At what point can we call the Stimulus a failure?

[The Snake Brotherhood]

For debate, is it when we look at the objective job numbers?:



This is exactly how the stimulus was sold to the public. Never mind that the stimulus critics were saying from the start that this sort of job prediction was wildly off the mark, but it turns out that the multiplier being used was just as absurd [http://reason.com/archives/2009/10/19/the-myth-of-the-multiplier], holding no historical basis in fact and only having theoretical numbers behind it.

Or perhaps we can call it a failure because the Obama administration cannot even honestly account for the jobs it claims to have "saved or created." [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33522856/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/] Not that 30k jobs is anything to crow about when you promised exponentially more than that, but when you're peddling inflated numbers to begin with?

Or maybe the most damning part is Christina Romer herself, one of the architects of the multiplier-based stimulus concept and the chair of Obama's Council of Economic Advisors, noting that "By mid-2010," she said, "fiscal stimulus will likely be contributing little to further growth." [http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i-95E_TCyqYX0CBZ5xQAV_V3VWyQD9BG9ULO0] Given that we've heard from the proponents of the stimulus that so much of it is spread out toward the back end, and so little of it has been spent so far, clearly this shows a severe lack of any faith in the ability of the stimulus to drive real job growth.

So, yeah - I think it's time to objectively call the stimulus package a failure. How about you?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Show what it would be without the stimulus plan and we'll talk.

[Gauntleted Fist]

Show what it would be without the stimulus plan and we'll talk.

I'd assume this would be somewhat impossible.

[Bottle]

You can call the stimulus a failure whenever you want.

Meanwhile, the country will continue to benefit from it, and will continue to be better off than it would have been without any stimulus package.

[Hydesland]

You still can't at this point say completely objectively that the stimulus has failed, although you can argue that it's plausible. I agree somewhat that the stimulus was probably not very effective, however this doesn't mean I think that the concept of fiscal stimulus in general has no effect, quite the contrary. More that the way the US gov has handled it specifically has not been great.

[Allanea]

You can call the stimulus a failure whenever you want.

Meanwhile, the country will continue to benefit from it, and will continue to be better off than it would have been without any stimulus package.

According to the people who implemented the stimulus plan, had it not been implemented, the unemployment rate would have peaked around 9%. Right now it is around 10%.

Either:

1. The people who implemented and advocated the stimulus have no clue about predicting economic trends, in which case they shouldn't be spending this much money.

Or:

2. The people who implemented and advocated the stimulus have no clue about predicting it's effects, in which case they shouldn't be spending this much money.

[Meoton]

People will see what they want regardless of the actual facts. I believe that many of the policies of The New Deal helped bring the U.S. out of the Great Depression, but the parent of this thread would probably say it kept us in it longer.

[Hydesland]

1. The people who implemented and advocated the stimulus have no clue about predicting economic trends, in which case they shouldn't be spending this much money.

Or:

2. The people who implemented and advocated the stimulus have no clue about predicting it's effects, in which case they shouldn't be spending this much money.

It's notoriously difficult to predict actual unemployment figures in times of crisis as opposed to normal times, even if you're the best economist ever. You shouldn't chastise them particularly for not being completely accurate in that area. It could be that had the fiscal stimulus not been implemented, unemployment could have been at 16%, for example. What's more important is the prediction that it will reduce unemployment from what it could potentially have been, not what the specific numbers will be. Although I agree personally that in this specific case it's plausible the stimulus had little effect.

[greed and death]

Show what it would be without the stimulus plan and we'll talk.

Impossible until we can take two choices at once.


Though looking at Texas that turned down large amounts the Stimulus Money our unemployment rate is lower, so I will go with things would be better. *NOD*

[Meoton]

Texas's economy is boosted by oil and oil refining among some other things.
As far as predicting future economics, when Reagan deregulated the S&L's he said, "Gentleman, we just hit the jackpot." A few years later, the S&L's crashed. Some rich people got richer, many common people lost their savings, and really only one sacrificial goat went to jail. I guess Republicans are very good at predicting economic outcomes.

[greed and death]

Texas's economy is boosted by oil and oil refining among some other things.
As far as predicting future economics, when Reagan deregulated the S&L's he said, "Gentleman, we just hit the jackpot." A few years later, the S&L's crashed. Some rich people got richer, many common people lost their savings, and really only one sacrificial goat went to jail. I guess Republicans are very good at predicting economic outcomes.

Well S&L was not spefically deregulated all banks were.

and S&L's downfall was caused by regulations.
1. S&L's can only make money from savings and loans (hence the name).
When the stock market took off in the 1980's, if you as a bank could not invest in the stock market other banks that could invest in the stock market could offer better rates. This forced S&L's to take riskier and riskier investments just to stay afloat.
2. S&L's were not allowed to use junk bonds.( these "junk" bonds funded companies such as Microsoft.)
Government Bonds (most of your A + rated bonds) were yielding very low interest rates because there was demand for the dollar over seas, and holding a government bond was as good as holding dollars.


the fall of S&L's was caused more due to backwards 1930's era regulations.

