Majority of Americans Doubt Obama Stimulus Results: Poll

[Appaholic]

WASHINGTON (AFP) – A majority of Americans believe that a 787-billion-dollar stimulus package passed six months ago with support from President Barack Obama has had no effect or even made the US economy worse.

A USAToday/Gallup poll released Monday found that 41 percent of Americans think the spending has made the US economy better, but 57 percent believe it has either made no difference or worsened the recession that began in 2007.

The paper noted, however, that while economists do not agree on impact of the package on the economy, most believe the recession would have been worse without the stimulus.

But respondents were skeptical about the effects of the massive expenditure on their personal finances, with just 18 percent saying their fortunes had improved, and 68 percent saying they had seen no change.

Americans also expressed pessimism about the long-term effects of the package, which combined 288 billion dollars in tax cuts and 499 billion in new spending for a variety of projects, including infrastructure renewal.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090817/pl ... 1ham9yaXR5

[Col Hogan]

I was listening to a Harvard economics lecturer on the D.C. all-news station the other day...he was asked if the stimulus package was helping or hurting the recovery...

He said it's too early to say if it hurt....but his opinion was definate that it wasn't helping the recovery...that the recovery so far would have happened without the stimulus package...it's just a matter ot time before we see if the stimulus leads to inflation (and thus hurts the country) or if it actually helps improve our situation...

[Appaholic]

I was listening to a Harvard economics lecturer on the D.C. all-news station the other day...he was asked if the stimulus package was helping or hurting the recovery...

He said it's too early to say if it hurt....but his opinion was definate that it wasn't helping the recovery...that the recovery so far would have happened without the stimulus package...it's just a matter ot time before we see if the stimulus leads to inflation (and thus hurts the country) or if it actually helps improve our situation...

My vote is it hurts....too many special projects for certain agendas that weren't tied to infrastructure....too much government spending....I'm no economist, but I think the other shoe drops Q1-Q2 2010....and it'll be worse....

[dbackjon]

I think history will show it kept the economy from completely tanking.

[Col Hogan]

I think history will show it kept the economy from completely tanking.

How so....very little of the $780+Billion has been spent...yet the economy is starting to pull out of the dive...and as I mentioned, the Harvard economics lecturer says the recovery to-date would have panned with or without the stimulus package being passed...

[TheDancinMonarch]

I think history will show it kept the economy from completely tanking.

I had a sandwich today. History will show the it kept me from starving to death.

[D1B]

I was listening to a Harvard economics lecturer on the D.C. all-news station the other day...he was asked if the stimulus package was helping or hurting the recovery...

He said it's too early to say if it hurt....but his opinion was definate that it wasn't helping the recovery...that the recovery so far would have happened without the stimulus package...it's just a matter ot time before we see if the stimulus leads to inflation (and thus hurts the country) or if it actually helps improve our situation...

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

Roubini’s case against Ben Bernanke and his predecessor Alan Greenspan is that they kept interest rates too low for too long—and downplayed the significance of the bubble they helped create. “They kept on arguing that this was a minor housing slump, and this housing slump was going to bottom out,” he said. “They kept repeating this mantra that the subprime problem was a ‘niche’ and ‘contained’ problem.” These were serious analytic errors, he said, of a sort that is common near the end of a bubble. “Bernanke should have known better, but it’s not really about him. It’s in everybody’s interest to let the bubble go on. Instead of the wisdom of the crowd, we got the madness of the crowd.

“So when the proverbial stuff hit the fan in the summer of 2007, [the Fed and the Bush administration] were initially taken by surprise,” he concluded. “Their analysis had been wrong. And they didn’t understand the severity of what was to come. And all along, their policy was two steps behind the curve.” He was much more respectful of the judgment that Timothy Geithner showed.

“You know, when Geithner became president of the New York Fed [late in 2003], the first eight speeches he gave were about systemic risk,” he said. (Most were about the way the growing complexity and interconnectedness of financial systems made it harder to know the real degree of risk the entire financial network was exposed to, and how far regulation was lagging behind the quickly changing realities. Most read well in retrospect.) Behind this difference in tone, according to Roubini, was a deeper contrast in belief about what the government could or should do when it saw a financial bubble beginning to form.

[UNI88]

I was listening to a Harvard economics lecturer on the D.C. all-news station the other day...he was asked if the stimulus package was helping or hurting the recovery...

He said it's too early to say if it hurt....but his opinion was definate that it wasn't helping the recovery...that the recovery so far would have happened without the stimulus package...it's just a matter ot time before we see if the stimulus leads to inflation (and thus hurts the country) or if it actually helps improve our situation...

