PDA

View Full Version : Stimulus vs.Bush tax cuts.



Satanicus
07-27-2010, 06:31 PM
The stimulus cost 800 billion dollars and created almost 3 million jobs inside of 2 years.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

The Bush tax cuts cost about 2.5 trillion and created about 3 million jobs in 8 years, IF we account every job created in those 8 years to the tax cuts.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:29 PM
Truth hurts huh ?

patriot45
07-27-2010, 07:33 PM
Truth hurts huh ?

Reading your common theme posts hurts!

Where did we pick up jobs? Census workers? Gov jobs! You are a tool!

Lager
07-27-2010, 07:33 PM
If everything the dems do is so perfect, and everything they touch is so great, then why aren't all Americans democrats? Why do they have to actuallly campaign to win elections rather than get swept into office easily?

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:34 PM
$800 billion/3 million=$266,666 per job. So, where are the $266K jobs. I want one.

Also, the Bush Tax Cuts weren't soley to create jobs. It was supposed to stimulate the economy. And it did. It allowed people to keep more of what they earn(there a word you will never understand). The stimulus, however, did nothing of the kind. Studying the mating habits of monkeys on crack is hardly a stimulus. Or to analyze bat droppings. Obama's stimulus money went to special interests and cronies. Bush's tax cuts went back to the people. Which do you prefer?

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:38 PM
Stimulus waste:


*Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, Florida used $15,551 in stimulus money to pay two researchers to study how alcohol affects a mouse's motor functions.

*The U.S. government handed over a staggering $54 million in "stimulus cash" to Connecticut's politically-connected Mohegan Indian tribe, which runs one of the highest grossing casinos in the country.

*Syracuse professor of psychology Michael Carey received $219,000 in federal stimulus money for a study that examines the sex patterns of college women.

*$1.15 million in stimulus funds was allocated for the installation of a new guard rail around the non-existent Optima Lake in Oklahoma.

*Researchers at the State University of New York at Buffalo received $389,000 to pay 100 residents of Buffalo $45 each to record how much malt liquor they drink and how much pot they smoke each day. Instead of spending nearly $400,000, the U.S. government could have achieved the same goal by having a couple of scientists join a fraternity.

*$100,000 in federal stimulus funds were used for a martini bar and a brazilian steakhouse.

*A dinner cruise company in Chicago got nearly $1 million in stimulus funds to combat terrorism.

*$233,000 in stimulus money went to the University of California at San Diego to study why Africans vote.

*The Cactus Bug Project at the University Of Florida was allocated $325,394 in stimulus funds to study the mating decisions of cactus bugs. According to the project proposal, one of the questions that will be answered by the study is this: "Whether males with large weapons are more or less attractive to females."

*One Denver developer received $13 million in tax credits to construct a senior housing complex despite that fact that the same developer is being sued as a slumlord for running rodent-infested apartment buildings in the city of San Francisco.

*Sheltering Arms Senior Services was awarded a contract worth $22.3 million in stimulus money to weatherize homes for poor families in Houston, Texas - but a new report from Texas Watchdog says that the weatherization work was performed so badly that 33 of the 53 homes will need to be completely redone.

*A liberal theater in Minnesota named "In the Heart of the Beast" (in reference to a well known quote by communist radical Che Guevara) received $100,000 for socially conscious puppet shows.

*California's inspector general found that $1 million in stimulus funds for a program to give summer jobs to young people was improperly used for overhead expenses such as rent and utility bills.

*Landon Cox, a Duke University assistant professor of computer science, was awarded $498,000 in stimulus money to study Facebook.

*The town of Union, New York is being urged to spend $578,000 in stimulus money that it did not request for a homelessness problem that it claims it does not have.

*Lastly, who could forget the $3.4 million "ecopassage" to help turtles cross a highway in Tallahassee, Florida?http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/stimulus-waste

Please tell me where the 3,000,000 jobs are? Please?

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:38 PM
If everything the dems do is so perfect, and everything they touch is so great, then why aren't all Americans democrats? Why do they have to actuallly campaign to win elections rather than get swept into office easily?

In 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections the American people gave the Dems more votes than the GOP , take away 9-11 and it's 5 of 5

America is center left , The republicans said so themselves when they ALL said Obama would be the most liberal president ever , and then he won is a massive landslide , getting more votes than anybody in history.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:39 PM
Stimulus waste:



Please tell me where the 3,000,000 jobs are? Please?

