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.
First of all the government is NOT taking over health care - that's just more Palin-inspired fear-mongering.
Secondly OF course the government deficit is greater this year than last year - tax revenues are way down this year compared to last year because this year we hit the deepest point in the recession (in regards to total unemployment - layoffs ARE a cumulative effect you know). That's the nature of a recession - tax revenues go down and spending goes up (if for no other reason than the fact that unemployment payments rise). That's kind of a no brainer - but all that will change as the economy recovers (which is also a no-brainer) - just as it did when the economy recovered under Clinton.
And Your KEY indicator that it did/didnt work would be what?
And When?
Two specific examples -
First of all is the New Deal. Yes I know the wingnuts all claim it didn't work and use as evidence the fact that the unemployment rate in 1938 was still 19% - but the fact is they conveniently ignore the fact that the unemployment rate had dropped from a high of 24.9% in 1933 (when the New Deal begin) down to 21.7% in 1934, then down to 20.1% in 1935, then down to 16.9% in 1936, then down to 14.3% in 1937. That's a drop of 10 points in 4 years. The reason it jumped back up to 19% in 1938 was because in 1937 FDR was pressured into cutting the New Deal back dramatically because of concerns over the deficit. So - a program which was generally working pretty well overall (series of programs actually - some of which worked and some of which didn't) was cut back dramatically - and the result was unemployment climbed 5 points in a single year.
It seems to me the folks that claim the New Deal didn't work - and use the 1933 vs 1938 number s without mentioning the numbers in between - are really being pretty dishonest. Those same folks then usually in the next breath go on to claim that the New Deal didn't end the Depression and that it was WWII which ended the Depression - making me always want to ask them "so what EXACTLY was it about WWII that ended the Depression? Was it the 11 million men and women who were DIRECTLY employed by the government (and put in uniform)? Or was it the tons and tons of money the government pumped into the economy buying everything from tanks to airplanes to food for the troops to pens and pencils and jeeps and trucks and ships and submarines and airplanes and uniforms and...?"
The fact is the New Deal worked fairly well to heal the economy because the government pumped a lot of money into the economy (both directly and indirectly) whereas WWII worked EVEN BETTER to heal the economy because the government pumped a LOT of money into the economy (both directly and indirectly). More money was spent so the effect was bigger.
The second instance where government spending helped boost the economy was under Reagan. Yes I know the GOP credits his spending cuts - but the fact is, Reagan not just cut taxes, he also increased government spending (specifically with the arms buildup) the result of all this was a major turnaround in the economy. This is essentially the same thing Obama is doing.
First of all is the New Deal. Yes I know the wingnuts all claim it didn't work and use as evidence the fact that the unemployment rate in 1938 was still 19% - but the fact is they conveniently ignore the fact that the unemployment rate had dropped from a high of 24.9% in 1933 (when the New Deal begin) down to 21.7% in 1934, then down to 20.1% in 1935, then down to 16.9% in 1936, then down to 14.3% in 1937. That's a drop of 10 points in 4 years. The reason it jumped back up to 19% in 1938 was because in 1937 FDR was pressured into cutting the New Deal back dramatically because of concerns over the deficit. So - a program which was generally working pretty well overall (series of programs actually - some of which worked and some of which didn't) was cut back dramatically - and the result was unemployment climbed 5 points in a single year.
It seems to me the folks that claim the New Deal didn't work - and use the 1933 vs 1938 number s without mentioning the numbers in between - are really being pretty dishonest. Those same folks then usually in the next breath go on to claim that the New Deal didn't end the Depression and that it was WWII which ended the Depression - making me always want to ask them "so what EXACTLY was it about WWII that ended the Depression? Was it the 11 million men and women who were DIRECTLY employed by the government (and put in uniform)? Or was it the tons and tons of money the government pumped into the economy buying everything from tanks to airplanes to food for the troops to pens and pencils and jeeps and trucks and ships and submarines and airplanes and uniforms and...?"
The fact is the New Deal worked fairly well to heal the economy because the government pumped a lot of money into the economy (both directly and indirectly) whereas WWII worked EVEN BETTER to heal the economy because the government pumped a LOT of money into the economy (both directly and indirectly). More money was spent so the effect was bigger.
The second instance where government spending helped boost the economy was under Reagan. Yes I know the GOP credits his spending cuts - but the fact is, Reagan not just cut taxes, he also increased government spending (specifically with the arms buildup) the result of all this was a major turnaround in the economy. This is essentially the same thing Obama is doing.
Ken
Well if this recession lasts 15 years and requires WWIII to end it we have bigger problems.
The government is certainly taking over health care. Insuring 30-45 million people who do not currently have health care will cause costs to rise. You will have 30-45 million people chasing the same amount of resources that exist today, supply and demand.