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

Roubini’s case against Ben Bernanke and his predecessor Alan Greenspan is that they kept interest rates too low for too long—and downplayed the significance of the bubble they helped create. “They kept on arguing that this was a minor housing slump, and this housing slump was going to bottom out,” he said. “They kept repeating this mantra that the subprime problem was a ‘niche’ and ‘contained’ problem.” These were serious analytic errors, he said, of a sort that is common near the end of a bubble. “Bernanke should have known better, but it’s not really about him. It’s in everybody’s interest to let the bubble go on. Instead of the wisdom of the crowd, we got the madness of the crowd.

“So when the proverbial stuff hit the fan in the summer of 2007, [the Fed and the Bush administration] were initially taken by surprise,” he concluded. “Their analysis had been wrong. And they didn’t understand the severity of what was to come. And all along, their policy was two steps behind the curve.” He was much more respectful of the judgment that Timothy Geithner showed.

“You know, when Geithner became president of the New York Fed [late in 2003], the first eight speeches he gave were about systemic risk,” he said. (Most were about the way the growing complexity and interconnectedness of financial systems made it harder to know the real degree of risk the entire financial network was exposed to, and how far regulation was lagging behind the quickly changing realities. Most read well in retrospect.) Behind this difference in tone, according to Roubini, was a deeper contrast in belief about what the government could or should do when it saw a financial bubble beginning to form.

I think history will show it kept the economy from completely tanking.

IMO, history will show that TARP played a much greater role in keeping the economy from tanking. A financial collapse although not certain would have been catastrophic.

History will show that the Stimulus package was largely a wasted opportunity that ended up filled with pork projects that provided little long-term value to the American economy. Primary responsibility for the steaming pile of crap that was the stimulus bill lies with Congress for not having the courage to focus on infrastructure, education and other projects that would really benefit the country for years to come.

[CID1990]

I was listening to a Harvard economics lecturer on the D.C. all-news station the other day...he was asked if the stimulus package was helping or hurting the recovery...

He said it's too early to say if it hurt....but his opinion was definate that it wasn't helping the recovery...that the recovery so far would have happened without the stimulus package...it's just a matter ot time before we see if the stimulus leads to inflation (and thus hurts the country) or if it actually helps improve our situation...

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

Roubini’s case against Ben Bernanke and his predecessor Alan Greenspan is that they kept interest rates too low for too long—and downplayed the significance of the bubble they helped create. “They kept on arguing that this was a minor housing slump, and this housing slump was going to bottom out,” he said. “They kept repeating this mantra that the subprime problem was a ‘niche’ and ‘contained’ problem.” These were serious analytic errors, he said, of a sort that is common near the end of a bubble. “Bernanke should have known better, but it’s not really about him. It’s in everybody’s interest to let the bubble go on. Instead of the wisdom of the crowd, we got the madness of the crowd.

“So when the proverbial stuff hit the fan in the summer of 2007, [the Fed and the Bush administration] were initially taken by surprise,” he concluded. “Their analysis had been wrong. And they didn’t understand the severity of what was to come. And all along, their policy was two steps behind the curve.” He was much more respectful of the judgment that Timothy Geithner showed.

“You know, when Geithner became president of the New York Fed [late in 2003], the first eight speeches he gave were about systemic risk,” he said. (Most were about the way the growing complexity and interconnectedness of financial systems made it harder to know the real degree of risk the entire financial network was exposed to, and how far regulation was lagging behind the quickly changing realities. Most read well in retrospect.) Behind this difference in tone, according to Roubini, was a deeper contrast in belief about what the government could or should do when it saw a financial bubble beginning to form.

D1B, did you know that Roubini was on NPR this weekend endorsing Bernanke's re-appointment? He, along with 70% of the economists surveyed on the subject.

[AZGrizFan]

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

I think history will show it kept the economy from completely tanking.

IMO, history will show that TARP played a much greater role in keeping the economy from tanking. A financial collapse although not certain would have been catastrophic.

History will show that the Stimulus package was largely a wasted opportunity that ended up filled with pork projects that provided little long-term value to the American economy. Primary responsibility for the steaming pile of crap that was the stimulus bill lies with Congress for not having the courage to focus on infrastructure, education and other projects that would really benefit the country for years to come.

As usual, 88, you are spot on.

[HI54UNI]

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

I think history will show it kept the economy from completely tanking.

IMO, history will show that TARP played a much greater role in keeping the economy from tanking. A financial collapse although not certain would have been catastrophic.

History will show that the Stimulus package was largely a wasted opportunity that ended up filled with pork projects that provided little long-term value to the American economy. Primary responsibility for the steaming pile of crap that was the stimulus bill lies with Congress for not having the courage to focus on infrastructure, education and other projects that would really benefit the country for years to come.

