Question:
Hey libs, do you have any proof that if the stimulus bill was not passed that we would be in a depression?
2010-08-26 07:08:20 UTC
Or do you just pull stuff like that out of your butt and hope all the morons out there will believe it?

I want some hard facts please.
Fourteen answers:
2010-08-26 07:13:26 UTC
Only the words of people smarter than you (not hard) or I (more difficult)...3 million jobs.
Noah H
2010-08-26 15:05:35 UTC
The nonexistent 'libs' get nailed again. The strawman of the Teapublicans is really taking a beating. But on to the question: Because of the self induced melt down of the unregulated banking industry credit has just about dried up in the American economy as it has world wide....this being a world wide recession. Because of the exportation of US industry to China the total amount of cash income into the pockets of American wage earners has fallen to a point where there isn't enough cash in the system to maintain a robust domestic economy. A market system requires three distinct things: Credit/production/consumption. All of these are interdependent. 'The Stimulus' adds cash to a cash poor system. The cash at first jump starts various work projects by private contractors...work projects such as rebuilding essential infrastructure like bridges. Once the projects are underway banks are less reluctant to lend to complete these projects. These two sources of cash are used to purchase supplies encouraging production in another part of the economy. To complete the projects and produce the materials workers are hired or at least retained. The cash the workers receive and the various suppliers receive gets spent and become income, investment, savings, profits and eventually taxes...beginning the investment, production, hiring equation all over again. Absent the above the economy will sink to a level of equilibrium far below that a 'stimulated' economy...to a point where production, credit and cash balance. A point far above the 9.5% 'official' unemployment that we have now. A better result would be seen if far more money was pumped into the system, though that alone would lead to inflation. That's why only a small amount of stimulus money has been allocated. In WW2 a massive 'stimulus' was ordered, but that stimulus also included rationing and wage and price controls...one can only assume that the right wing radio dummies who continually dump on the non existent 'liberals' would keel over dead behind that kind of situation. However, if you recall, the US went from about 20% unemployment to full employment almost over night behind FDR's war time 'stimulus'. In the world of the right wing radio dummies doing nothing or going backwards to a time that never was is the answer to everything, as illustrated by this 'question'. We need to do more 'stimulus', but should the reactionaries of the right 'win' in the next election cycle you can bet we'll do less....what a bummer!
2010-08-26 14:11:28 UTC
Yes. I'll get you the link to Bush's economic advisor from 2 weeks ago.

=========

Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics -



"We find that the effects on real GDP, jobs, and inflation are huge, probably averting what would have been called Great Depression 2.0."



"For example, we estimate that, without the policy responses, GDP in 2010 would be about 6½% lower, payroll employment would be about 8½ million jobs lower, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation."



"our estimated effects of the fiscal stimulus policies alone are very substantial: In 2010, real GDP that is about 2% higher, an unemployment rate that is about 1½ points lower, and almost 2.7 million more jobs..."



"As Mr. Blinder and Mr. Zandi note, their estimates of the fiscal stimulus are similar to the estimates of others — including the Congressional Budget Office."



http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/07/the-no-stimulus-baseline.html



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/business/economy/28bailout.html
2010-08-26 14:12:14 UTC
you can't prove something that didn't happen...



unless you have a time machine and you want to go "back to the future"... and you go back and stop the stimulus from being passed, then go into the future to see the impact...



the simple fact that you ask for proof is a bit silly...



but, there are several economists who believe it was possible and believed that we were in a similar trend to the 29 crash... but that's just opinion in the end...



the only "facts" that we can point to are the falling unemployment rates and stock market before the stimulus was passed, and both stabilized afterward...now, you could say that it's just a coincidence... but that's pretty convenient...
B Man
2010-08-26 14:22:54 UTC
hey cons,

do you have any proof that if we didn't pass bush's stimulus bill that we would all be sitting on gold-plated toilet-bowls right now?



EXACTLY!!! So why do you make claims that you cannot prove? Where is the proof!?..



rabblerabblerabble
Green
2010-08-26 14:13:38 UTC
No, do you have proof that it would not have?



Or do you just pull stuff like that out of your butt and hope all the morons out there believe it?



I want some hard facts please.
Entirely of This World
2010-08-26 14:12:44 UTC
We are in a depression. One aspect of the stimulus, the $8k new home owners credit, got me into a house at the bottom of the market, so I have benefited. I believe it would be worse if not for the stimulus. Eight years of deficit spending to fund an unnecessary war in Iraq can not be undone. We are in a mess for which no one can get us out.
Toledo
2010-08-26 14:27:39 UTC
Exactly, you say we can not prove something that does not exist, so why did you post this question?



I fail to understand why you did, unless you did it for partisan reasons and that makes you far less intellegent then you think you are.



Why?



Because partisans are blinded by their own idiology. Just ask former Nazi's about that.
?
2010-08-26 14:11:11 UTC
What morons liberals are!



When we conservatives want to prove that something WOULD HAVE HAPPENED if something else that didn't happen had occurred, all we have to do is travel to a parallel universe in which the thing that didn't occur actually occurred. Then we travel back to this universe with photos. Presto! All the proof we need.
Forget War Buy More
2010-08-26 14:13:46 UTC
Lol. So do you have evidence to the contrary? Cold hard facts?



Nice use of the defensive ploy to take a position rather than using your own evidence to create one.
blueridgeliving
2010-08-26 14:11:08 UTC
Yeah, we pulled the Wall Street meltdown of 2008 "out of our butts".