Clinton had the benefit of the tech bubble. I do not foresee any such thing happening now. Not even the biggest Obama booster is predicting Clinton like numbers from the recovery, most are saying jobless recovery.
Health care is a WHOLE separate issue than the one at hand (the stimulus). Suffice it to say however that those 30-45 million people currently without health ALREADY cost US taxpayers a ton of money - mainly because they end up in emergencies rooms getting FREE care (and emergency care is FAR more expensive than than regular care (if you don't believe me just take a look at your bill the next time you make a visit there)).
Regarding Clinton and the Tech Bubble - that's definitely true, but then again not too many people saw that Tech Bubble coming either - predicting the "next big thing" is a pretty hard thing to do. A lot of pretty smart folks though are predicting it may very well revolve around alternate energy and emission control (sounds a bit like Cap and Trade to me).
First of all is the New Deal. Yes I know the wingnuts all claim it didn't work and use as evidence the fact that the unemployment rate in 1938 was still 19% - but the fact is they conveniently ignore the fact that the unemployment rate had dropped from a high of 24.9% in 1933 (when the New Deal begin) down to 21.7% in 1934, then down to 20.1% in 1935, then down to 16.9% in 1936, then down to 14.3% in 1937. That's a drop of 10 points in 4 years. The reason it jumped back up to 19% in 1938 was because in 1937 FDR was pressured into cutting the New Deal back dramatically because of concerns over the deficit. So - a program which was generally working pretty well overall (series of programs actually - some of which worked and some of which didn't) was cut back dramatically - and the result was unemployment climbed 5 points in a single year.
It seems to me the folks that claim the New Deal didn't work - and use the 1933 vs 1938 number s without mentioning the numbers in between - are really being pretty dishonest. Those same folks then usually in the next breath go on to claim that the New Deal didn't end the Depression and that it was WWII which ended the Depression - making me always want to ask them "so what EXACTLY was it about WWII that ended the Depression? Was it the 11 million men and women who were DIRECTLY employed by the government (and put in uniform)? Or was it the tons and tons of money the government pumped into the economy buying everything from tanks to airplanes to food for the troops to pens and pencils and jeeps and trucks and ships and submarines and airplanes and uniforms and...?"
The fact is the New Deal worked fairly well to heal the economy because the government pumped a lot of money into the economy (both directly and indirectly) whereas WWII worked EVEN BETTER to heal the economy because the government pumped a LOT of money into the economy (both directly and indirectly). More money was spent so the effect was bigger.
The second instance where government spending helped boost the economy was under Reagan. Yes I know the GOP credits his spending cuts - but the fact is, Reagan not just cut taxes, he also increased government spending (specifically with the arms buildup) the result of all this was a major turnaround in the economy. This is essentially the same thing Obama is doing.
Ken
You mean people like Christina Romer?
Quote:
Fiscal policy played a relatively small role in stimulating recovery in the United States. Indeed, the Revenue Act of 1932 increased American tax rates greatly in an attempt to balance the federal budget, and by doing so dealt another contractionary blow to the economy by further discouraging spending. Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, initiated in early 1933, did include a number of new federal programs aimed at generating recovery. For example, the Works Progress Administration (WPA) hired the unemployed to work on government building projects, and the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA) gave large payments to farmers. However, the actual increases in government spending and the government budget deficit were small relative to the size of the economy. This is especially apparent when state government budget deficits are included, because those deficits actually declined at the same time that the federal deficit rose. As a result, the new spending programs initiated by the New Deal had little direct expansionary effect on the economy. Whether they may nevertheless have had positive effects on consumer and business sentiment remains an open question. United States military spending related to World War II was not large enough to appreciably affect total spending and output until 1941.
Sure - not everyone agrees - that's why economics has different factions. I've yet to hear ANY of those folks really explain to me a real difference between the government spending that they claim ended the Depression (ie WWII) and the government spending they claim was a failure (ie the New Deal). It seems pretty clear to me that the only real difference (from an economics point of view) was the SCALE.
This recession will not last 15 years though (nor did the Recession) - EVERYTHING moves a LOT faster in today's world.
The second instance where government spending helped boost the economy was under Reagan. Yes I know the GOP credits his spending cuts - but the fact is, Reagan not just cut taxes, he also increased government spending (specifically with the arms buildup) the result of all this was a major turnaround in the economy. This is essentially the same thing Obama is doing.
Ken
Obama talks down America and its people. That's the antithesis to what Reagan did. Confidence is an important role in economies. Obama seems to be coming around to that, at least in his speeches at the Noble Prize Ceremony and West Point. Of course his underlying beliefs are contrary to that so how long this promotion of America will go on is still in question.
You know the point... You know who that assessment is by. Don't front.
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.
