The Stimulus, Before/After

[Direckshun]

I have not the slightest idea how to copy and paste this piece into a thread here. So my apologies on that.

Fortunately, it's 20 slides you should be able to breeze through in a couple minutes.

http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-co...f/stimulus.pdf

I'm sure the next 50 posts will tell me to shove my head up my ass.

It's a good "read" regardless. Thoughts welcome, as if I needed to ask.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by SNR

This is the dumbest post I've read on this forum in quite some time.

You mean you don't agree that what America needs is more kids who don't know what an honest day's work is?

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by scho63

Also, the unemployment rate is FALSE-it has been rigged to exclude workers who have stopped looking for work.

That rate of unemployment largely mirrors the one that economists follow.

It's a rate that will always be higher than the one economists study, but its fluctuations almost always go in the same direction.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

As I've said before, the big thing I can't stand about Obama is that he spends an astronomical amount of money to create short upticks. He wants to hire more teachers, firefighters, and cops. Much as I respect those professions,do we need more of them? No. They aren't job creators. Construction jobs create jobs, but long term jobs? No. And so we fund a whole ton of these projects often on things we don't even need. In this slumping economy I can't even believe the massive amount of construction I've seen to widen street lanes.

You know what creates jobs? The next google. The next Facebook.

Creating jobs like construction jobs, for instance, injects the economy with demand. So it can create an uptick in job creation, it's basically like a rebate, but through a paycheck instead of a handout. Shrug.

I can't speak to Google, but doesn't Facebook make billions but only employs a few hundred people?

[SNR]

Originally Posted by patteeu

You mean you don't agree that what America needs is more kids who don't know what an honest day's work is?

It's the notion that just because a company doesn't manufacture widgets, they're not as beneficial to the economy as one who does.

[Iz Zat Chew]

Originally Posted by SNR

This is the dumbest post I've read on this forum in quite some time.

That you would make that comment only bolsters my belief that I am totally correct. It also indicates that you aren't aware of the massive amounts of goods we consume that are no longer manufactured in the U.S.

[SNR]

But yes, it's also the "KIDS TODAY SO DAMN DISRESPECTFUL DONT' KNOW HONEST DAYS WORK HURPA DUHR!" old man garbage that I can't stand. If old farts like Tom don't like the changes in society he sees, then guess whose fault that is.

[Iz Zat Chew]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Creating jobs like construction jobs, for instance, injects the economy with demand. So it can create an uptick in job creation, it's basically like a rebate, but through a paycheck instead of a handout. Shrug.

I can't speak to Google, but doesn't Facebook make billions but only employs a few hundred people?

Those billions are not fully shared with those that are employed. You seem to be laboring under a delusion. The owner of Facebook is worth billions, did not the true worth of Facebook show itself when it went public? How many people lost their investment before they even were invested?

As I said, Google and Facebook do not produce any goods of any kind.

[Iz Zat Chew]

Originally Posted by SNR

It's the notion that just because a company doesn't manufacture widgets, they're not as beneficial to the economy as one who does.

Actually companies that do not manufacture widgets have caused more financial loss than those that do. Remember the dot com bust a few years ago? Non-producing companies that went down the shitter.

[Iz Zat Chew]

Originally Posted by SNR

But yes, it's also the "KIDS TODAY SO DAMN DISRESPECTFUL DONT' KNOW HONEST DAYS WORK HURPA DUHR!" old man garbage that I can't stand. If old farts like Tom don't like the changes in society he sees, then guess whose fault that is.

Again you are showing a massive amount of ignorance as well as disrespect for the generations that came before us that made America great. Our generation will be the impetus that will most likely kill America.

[KC native]

Why do people insist that unemployment measurement has changed under Obama?

[KC native]

Originally Posted by Iz Zat Chew

Actually companies that do not manufacture widgets have caused more financial loss than those that do. Remember the dot com bust a few years ago? Non-producing companies that went down the shitter.

Tom, you are ****ing stupid.

What about Amazon, Google (I could go on but everyone knows you're a dipshit.)?

[Iz Zat Chew]

Originally Posted by KC native

Why do people insist that unemployment measurement has changed under Obama?

Has it? What I see now that I didn't see before is that after your UE benefits run out you are no longer unemployed. Did they keep the same format for counting the unemployed from administration to administration? If they have not changed the method why is it that the liberals didn't have that as one of their points of contentionduring conservative presidents administrations?

This administration is not concerned with the wellbeing of the American public, only the American President. It's all about Obama.

[Iz Zat Chew]

Originally Posted by KC native

you are ****ing stupid.

What about Amazon, Google (I could go on but everyone knows you're a dipshit.)?

Amazon provides a physical service. Google does not, it lives on advertising just as Facebook does. You should go on, it will only out your ignorance.

Go out and get a job, get off the computer and I bet you'll lose about 200 of those 450 pounds you weigh.

[KC native]

Originally Posted by Iz Zat Chew

Has it? What I see now that I didn't see before is that after your UE benefits run out you are no longer unemployed. Did they keep the same format for counting the unemployed from administration to administration? If they have not changed the method why is it that the liberals didn't have that as one of their points of contentionduring conservative presidents administrations?

This administration is not concerned with the wellbeing of the American public, only the American President. It's all about Obama.

No, it hasn't. The BLS last revised it under Bush. A simple google search would have told you that.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

That rate of unemployment largely mirrors the one that economists follow.

It's a rate that will always be higher than the one economists study, but its fluctuations almost always go in the same direction.

It does, but this is the first time that significant numbers of unemployed have been out for long enough to really make the flaws in the methodology significant.