Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

Employment: ‘Stimulus’ led to little growth

September 13, 2013

President Barack Obama likes to boast that trillions of dollars in “stimulus” spending of various types has put more Americans back to work. It has not....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Sep-13-13 6:32 AM

I was never a George W. Bush fan. Barack Obama is no improvement, however. Looks to be 16 years wasted.

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 7:18 AM

What would it look like WITHOUT the stimulus should be the question. We were on the very brink of a Great Depression. We adverted one. Economy is slowly in recovery.

If we want a faster recovery from the almost complete collapse of our entire economy, turn to Congress and ask why they keep voting on things like defund Obamacare, rather than on JOBS.

So far, they have had 41 votes to repeal ACA....0 (yes NONE...NADA) votes on JOBS.

Look where their priorities are! Clearly not with the people.

In spite of the resistant obstructionist of the Congress, still the economy slowly is digging out of the deep hole that the Greed on Wall Street shoved us all into.

6 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 7:23 AM

"Washington remains a wild card for the economy. Congress must agree on at least a short-term spending plan by October or risk shutting down the federal government. In addition, the nation may not be able to pay all its bills unless lawmakers agree to raise the debt ceiling before a mid-October deadline."

Hope Congress understands this. We cannot risk our entire credit rating again because some in our Congress do not understand basic economics. Time to complain about how high a bill is when you are spending the money...NOT when the bill comes due. We pay our bills. At least the USA used to. We cannot allow this Congress to make the USA a deadbeat when it comes to paying our bills. The impact this would have on our economy and credit rating would be devastating. Do they care?

5 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 7:50 AM

Annnnd we have Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck/Hannity writing editorials for the newspaper now, awesome!

9 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 8:01 AM

listen to the liberals. The weakest recovery in many decades and they claim a success. thats why judeye wants another jobs bill, the first one, the stimulus did not work.its jobs she claims ! judeye, do you read anything ? know whats going on in the country ? I dont think so. it is the fault of congress . wow ,it was private enterprise that made the country great, not the govt.the libs dont believe this. Do they care she says. You bet they do. I want everything obama and the dumbacrats obstructed to preserve what little liberty i have left.the libs are great at making people dumb. now even obama has seen the economic benfits of fracking. judeye says dont frack with our water, go green. She is for everything that does not work and against things that work.thats a liberal. now you know why the great depression was great, the libs made it so with govt programs. and bush is stupid they say ! stupid liberals.

7 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 8:08 AM

judeye , in your classic cherry picking you neglect that big labor does not like Obamacare, wants it fixed, code for repeal . they say it will destroy the 40 hr week. and judeye keeps blaming the repubs.did ya hear of this judeye ? libs, why do you ignore such a huge thing from big labor? Big labor is democratic.Other libs have said that obamacare needs fixing. Judeye, like the captain on titanic,orders full speed ahead. clear thinking has ever eluded the libs. They answer in simple terms like we have hannity etc writing editorials. Anyone with any brains can see the economy is stuck and the libs call one stupid for saying it.thats a liberal folks, thats why they say you did not build that. the libs never built anything that works, except govt.

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 8:36 AM

One ALWAYS knows they are on the decent, intelligent and correct side of any issue if your opinion is the opposite of Steiner's. A very good rule of thumb!

8 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 9:05 AM

Well Judeye what do you propose the Government do to create jobs,nationalize all small business or throw good money after bad into the abyss? The article is truthful and I know it hurts that your pal couldn't deliver on his grandiose designs and promises.

11 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 9:17 AM

christopher, you have said nothing. Why is that ? the economy is stuck. the stimulus did not work. obamacare is hanging over business like a sword of damocles. Everyone is waiting to see how this will pan out.christopher, you ignore like the libs do the letter fom big labor about obamacare. Why is that libs ? it sort of sinks you dont it ? christopher,you never disappoint, like judeye. ALways missing the point. where the jobs christopher ? Overseas ? thats just what Wilson thought might happen in his underwood tariff speech. Businessmen would have to be clever to make the same amount of money. They were. Moved it offshore. christophers unions did the rest, destroying the auto industry in am i doing christopher ?

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 9:24 AM

From the CBO -- a nonpartisan body full of economic expert & analysts all who have access to reams & reams of data (unlike the clueless church lady gaggle OBSERVER board who have trouble with googling...) said that, for 2012 alone, the stimulus: 1)Raised real GDP by between 0.1% & 0.8%, 2)lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.1 & 0.6 % points, 3)increased employment by up to 1.1 million, and 4)increased FTE jobs by up to 1.3 million.

