Is the economy better?

[oblioman]

Originally Posted by Nexgenrulz

Of course they would of. We would have tax cuts which is proven to create jobs. And they aren't socialists! Good enough for you?

Some people tend to disagree - http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1811

[oblioman]

Originally Posted by mobiushky

Hey guys, just be glad we passed the Stimulus bill otherwise unemployment might have gone higher than 8%.

http://otrans.3cdn.net/ee40602f9a7d8172b8_ozm6bt5oi.pdf
See page 4.

Thank goodness that didn't happen....

MOB,,,you forgot the fine print -

"It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant
margins of error. There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical
package rather than the final legislation passed by the Congress. But, there is the more fundamental
uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic
relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly
in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the
current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."

[mobiushky]

Originally Posted by oblioman

MOB,,,you forgot the fine print -

"It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant
margins of error. There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical
package rather than the final legislation passed by the Congress. But, there is the more fundamental
uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic
relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly
in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the
current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."

How many times did they bring up the fine print in news broadcasts when we were told we had to pass the bill that very instant or face higher than 8% unemployment? My point was that 8% was used as a scare tactic to pass a bill that did nothing. In fact, many critics of the bill complained that the vast majority of the actual spending of the bill was delayed until mid 2010. Which it is. This was not a stimulus, it was a pork bill that had a little stimulus added to make the media happy.

Second, the cbpp is a left wing think tank. Why would they write anything that would make tax cuts look good? Critics point out that they tend to shade their reports.

[DerFish]

Originally Posted by Cygnus

So are you saying that mccain/palin would have done a better job?

Possible not. But couldn't do any worse.

[oblioman]

Originally Posted by mobiushky

How many times did they bring up the fine print in news broadcasts when we were told we had to pass the bill that very instant or face higher than 8% unemployment? My point was that 8% was used as a scare tactic to pass a bill that did nothing. In fact, many critics of the bill complained that the vast majority of the actual spending of the bill was delayed until mid 2010. Which it is. This was not a stimulus, it was a pork bill that had a little stimulus added to make the media happy.

Second, the cbpp is a left wing think tank. Why would they write anything that would make tax cuts look good? Critics point out that they tend to shade their reports.

As for the first part, me was merely pointing out that nothing was set in stone. Nobody can predict the future. They certainly underestimated the depth of the recession (depression).

On the second part about the cbpp, even if their predictions about the bush tax cuts were wrong,,,or shaded as you put it,,,the Bush tax cuts of 2001 had 7 years to work their magic. And the rest is history,,,called recession (depression).

[DerFish]

Originally Posted by mobiushky

How many times did they bring up the fine print in news broadcasts when we were told we had to pass the bill that very instant or face higher than 8% unemployment? My point was that 8% was used as a scare tactic to pass a bill that did nothing. In fact, many critics of the bill complained that the vast majority of the actual spending of the bill was delayed until mid 2010. Which it is. This was not a stimulus, it was a pork bill that had a little stimulus added to make the media happy.

Here is a good graph of what we were told and reality. And these clowns expect us to believe what they tell us about a government takeover of healthcare.

[Cygnus]

Yeah, tax cuts for the super rich certainly worked when dubya was prez.. What the economy is facing is bigger than what the typical supply side economics thinker understands... If taxes were cut, companies would have taken the $$ and run while still slashing jobs...

Originally Posted by Nexgenrulz

Of course they would of. We would have tax cuts which is proven to create jobs. And they aren't socialists! Good enough for you?

[Cygnus]

I dunno.. I still think the current admin is the lesser evil than mccain/palin. With all the stress of the job, mccain prob would have had a heart attack by now and prez palin would be in power... Look at how obama has aged since he has been in office..

Originally Posted by DerFish

Possible not. But couldn't do any worse.

[oblioman]

Originally Posted by DerFish

Here is a good graph of what we were told and reality. And these clowns expect us to believe what they tell us about a government takeover of healthcare.

A very good chart showing the depth of the Bush generated recession (depression).

[Nexgenrulz]

Originally Posted by Cygnus

Yeah, tax cuts for the super rich certainly worked when dubya was prez.. What the economy is facing is bigger than what the typical supply side economics thinker understands... If taxes were cut, companies would have taken the $$ and run while still slashing jobs...

Nice try! Stop with the MSLSD & CNN talking points. How about the top 50% pay 96.54% of all income taxes & the top 1% pay 34.27%. Here's the CBO's effective federal tax rates for 2001-2014. You see the "poor" have no money. Therefore they don't pay anything.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/57xx/doc5...edTaxRates.pdf

[DerFish]

Originally Posted by oblioman

A very good chart showing the depth of the Bush generated recession (depression).

Rangel/Dodd recession is more accurate. Since they have controlled the banking system for the last 3 years and are members of the party that has controlled the legislative branch as well, I think we should give credit were credit is due.

[DonnyDC]

Originally Posted by Nexgenrulz

Of course they would of. We would have tax cuts which is proven to create jobs. And they aren't socialists! Good enough for you?

Maybe they need to be more socialist and increase taxes.. afterall Canada's is pretty much out of the recession and apparently we're communist according to some people's standards...

[DerFish]

Originally Posted by DonnyDC

Maybe they need to be more socialist and increase taxes..

It's coming. You can't print trillions of dollars and not to expect to see higher taxes.

[oblioman]

Originally Posted by DerFish

Rangel/Dodd recession is more accurate. Since they have controlled the banking system for the last 3 years and are members of the party that has controlled the legislative branch as well, I think we should give credit were credit is due.

that accounts for 3 years,,,,what about the prior 5 years? This stuff don't happen over night.

[DerFish]

Originally Posted by oblioman

that accounts for 3 years,,,,what about the prior 5 years? This stuff don't happen over night.

Agreed. Plenty of blame to go around. More of a government problem than a single party. Disappointing thing is that there has been no change.