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/cbo-stimulus-put-up-to-34m-to-work-in-first-quarter.php

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:41 PM
In 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections the American people gave the Dems more votes than the GOP , take away 9-11 and it's 5 of 5

America is center left , The republicans said so themselves when they ALL said Obama would be the most liberal president ever , and then he won is a massive landslide , getting more votes than anybody in history.

You must either be thick headed, a troll looking to stir the shit pot, or just plain stupid. As I said in your other inane thread, the elections of 1992 and '96, a majority of American voters did not want Clinton as their president. But you ignore this.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:42 PM
You must either be thick headed, a troll looking to stir the shit pot, or just plain stupid. As I said in your other inane thread, the elections of 1992 and '96, a majority of American voters did not want Clinton as their president. But you ignore this.

I never ever said majority you fucking idiiot. How fucking stupid are you ?

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:43 PM
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/cbo-stimulus-put-up-to-34m-to-work-in-first-quarter.php


The CBO estimates that the stimulus put 1.2 million to 2.8 million to work in the first quarter, and boosted GDP between 1.7% and 4.2%.
Again, I ask where are the 3,000,000 jobs? An estimate is all bullshit. I gave you concrete facts. You give me concrete facts. What stimulus money went to create jobs? And Census jobs do not count. Government jobs do not count. Where in the private sector were jobs created. Give me the data.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:45 PM
You must either be thick headed, a troll looking to stir the shit pot, or just plain stupid. As I said in your other inane thread, the elections of 1992 and '96, a majority of American voters did not want Clinton as their president. But you ignore this.

I never ever said majority you fucking idiiot. How fucking stupid are you ?

No , Really , how stupid are you ?

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:45 PM
I never ever said majority you fucking idiiot. How fucking stupid are you ?

Then don't make it sound like the Democrats are the choice of America.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:46 PM
What stimulus money went to create jobs?.

Tax cuts.

The GOP says tax cuts create jobs. And never before has so much money been spent so fast on tax cuts as with the stimulus.

Really , how stupid are you ?

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:49 PM
Tax cuts.

The GOP says tax cuts create jobs. And never before has so much money been spent so fast on tax cuts as with the stimulus.

Really , how stupid are you ?

Tax cuts go directly to the people. The Stimulus money went to special interests, cronies, and pork projects. What part of this do you not understand? And allowing people who earn a living to keep more of what they earn is hardly spending. Get a job. Become a tax payer. And then we'll talk.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:49 PM
Then don't make it sound like the Democrats are the choice of America.

In 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections the American people gave the democrats more votes than the republicans , the Dems were the choice of the American people, it'sa written history now buddy.

So , you were wrong , I nevewr said majority , and you called me stupid and told me I can't read , how did that turn out for you ?

There are 31 members online now , and about 150 visitors , those guys are cracking up right about now

swirling_vortex
07-27-2010, 07:51 PM
Assuming those numbers are true, 800 billion into 3.7 million equates to $216,216 per job. That's not a very efficient way of achieving job growth. Plus, what the CBO doesn't tell you is that most of those jobs are "estimated". That means they not even have existed, such as the jobs that were created and/or towards those phony zip codes. Plus, even if it did create and/or save jobs, they could have been temporary work. Judging by the unemployment situation, I think it's pretty clear that the only thing the stimulus stimulated was government.

As for Bush, you should note that Presidents don't create jobs. Again, as I stated in my other post which you didn't respond to at this point in time, economies do not turn on a dime. You can't simply wave a magic wand and have producers start producing again (unless you're a Keynesian). And if you're going to blame Bush, then you should blame the Democratic congress as well.

Furthermore,

The Bush tax cuts cost about 2.5 trillion....
How do tax cuts "cost" something? The only thing that costs something is spending. If the grocery store cuts their price of bread and demand goes up, is that a "cost"? Of course, what you're trying to allude to is that the tax cuts reduced revenue. This, again, is another lie.
http://rightwingchicky.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/revenue-growth.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v504/ZendoDeb/misc/TaxRevenue.gif

Truth hurts huh ?
Apparently it does, because you seem to be avoiding it.

America is center left , The republicans said so themselves when they ALL said Obama would be the most liberal president ever , and then he won is a massive landslide , getting more votes than anybody in history.
America is center-right and you know that. Obama won because a) People were dis-satisfied with the current party in the President and b) Candidate Obama ran on a center-right platform, speaking about issues such as deficit reduction.

