Stimulus?

#1
T-TownVol

T-TownVol

Keep America Great
Lab Rat
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
19,804
Likes
6,832
#1
Economists: The stimulus didn't help
By Hibah Yousuf, staff reporterApril 26, 2010: 3:56 AM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The recovery is picking up steam as employers boost payrolls, but economists think the government's stimulus package and jobs bill had little to do with the rebound, according to a survey released Monday.

In latest quarterly survey by the National Association for Business Economics, the index that measures employment showed job growth for the first time in two years -- but a majority of respondents felt the fiscal stimulus had no impact.

NABE conducted the study by polling 68 of its members who work in economic roles at private-sector firms. About 73% of those surveyed said employment at their company is neither higher nor lower as a result of the $787 billion Recovery Act, which the White House's Council of Economic Advisers says is on track to create or save 3.5 million jobs by the end of the year.

That sentiment is shared for the recently passed $17.7 billion jobs bill that calls for tax breaks for businesses that hire and additional infrastructure spending. More than two-thirds of those polled believe the measure won't affect payrolls, while 30% expect it to boost hiring "moderately."

But the economists see conditions improving. More than half of respondents -- 57% -- say industrial demand is rising, while just 6% see it declining. A growing number also said their firms are increasing spending and profit margins are widening.

Nearly a quarter of those surveyed forecast that gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity, will grow more than 3% in 2010, and 70% of NABE's respondents expect it to grow more than 2%.

Still, the survey suggested that tight lending conditions remain a concern. Almost half of those polled said the credit crunch hurts their business.

The economy will come back. Government needs to get out of the way.
 
Last edited:
#9
#9
Is money that was transferred to the states and used to pay teachers, policeman, and other workers a stimulus to the economy?

Or would we have been better off with tens of thousands of more unemployed people?
 
#10
#10
Velo Vol said:
Is money that was transferred to the states and used to pay teachers, policeman, and other workers a stimulus to the economy?

Or would we have been better off with tens of thousands of more unemployed people?
Click to expand...

This argument suggests that any spending by the government is stimulative.

The issue is was the money well spent? Did it have the claimed stimulative effect? Would we be better off spending it elsewhere or not spending it at all?

The posted article suggests it was generally ineffective as stimulative spending.
 
#11
#11
Velo Vol said:
Is money that was transferred to the states and used to pay teachers, policeman, and other workers a stimulus to the economy?

Or would we have been better off with tens of thousands of more unemployed people?
Click to expand...

At 800 billion, we could have sent 10K to 80 million people. I bet that would have done more to stimulate the economy than the Porkulous bill did.

It was highly ineffective spending from a stimulus perspective.
 
#12
#12
Velo Vol said:
Is money that was transferred to the states and used to pay teachers, policeman, and other workers a stimulus to the economy?

Or would we have been better off with tens of thousands of more unemployed people?
Click to expand...

there's no way that could have a stimulative effect. Even if you believe the "saved jobs" BS, those people didn't go out and buy ten thousand dollar HDTV's and vacations in Vegas. Odds are they continued to live life normally, pay bills, etc.
 
#13
#13
MG1968 said:
there's no way that could have a stimulative effect. Even if you believe the "saved jobs" BS, those people didn't go out and buy ten thousand dollar HDTV's and vacations in Vegas. Odds are they continued to live life normally, pay bills, etc.
Click to expand...
Do you live life normally or pay your bills when you've just been given a pink slip.Ask those people in Scott and Hancock counties that waited in line for the oppurtunity to get a stimulus paid for job how normally they have lived for the last year.
 
#14
#14
DAVOL said:
Do you live life normally or pay your bills when you've just been given a pink slip.Ask those people in Scott and Hancock counties that waited in line for the oppurtunity to get a stimulus paid for job how normally they have lived for the last year.
Click to expand...

every study has shown that increased unemployment benefits increases the time someone is unemployed.
 
#15
#15
DAVOL said:
Do you live life normally or pay your bills when you've just been given a pink slip.Ask those people in Scott and Hancock counties that waited in line for the oppurtunity to get a stimulus paid for job how normally they have lived for the last year.
Click to expand...

it really depends on the definition of "stimulus". Did saving a job result in a net increase of spending? Yes/no. The person didn't spend more than normal but if they lost their job, spending would have decreased.

Still, it's a crappy stimulus program.
 
#16
#16
DAVOL said:
Do you live life normally or pay your bills when you've just been given a pink slip.Ask those people in Scott and Hancock counties that waited in line for the oppurtunity to get a stimulus paid for job how normally they have lived for the last year.
Click to expand...

read my post again, I wasn't talking about people who've lost their jobs.
 
#17
#17
droski said:
every study has shown that increased unemployment benefits increases the time someone is unemployed.
Click to expand...
They were looking for jobs that were paid for by the stimulus bill what's that got to do with unemployment other than they were unemployed.
 
#19
#19
DAVOL said:
They were looking for jobs that were paid for by the stimulus bill what's that got to do with unemployment other than they were unemployed.
Click to expand...

and what do you think will happen when the stimulus money runs out?
 
#20
#20
DAVOL said:
And if the states did not get the money then they would also have been in line looking for jobs with the rest of them.
Click to expand...

but since they got the money and kept their jobs, their spending habits didn't change, hence, no stimulative effect on the economy.
 
#21
#21
droski said:
and what do you think will happen when the stimulus money runs out?
Click to expand...
Well I'm just guessing here but I'd say they are hoping that the economy will have picked up by the time these temp jobs expire and the great private sector employers will hire some of these people.
 
#22
#22
if Obama and company keep screwing with the private sector, those jobs won't be coming back, at least not to Americans.
 
#23
#23
MG1968 said:
but since they got the money and kept their jobs, their spending habits didn't change, hence, no stimulative effect on the economy.
Click to expand...
Would you have felt better and called it a stimulus if they had allowed them to get laid off then rehired them a week later with stimulus money.
 
#24
#24
MG1968 said:
if Obama and company keep screwing with the private sector, those jobs won't be coming back, at least not to Americans.
Click to expand...
Hard to outsource service jobs and healthcare which is what our economy is basically.
 
#25
#25
DAVOL said:
Would you have felt better and called it a stimulus if they had allowed them to get laid off then rehired them a week later with stimulus money.
Click to expand...

no, because it still would not have had a stimulative effect on the economy.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top