Porkapaloosa - aka Obama stimulus

[BermudaSooner]

Germany Growth rate 2Q 2009: 0.3%
France Growth rate 2Q 2009: 0.3%
US Growth rate 2Q 2009: -1.0%

German Stimulus: EUR 0
French Stimulus: EUR 0
US Stimulus: $850,000,000,000

Is there any doubt this is the wrong direction for the country?

[OklahomaTuba]

But we sold a lot of Toyotas and Hondas. That has to count for something, right????

[mdklatt]

German Stimulus: EUR 0
French Stimulus: EUR 0



Hmmm....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/07/business/global/07stimulus.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/business/worldbusiness/06stimulus.html


Somebody's lying. I'm gonna guess it's you.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Now Now, being misinformed doesn't make one a liar. Glen Beck probably didn't fact check again ;)

[49r]

mdklatt, The New York Times is nothing but a Liberal propaganda machine and they do nothing but lie all the time...really, you trust this communist/socialist rag to get their facts straight?



:D (There really needs to be a sarcasm smilie, like, :sarcasm: )

[OklahomaTuba]

So Germany only spent $23 Billion and are growing????

Dear Leader gave more money to ACORN and Goldman Sachs then that. No wonder ours is such a miserable failure compared to theirs.

[mdklatt]

Now Now, being misinformed doesn't make one a liar.

That's true. I just assumed that since the OP didn't source his information he was passing it off as his own. Maybe he's just a plagiarist.



Glen Beck doesn't fact check ever ;)

Fixed!

I saw a WSJ editorial that makes me question if there's anything that Republicans--the ones that are left--won't lie about. This was your standard "the Post Office sucks so how can we trust the government to do anything right" argument, with a factoid (read: lie) about how postage has increased faster than inflation. Except that by law postage can't increase faster than inflation as defined by the CPI.

(FYI this is why Forever stamps are a bad investment.)

[jkjsooner]

(FYI this is why Forever stamps are a bad investment.)

Not if you buy a billion of them the day before the increase goes into effect. (Now, unloading a billion stamps might be tricky but you get my point.)

[OklahomaTuba]

This was your standard "the Post Office sucks so how can we trust the government to do anything right" argument
Ironically, it was Obama that made that very argument...


"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having problems."

I think That was the best argument for government run healthcare so far IMO.

[mdklatt]

Dear Leader gave more money to...Goldman Sachs

And by "Dear Leader" you mean "Bush administration".

[mdklatt]

I think That was the best argument for government run healthcare so far IMO.

I think the best argument for government-run health care is all the places it works better than what we have for less money.

But go ahead and google (http://www.google.com/search?q=health+care+site%3Arushlimbaugh.com) up some lies to prove otherwise.

[OklahomaTuba]

And by "Dear Leader" you mean "Bush administration".You only wish I did. ;)

[OklahomaTuba]

I think the best argument for government-run health care is all the places it works better than what we have for less money. Kinda like how the VA and Indian health care clinics work better with less money too????

I would sure like to see just ONE thing the government does better for less money than the private sector does.

Like the post office.

[mdklatt]

:D (There really needs to be a sarcasm smilie, like, :sarcasm: )

How about :rolleyes::D

[mdklatt]

You only wish I did. ;)

I guess if Obama can travel back in time to place fake birth announcements in the Honolulu newspaper he can travel back a couple of months before his inauguration to implement the financial sector bailout.

[OklahomaTuba]

I guess if Obama can travel back in time to place fake birth announcements in the Honolulu newspaper he can travel back a couple of months before his inauguration to implement the financial sector bailout.He did, its called TARP.

[mdklatt]

I would sure like to see just ONE thing the government does better for less money than the private sector does.


Why do you hate the troops?

[OklahomaTuba]

Why do you hate the troops?So, you're trying to say there is a civilian equivalent somewhere???

[Harry Beanbag]

Why do you hate the troops?

Why do you like making ridiculous arguments?

[Harry Beanbag]

So, you're trying to say there is a civilian equivalent somewhere???

