Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Solyndra's cost was less than the rounding error of the cost of the Iraq War.
I can't think of anything in the Stimulus that had no economic stimulative effect.
Duh. what a brilliant post.
I know you think of yourself as being so much smarter the the rest of us.
With that said I will go real slow just for you.
Solyndra was an EXAMPLE. There are other companies Obama has gotten his fingers into that have wasted precious tax dollars.
Obama touted the Stimulus as a way, wait for it, to STIMULATE the economy. He promised if it was passed, unemployment would NOT go above 8%. How well did that work out.
He is even seen laughing and saying, "I guess there wasn't many shovel ready projects after all."
I guess in your Obama loving world you turned your ears off every time he touted that the stimulus was to go for "shovel ready jobs". When in reality way to much went to gov't agencies which were not in jeopardy of going out of business.
Some money even went to the HHS to pay for OVERTIME. Their existing budget already covered that.
I could go on but you aren't interested in anything negative about your idol.
The conservative response is that cutting taxes and laying of government workers is going to increase employment. It didn't work ever before.
The progressive plan is to use Keynesian principles that have worked before.
I almost fell off my chair laughing at your posting again because
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
Yet, Clinton had far more lasting employment.
Clinton followed the conservative platform, by cutting taxes, and reducing the growth of government. you celebrate him in 1 posting, while blasting his policies in another.
And there hasnt been a Keynesian principle put into place in America since our foundation, so how the hell would you know if it works? Keynesian principles involve RUNNING SURPLUSES.. Something we dont do EVER,..
Its called a recession.. Thats like saying the great depression was weaker than the period before it, and then blaming tax cuts.. Utterly ridiculous..
The entire Bush presidency wasn't in recession. Before the great recession in 2008, the only previous recession was in 2001 that lasted 3 quarters. All the periods between the economy was weaker, with lack luster job growth.
The facts still stand that Bush's economy, with lower taxes, was weaker than Clinton's, with higher taxes. Your excuse about a recession, which was short-lives, doesn't explain your theory that low taxes improve the economy. It didn't during the periods that Bush's economy wasn't in recession.
What's utterly ridiculous is you clinging ideology which again and again is disproved by facts.
I know you think of yourself as being so much smarter the the rest of us.
With that said I will go real slow just for you.
Solyndra was an EXAMPLE. There are other companies Obama has gotten his fingers into that have wasted precious tax dollars.
Obama touted the Stimulus as a way, wait for it, to STIMULATE the economy. He promised if it was passed, unemployment would NOT go above 8%. How well did that work out.
He is even seen laughing and saying, "I guess there wasn't many shovel ready projects after all."
I guess in your Obama loving world you turned your ears off every time he touted that the stimulus was to go for "shovel ready jobs". When in reality way to much went to gov't agencies which were not in jeopardy of going out of business.
Some money even went to the HHS to pay for OVERTIME. Their existing budget already covered that.
I could go on but you aren't interested in anything negative about your idol.
The entire Bush presidency wasn't in recession. Before the great recession in 2008, the only previous recession was in 2001 that lasted 3 quarters. All the periods between the economy was weaker, with lack luster job growth.
The facts still stand that Bush's economy, with lower taxes, was weaker than Clinton's, with higher taxes. Your excuse about a recession, which was short-lives, doesn't explain your theory that low taxes improve the economy. It didn't during the periods that Bush's economy wasn't in recession.
What's utterly ridiculous is you clinging ideology which again and again is disproved by facts.
The GDP under Clinton, the years you celebrate as fabulous, grew by $3.5T, under Bush, they grew over $4T, until of course we hit the recession. Furthermore, if Clinton was so fabulous, then why arent you pushing tax cuts, because Clinton also cut taxes. Capital gains from 28% to 20%, and taxes on 90% of small businesses.
Its not my clinging ideology which is failed, its you saying they are bad, while then celebrating presidents who used this platform to boost their economy. Smaller government, cutting taxes are EXACTLY what Clinton did to jumpstart his economy, but you sit here and call for the opposite to take place while using Clinton as an example who didnt use your utopia scenario. in fact he used the exact opposite.
Real GDP grew by two trillion under Bush EXCLUDING the drop in 2008 and about 2.5 trillion under Clinton.
GDP
End of 1992 - $6.5 trillion
End of 2000 - $10.0 trillion
End of 2007 - $14.1 trillion
Then we entered the recession.
As for me not supporting my data, you never do. You sat here and jumped up and down about how Clinton was so great, but you completely ignored the fact that Clinton cut taxes and the growth of government.
Hey MTA, if Clinton cut taxes, and the growth of government, leading to such a fabulous economy, why exactly are you expecting the same result from doing the exact opposite?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
