. not to be progressive, humane

Allow to bask in mythological glory
The wine of superstition to sweeten your story
Forgive U.S. our trespasses, our prejudice then
We'll "bathe" on Sunday and start over...again

 

[busybody..]

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: What If Obama Were Governor Of Texas?


For anyone having trouble imagining Rick Perry replacing Barack Obama as America’s president, imagine if Barack Obama had replaced Rick Perry as governor of Texas.

Both Obama and Perry inherited an economy from George W. Bush, but here’s what happened in each case:

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), under Obama, 2.4-million jobs have been lost in America.

In the first decade of Perry’s tenure, from June 2000 to June 2010, the BLS says that Texas had a net gain of 907,000 jobs—the best record in the country. . . . Since Obama’s inauguration in January 2009, unemployment nationwide has gone from 7.6 percent to 9.1 percent. The current unemployment rate in Texas with Perry as governor is 8.2 percent.

During the past seven years, CEOs polled by Chief Executive magazine have rated Texas first in the nation in business development and job growth. The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis reports that in 2010, Texas’ economy grew 5.3 percent versus 3.8 percent for the overall U.S. economy.

You can be sure that if Obama were Governor of Texas, Texas would get better press, regardless.

 

[busybody..]

Problem: You're plugged into the FauxNews-Limbaugh lie machine, and they keep spewing bullshit about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse.

Only a DEMENTED LUNATIC could actually believe that shit!

 

[koalabear]

Stocks struggle amid growing consumer worries
The Dow is drifting lower after the Conference Board says consumer confidence is back to recession levels. Gold jumps on speculation of more Fed easing. Interest rates drop.


Updated: 08/30/2011 01:35 ET
DOW 11,502.13 -37.12

 

[koalabear]

The White House’s dilemma: Hence the dilemma for the White House -- which is leading to real disagreements in the West Wing over where to go next. One gets the sense Team Obama is surprised by how much damage the president suffered during the debt ceiling debate. Many folks in the president's circle thought he'd get more credit with the public for looking like the reasonable guy in the room. A miscalculation?

Washington Post

 

[NeverEndingMe]

keep on drinking that obama juice


how long will it take for you to realize that the obama ship has sunk?

Problem: You're plugged into the FauxNews-Limbaugh lie machine, and they keep spewing bullshit about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse.

Solution: Here are three "reality-based" charts for you. These charts show what actually happened.

Spending:

Government spending increased dramatically under Bush. It has not increased much under Obama. Note that this chart does not reflect any spending cuts resulting from deficit-cutting deals.

Deficits:

Notes, this chart includes Clinton's last budget year for comparison.

The numbers in these two charts come from Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. They are just the amounts that the government spent and borrowed, period, Anyone can go look then up. Peoplewho claim that Obama "tripled the deficit" are either misled or are trying to mislead.

The Stimulus and Jobs

In this chart, the RED lines on the left side -- the ones that keep doing DOWN -- show what happened to jobs under the policies of Bush and the Republicans. We were losing lots and lots of jobs every month, and it was getting worse and worse. The BLUE lines -- the ones that just go UP -- show what happened to jobs when the stimulus was in effect. We stopped losing jobs and started gaining jobs, and it was getting better and better. The leveling off on the right side of the chart shows what happened as the stimulus started to wind down: job creation leveled off at too low a level.

It looks a lot like the stimulus reversed what was going on before the stimulus. In fact, it looks a lot like the stimulus was just a bit too small, which has been the contention of many economists.

Alas, Graphs and charts and meaningful words
Matter not to right-wing birds
They fly in circular patterns each day
To land at the same spot where they pray

"Oh lord, deliver U.S. from evil
From science, altruism and blue boll weevils
Holy father we pray in your name
Ask U.S. not to be progressive, humane

Allow to bask in mythological glory
The wine of superstition to sweeten your story
Forgive U.S. our trespasses, our prejudice then
We'll "bathe" on Sunday and start over...again