Not yet, Barack is working on it though.

[OklahomaTuba]

Not yet, Barack is working on it though.Yeah, havn't heard about that civilian army of his that he planned to fund "as well or better than the US military".

Maybe he just meant ACORN being his personal SS?????

[BermudaSooner]

Somebody's lying. I'm gonna guess it's you.

Lying...well that's a bit strong. I pulled this from National Review, which is generally good on the facts. In re-reading, the quote is "unlike Germany and France, which had no real stimulus to speak of...." So, my bad for not fact checking entirely.

Let's compare packages:

France had a EUR 33 billion stimulus or about $47 billion at today's exchange rate. Germany had a EUR 50 billion stimulus or about $71.5 billion at today's rate. GDP of the countries is $2.98 trillion, and $3.8 trillion, respectively. So the stimuli were about 1.5% - 1.9% of GDP.

the US has a $14.3 trillion GDP. Our stimulus represents about 6% of GDP.

The growth rates are correct:

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/8/14/business/20090814080721&sec=business

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

Still feel like defending Obamavich?

[mdklatt]

Lying...well that's a bit strong. I pulled this from National Review, which is generally good on the facts. In re-reading, the quote is "unlike Germany and France, which had no real stimulus to speak of...." So, my bad for not fact checking entirely.

Fair enough.




Let's compare packages:


Why should we assume that France and Germany make good analogues to the US economy? Were they as heavily invested in Big ****pile? Where Germans trying to flip condos and McMansions on the Baltic coast? France has a mandatory 35-hour work week. Maybe we should have done that instead of spending more money. France and Germany have extensive public transportation, so the spike on oil prices wouldn't have been disastrous for them. Maybe we should do that? Germany has made a dedicated national effort to invest in alternative energy. Maybe we should do that? You what else France and Germany have that we don't? National health care that costs lost than ours and makes sure unemployed people still have health care. Maybe that helped their recovery along?





Still feel like defending Obamavich?

I'm not defending Obama, I'm criticizing bull**** arguments. First of all, if the National Review can't even get the basic facts of their story right, why should we continue reading after that? It took me two seconds to refute the basic premise of that article on Google. That's some quality fact-checking. Of course, the right wing gave up on fact checking long ago.

Is there anything other than hand waving and unfounded assertions in that article? What's their point in the first place? Is it that spending 6% of GDP on the stimulus made things worse than if we'd only spent 2%? How do they know that we didn't spend too little? Or that we didn't spend too long sitting on our thumbs before the stimulus money started going out the door? Do they have any unkind words for the previous administration--you know, the folks that were on watch when this mess started and who started the bailouts?

Why is anybody taking a right-wing op ed magazine seriously in the first place?

[49r]

pwned!

[JohnnyMack]

Let's compare packages:


http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g227/crazyGT/gay.jpg

[Harry Beanbag]

pwned!


Really? So throwing out a bunch of bull**** and saying you are criticizing bull**** arguments qualifies as pwning nowadays?

[OklahomaTuba]

You what else France and Germany have that we don't?A massive welfare state they can't afford and are trying to dismantle???

Oh wait, we have that too...

[OklahomaTuba]

Really? So throwing out a bunch of bull**** and saying you are criticizing bull**** arguments qualifies as pwning nowadays?Its all the got left HB.

[49r]

Really? So throwing out a bunch of bull**** and saying you are criticizing bull**** arguments qualifies as pwning nowadays?


Nowadays???

It always has.

Goodness gracious, I'm allowed an opinion aren't I? Last I heard it's still a free country.

...and why are you so vigorously defending BermudaSooner anyway? hmmm?

[Harry Beanbag]

...and why are you so vigorously defending BermudaSooner anyway? hmmm?

Where did I do that? :confused:

[BermudaSooner]

Fair enough.




Why should we assume that France and Germany make good analogues to the US economy? Were they as heavily invested in Big ****pile? Where Germans trying to flip condos and McMansions on the Baltic coast?