[Allanea]

Texas's economy is boosted by oil and oil refining among some other things.

Even as oil prices have dropped?

[Vittos Ordination]

You can call the stimulus a failure whenever you want.

Meanwhile, the country will continue to benefit from it, and will continue to be better off than it would have been without any stimulus package.

We know that Wall Street has benefited from it, but I don't see any reason to believe that the rest of the country has benefited at this point.

The OP showed that the stimulus package has left unemployment much higher than it was predicted to be without the stimulus.

[Sitspot]

For debate, is it when we look at the objective job numbers?:

Indicator number 1 that a graph is propaganda rather than information.
The y axis is not started at zero so that gradients and differences can look as great as possible within the space available for presentation. Much more impressive than saying a difference of 2% which is what the bit of the graph I can see illustrates.

[Neo Art]

I have a job. I make money from that job. I use that money to pay bills, buy luxury goods, and fly myself and my girlfriend back and forth visiting each other. I put the money I make directly into the economy.

My job would not exist, let me state that again, would not exist if it wasn't for the federal stimulus plan. My job is directly funded by federal stimulus funds. All the money I put into the economy, into restaurants, shopping malls, clothing stores, airlines, as well as the money I'm NOT taking out of the public coffers by being unemployed, is DIRECTLY because of the federal stimulus plan.

And I know 100 other people in this office alone who can say the same.

So go ahead, tell me it isn't working.

[Vittos Ordination]

Right now stimulus money is still floating around financial markets, as it begins to trickle down we will start seeing the real costs of it: inflation.

We can only hope that a huge correction doesn't take place in financial markets and the world doesn't completely bail on the dollar at the same time or we haven't even peered into the depths of the "crisis".

Although, I rather like what I foresee coming from the crisis. Goodbye corporations, hello community!

[Allanea]

I have a job. I make money from that job. I use that money to pay bills, buy luxury goods, and fly myself and my girlfriend back and forth visiting each other. I put the money I make directly into the economy.

My job would not exist, let me state that again, would not exist if it wasn't for the federal stimulus plan. My job is directly funded by federal stimulus funds. All the money I put into the economy, into restaurants, shopping malls, clothing stores, airlines, as well as the money I'm NOT taking out of the public coffers by being unemployed, is DIRECTLY because of the federal stimulus plan.

And I know 100 other people in this office alone who can say the same.

So go ahead, tell me it isn't working.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

[Neo Art]

The plural of anecdote is not data.

This is you, not refuting my point. Anecdotal evidence is still evidence. It may not be the most compelling evidence possible, but my point, as it still stands, is irrefutable:

1) stimulus funds have created jobs
2) jobs results in money being spent into the economy
3) money being spent into the economy is the main method of economic recovery

[Hydesland]

Much more impressive than saying a difference of 2% which is what the bit of the graph I can see illustrates.

In the context of unemployment, 2% can still be quite significant.

[Libertarian Governance]

I called it a failure while they were selling this corporate welfare to the misguided sheeple of America. Its really a shame that the US military doesn't take its oath of office as serious as the Honduran military.

[Allanea]

The plural of anecdote is not data.

This is you, not refuting my point.

I cannot refute it because you don't have one. You having job has little to do with the overall effect on the US economy.

[Vittos Ordination]

My job would not exist, let me state that again, would not exist if it wasn't for the federal stimulus plan. My job is directly funded by federal stimulus funds. All the money I put into the economy, into restaurants, shopping malls, clothing stores, airlines, as well as the money I'm NOT taking out of the public coffers by being unemployed, is DIRECTLY because of the federal stimulus plan.

All the money you and the 100 others put into restaurants, shopping malls, clothing stores, airlines, etc. is zapping the purchasing power of the job that I got without relying on a "stimulus.

Thanks a lot. You are chewing up my last raise.

[The_pantless_hero]

Show what it would be without the stimulus plan and we'll talk.

I'd assume this would be somewhat impossible.

Then criticizing the stimulus plan is impossible.

[Neo Art]

All the money you and the 100 others put into restaurants, shopping malls, clothing stores, airlines, etc. is zapping the purchasing power of the job that I got without relying on a "stimulus.

Thanks a lot. You are chewing up my last raise.

Screw you hippy!

Although, I am aware of the big criticism of my point, and you touched upon it by your comment of "relying". Which is, it's impossible to say what job I'd have (if any) if there WAS no stimulus. I have one because of it, but it's fairly difficult to say that I wouldn't without it.

Although with 10% unemployment, it's fairly easy to assume I quite POSSIBLY wouldn't.

[Vittos Ordination]

3) money being spent into the economy is the main method of economic recovery

Nope, matching consumption with production and the accurate valuation of economic goods is the only method of recovery. Everything else is decoration that will crumble eventually.