Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


dcnovice -> Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/11/2012 4:56:11 PM)

The Washington Post has an interesting (imho), recurring feature in which a journalist or expert looks at "five myths" about a hot topic. The latest is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, aka stimulus bill, passed in 2009.

quote:

President Obama’s February 2009 stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, was a political disaster. It helped fuel the Republican revival of 2010 and now stars in Mitt Romney’s ads. The president even stopped uttering the word “stimulus.” But the $787 billion bill was one of the most important and least understood pieces of legislation in modern history. It was the purest distillation of what Obama meant by change, transforming our approaches to energy, education, health care, transportation and the economy, promoting long-term reinvestment as well as short-term recovery. Just about everything Americans think they know about it is wrong. Here are a few examples.

1. The stimulus didn’t create jobs.
[Discussion]

2. The stimulus was full of waste, pork and fraud.
[Discussion]

3. The stimulus should have been much bigger.
[Discussion]

4. Unlike the New Deal, the stimulus will leave no legacy.
[Discussion]

5. The stimulus showed that Obama can’t legislate.
[Discussion]

More at The Washington Post


Thoughts? Does the stimulus deserve a second look? Is it a case where we all think we know more than we actually do?





erieangel -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/11/2012 10:45:36 PM)

All of the myths come from the right wing talking points.

1. I know a few construction workers who would have been on the unemployment line had it not been for the stimulus and the road work that came with it.

2. Right wingers say this, but they never point out just where, exactly that waste, pork and fraud was found.

3. Oh. I agree. The stimulus should have been bigger. But Obama took what he could get. He needed 60 votes in the Senate--from blue dogs and a few republicans--who insisted their votes relied on the bill being at a cost of below $800billion and heavy on the tax cuts. It showed just how willing Obama is to work with others and how pragmatic he can be.

4. I'm not sure if it will or not. To soon to tell.

5. False. Again. It showed him to be pragmatic, willing to compromise. He may not have gotten everything that he wanted, but if he had tried to play hard ball and tried to insist on only what he wanted, he'd have gotten at all--that would have proven him unable to legislate.





joether -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/11/2012 11:50:19 PM)

When it comes to the the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, is only 8% of Americans actually....READ....the bill. What does that say of the other 92%?

Most folks on either side never read the whole bill for a variety of reasons. Some journalists actually took it upon themselves to explain the key points and the reasons why such a thing made it into the bill. But ignorance of the bill drove more people against the concept. The primary reason for the bill was to advert an economy that was already in a recession from sliding quickly and effortlessly into a depression that would have made 'The Great Depression' seem like child's play. The problem the country experienced in 2009 was a critical shortage of demand for all the supply across dozens of primary industries and a host of secondary sectors. It wasn't going to be a political trophy for the President at the time. Because at the time, all the indicators showed that if something wasnt done immediately, the siutation would grow much worst in the weeks and months.

The GOP was very much against this bill. Some Republicans whom have maintain a moderate outlook and view stood with the President. The Blue Dog Democrats decided that would be a good time to get some....pork....if they stalled just alittle. Well, how many of those blue dog Democrats are still in Congress after all that?

The bill would create an artifical demand for the supply, thereby allowing jobs to be maintained for up to two years (the total length of the bill). Most folks (particularly of the conservative political forum) thought the total price tag would be paid for one year, not two. That information was in the bill if the other 92% had read it. Instead, they listen to conservative talk radio and the rest as they say, is history!

Texas went on record as saying they were not effected by the recession as their budget had not dimished like a host of other states. Until some journalists looked into the records and found they were using the money to offset their budget. Got Texas Republicans into quite a pickle since they publically denounced the bill but were secretly taking the money. Its just to bad all those conservatives were too dim to hold their own party responsible for saying one thing and doing another.

During the second year of the bill, many industries had leveled off and were making positive gains. However, the rate of those gains were much slower than most desired it to be. Conservatives seized this moment to claim two things: A) The economy could be a 'double dip' recession and B) President Obama is spending money we dont have. Both were untrue, but the GOP has been known (and still is known) to fearmonger its supporters into submission. By the end of the bill's term, some industries had made it back into positive grounds; as if the past two years were a slow down rather than a full recession or dreadful depression!

I recall quite a number of economists stating that if the bill had gone further for one more year, spending another $400-450 Billion the remaining industries and sub-sectors would have been back in positive territory. HOWEVER, the GOP could not allow this to happen! They had to make the failed economy all President Obama's fault, not the GOP's. To that end, used quite a number of 'misinformation' sources to seed fear and dread into voters for the 2010 mid-term elections. The facts and evidence were far different from the fantasy the GOP tried to push. If that extention had gone through, its highly likely most sections of the USA would not be in a recession today.

On a side note, if the Bush Era Tax cuts were to expire like they should have in 2010, its more than likely the deficit would have been evened out, if not a surplus. Yet again, the GOP did everything in its power to make sure this event NEVER took place.




Fellow -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/12/2012 12:25:00 AM)

I do not understand why are these called the "myths"?
Who says 700-something billion does not create any jobs?
There was a lot of pork and waste, hard to argue.
Bigger stimulus was the idea of a few Keynesian economists like P. Krugman for example [not anti-Obama pundits]. It is certainly not a myth but can be argued in both ways.
Legacy or not, it will be decided in the future, who spreads this myth?
Obama does not need, and he should not legislate, the Congress is legislating body.

CBO calculation said 4.1 million was spent per job [ http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/cbo-finds-obama-stimulus-may-have-cost-as-much-as-4-1-million-per-job/ ] . It illustrates the point: the stimulus was designed based on wrong understanding of the US economy. It assumed the economy has no structural problems.  Perhaps it stimulated more the Chinese economy. The money was not spent wisely.




