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: i-node who wrote (655713)	5/20/2012 8:54:33 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579131

"Now, you know damned well that is an absurd claim." No I don't. Because it happens to be the case. Granted, it didn't keep unemployment below 8%. It was too small for that, a point I made at the time. "This is typical cj misrepresentation. It is no coincidence that the job losses peaked right as Obama took office -- businesses were scared shitless of what he would do to the economy." Typical i-node making it up as he goes along. The job loss started in Jan. 2008. By the end of 2008, things were dire. money.cnn.com 2009 was even worse. bls.gov Things didn't really improve until April 2009. rickmunoz.com The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was signed into law on Feb. 17, 2009. So the April/May recovery is just about what you would expect if it worked. From the wikipedia In November 2011 the Congressional Budget Office updated its earlier reports concerning the Act. The CBO stated that "the employment effects began to wane at the end of 2010 and have continued to do so throughout 2011." Nevertheless, in the third quarter of 2011, the CBO estimated that the Act had increased the number of full-time equivalent jobs by 0.5 million to 3.3 million en.wikipedia.org "Economists have long known that anything government does takes MONTHS to be reflected in unemployment figures." And it took months. Your point? ". There is not one shred of evidence to suggest that the "stimulus" did anything at all for the economy." Despite you use of bolding, this is an incorrect statement. The facts back it up. " Any president would have made the same decision Obama made, including GWB (although, he would likely have taken him alive so as to interrogate him instead of killing him to avoid the hassle of dealing with it)." Nonsense. Smirk had stopped looking for him. Can't find him if you don't look. " An act which insures that GM will be back in Chapter 11 before thing thing is over." More bolding. And, again, not factual. GM is more profitable than they have been in years. What makes you think they will be in Chapter 11? More wishful thinking? "The same OMB that carries the president's water" You are really inconsistent about the OMB. When you like their figures, you trumpet them. When you don't, you slam them. "No he didn't. Anyone can readily see that the national debt has gone up EVERY YEAR in recent history:" He came close. And we were on track to running a surplus in just a couple of years. During his entire administration, the debt went up a total of $1.2 trillion with the rate of growth declining pretty much every year. Under Reagan, it was $1.7 trillion, with the rate of growth increasing pretty much every year. Under Bush Sr., a 4 year term, it increased $1.2 trillion, with the rate of growth increasing again. Under Bush Jr., it set new levels. It was $6.2 trillion and accelerated greatly. Under Obama, the debt has increased by $2.8 trillion by the end of the year. While that is high, Bush handed him a deficit of about $1.3 trillion a year. What are the components? According to the wikipedia, it breaks down like this The U.S. budget situation has deteriorated significantly since 2001, when the CBO forecast average annual surpluses of approximately $850 billion from 2009–2012. The average deficit forecast in each of those years as of June 2009 was approximately $1,215 billion. The New York Times analyzed this roughly $2 trillion "swing", separating the causes into four major categories along with their share: Recessions or the business cycle (37%); Policies enacted by President Bush (33%); Policies enacted by President Bush and supported or extended by President Obama (20%); and New policies from President Obama (10%). en.wikipedia.org