Estimates Say Fewer Jobs, Larger Deficits if Republicans Were in Charge (elect, money)
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.
I think the biggest issue here is both parties kind of stink. How long has the back and forth between these parties and those that blindly support them for whatever reasons? All the while the poeple in both parties gain power and money, taking it from us in one way or another. Seems the best option may be some other party.
Johnny I agree with much of what you've stated here, except of course for the issue. The issue is, in simple mathematic terms the ideas one party has put forth would have created fewer jobs and larger deficits than the other, had those plans and ideas been implemented.
This is a message from OhioIstheBest at City-Data Forum ( //www.city-data.com/forum/ ). The City-Data Forum owners cannot accept any responsibility for the contents of the email.
But Dems were in charge since 2007 (Congress) so isn't it them that got us this deep and with so many job losses ?
To say the Repubs would have done worse is just trying to push reality aside.
The Dems want to keep their control and will do/say whatever it takes to get re-elected.
Maybe Repubs in Congress come November is good. The Dems lose control and then nothing will get passed...like cap&trade, amnesty, who knows what other spending/taxing bills.
All these spending/stimulus bills are just covering up the problem..sky high debt. Until the debt is purged there will be no recovery.
First they were saying it would have been worse if the stimulus wasn't passed.
Now they're saying it would have been worse if the Repubs were in charge.
Why all the deflection ? People who play victim and point to other forces as blame will never come to terms with accountability and never solve their problems which in this case are U.S. problems.
But how about the jobs saved??? (biggest load of bull!)
The "What if" factor never surprises me.
lol...
You don't like the math.
Quote:
Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody’s Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative.
Since you havent responded to my previous posting, I'll try again..
This is the part YOU quoted earlier.
We find that the effects on real GDP, jobs, and inflation are huge, probably averting what would have been called Great Depression 2.0. For example, we estimate that, without the policy responses, GDP in 2010 would be about 6½% lower, payroll employment would be about 8½ million jobs lower, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation
Do you see the part YOU underlined and put in bold.. The story assumed the GOP would have done NOTHING..
Sorry, YOU pointed out why the story was wrong..
in addition, YOU pointed out the problem that we are currently facing.. The GDP is 6.5% higher than it SHOULD be because of GOVERNMENT spending. GDP spending isnt always good if it comes from borrowing and decreasing future spending. Do you not undrestand that if you take this increase now, that its not a real increase, its just a movement of when the increase would have taken place? (in this scenario, from the future when the money WOULD have entered the economy)
And I'd like to know how they figured 8.5M jobs because not even the CBO is coming close to that number.
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.