Well, there is significant real estate speculation in Germany and less in France, from my experiences there, but i agree they are different economies to the US, but not so different that we can't draw some conclusions. Their large companies like Areva and EADS (Airbus) are government owned--and now so are ours!

I thought it was an interesting observation made by the National Review. I'm a big believer that a free market works things out much more efficiently and quicker than a government can--this stat doesn't prove that, but it certainly helps to add evidence to the argument.



France has a mandatory 35-hour work week. Maybe we should have done that instead of spending more money.

Yea, cause that works great. I employ people in France--it is a frigan nightmare and everytime I hire someone else, France is the last place I look to put them. You clearly have no international business experience if you think this is a reasonable thing to do.


France and Germany have extensive public transportation, so the spike on oil prices wouldn't have been disastrous for them. Maybe we should do that? Germany has made a dedicated national effort to invest in alternative energy. Maybe we should do that? You what else France and Germany have that we don't? National health care that costs lost than ours and makes sure unemployed people still have health care. Maybe that helped their recovery along?

Well, the logistics of public transportation don't work in the US. Can you imagine light rail in LA? I agree with you on alternative energy--let's drop our objection to nuclear.

National Health care--well, I could go on and on here, but there is a reason wealthy people fly over to the US for care from these countries--and there is a reason it costs less--cause it sucks, but also because Europeans on average are healthier than Americans.




I'm not defending Obama, I'm criticizing bull**** arguments. First of all, if the National Review can't even get the basic facts of their story right, why should we continue reading after that? It took me two seconds to refute the basic premise of that article on Google. That's some quality fact-checking. Of course, the right wing gave up on fact checking long ago.

Uhhh, so you are saying the statement "no real stimulus to speak of" is getting the basic facts wrong? I disagree, if you are a Keynesian believer, then a tiny stimulus does very little--you have to go big or go home. We did go big, and even more of us can't go home because the banks (now the gov't) own our homes.



Is there anything other than hand waving and unfounded assertions in that article? What's their point in the first place? Is it that spending 6% of GDP on the stimulus made things worse than if we'd only spent 2%? How do they know that we didn't spend too little? Or that we didn't spend too long sitting on our thumbs before the stimulus money started going out the door? Do they have any unkind words for the previous administration--you know, the folks that were on watch when this mess started and who started the bailouts?

Why is anybody taking a right-wing op ed magazine seriously in the first place?

Hoping you'd bring that up. If Bush had stood up to Barney Frank and his left wing non-sense, we likely wouldn't be in this situation. The expansion of Freddie and Fannie--Barney's babies, started this mess (UNDER THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION). When your goal is to get every American into a home--even the deadbeats that won't pay, and tell the banks "don't worry, the US gov't has your back," then we are setting down a path guaranteed for failure. And now with healthcare we are looking to go down the same path. What a nightmare.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Stimulus, smimulus. Didn't you hear? Ben Bernanke saved the world
.
.
.
.
.
For Goldman Sachs to plunder.

[mdklatt]

Really? So throwing out a bunch of bull**** and saying you are criticizing bull**** arguments qualifies as pwning nowadays?

That's the whole point. My speculative bull**** is no less convincing than the speculative bull**** in the OP. The National Review's point--I'm guessing--is that if only we'd spent less money we'd have been out of the recession a long time ago. Yet they don't provide any convincing evidence for that, or else it just wasn't included in the OP. Which is why if you're going to crib **** from another source you need to link to that other source.

[JohnnyMack]

Hoping you'd bring that up. If Bush had stood up to Barney Frank and his left wing non-sense, we likely wouldn't be in this situation. The expansion of Freddie and Fannie--Barney's babies, started this mess (UNDER THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION). When your goal is to get every American into a home--even the deadbeats that won't pay, and tell the banks "don't worry, the US gov't has your back," then we are setting down a path guaranteed for failure. And now with healthcare we are looking to go down the same path. What a nightmare.

The longer you keep thinking this is a black/white, good guy/bad guy, Dem/Rep, issue the longer Goldman Sachs gets rich and thanks you for being a giant distraction.

[Fraggle145]

The longer you keep thinking this is a black/white, good guy/bad guy, Dem/Rep, issue the longer Goldman Sachs gets rich and thanks you for being a giant distraction.

This.

[mdklatt]

I thought it was an interesting observation made by the National Review. I'm a big believer that a free market works things out much more efficiently and quicker than a government can--this stat doesn't prove that, but it certainly helps to add evidence to the argument.


One of the NYT articles I linked to indicated that the German (or maybe France) stimulus was so successful because they started pumping cash into the economy immediately while the US was still debating about what to do. Why is that not as relevant as the actual amount of spending?




You clearly have no international business experience if you think this is a reasonable thing to do.


I don't think it's a reasonable thing to do. I also don't think pulling out a single metric (one that was wrong in the first place) and saying "told you so!" is valid when you're comparing apples to oranges and bananas.

Again, why should we believe the National Review's implication that the French and German economies are good analogues to the US economy when we're always hearing from--ahem--the National Review about what a bunch of Commies they are in Europe and how their socialist policies would never work in the US.




Well, the logistics of public transportation don't work in the US. Can you imagine light rail in LA?


This light rail? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County_Metro_Rail)

Again, the point wasn't to advocate for any of those things I mentioned, but to point out all of the differences between there and here and why maybe throwing out a single comparison is pointless.



National Health care--well, I could go on and on here, but there is a reason wealthy people fly over to the US for care from these countries--and there is a reason it costs less--cause it sucks, but also because Europeans on average are healthier than Americans.


So European health care sucks because Europeans are healthier than Americans...what?



Uhhh, so you are saying the statement "no real stimulus to speak of" is getting the basic facts wrong?

Saying "the Europeans didn't spend any stimulus money" is materially different from saying "the Europeans didn't spend as much stimulus money". You and I both know that the intent of that was to be as misleading as possible. Or else they have woefully incompetent fact checkers working there.




The expansion of Freddie and Fannie--Barney's babies, started this mess (UNDER THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION).

It's all poor people's fault!

[Fraggle145]

Well, the logistics of public transportation don't work in the US. Can you imagine light rail in LA? I agree with you on alternative energy--let's drop our objection to nuclear.

I could imagine it. It seems to work for New York. The problem with public transportation is that it seems to require forethought during the planning process and is usually dealt with only as an afterthought (e.g. Dallas, Atlanta).

Also can we drop the whole all dems/liberals/whatever are against nuclear power act. I think that is pretty bogus.

[mikeelikee]

[QUOTE=mdklatt;2672100]Fair enough.




Why should we assume that France and Germany make good analogues to the US economy? Were they as heavily invested in Big ****pile? Where Germans trying to flip condos and McMansions on the Baltic coast? France has a mandatory 35-hour work week. Maybe we should have done that instead of spending more money. France and Germany have extensive public transportation, so the spike on oil prices wouldn't have been disastrous for them. Maybe we should do that? Germany has made a dedicated national effort to invest in alternative energy. Maybe we should do that? You what else France and Germany have that we don't? National health care that costs lost than ours and makes sure unemployed people still have health care. Maybe that helped their recovery along?





I'm not defending Obama, I'm criticizing bull**** arguments. First of all, if the National Review can't even get the basic facts of their story right, why should we continue reading after that? It took me two seconds to refute the basic premise of that article on Google. That's some quality fact-checking. Of course, the right wing gave up on fact checking long ago.

Is there anything other than hand waving and unfounded assertions in that article? What's their point in the first place? Is it that spending 6% of GDP on the stimulus made things worse than if we'd only spent 2%? How do they know that we didn't spend too little? Or that we didn't spend too long sitting on our thumbs before the stimulus money started going out the door? Do they have any unkind words for the previous administration--you know, the folks that were on watch when this mess started and who started the bailouts?

[B]Why is anybody taking a right-wing op ed magazine seriously in the first place?

For the same reason you apparently take the left-wing rags like the New York Times seriously. Objective journalism became extinct there some time back, in case you weren't aware.