And he did not win in a massive landside. 53% is hardly a landslide. 60% is more like a landslide.

I never ever said majority you fucking idiiot. How fucking stupid are you ?
Because you said it yourself:

"In 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections the American people gave the Dems more votes than the GOP , take away 9-11 and it's 5 of 5"

You are certainly implying such a thing.

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 07:51 PM
In 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections the American people gave the democrats more votes than the republicans , the Dems were the choice of the American people, it'sa written history now buddy.

So , you were wrong , I nevewr said majority , and you called me stupid and told me I can't read , how did that turn out for you ?

There are 31 members online now , and about 150 visitors , those guys are cracking up right about now

Yeah, at your stupidity.

Constitutionally Speaking
07-27-2010, 07:51 PM
The stimulus cost 800 billion dollars and created almost 3 million jobs inside of 2 years.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

The Bush tax cuts cost about 2.5 trillion and created about 3 million jobs in 8 years, IF we account every job created in those 8 years to the tax cuts.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/


This is why you get zero respect.

These are two different measurements. You are using a net jobs created for Bush, yet you do NOT do the same for Obama.

That would be because if you used the same criteria, Obama would show a net loss of 3.26 Millon jobs.


You need to be making an apples to apples comparison.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:52 PM
Tax cuts go directly to the people. The Stimulus money went to special interests, cronies, and pork projects. What part of this do you not understand? And allowing people who earm a living to keep more of what they earn is hardly spending. Get a job. Become a tax payer. And then we'll talk.

You are saying that the stimulus contained no tax cuts ?

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/21/news/economy/tax_savings_stimulus/index.htm

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:55 PM
you should note that Presidents don't create jobs.

Then why does the GOP keep asking Obama "where are the jobs Mr. President ?"

Obama passed the stimulus and it created millions of jobs. You couldn't be more wrong.

Satanicus
07-27-2010, 07:57 PM
This is why you get zero respect.

These are two different measurements. You are using a net jobs created for Bush, yet you do NOT do the same for Obama.

That would be because if you used the same criteria, Obama would show a net loss of 3.26 Millon jobs.


You need to be making an apples to apples comparison.

Same measurements here ...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mupm2BmIjtc/S7ZwZRn4mFI/AAAAAAAALQY/9adN70fVUAU/s1600/chart+jobs.jpg

Rockntractor
07-27-2010, 08:00 PM
Same measurements here ...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mupm2BmIjtc/S7ZwZRn4mFI/AAAAAAAALQY/9adN70fVUAU/s1600/chart+jobs.jpg
http://raincrystal.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/po-fruitcake.jpg

malloc
07-27-2010, 08:02 PM
Same measurements here ...
*image of a chart Satanicus can't understand*


And once again your favorite chart comes out. Since you fail to see the relevance of this chart or what it means, let me express THE EXACT SAME data from this chart in a manner less flattering to your poster boy. These graphs, from my Bush Tax Cuts thread, which you ignored, are the EXACT SAME DATA as the graph you keep posting, only instead of using the Obama flattering rate change month-over-month method, this is the less than flattering cumulative month-over-month:

http://imgur.com/4e3N2.png


Anything to say about that?

swirling_vortex
07-27-2010, 08:03 PM
Then why does the GOP keep asking Obama "where are the jobs Mr. President ?"

Obama passed the stimulus and it created millions of jobs. You couldn't be more wrong.
Because Obama has claimed them to be there when they aren't. Yes, I suppose you'd think that those unemployment lines are a conservative lie too. :rolleyes:

Same measurements here ...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mupm2BmIjtc/S7ZwZRn4mFI/AAAAAAAALQY/9adN70fVUAU/s1600/chart+jobs.jpg
I have already pointed out the problems with that chart and you still have not addressed them. Please don't post it unless you have something other than TPM quotes to back it up.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showpost.php?p=292809&postcount=34

malloc
07-27-2010, 08:05 PM
Then why does the GOP keep asking Obama "where are the jobs Mr. President ?"

Obama passed the stimulus and it created millions of jobs. You couldn't be more wrong.

Don't you think that "millions of jobs" would have made a dent in the unemployment rate? Where is this huge drop in the unemployment, adjusting for census workers?

NJCardFan
07-27-2010, 08:13 PM
You are saying that the stimulus contained no tax cuts ?

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/21/news/economy/tax_savings_stimulus/index.htm
Not in my paycheck it didn't.


