The Stimulus Worked

B

Bonestorm

Thrillhouse
Just another reminder:

1.2B08



The blue line is US GDP. The green line is UK GDP. The US enacted stimulus measures. The UK did not. US GDP is about at its pre-recession peak. UK GDP is about 5% below its pre-recession peak.


http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/MSUN-8MXFSY?OpenDocument
 
It will be interesting to see what psuedoscience Freak will use to rebut you. A graph from the Lexington institute? A chart from Newsmax? A non-peer reviewed paper from the Discovery Institute or his favorite the Petroleum Institute of America! LOL
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It will be interesting to see what psuedoscience Freak will use to rebut you. A graph from the Lexington institute? A chart from Newsmax? A non-peer reviewed paper from the Discovery Institute or his favorite the Petroleum Institute of America! LOL
Click to expand...

LOL The Petroleum Institute of America, really? I must have missed that.
 
awesome. we spent 1.5 trillion dollars in stimulus so the GDP would only be .06 trillion less than it was 3 years ago. what brilliant financial minds we have ruining, i mean running, our economy.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
awesome. we spent 1.5 trillion dollars in stimulus so the GDP would only be .06 trillion less than it was 3 years ago. what brilliant financial minds we have ruining, i mean running, our economy.
Click to expand...


I love it. I'm not sure which part is my favorite though. It's a coin-flip between made up $1.5T number or the idea that an economy producing $600 billion less is no big deal.
 
David St. Hubbins said:
I love it. I'm not sure which part is my favorite though. It's a coin-flip between made up $1.5T number or the idea that an economy producing $600 billion less is no big deal.
Click to expand...

glad you're dumbass liked it, however, if you want to be exactly specific because of the word 'stimulus', we spent 787 billion and lost 600 billion. maybe it's just me, but i'm not seeing that as 'working'.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
glad you're dumbass liked it, however, if you want to be exactly specific because of the word 'stimulus', we spent 787 billion and lost 600 billion. maybe it's just me, but i'm not seeing that as 'working'.
Click to expand...

I get the $787B (but to be clear, that includes tax cuts, which I think of as "spending" but others don't, particularly when the tax cuts are to the income taxes of rich people) but I'm not sure where the lost $600 billion comes from.
 
i love made up correlation claims

i love it when people try to compare two different economies and use that as proof of something

i also love how TARP is ignored....oh yeah....because that was bush thing

:rolleyes:
 
Onceler said:
It didn't promise that there wouldn't be unemployed people. Did it?
Click to expand...

No, it promised 8% unemployment. What did it produce 9%? Now I'll take responsiblity for my own official unemployment but having been a regular in the job market for awhile unless you are in the tech space I see what's going on and it is not all that pretty so you'll excuse me for my lack of over exuberance.
 
cawacko said:
No, it promised 8% unemployment. What did it produce 9%? Now I'll take responsiblity for my own official unemployment but having been a regular in the job market for awhile unless you are in the tech space I see what's going on and it is not all that pretty so you'll excuse me for my lack of over exuberance.
Click to expand...

Sorry, man - forgot you were unemployed. No need to be exuberant about it. I think the fact that the stimulus hasn't restored full employment only shows the limits of gov't action.

But, I'm still glad there was action.
 
Onceler said:
Sorry, man - forgot you were unemployed. No need to be exuberant about it. I think the fact that the stimulus hasn't restored full employment only shows the limits of gov't action.

But, I'm still glad there was action.
Click to expand...

No worries man, thanks though. I understand the debate about the stimulus is a big picture debate. I was just filling out a couple of job applications which is why I had it on the brain. Otherwise I'd be with you in talking about it from a big picture perspective.
 
Onceler said:
Sorry, man - forgot you were unemployed. No need to be exuberant about it. I think the fact that the stimulus hasn't restored full employment only shows the limits of gov't action.

But, I'm still glad there was action.
Click to expand...

Cawacko said:
No worries man, thanks though. I understand the debate about the stimulus is a big picture debate. I was just filling out a couple of job applications which is why I had it on the brain. Otherwise I'd be with you in talking about it from a big picture perspective.
Click to expand...

Do men have to refer to each other, self-consciously, as "man" in order to express concern or empathy for each other on the internet? Like, let's say Onceler answered the way I would have: Oh Cawacko I forgot you're unemployed, how is that going? I know you are going to get a job!

And Cawacko had responded to that the way I would: "Oh thanks, that's so nice of you."

Would that put you both under suspicion of being not entirely heterosexual to other men here?

I'm just trying to learn!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top