[url]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/22/cbo-stimulus-hurts-economy-long-run/[/url]

[quote]The [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congressional-budget-office/"]Congressional Budget Office[/URL] on Tuesday downgraded its estimate of the benefits of President Obama’s 2009 stimulus package, saying it may have sustained as few as 700,000 jobs at its peak last year and that over the long run it will actually be a net drag on the economy.[/quote] How about that recovery? :roll:

Re: CBO Downgrades the Zero-In-Chief's "Stimulus"

Any economic mind could've told you that the concept of a stimulus is for the immediate and short-term benefit of said economy. Obviously that level of outlay isn't good for us over the long-term. However, without the stimulus that people are so quick to rip on this country's economy would be in a much tougher spot than we are in today. I applaud Obama for at least getting a stimulus package put together. His only mistake in that regard is that the stimulus should have been larger, but that would've been near impossible with a right aisle full of obstructionists posing as elected representatives of the citizens of this country.

Re: CBO Downgrades the Zero-In-Chief's "Stimulus"

Right...because spending one way's into prosperity has always been a successful method in the past. Dude and his party had full control of the legislative and executive branches for 2 years, so the whole obstructionist argument falls flat. I love the economic ineptitude on display in general today...TARP was a disaster and so is everything that has followed since, and I am 99% sure the future will bear this out once the can-kicking games are over and done. More credit downgrades on the way, no amount of "stimulants" would have stopped them. So much for taking the medicine when it was still feasible.

Re: CBO Downgrades the Zero-In-Chief's "Stimulus"

I don't think you understood what he just said.

Re: CBO Downgrades the Zero-In-Chief's "Stimulus"

Stimuli are, in effect, expenditures that add to the national debt and only give a short-term boost (and thus are some of the worst kind of political tools for would be despots).

Do I have to be Paul Krugman to understand the logic of an out of control Keynesian? Never gonna' happen.

EDIT: Fine, you mean his colleagues. I have to at least give him credit for submitting a budget. Congress has been incapable of doing the same (aside from the House of Representatives). Here's looking at you, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, et al. GO CHOKE ON A TURKEY LEG.

Re: CBO Downgrades the Zero-In-Chief's "Stimulus"

[QUOTE=vinnie97;1005712]Stimuli are, in effect, expenditures that add to the national debt and only give a short-term boost (and thus are some of the worst kind of political tools for would be despots). [/QUOTE]

All I can say Vinnie is that if the government were to do nothing at all i.e. no stimulus or other legislation we truly would have gone into a depression that would make the great depression seem like a sunny day in comparison. Don't get me wrong here, I am fully aware that we'll be bogged down for many years into the future, but at the very least the ARR act kept us from going down the proverbial rabbit hole.

Re: CBO Downgrades the Zero-In-Chief's "Stimulus"

The Great Depression was way more serious than where our economy could have gone without a stimulus. I'm sure we wouldn't have been standing around in bread lines if Obama didn't send billions and billions of dollars to companies that have failed since or are failing now cough Solyndra cough. However to see your point on the fact that a stimulus package could have helped our economy, that money should have gone into the hands of the American people and not into companies that would never benefit our economy even after being bailed out. If that 800 billion dollars where divided amongst each person who filed a tax return in 2009, they'd of received and average of $5000 each. Now if that were sent to each person in a form of a debit card that could only have been spent on goods, imagine the "stimulus" that would have created. Businesses would have grown and jobs would have been created. That trend would have continued if the sanctions and regulations put on domestic businesses would have never been put into place. Businesses are scared to hire at this point, but this is a whole other argument.

The next thing he could have done, or any other president that steps foot into that office should do, is eliminate loopholes for people and companies to skip out on paying taxes. Every profit earning business and individual should pay their portion of taxes, period. If that had happened during his first year in office, we would not be in the "wealth redistribution" mode we are currently in. There would not be as much hatred towards "rich" people and that lack of taxes some of them are actually paying. There would be no occupy my anus protesters either. With full control for his first 2 years, Dems could have made that happen. You know why they didn't, cause are just as guilty as these horrible rich people and republicans that are being blamed for this mess we are in today. They benefit plentiful from these loopholes...