America is center left , The republicans said so themselves when they ALL said Obama would be the most liberal president ever , and then he won is a massive landslide , getting more votes than anybody in history.
Wow, and you have the cajones to call me stupid? Center-left, huh:
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/iglnwvn0jeaslencabs5iq.gif
http://www.gallup.com/poll/141032/2010-conservatives-outnumber-moderates-liberals.aspx

And a landslide? Ha-Ha! Yeah, 53% is a majority but hardly a landslide. Allow me to show you what a landslide looks like:

1984 Electoral Map
http://uspoliticsguide.com/images/Presidents-history/1984-electoral-map.gif

Reagan won by 18% in 1984. Obama won by 7%. Nixon beat McGovern by 23%. That's a landslide. As for Obama's voters. Um, you mean people like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8
And these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU&feature=related

Obama wasn't elected because of his policies. He was elected because it was the in thing to do. It was hip. Not to mention because of the color of his skin. Now I ask you, of that 53%, what % do you think are having buyers remorse?

Hawkgirl
07-27-2010, 08:15 PM
Let's not confuse Satanacus with reality......he likes living in Delusional-land....as long as someone else picks up his tab.

warpig
07-27-2010, 08:24 PM
From the Bureau of Labor
Statistics

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm


So far this year, private-sector employment has increased by 593,000
but in June was 7.9 million below its December 2007 level. (See
table B-1.)

This year's increase in jobs is 593,000........................must have been a hell of a good year in 2009 to get a job if we are to believe over 3 million have been created.

Constitutionally Speaking
07-27-2010, 10:10 PM
Then why does the GOP keep asking Obama "where are the jobs Mr. President ?"

Obama passed the stimulus and it created millions of jobs. You couldn't be more wrong.

His annual job record is FAR worse than Bush's

Lager
07-27-2010, 11:24 PM
America is center left , The republicans said so themselves when they ALL said Obama would be the most liberal president ever , and then he won is a massive landslide , getting more votes than anybody in history.

You are delusional. "Massive landsliide"? Whatever is troubling you, I strongly suggest you go deal with it in real life, away from the computer. You won't fix it here, and you might possibly make it worse. The demons in today's world are not conservatives on message boards. Though it might temporarily appease you to tilt at these windmills, our world is far more complex than that of Don Quixote. There are better and more worthy battles to fight than to continue to try and ram talking points down the throats of people whose values and opinions you don't understand, or care to. Seriously. Take a break. It's okay.

djones520
07-28-2010, 04:21 AM
His annual job record is FAR worse than Bush's

When you take into account that the CBO is forecasting unemployment to stay around 8-9% his entire term, Obama will have a negative job growth rate.

So much for BAR NONE!

djones520
07-28-2010, 04:29 AM
In 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections the American people gave the Dems more votes than the GOP , take away 9-11 and it's 5 of 5

America is center left , The republicans said so themselves when they ALL said Obama would be the most liberal president ever , and then he won is a massive landslide , getting more votes than anybody in history.

Ummm... Obama got 54% of the popular vote. Reagon got 58% in the 1984 election.

If you are just counting raw votes, of course he got more. The US population is 80,000,000 higher dumbshit. 20 years from now candidates will be getting 75 million votes, and Obama's 69 million will be forgotten. :rolleyes:

Hell, even George H Bush got a larger spread then Obama. Obama only beat McCain by 7%. George H Bush beat Dukakis by 9%. :rolleyes:

Come on, find another strawman for us to set on fire.

djones520
07-28-2010, 04:42 AM
I never ever said majority you fucking idiiot. How fucking stupid are you ?

Thats what matters dumb ass. You can't say "more votes" population grows. It's a meaningless appelation. The will of the American People is determined by a % sign, not a number that changes every minute.

Sonnabend
07-28-2010, 06:07 AM
[/URL][URL="http://www.redstate.com/joeschoffstall/2010/07/15/pence-%E2%80%9C3-million-jobs-have-been-lost%E2%80%9D-since-stimulus-was-signed/"]Link (http://www.redstate.com/joeschoffstall/2010/07/15/pence-%E2%80%9C3-million-jobs-have-been-lost%E2%80%9D-since-stimulus-was-signed/)


Bureau of Labor statistics and they tell a completely different story– a net job loss of 2.4 million jobs.


Since the stimulus was enacted, more than 3 million jobs have been lost in this country. A net job loss of 2.4 million jobs. Enough with the talk. The stimulus bill has failed. It’s time for new ideas. Across the board tax relief and fiscal discipline now.

