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.
Unemployment benefits, food stamps, and payroll taxes are the places where you get your biggest bang for the buck in stimulating the economy in the short run.
Both the CBO and Moody's showed this.
The CBO lies.
I told you a year ago your unemployment rate would be 9+% through 2013 and beyond.
It was only 2 months ago that the CBO got a temporary spine implant and finally admitted that your unemployment rate will be 9+% through 2013 and beyond.
And the CBO still lied, because they claim unemployment will be 5.2% by December 2016.
Well, to get there, you'll need 375,000 new jobs every single month for the next 64 straight months.
That is unprecedented in any economy in history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kick Start
However, many on the right here never took basic economics. All they do is spout opinions.
I'm as far to the right as you can get and I have a BA in Economics, and my Master's is economics-based.
I've been right every step of they way. I just don't spout opinions, I show you the numbers every single step of the way.
I have proven repeatedly on this forum using BLS' own FUBAR numbers that there are no jobs through 2018.
The BLS themselves only predicted 126,000 new jobs created every month between 2008 and 2018.
Is there some part of that you don't understand? The rest of your "jobs" comes from retiring Boomers, and they ain't, at least not yet.
You might want to actually look at retail grocery. Their margins are only the 10%-30% range. Kroger's and Meijers' and such make all of their money on non-food items, like soap and shampoo and all the other things except food that they sell.
I don't know that I'd call it "stimulus", since that usually has a different meaning to the average person...but from a technical economic standpoint, they are absolutely right that it has a short-term incremental impact to GDP (although arguably quite small). This is not particularly controversial to most economists. Whether it is the best policy at this time with the best impact to GDP is an entirely different debate. You even posted the quote that explains it to you...read it again.
I told you a year ago your unemployment rate would be 9+% through 2013 and beyond.
It was only 2 months ago that the CBO got a temporary spine implant and finally admitted that your unemployment rate will be 9+% through 2013 and beyond.
And the CBO still lied, because they claim unemployment will be 5.2% by December 2016.
Well, to get there, you'll need 375,000 new jobs every single month for the next 64 straight months.
That is unprecedented in any economy in history.
The CBO does not lie and you did not tell me anything. Economic forecasting is difficult and for someone to take economic forecasting as absolute, then the error is on them. In this case, you are at fault for believing that any economic analysis is 100% truth.
We are not in 2016, so how the hell is the CBO lying?
Please take your right wing conspiracies elsewhere.
Quote:
I'm as far to the right as you can get and I have a BA in Economics, and my Master's is economics-based.
I've been right every step of they way. I just don't spout opinions, I show you the numbers every single step of the way.
I have proven repeatedly on this forum using BLS' own FUBAR numbers that there are no jobs through 2018.
The BLS themselves only predicted 126,000 new jobs created every month between 2008 and 2018.
Is there some part of that you don't understand? The rest of your "jobs" comes from retiring Boomers, and they ain't, at least not yet.
You might want to actually look at retail grocery. Their margins are only the 10%-30% range. Kroger's and Meijers' and such make all of their money on non-food items, like soap and shampoo and all the other things except food that they sell.
And Food Stamps doesn't buy that stuff.
I also have degrees in economics. I also know that the job market sucks and unemployment is is high. I never claimed otherwise.
I am also skeptical of using multipliers since they do not take into consideration uncertainty, which there is a lot in the market. Even with a temporary boost in AD, employers are hesitant to hire due to uncertainty.
Nonetheless, Obama and Pelosi are just repeating what economist are telling them. Don't attack them, attack the economists.
Last edited by CaseyB; 08-18-2011 at 04:18 AM..
Reason: rude
We, as a nation, have sunk to new depths with this Clown and his Company of Clownlings and Clownettes and Clowntards as they daily make fools of themselves.
He's right. Many grocery stores and hundreds of thousands of jobs would be gone overnight if we completely eliminated the food stamps program.
That said, it's hardly enough of a stimulus to fix the severe structural job crisis we already have.
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.
