Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 65 of 65
  1. #61  
    Senior Member malloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Queen Creek, AZ
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Satanicus View Post
    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-mone...ted-job-growth

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...r-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?
    Last edited by malloc; 07-28-2010 at 04:11 PM.
    "In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundred thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived."
    —Thomas Paine, Common Sense
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #62  
    Satanicus, do you even read your own links?

    Here is the report in question linked from the blog: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc...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.
    Last edited by swirling_vortex; 07-28-2010 at 04:57 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #63  
    Senior Member malloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Queen Creek, AZ
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by swirling_vortex View Post
    Satanicus, do you even read your own links?

    I'm not entirely sure he reads a > 3rd grade level.
    "In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundred thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived."
    —Thomas Paine, Common Sense
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #64  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,769
    Quote Originally Posted by swirling_vortex View Post
    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 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.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by malloc View Post
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •