Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (616103)	6/14/2011 1:54:18 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580216

Why is it fair for you to blame obama for the stimulus and for allegedly making the mess he found worse but not fair for me to criticize bush for presiding over the conditions that preceded the mess...and for failing to diagnose the impending collapse and take action? There is no issue of "fairness". You can criticize anyone you'd like, as can I. The question is which argument makes sense and is supported by history. Empirically, we know that government spending programs do not stimulate the economy -- it was tried in the 30s, and the architect of it later stated flatly that spending money "does not work". And in fact, in the instant case, we have seen the same. At the end of the day, the question is whether government spending provides more stimulus than the harm done by increasing the debt. That's it. In this case, increasing the debt by a trillion dollars had the effect of damaging consumer confidence. Even if, at some point in the past, consumer confidence could have been primed with government spending, today, it is clear that is not the case. More spending simply increases the level of concern. It is, to me, laughable that you would mention GWB's increases in the debt in light of what Obama has done and continues to do.