3 ms·

You mentioned the evidence that it made things worse, by obama's own numbers, the unemployment rates are much higher than he claimed they would be if we DIDN'T

by lzw 16y ago

You mentioned the evidence that it made things worse, by obama's own numbers, the unemployment rates are much higher than he claimed they would be if we DIDN'T pass the bill. The "stimulus" destroyed jobs, as all government spending does, and it made the economy worse. Further, it is deficit spending that is killing us, as we are incurring unprecedented deficits. Finally, borrowing is already becomming a problem with indications that the FED is printing money to participate in the auctions (using a major bank of convenience, of course) in order to keep auction rates low... this means that the treasury auctions have already started to fail. Further, the auctions for the last 2 years have shown a sharp shift towards shorter term notes, which means the amount that has to be rolled over at each auction is snowballing.

ajg1977 16y ago
You mentioned the evidence that it made things worse, by obama's own numbers, the unemployment rates are much higher than he claimed they would be if we DIDN'T pass the bill. How is that evidence it made things worse? It could be evidence that job losses were far more severe than anyone anticipated, but with the stimulus they were still lower than without. Your following two statements are basically soundbites with no reasoning, or basis in economic theory.
- lzw 16y ago
  Right, just imagine how much blood loss the patient would have experienced if we hadn't used the leeches! His is the kind of nonsense you guys trot out to defend every program... No matter how much damage to the economy, you just claim that things would have been worse otherwise. You never support these claims, of course, but you then go on to claim that those who point out the damage are not supporting their claims, even when they do, and you just, out of the blue make nonsese assertions like "have no basis in economic theory".... Without, of course, defending that asertion. I find this mode of argument particularly anti-intellectual.
  - Teckla 16y ago
    Congratulations on knocking down that straw man. ajg1977 didn't say the economy would have been worse without the stimulus. He said that what you presented as evidence was not, in fact, evidence, because it could be interpreted a different way.

by lzw 16y ago

ajg1977 16y ago

You mentioned the evidence that it made things worse, by obama's own numbers, the unemployment rates are much higher than he claimed they would be if we DIDN'T pass the bill. How is that evidence it made things worse? It could be evidence that job losses were far more severe than anyone anticipated, but with the stimulus they were still lower than without. Your following two statements are basically soundbites with no reasoning, or basis in economic theory.

lzw 16y ago
Right, just imagine how much blood loss the patient would have experienced if we hadn't used the leeches! His is the kind of nonsense you guys trot out to defend every program... No matter how much damage to the economy, you just claim that things would have been worse otherwise. You never support these claims, of course, but you then go on to claim that those who point out the damage are not supporting their claims, even when they do, and you just, out of the blue make nonsese assertions like "have no basis in economic theory".... Without, of course, defending that asertion. I find this mode of argument particularly anti-intellectual.
- Teckla 16y ago
  Congratulations on knocking down that straw man. ajg1977 didn't say the economy would have been worse without the stimulus. He said that what you presented as evidence was not, in fact, evidence, because it could be interpreted a different way.