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 07:02 AM
When you take into account that the CBO is forecasting unemployment to stay around 8-9% his entire term, Obama will have a negative job growth rate.

So much for BAR NONE!

Oh , so now the CBO predictions are OK with you ?

Figures.

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 07:03 AM
Ummm... Obama got 54% of the popular vote. Reagon got 58% in the 1984 election.

If you are just counting raw votes, of course he got more. The US population is 80,000,000 higher dumbshit. 20 years from now candidates will be getting 75 million votes, and Obama's 69 million will be forgotten. :rolleyes:

Hell, even George H Bush got a larger spread then Obama. Obama only beat McCain by 7%. George H Bush beat Dukakis by 9%. :rolleyes:

Come on, find another strawman for us to set on fire.

And yet the fact remains. No matter how much you cry to mommy.

djones520
07-28-2010, 07:15 AM
And yet the fact remains. No matter how much you cry to mommy.

Of course the fact remains. Humans breed. Populations grow. The number is ALWAYS GONNA GET LARGER! Are you going to cry if a Republican gets 72,000,000 votes in 2012? No one is denying he got more votes. The only thing that matters is it is a POINTLESS fact. The only number that matters is the % number.

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 07:20 AM
Of course the fact remains. Humans breed. Populations grow. The number is ALWAYS GONNA GET LARGER! Are you going to cry if a Republican gets 72,000,000 votes in 2012? No one is denying he got more votes. The only thing that matters is it is a POINTLESS fact. The only number that matters is the % number.

So , are you now accepting the CBO ?

djones520
07-28-2010, 07:27 AM
So , are you now accepting the CBO ?

Mind showing me where I said I discounted them?

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 07:33 AM
Mind showing me where I said I discounted them?

YOU JUST SAID the CBO says the public option is unsustainable , this is 100% lie , they have never said this.

I pointed out that they say the CBO will save almost 70 billion by 2020 , you disagree.

I pointed out that they say the Stimulus has created almost 3 million jobs , you disagree.

Then in the next breath you think you never discounted them ? ....WTF dude ?

djones520
07-28-2010, 07:34 AM
YOU JUST SAID the CBO says the public option is unsustainable , this is 100% lie , they have never said this.

I pointed out that they say the CBO will save almost 70 billion by 2020 , you disagree.

I pointed out that they say the Stimulus has created almost 3 million jobs , you disagree.

Then in the next breath you think you never discounted them ? ....WTF dude ?

I did? Really? Show me where.

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 07:39 AM
I did? Really? Show me where.

Right here you stupid fuck , we are debating in that thread RIGHT NOW.

" A public option is unsustainable"
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?p=293360#post293360

djones520
07-28-2010, 07:41 AM
Right here you stupid fuck , we are debating in that thread RIGHT NOW.

" A public option is unsustainable"
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?p=293360#post293360

That is conjecture on my part. What I challenged you was to show me where I said the CBO was a bad source.

That is what you cannot do. Because you are a LIAR.

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 07:49 AM
That is conjecture on my part. What I challenged you was to show me where I said the CBO was a bad source.

That is what you cannot do. Because you are a LIAR.

LOL. Now I heard it all.

So you didn't really mean it ?

So, we agree that the PO would save 70 billion ?

We agree that the stimulus created almost 3 million jobs.

Is this right ? ..we agree on these issues ?

djones520
07-28-2010, 07:56 AM
LOL. Now I heard it all.

So you didn't really mean it ?

So, we agree that the PO would save 70 billion ?

We agree that the stimulus created almost 3 million jobs.

Is this right ? ..we agree on these issues ?

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?p=293373#post293373

lacarnut
07-28-2010, 08:01 AM
LOL.?

We agree that the stimulus created almost 3 million jobs.



No. Not permanent jobs and not jobs double and triple counted by the Obama admin. who gave out these phony numbers.

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 08:18 AM
From the Bureau of Labor
Statistics

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm



This year's increase in jobs is 593,000........................must have been a hell of a good year in 2009 to get a job if we are to believe over 3 million have been created.

The Bureau of labor is rejected by the CU. You should have been told that.

Molon Labe
07-28-2010, 08:29 AM
The stimulus cost 800 billion dollars and created almost 3 million jobs inside of 2 years.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

The Bush tax cuts cost about 2.5 trillion and created about 3 million jobs in 8 years, IF we account every job created in those 8 years to the tax cuts.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

Bush tax cuts have nothing to do with the overall rotten system that created the depression we're in. IJust as Obama's stimulus has nothing to do with job creation.

