Forget what those expert economists say: Jeff Poor knows better
November 27, 2009 2:38 pm ET by Jamison Foser
Newsbusters' Jeff Poor issues a proclamation:
We've already seen how ineffective the previous $787-billion stimulus Congress and the President forced through earlier this year has been with curbing unemployment, as it has raced into double-digits over the previous months. But will there be an effort to force through another one?
Now, let's set aside the question of whether the first stimulus really has been "ineffective" for a moment.
Poor never once entertains the possibility that if it has been ineffective (or insufficiently effective), it's because it was too small. This despite the fact that many economists at the time said it should be bigger. And despite the fact that conservative economist Martin Feldstein, a former Reagan administration official, says "There should have been more direct federal spending," and former McCain economic advisor Mark Zandi says "there was a considerable amount of hand-wringing that it was too small, and I sympathized with that argument." Zandi also says "the stimulus is doing what it was supposed to do - it is contributing to ending the recession. ... In my view, without the stimulus, G.D.P. would still be negative and unemployment would be firmly over 11 percent. And there are a little over 1.1 million more jobs out there as of October than would have been out there without the stimulus."
No, forget all that: Newsbusters' Jeff Poor says the stimulus has been ineffective, and there shouldn't be any more. He doesn't offer any evidence or expert analysis -- but why would we need any? He's Newsbuster Jeff Poor. Isn't that enough?
Apparently the same tax fairy that allowed Reagan to tripled the debt and Bush 2 to double the debt.
Get real. You want commentary from authoritative sources? Watch ESPN, for cryin' out loud...
by the way, MMfA, you should take a look at one of newsbusters' latest postings attempting to hint at the claim that obama was working with the NFL to keep him from buying the rams just because he did a commercial with the NFL and "united we serve". its a real hoot.
by the way, MMfA, you should take a look at one of newsbusters' latest postings attempting to hint at the claim that obama was working with the NFL to keep him from buying the rams just because he did a commercial with the NFL and "united we serve". its a real hoot.
Now, although O has authored the largest single deficit in US history, he's aiming even higher in that area. There is talk of another stimulus.
A stimulus is good for a holding pattern while the economy heals itself. Most people would agree with that. The stimulus does not create or grow the economy. It simply allows people to not be unemployed or if they are to continue receiving a hand-out for not working. Since O hates business large and small, the economy is not growing and won't until they can get a measure that O isn't going to be attacking them. Hanging over business' head are huge increases in energy taxes, life threatening taxes for health plans for small businesses, and forced unionization. Hanging over your and my head is significant increases in health insurance if you have insurance now.
All in all, O has made things worse, a lot worse. Some economists said last week that employment would start growing in the 2-nd half of next year, adding jobs. Did they factor in a Health care law, a cap and trade law and a forced unionization law?
The insurance companies, pharmaceuticals etc are looting you everyday and you want to complain about how much a reform, not the best reform, just a reform, will cost. How about complaining to your Rep and Senators about how much health care (like Medicare Part D passed by the conservatives, by the way) costs NOW?
See here and here.
How nice of you to sum up so many right wing talking points in one post, so I can refute them one at a time.
Yes Obama's team predicted the stimulus would stop unemployment at 8%, and yes, they were wrong. In their prediction. Unemployment topped 9% in April, before any of the stimulus money even went out the door. So it's a phony conclusion to say the Obama plan is ineffective because unemployment went up. He just failed to understand just how bad of shape Bush left the economy. Thats the common sense conclusion you might have reached, if you didn't have Rush and Fox fogging up your logic with lies.
Ah yes, the single largest deficit in history, it may be. But this bloated baby was authored by the administration that started with a surplus, then charged a trillion dollar war and a 750 billion prescrition drug company bonus on the national Visa card. And instead of asking America to pay its damn bills, Bush cut taxes instead. He authored 1.2 trillion of the 1.4 trillion dollar deficit, because he also had to borrow another 750 billion to keep the banks from melting down. This was all done by October, before Obama was even elected.
Now come on, conservatives. You know this is true. Why all of a sudden has the right gone deficit hawk? At least with health care, Obama says "its expensive, so we have to figure out how to pay for it." Had Bush done the same with the war, we might be a trillion less in debt. You are the party of spend and don't tax. Yet now you worry about the bill being left to your grandkids. If you'd been worried 2 years ago, when your party controlled the White House and Congress. maybe you could have done something about it. Instead, it just sound like you hate Obama, and want him to fail? As Hannity loves to ask, "Why do you hate America?"
Since O hates business large and small. Sorry, the only proof Obama hates business is the words of right wing commentators. All of his actions, like proposing a health care bill that preserves private insurance, moving to save banks and keep car companies afloat says he does not hate business. Unless you also believe he hates America, hates white people and is a foreign born secret Muslim.
There is no HUGE increase in taxes hidden in the health care bill...more likely just a surtax on millionaires, who'll pay a few thousand more. The wealthy will still pay less than under Reagan or Clinton, so it clearly won't crush the economy. The claimed $3000 cap and trade tax per individual is a Heritage foundation fiction. The CBO number is just a few hundred. As far as increases in insurance, mine goes up 10% every year under the current Republican free market plan. And I still face bankruptcy, if my insurer can find a way to weasel out of paying my bills.
As for the claim Obama has made things much worse, remember 1 year ago? Dow around 7000? 401k's sliced in half? Home prices plumetting? Foreclosure crisis? 600,000 jobs a month disappearing? No one sure their own bank wouldn't collapse tomorrow? Now the economy growing again, the Dow is over 10000, we're losing jobs at less than half the rate. It ain't pretty, but its a flat out lie to say its worse now that on Jan 21st. Most credible economists say without the stimulus, we'd still be in negative growth, and unemployment would be higher.
Its just amazing how misinformed some people are. I really blame Fox. It lies so much, its viewers still think Saddam was responsible for 9-11, and he had WMD's. The only way you can believe its worse is if you believe to be fact things that are not true. For examples, pick any sign seen at the Fox-Tea parties. If your news source makes you dumber, its not a news source, its a propaganda machine.
Please wise up before you elect the female Bush, Sarah Palin. I don't think the Chinese will loan us the money for another stupid war.
Also, why shouldn't employees be able to form a union if that's what they want?
Remember, your comment is only as sane as the craziest sentence.