Cute, but not a valid response and evidence that you are not aware about the funding mentioned in the law. It's not a bill anymore, it is a law. Well, I've never said that all government deficit spending stimulates the economy and I don't think anyone else has either. You are putting up a straw man and asking me to defend it. Sorry, I don't believe that all government spending stimulates the economy, it has to be targeted spending. I also don't believe that war expenses stimulate the economy unless we are on a wartime economic footing as in WWII when all domestic industry was retasked to support the war effort. A great deal of the Iraq/Afghan war spending was spent overseas--vast amounts were given as aid to the countries we attacked. The domestic portion spent did stimulate the economy a bit, but that has no effect on the huge deficits and debt incurred by the war. In WWII we paid for the war by increasing taxes, buying War Bonds, rationing by the citizenry, drafting low-paid soldiers instead of a highly-paid professional army, and putting housewives into the working economy. none of this was done in Bush's wars. We just borrowed the money and then gave much of it away. The Taliban had to be toppled for supporting Al Qaeda, but we should never have occupied Afghnaistan, just supported the warlords that were anti-taliban and kept going after Al Qaeda. Now the insurgency we fight is mostly local fighting just to get rid of us and it actually hurts the effort to kill to Al Qaeda. Iraq was one collosal blunder from beginning to end. On this we can agree, Yes, it did. The recession ended in the summer of 2009, the market has been rising, housing has stabilized, the banks have repaid the loans. Unemployment is always a lagging figure but it is improving as well. The stimulus was to reverse the recession and prevent it from going into a depression, and it did. We are not in a depression. And stimulating the economy has always been a path out of recession and depression. Look no further than the New Deal. Look no further than the other industrialized nations who all did the same thing.
Active measures doesn't necessarily equate to beneficial measures. They can in fact be detrimental. FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate / UCLA Newsroom
Horsesh!t in your Christmas stocking doesn't necessarily mean you got a pony for Christmas By your logic, the stimulus also prevented hurricanes from coming into Louisiana this year.
They also illustrate the ignorance and bias in your proclamations. I would love to see your proof that the stimulus prevented a depression. The fact that we are not in a depression is not proof. The only thing the stimulus did was to stimulate a power transfer in the US Congress.
No you don't. I've presented reams of evidence to you on a host of topics and you just blow them off with some quip that they are red's bullchit. You won't back up any of your wild-ass claims. It's proof that we are not in a depression! Neither of us can "prove" our contentions here. All we can do is try to offer some evidence that we are not just blowing hot air. I will do this. You will not. And it won't matter to you one bit. Business Breakfast: Stimulus Prevented Another Great Depression - Derek Thompson - Business - The Atlantic Economic Study: Bailout and Stimulus prevented 2nd depression - Dallas County Political Buzz | Examiner.com CBO: Stimulus Prevented Depression AND Double-Dip Recession | FDL News Desk
Red- Printing some 1.7 trillion dollars we don't have to prop up a failing system doesn't quite equal avoiding a depression or getting out of a recession. The cards will tumble they just bought some time.
