Thread: Proof the Stimulas Worked

[quote name='PoliticalHotwire' date='29 October 2009 - 01:27 PM' timestamp='1256840844' post='47569']

I'll take that as a no

[/quote]



LOL - you are one to talk.



You have yet to support the graphs and charts you like to post.



How ridiculous that you expect me to support a Political Cartoon.



How's this?

I was in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with another speechwriter, a young man named Jonathan. (His last name was Horn; the president nicknamed him Horny.) We were chatting casually when the president’s favorite speechwriter came in. Chris Michel was in his midtwenties, with sandy blond hair. He was usually chipper, though at the moment his face was so pale he must have been the whitest man in the Bush White House. And that was no small accomplishment. Chris had just come from a secret meeting in the Oval Office, and without so much as a hello he announced: “Well, the economy is about to completely collapse.”



“You mean the stock market?” I asked.



“No, I mean the entire U.S. economy,” he replied. As in, capitalism. As in, hide your money in your mattress.



The secretary of the treasury, Hank Paulson, had sketched out a dire scenario. And Chris said we’d have to write a speech for the president announcing his “bold” plan to deal with the crisis. (The president loved the word bold.)



We had to reassure the American people that everything was going to be okay. As it turned out, Secretary Paulson had a plan that would fix everything: a $700 billion bailout of the financial system. The plan, like the secretary himself (who’d been pretty much a nonperson at the White House), seemed to come out of nowhere, as if it had been hastily scribbled on a sheet of paper in the secretary’s car on his way to work. Basically, it could be summed up as: Give me hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars and then trust me to do the right thing.



There was no denying it. This plan was certainly “bold.”



http://www.gq.com/news-politics/poli...conomy-bailout

[quote name='PoliticalHotwire' date='29 October 2009 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1256843529' post='47612']

Why? I'm proving hard links?



http://www.politicalhotwire.com/foru...post__p__46442

http://www.politicalhotwire.com/foru...post__p__46173



What else needs to be supported there. I have been very clear that these cahrts come with no interpretation and I'm leaving it open for other members to digest them as they please.



When presented with the opportunity to provide factual-based data to back up an assertion you give an opinion piece from GQ. I think that speaks for itself. Do you have any numbers, any economist, anything who says that the Stimulus was a success from a cost-benefit perspective? I'm not questioning that it does exist, I jus haven't seen it and would like to relate to the decision-making process that you used to determine that the Stimulus was a wild success. If it's based off of articles from GQ, fine, then just say it.

[/quote]



You asked for a link to something that supports the opinion as reflected in the political cartoon. I provided you with that.



You continue to post a graph with blurred lettering that is supposed to mean something. In order to mean something one would have to understand the source of the information reflected in the graph. You have not provided anything that supports the graph and when I went to the site from which the graph originated it was discovered that the blogger that created it has refused to sign off on it. Thus, it is hard to know if he is just another citizen interpreting information or if he is an economist or someone with some type of expertise. It is also difficult to tell from the graph and the blog source (which you never provided) what information was used to create the graph.



Relative to your chart - again, you didn't provide a source but when one clicks on the chart they can tell by its properties that it was created by the republican house ways and means committee. Again, there is no reference to where they obtained their information so it is hard to determine if what is depicted on the chart is legitimate. It is obvious that it was created by a someone with bias, republicans do not want Obama to be successful. A sad reflection on our times, how political opponents want the nation to suffer just so their opponent will fail.



Now, you can continue to play these games and to post the nonsense, it doesn't bother me. But as you continue down this path remember that it reflects on you. It is obvious you don't like to be challenged and you cannot support the contents of the charts and graphs you rely on. Not necessarily the greatest of debating skills but if it pleases you then so be it.



.

[quote name='Vortex' date='27 October 2009 - 06:36 PM' timestamp='1256686565' post='46147']

BTW, if you read my post you would know that I discussed more than just government employees. The large majority of jobs that have been saved due to the stimulus are private jobs, you know, those "hard working private citizens". [/quote]



Prove it.



Here for ABC News.



"Of the 640,329 jobs cited today, White House officials said 80,000 were in the construction sector and more than half -- 325,000 -- were education jobs, despite President Obama's claim in January that 90 percent of the stimulus jobs would be in the private sector."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...tor-abuse.html



In the meantime relish in the fact that each of those jobs COST the taxpayer $164,000. If the person pays $10,000 in taxes a year it will only take us 16.4 years to get our investment back without any interest.

[quote name='Forplay' date='27 October 2009 - 08:15 PM' timestamp='1256692557' post='46229']

The reason corporations are not hiring is because they have no growth, and the reason there is no growth is there is no profits. Companies need a profit to grow. Lending a company money that it has to pay back without making a profit to expand, it's not going to borrow the money nor is any bank going to lend to a company that is not making a profit.

[/quote]



And what does this idiot administration want to do, take MORE profits away from the companies.

[quote name='Vortex' date='29 October 2009 - 03:18 PM' timestamp='1256847513' post='47640']

You asked for a link to something that supports the opinion as reflected in the political cartoon. I provided you with that.



You continue to post .......

[/quote]



IOW you can't refute the facts that have been posted.