[Harry Beanbag]

That's the whole point. My speculative bull**** is no less convincing than the speculative bull**** in the OP. The National Review's point--I'm guessing--is that if only we'd spent less money we'd have been out of the recession a long time ago. Yet they don't provide any convincing evidence for that, or else it just wasn't included in the OP. Which is why if you're going to crib **** from another source you need to link to that other source.

My mistake. The nonsense you posted was so similar to most of your posts I came to the wrong conclusion. I apologize. ;)

[StoopTroup]

Stimulus, smimulus. Didn't you hear? Ben Bernanke saved the world
.
.
.
.
.
For Goldman Sachs to plunder.

They have been doing that the whole time Greenspan was Chairman...hell even before that...

Bernanke as the Bad Guy won't help any of this.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

The longer you keep thinking this is a black/white, good guy/bad guy, Dem/Rep, issue the longer Goldman Sachs gets rich and thanks you for being a giant distraction.

Shhh! The sheeple are having a political discussion. Now I got to buy some more Congressmen to get that cap and trade done so I can create another asset bubble, er, valuable market for the American people

[BermudaSooner]

This light rail? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County_Metro_Rail)


Yes, that light rail. It is ridiculous. Have you been on it...neither has anyone else. The point is, advocating that trains will some somehow insulate us from recession is bizarre at best.



Again, the point wasn't to advocate for any of those things I mentioned, but to point out all of the differences between there and here and why maybe throwing out a single comparison is pointless.


I didn't throw out a single comparison..you did. I threw out a macroeconomic comparison. These countries did little, their economies are recovering, we did lots our economy is not.

If you read what's in the Obama "stimulus" you will realize most of it isn't "stimulating" even if you are a Keynesian. It is the Dems taking advantage of a situation and pushing their left wing bull****.



So European health care sucks because Europeans are healthier than Americans...what?


Yet those that can come to the states for treatment. Hmmm...could you be saying the same thing you are accusing me of? Why is it that Euros are on average healthier than Americans? Could it be because they eat better, get more exercise and watch less TV?

Let me put it this way, if you or a close family member has a serious illness, do you want American health care the way it is, or Euro/Canadian health care?





It's all poor people's fault!



No, it is politicians messing around with financial markets fault. Without Fannie and Freddie, the bad loans never get made as the banks would have to live with the repercussions--Ergo, no bad loans, no recession. I'm pissed off at for Bush for allowing it to continue, but he liked trumpeting that America had the highest percentage of home ownership ever under his watch. Now we've got a huge amount of foreclosures and a hole at Freddie and Fannie that is getting deeper all of the time. I've seen estimates that it may end up costing $1 trillion--quite a legacy Barney Frank.

[BermudaSooner]

The longer you keep thinking this is a black/white, good guy/bad guy, Dem/Rep, issue the longer Goldman Sachs gets rich and thanks you for being a giant distraction.

Part of what Goldman does is just plays in the sandbox set up for them--for that I can't fault them. In my job I make a living off of stupid government regulations.

When Goldman actually sets up the sandbox, like cap and trade, that is a real problem. Maybe one day we'll actually have a government of true reform where these parasites aren't prevalent through the whole administration.

[OklahomaTuba]

Yes, that light rail. It is ridiculous. Have you been on it...neither has anyone else. The point is, advocating that trains will some somehow insulate us from recession is bizarre at best.
The idea that light rail/high speed rail will somehow save our country and the planet is one of the more humorous dumb**** ideas the left has come up with.

Its like they forget what a disaster AMTRAK has been.

[Animal Mother]

The idea that light rail/high speed rail will somehow save our country and the planet is one of the more humorous dumb**** ideas the left has come up with.

Its like they forget what a disaster AMTRAK has been.

Have your parents forgotten how big a disaster you've been Squeaky?

'Bama is a Commie! He'll take our guns away! Do you and the other beanie copters have some other records for all of us to listen to? If you do PLEASE PUT THEM ON NOW!