If you want to argue that the whole rotten monetary system is at fault then I'm listening. And that's not a partisan issue.

djones520
07-28-2010, 08:46 AM
Bush tax cuts have nothing to do with the overall rotten system that created the depression we're in. IJust as Obama's stimulus has nothing to do with job creation.

If you want to argue that the whole rotten monetary system is at fault then I'm listening. And that's not a partisan issue.

He wants to do no such thing. Is argument includes qouting you, talking about something else, calling you a liar, and then saying check mate. He's incapable of true reasonable discussion.

Nubs
07-28-2010, 08:58 AM
Time to send Satanicus to pasture

Sonnabend
07-28-2010, 09:03 AM
This is one fyunch (click) no Mediator would want...........:rolleyes:

Rebel Yell
07-28-2010, 09:03 AM
Studying the mating habits of monkeys on crack is hardly a stimulus.

You've really been working in the prison system too long.:D

swirling_vortex
07-28-2010, 09:14 AM
The Bureau of labor is rejected by the CU. You should have been told that.
I wouldn't say it's rejected, we just don't think that the BLS is reporting the true unemployment number.

http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/sgs-emp.gif?hl=ad&t=1278079996

If anything, that number might be worse. But you've just presented a conflict for yourself. Which one do you believe, the BLS or Obama's numbers? You can only pick one.

malloc
07-28-2010, 02:59 PM
Satanicus, reply to my post's which completely destroy your favorite little graph please. Do something useful and actually debate, since that seems to be what you are whining about. Make a real argument, not one or two lines asking the same question over and over again.

Obama, and his stimulus, hasn't created jobs. He hasn't even started the economy on the right track. He's done absolutely nothing other than causing uncertainty in the market. Your hero doesn't know what the hell he is doing at the helm, and saying anything to contrary without backing it up with market data is a flat out lie. You don't want to be a liar do you?

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 03:30 PM
Satanicus, reply to my post's which completely destroy your favorite little graph please. Do something useful and actually debate,

You wanna know why we don't debate ? ..cause of the way you reject reality, notice..


Obama, and his stimulus, hasn't created jobs.

The CBO says millions were created.


He hasn't even started the economy on the right track

He took over when the nation was seeing 700,000 jobs being shed every month , and negative GDP growth , now we are losing very little if any jobs per month , and now have positive gdp growth , and you claim we are not heading in the right direction. I will ask again....

"Is losing 700,000 jobs a month better or worse than losing 1000 a month ?"


He's done absolutely nothing other than causing uncertainty in the market

The market went from a low of 6500 and is now in the 10,000's , wtf market are you looking at ?

You are rejecting reality , and if you don't answer the question in bold, then we are done.

asdf2231
07-28-2010, 03:32 PM
You wanna know why we don't debate ? ..cause of the way you reject reality, notice..

http://graphjam.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/hurr.gif


You are rejecting reality , and if you don't answer the question in bold, then we are done.

I added a chart to explain Blarch's position better.

Lager
07-28-2010, 03:34 PM
I thougt we were done, about 15 "We are dones" ago? :D

malloc
07-28-2010, 03:51 PM
You wanna know why we don't debate ? ..cause of the way you reject reality, notice..



I reject reality? You are too blinded by fanboydom to even be on the same plane of existence. I have offered math, science, economics, you have offered cheerleading and graphs you don't know how to read.

You are so far removed from reality that it becomes a problem in your day to day to life doesn't it? You have trouble making and keeping friends and relationships. You have trouble holding a job. No one really interacts with you in social situations do they? You behave as if you have some sort of dementia combined with an extremely low IQ. Tell me, are you on medication for this dementia and anxiety? If so, are you taking it as prescribed.



The CBO says millions were created.


Here is a perfect example of you rejecting reality. The CBO didn't say that millions were created. What did they do, count? Did they go door and door and and conduct a survey like the Bureau of Labor Statistics? If they did this, why doesn't the numbers from the BoLS match the numbers from the CBO within a reasonable margin of error? Your extremely low IQ has a negative effect on your language skills. The CBO did not say the stimulus created any jobs, they predicted and projected that the stimulus would create jobs. That prediction or projection never came true, and that fact is verifiable via the BoLS



He took over when the nation was seeing 700,000 jobs being shed every month , and negative GDP growth , now we are losing very little if any jobs per month , and now have positive gdp growth , and you claim we are not heading in the right direction. I will ask again....
"Is losing 700,000 jobs a month better or worse than losing 1000 a month ?"