Sanity -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/12/2012 4:15:54 PM)


4.1 million per job...

How much did those jobs pay I wonder

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

I do not understand why are these called the "myths"?
Who says 700-something billion does not create any jobs?
There was a lot of pork and waste, hard to argue.
Bigger stimulus was the idea of a few Keynesian economists like P. Krugman for example [not anti-Obama pundits]. It is certainly not a myth but can be argued in both ways.
Legacy or not, it will be decided in the future, who spreads this myth?
Obama does not need, and he should not legislate, the Congress is legislating body.

CBO calculation said 4.1 million was spent per job [ http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/cbo-finds-obama-stimulus-may-have-cost-as-much-as-4-1-million-per-job/ ] . It illustrates the point: the stimulus was designed based on wrong understanding of the US economy. It assumed the economy has no structural problems.  Perhaps it stimulated more the Chinese economy. The money was not spent wisely.






slvemike4u -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/12/2012 4:29:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


4.1 million per job...

How much did those jobs pay I wonder

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

I do not understand why are these called the "myths"?
Who says 700-something billion does not create any jobs?
There was a lot of pork and waste, hard to argue.
Bigger stimulus was the idea of a few Keynesian economists like P. Krugman for example [not anti-Obama pundits]. It is certainly not a myth but can be argued in both ways.
Legacy or not, it will be decided in the future, who spreads this myth?
Obama does not need, and he should not legislate, the Congress is legislating body.

CBO calculation said 4.1 million was spent per job [ http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/cbo-finds-obama-stimulus-may-have-cost-as-much-as-4-1-million-per-job/ ] . It illustrates the point: the stimulus was designed based on wrong understanding of the US economy. It assumed the economy has no structural problems.  Perhaps it stimulated more the Chinese economy. The money was not spent wisely.




Better change the heading of the OP...we now have six myths....and surprise,surprise sanity swallowed it hook ,line and sinker.
[:D][:D][:D][:D]




joether -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/12/2012 11:52:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow
CBO calculation said 4.1 million was spent per job [ http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/cbo-finds-obama-stimulus-may-have-cost-as-much-as-4-1-million-per-job/ ] . It illustrates the point: the stimulus was designed based on wrong understanding of the US economy. It assumed the economy has no structural problems.  Perhaps it stimulated more the Chinese economy. The money was not spent wisely.


Most people in this nation didnt know at the time nor still to this day, what the ARRA was set up to accomplish. The '$4.1 million/job' is a bit taken out of context. A portion of the money (and in all honesty hard to explain it) went not to paying directly for jobs, but shoring up expense accounts (i.e. Florida) and off-setting budgets (i.e. The States of Texas). Each of the states were given 'x' amount of funds to use as they thought best. Some placed the money towards actual work projects to either keep people employed or help those unemployed work at 'full time' for a matter of months. Republicans bitched about the bill publically but lined up in secret to take their share for their state/district.

I'm sure you would understand the history at the time, that Republicans were doing anything and everything in their limited capacity in Congress to stall and hinder this effort. In the states that was governed by Republicans with strong support in their state goverments, NOT, to do anything that might make the President look like "He understood the problem and they didnt". You and everyone else will believe what you feel is the most advantagous for your political view. The facts remain the same, regardless of how much the GOP tries to revise history.

In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I know they put the majority of the money towards road and infrastructure updates.




tazzygirl -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/13/2012 1:57:43 AM)

Here is what PA did with theirs...

http://www.pasenatepolicy.com/PDF_Files/ARRAFundingbyAgency-050709.pdf

And yet more info...

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecoveryData/Pages/statesummary.aspx?StateCode=PA

Top Recipients

TRANSPORTATION, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF $1,030,112,380
School District of Philadelphia $502,426,297
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA $420,674,456
AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC. $360,996,894
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH THE $217,627,465

and yet they report only 5200 jobs... at this time... which is the misleading factor.

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecoveryData/Pages/JobSummary.aspx

The number of jobs they are reporting are those being funded NOW.

5200 in PA at this time....

Jul 1 - Sep 30, 2010 29,130.6

Yet that was the highest number of jobs funded....

http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/textview.aspx?data=stateInfoJobs&state=PA

The spin on this is like everything else.... skewed to look like however people want them too. Once you dig into the facts, it becomes more apparent.




Fellow -> RE: Five myths about Obama’s stimulus (8/13/2012 8:04:26 AM)

quote:

I'm sure you would understand the history at the time, that Republicans were doing anything and everything in their limited capacity in Congress to stall and hinder this effort. In the states that was governed by Republicans with strong support in their state goverments, NOT, to do anything that might make the President look like "He understood the problem and they didnt". You and everyone else will believe what you feel is the most advantagous for your political view. The facts remain the same, regardless of how much the GOP tries to revise history.


I am not partisan. I agree the political climate at the time stimulus was voted in was a major factor. I would argue the most important reason for stimulus was not to allow large GDP fall and to have panic in the market. In this context the economic fundamentals are not so important as the government spending, a component of GDP, has an immediate effect. The bailouts were in the same category. Also, the factor could have been  to smooth the public outrage about the bailouts and to give the progressive Democrats wing something substantial. Still, these policies can be argued in many ways. I do not know how to estimate the "panic factor". It is important here. The whole economic system has been let to develop into very unstable condition. Was it actually  "saved" will be seen in few years. Today things do not look good, there is not much progress compared to 2007.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125