My 401k lost over HALF its value. And I'm small potatoes. Houses were being foreclosed on left and right. Businesses were dropping like flies. People were being laid off.

There was GLOBAL panic. Stock markets all over the world were crashing.



Do you guys actually live in a cave? How can you not remember what happened like five seconds ago?

***********************************

CRISIS WEEKEND 2008



The Subprime Mortgage Crisis on Trial

August 25, 2010, 11:37 am



Peter J. Henning follows issues involving securities law and white-collar crime for DealBook’s White Collar Watch.



The financial crisis has led to only a few civil and criminal cases against executives, and even those focused on peripheral issues: Goldman Sachs’s peddling of a credit derivative obligation and the communications of two former Bear Stearns hedge fund managers.



But the Securities and Exchange Commission’s securities fraud action against Angelo R. Mozilo, former chief executive of Countrywide Financial, promises to feature the aggressive mortgage practices of what was then the nation’s largest mortgage lender.



G.E. Disputes Incident in Paulson’s Book

February 11, 2010, 12:35 pm



When it comes to Henry M. Paulson Jr.’s new book, “On the Brink,” it seems there’s a little bit of disagreement over some of the particulars — and should make for an interesting conversation with Jeffrey R. Immelt next week.



In this case, Mr. Immelt, General Electric’s chief executive, is disputing an anecdote in which he’s purported to have told the former Treasury secretary about his company’s commercial paper troubles at the height of the crisis.



Fed to Offer Bridge Loan to A.I.G. and Take Control of Firm

September 16, 2008, 5:24 pm

Updated: The Federal Reserve plans to offer an $85 billion bridge loan to the American International Group in return for control of the ailing insurance giant, people briefed on the matter said Tuesday night.



In an intense discussion at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on Tuesday afternoon, the Fed and a group of executives from JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and other firms agreed that a banking syndicate to provide the $75 billion in emergency financing could not be arranged by Tuesday night.



After Lehman’s Fall, Picking Up the Pieces

September 16, 2008, 8:38 am

Lehman Brothers’s bankruptcy filing has set the stage for hard-fought negotiations in and out of the courtroom, as potential buyers pick through its remaining assets and creditors seek to maximize their recoveries.



Barclays confirmed Tuesday that it was in talks with Lehman about “the possible acquisition” of some assets at the American bank.



Meanwhile, Lehman was said to be continuing talks with several private equity firms over a sale of its entire investment management division, and has reportedly narrowed the list of potential buyers to Bain Capital, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Clayton Dubilier & Rice and Hellman & Friedman.



BofA’s Merrill Deal Brings Risks and Opportunity

September 16, 2008, 8:11 am

Last Friday, Kenneth D. Lewis, chief executive of the Bank of America Corporation, was in his headquarters in Charlotte, N.C., pondering a possible acquisition of Lehman Brothers, the foundering investment bank.



By the next morning, Mr. Lewis already had a new target in his sights: Merrill Lynch, The New York Times’s Eric Dash reports. John A. Thain, Merrill’s chief executive, phoned Mr. Lewis about a deal and by Saturday afternoon the two men were encamped in a Bank of America apartment in the Time Warner Center overlooking Central Park.



A Fight for a Piece of What’s Left

September 16, 2008, 8:10 am

A worldwide battle began on Monday over the remains of Lehman Brothers as the biggest bankruptcy filing in history sent creditors scrambling to protect their investments, The New York Times’s Jonathan D. Glater and Gretchen Mrorgenson reported.



Lawyers for global companies like JPMorgan Chase, the General Electric Capital Corporation and Credit Suisse rushed into court, as well as small investors, like Arapahoe County, Colo., and the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District in the suburbs of Dallas. All may be owed money by Lehman and want to preserve their interests in its reorganization, which will be overseen by a bankruptcy judge.



Attention to Turns to Lehman’s Fuld

September 16, 2008, 8:06 am

Even in the final hour, Dick Fuld could not let go.



As midnight approached on Sunday and the world anticipated a bankruptcy filing from Lehman Brothers, Mr. Fuld, the bank’s pugnacious chief executive, continued to work the phones, desperate to find a buyer for a venerable franchise he had saved from near death in the past, according to The New York Times’s Ben White and Michael M. Grynbaum.



After Bank of America and Barclays walked away on Sunday, unwilling to do a deal without government support, Mr. Fuld called anyone he could think of, including Morgan Stanley, that might agree to a last-second transaction, The Times said.



Wall St.’s Turmoil Sends Stocks Reeling

September 16, 2008, 7:53 am



Fearing that the crisis in the financial industry could stun the broader economy, investors drove stocks down almost 5 percent Monday, sending the Dow Jones industrial average and Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index to their lowest levels in two years.



The Dow fell 504.48 points, its biggest one-day point drop since Sept. 17, 2001, the first trading day after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.



On Tuesday, the slide continued overseas. Japanese banking stocks posted their biggest one-day loss since 1987. European markets opened lower.
jwthoughts
2010-08-26 14:12:03 UTC
It is the latter. And it is ridiculous. There were many economists screaming not to throw out that money or it would get worse. Today there are many economists who say that we are worse off.



But the Obamination administration chose to follow their lapdog economists into this pit.
2010-08-26 14:09:41 UTC
They cant prove it. All they have is BS propaganda the White House sends out to cover their failures.
?
2010-08-26 14:11:40 UTC
They must not see the question....(:


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...