Well put. And as the Col noted very little of the stimulus money has been spent with the exception being the money wasted on propping up bloated state budgets.

[Col Hogan]

History will show that the Stimulus package was largely a wasted opportunity that ended up filled with pork projects that provided little long-term value to the American economy. Primary responsibility for the steaming pile of crap that was the stimulus bill lies with Congress for not having the courage to focus on infrastructure, education and other projects that would really benefit the country for years to come.

As usual, 88, you are spot on.

True.....very true....

It's a shame, but 88, you speak the truth...

[D1B]

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

D1B, did you know that Roubini was on NPR this weekend endorsing Bernanke's re-appointment? He, along with 70% of the economists surveyed on the subject.

What do you think Myron? Post a link or shut the fuck up.

[AZGrizFan]

D1B, did you know that Roubini was on NPR this weekend endorsing Bernanke's re-appointment? He, along with 70% of the economists surveyed on the subject.

What do you think Myron? Post a link or shut the fuck up.

Go take your meds and come back in an hour.

We'll wait.

[D1B]

What do you think Myron? Post a link or shut the fuck up.

Go take your meds and come back in an hour.

We'll wait.

Fuck, Z, I don't know CID for shit. Just asking to back that up is all...

[AZGrizFan]

Go take your meds and come back in an hour.

We'll wait.

Fuck, Z, I don't know CID for shit. Just asking to back that up is all...

How do you link to a radio station?

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

D1B, did you know that Roubini was on NPR this weekend endorsing Bernanke's re-appointment? He, along with 70% of the economists surveyed on the subject.

What do you think Myron? Post a link or shut the fuck up.

Here's one I found after a quick search.

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-new ... -term/905/

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Fuck, Z, I don't know CID for shit. Just asking to back that up is all...

How do you link to a radio station?

That's what I was gonna say as a smart ass as well. It's tough to link to something you heard but it's bound to be in writing somewhere on the web.

[Col Hogan]

****, Z, I don't know CID for ****. Just asking to back that up is all...

How do you link to a radio station?

From the guy who got pissed when I challenged him to back something up... SMFH...

Here's the back up for CID

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =111937512

[D1B]

Here's another opinon from a highly respected economist:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/roubini

D1B, did you know that Roubini was on NPR this weekend endorsing Bernanke's re-appointment? He, along with 70% of the economists surveyed on the subject.

Read the whole article. You're off point here.

[D1B]

Fuck, Z, I don't know CID for shit. Just asking to back that up is all...

How do you link to a radio station?

What a dumbass. SMFH...

[CID1990]

I listened to the whole radio show. I wouldn't have known how to link to it.

That being said, he does support Bernanke. Unless he was lying when he said what he said.

I'm more surprised you didn't make some snide ass comment about the fact that I am a conservative who listens to NPR, but then you're only sharp in the name-calling category.



Or not.

[D1B]

I listened to the whole radio show. I wouldn't have known how to link to it.

That being said, he does support Bernanke. Unless he was lying when he said what he said.

I'm more surprised you didn't make some snide ass comment about the fact that I am a conservative who listens to NPR, but then you're only sharp in the name-calling category.



Or not.

Good for you CID, here's a cookie.

Read the whole Atlantic article, not just the snippet I posted. Then read, again, what this thread is about and what it was responding to. Then comment, if you can. Got it Opey?

You are not a conservative. You voted for Cheney/Bush twice, like a dumbass.

[native]

I was listening to a Harvard economics lecturer on the D.C. all-news station the other day...he was asked if the stimulus package was helping or hurting the recovery...

He said it's too early to say if it hurt....but his opinion was definate that it wasn't helping the recovery...that the recovery so far would have happened without the stimulus package...it's just a matter ot time before we see if the stimulus leads to inflation (and thus hurts the country) or if it actually helps improve our situation...

My vote is it hurts....too many special projects for certain agendas that weren't tied to infrastructure....too much government spending....I'm no economist, but I think the other shoe drops Q1-Q2 2010....and it'll be worse....

I believe you are correct, Appy!

Now take the political leanings test again and get your @$$ out of the communist quadrant and back onto the moderate conservative team where you belong!

[CID1990]

I listened to the whole radio show. I wouldn't have known how to link to it.

That being said, he does support Bernanke. Unless he was lying when he said what he said.

I'm more surprised you didn't make some snide ass comment about the fact that I am a conservative who listens to NPR, but then you're only sharp in the name-calling category.



Or not.

Good for you CID, here's a cookie.

Read the whole Atlantic article, not just the snippet I posted. Then read, again, what this thread is about and what it was responding to. Then comment, if you can. Got it Opey?

You are not a conservative. You voted for Cheney/Bush twice, like a dumbass.

I have voted Libertarian consistently since 1992, boy.