I know it's really, really hard for someone with such a low IQ to learn any thing new, but this is really simple, basic economics. The GDP is up because of deficit spending, you know this, you are just being obtuse. If you had bothered to stay in high school long enough to take high school economics you would know this. Get this through your crack baby syndrome head: We are out of jobs to lose, and that is the only reason why jobs losses aren't continuing. We have bottomed out, and your homosexual fantasy lover Obama can take the credit for bottoming out the economy. Do you understand that? What that in simple enough terms for you to understand?

So, to answer your question in bold, like I've done many times: No. If people aren't going back to work, meaning that overall more people have jobs this month than people had jobs last month, we are still at rock bottom. I need you to do something you don't normally do, and engage that drug and psychosis riddled brain for a second, and answer this question. Which is worse, 700,000 people without a job, or 701,000 people without a job.





You are rejecting reality , and if you don't answer the question in bold, then we are done.

You do realize that threatening me to "be done" is the same as any threat from the gordo kids who ride the short yellow bus with the red helmets and lick the windows right?



The market went from a low of 6500 and is now in the 10,000's , wtf market are you looking at ?


The "market" has a number? Really? Oh, I think you got retard confused again and posted some more bullshit that you don't really understand. So let's try this. Which economic indicator, not market went from 6500 to 10,000?

Oh, and take your psych medication like the doctor told you! I'm sorry they don't make a medicine to raise your intellect.


I'll leave you with this challenge: Find one, only one published and accredited Austrian economist who believes Obama's economic policy is on the right track. When you can't find one, will your view of Obama's failure of policy change?

Satanicus
07-28-2010, 04:00 PM
IHere is a perfect example of you rejecting reality

Oh jeeesh.


The CBO didn't say that millions were created.

Wrong again , just the word in bold.

A report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office shows the Recovery Act has increased the number of workers by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/cbo-says-stimulus-added-up-to-21-million-jobs-in-fourth-quarter-of-2009.html


. The CBO did not say the stimulus created any jobs, they predicted and projected that the stimulus would create jobs. That prediction or projection never came true, and that fact is verifiable via the BoLS

Show me just ONE link that says the stimulus created no jobs , you just can't tell me the CBO is wrong , you need to show me a link or source that says so.

and now, to end our 'debates' you claim that losing 700,000 jobs is better than losing 1000 jobs.

Get it idiot ? ..You think losing 700,000 jobs a month is better than losing 1000 a month , this is why we won't debate any longer.

Learn some simple math and get back to me.

malloc
07-28-2010, 04:09 PM
Oh jeeesh.



Wrong again , just the word in bold.

A report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office shows the Recovery Act has increased the number of workers by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/cbo-says-stimulus-added-up-to-21-million-jobs-in-fourth-quarter-of-2009.html



Show me just ONE link that says the stimulus created no jobs , you just can't tell me the CBO is wrong , you need to show me a link or source that says so.

and now, to end our 'debates' you claim that losing 700,000 jobs is better than losing 1000 jobs.

Get it idiot ? ..You think losing 700,000 jobs a month is better than losing 1000 a month , this is why we won't debate any longer.

Learn some simple math and get back to me.

You are the idiot who thinks that losing less jobs month over month is some sign of recovery and the miracle that is Obama, when in reality it just means we hit rock bottom, a fact you have yet to acknowledge. Then again, you are also the retard who thinks I said the stimulus created no jobs. It created some, nowhere near 21 million that's for damn sure, but when you borrow to spend $1 million per job, I'm sure some traction will be gained. Too bad my children will still be paying off the few jobs the stimulus created when they are my age.

Jesus christ you are really retarded! Did you go to special ed and ride the short bus! OMFG, I'm actually talking to real live retard on the internet! That's amazing! Now I know why everyone just points and laughs and makes fun you with ridiculous pics. Wow, and I got called an idiot by a retard as well! That's priceless.

I study economics every day and am working towards a degree in the field. I know exactly what the fuck I'm talking about. You are a clueless retard idiot who doesn't understand English, math, economics or simple logic.

Why don't you go find that Austrian Economist who agrees with Obamanomics now, mkay? Oh, and why didn't you answer my questions about the status of your mental health?

swirling_vortex
07-28-2010, 04:43 PM
Satanicus, do you even read your own links?

Here is the report in question linked from the blog: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11044/02-23-ARRA.pdf

What does the title say? Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output From October 2009 Through December 2009

Yes, estimated, as in, we guessed. Rather than quote old predictions, you need to look at the historical data, which will show you we ended up with a net loss of jobs.

On page 9 it says this:

Recipients reported that ARRA funded nearly 600,000 full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs during the fourth quarter of 2009. (2) Such reports, however, do not provide a comprehensive estimate of the law’s impact on employment in the United States. That impact may be higher or lower than the reported number for several reasons (in addition to any issues about the quality of the data in the reports). (3) First, some of the reported jobs might have existed in the absence of the stimulus package, with employees working on the same activities or other activities. Second, the reports filed by recipients measure only the jobs created by employers who received ARRA funding directly or by their immediate subcontractors (so-called primary and secondary recipients), not by lower-level subcontractors. Third, the reports do not attempt to measure the number of jobs that may have been created or retained indirectly as greater income for recipients and their employees boosted demand for products and services. Fourth, the recipients’ reports cover only certain appropriations made in ARRA, which encompass about one-fifth of the total
amount spent by the government or conveyed through tax reductions in ARRA during the fourth quarter; the reports do not measure the effects of other provisions of the stimulus package, such as tax cuts and transfer payments (including unemployment insurance payments) to individuals.
This is why you can't take the CBO as Gospel because even they say their stuff might be inaccurate.

malloc
07-28-2010, 04:52 PM
Satanicus, do you even read your own links?



I'm not entirely sure he reads a > 3rd grade level.

Molon Labe
07-28-2010, 04:56 PM
Satanicus, do you even read your own links?

What does the title say? Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output From October 2009 Through December 2009

On page 9 it says this:

This is why you can't take the CBO as Gospel because even they say their stuff might be inaccurate.

I doubt he's ever read an economic book.

Suggest he read this chapter (http://jim.com/econ/chap04p1.html)for edumacation on how the Stimulus really works.

Public Works Mean Taxes


A bridge is built. If it is built to meet an insistent public demand, if it solves a traffic problem or a transportation problem otherwise insoluble, if, in short, it is even more necessary to the taxpayers collectively than the things for which they would have individually spent their money had it had not been taxed away from them, there can be no objection. But a bridge built primarily “to provide employment” is a different kind of bridge. When providing employment becomes the end, need becomes a subordinate consideration. “Projects” have to be invented. Instead of thinking only of where bridges must be built the government spenders begin to ask themselves where bridges can be built. Can they think of plausible reasons why an additional bridge should connect Easton and Weston? It soon becomes absolutely essential. Those who doubt the necessity are dismissed as obstructionists and reactionaries.

Two arguments are put forward for the bridge, one of which is mainly heard before it is built, the other of which is mainly heard after it has been completed. The first argument is that it will provide employment. It will provide, say, 500 jobs for a year. The implication is that these are jobs that would not otherwise have come into existence.

This is what is immediately seen. But if we have trained ourselves to look beyond immediate to secondary consequences, and beyond those who are directly benefited by a government project to others who are indirectly affected, a different picture presents itself. It is true that a particular group of bridgeworkers may receive more employment than otherwise. But the bridge has to be paid for out of taxes. For every dollar that is spent on the bridge a dollar will be taken away from taxpayers. If the bridge costs $10 million the taxpayers will lose $10 million. They will have that much taken away from them which they would otherwise have spent on the things they needed most.

Therefore, for every public job created by the bridge project a private job has been destroyed somewhere else. We can see the men employed on the bridge. We can watch them at work. The employment argument of the government spenders becomes vivid, and probably for most people convincing. But there are other things that we do not see, because, alas, they have never been permitted to come into existence. They are the jobs destroyed by the $10 million taken from the taxpayers. All that has happened, at best, is that there has been a diversion of jobs because of the project. More bridge builders; fewer automobile workers, television technicians, clothing workers, farmers.

swirling_vortex
07-28-2010, 11:12 PM
I'm not entirely sure he reads a > 3rd grade level.
I think his main problem is that he simply does what most liberals do. Find some source that agrees with him, post it, quote it as the truth, and then move on to the next talking point. I find that's a big case on DU where they'll post a DailyKos article and then all of the responses that follow agree with it. In this case, he just posted two blogs without even checking to see if the information was even up-to-date, let alone looking into the actual CBO report itself.