CBO data for 2008 - 2011 is also available. All combined, the data shows the clueless gaggle board has no idea what its talking surprise.

7 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 9:31 AM

It seems like the Observer likes to make simplistic statements with no analysis. 8.8 million jobs were lost in the great recession. The stimulus planned to create 4 million jobs. It could have done more but putting people to work is not on republican's list of things to do. A lot of the money was spent to save public sector jobs from being eliminated, and as the money has run out many have been eliminated. And a big portion of the money was spent on tax credits to appease republicans. Many of the jobs were construction related, and those projects have been completed. Is the Observer even aware that google exists to check for facts? htt p://money.cnn.c om/2011/09/08/news/economy/stimulus_jobs_record/index.htm

4 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 10:02 AM

I would normally take a very conservative position when it comes to government spending but this was a different situation. Most economists would agree that the $787 billion stimulous was necessary to avoid a depression and we did avoid a depression. Consider this: President Herbertt Hoover was obsessed with balanced budgets and he cut spending and taxes during the great depression. We all know how that turned out - the depression lasted over ten years. The truth is that increased government spending is sometimes necessary to stimulate a failing economy. As for slow job creation, we have to consider the impact of de-industrialization, the impact of shipping manufacturing jobs overseas, computerization and robotics. China, India and other low cost countries now have many of the low skilled jobs that used to be in America. Computers now do the work that used to be performed by millions of Americans and robots are used in the manufacturing process. The work world has changed (con't)

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 10:07 AM

(con't) and employers have found that the only way to survive is to produce goods in Mexico, South America or overseas. A good education is still the best way to secure your future but low cost competition and automation are here to stay. Unions are a thing of the past. America must learn to compete or lose it's status as an industrial giant and economic powerhouse.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 10:39 AM

No judeye, the truth is we have no idea what would have happened if Washington hadn't pushed us further towards bankruptcy with over $1T in "stimulus". We might be just fine. That was such a scare tactic, but difficult to prove they made the wrong decision because you can't prove a negative outcome when it wasn't given a chance.

Picture this. Thunderstorm rolling in. You are in the middle of a barren field, the tallest object around for miles, and there's one underground bunker. A weather guru says you have a good chance of being struck by lightning you need to get in the bunker now. You get in the bunker and are not struck by lightning. Does that mean, unequivocally, that you avoided being struck because you got in the bunker. Were you absolutely going to be struck if you didn't get underground? NO. Same with the stimulus. We very well could be right where we are today, just $1T richer.

7 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 11:10 AM

How is the stimulus working? We are printing 85 billion in paper money a month and then buying the United States Treasury bonds with that money. That is called using a credit card to pay your bills folks, something any accountant is going to tell you to never do. This is a smoke and mirrors "recovery". How many people are now earning less than they were ten years ago? How many are unemployed? And how many are going to get "fined" (taxed) when the wonderful Obamacare go into effect? Recovery? You are kidding right? And how is it the deficit didn't grow but we spent 146 billion dollars more than was taken in?

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 11:48 AM

The 146 billion dollars was last month. Not one dollar was added to the deficit though? How is that possible? Let's ask that bastion of honesty the CBO....

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 11:55 AM

"...We cannot risk our entire credit rating again because some in our Congress do not understand basic economics...."

You mean like the basic economic fact such as you can not continually spend more then you make without it eventually destroying your economy?

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 11:58 AM

Or how about basic economic fact that financial incentives and disincentives work so by taking money from those that work and giving it to those that choose not to you are in fact discouraging work and encouraging people to spend their lives leeching off the working class.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 2:07 PM

What Dcroakernig fails to mention is the number of people entering the job market each month which of course negates his(?) phoney baloney statistics! That goose crap has for sure taken a toll on the frontal lobe!

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 2:49 PM

judeye your hero has been working toward the "devastating effect" you are so worried about for years...all you kept doing is extolling the virtues of his spend, spend, spend policies. Now you are going to worry? And attempt to blame (yet again) those dastardly Republicans? What the h.e.l.l. is in that kool aid? IQ eraser?

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 4:06 PM

The all-too-slowly-recovering job market has seen women rebound faster than men – they've now regained all the jobs they lost in the “Great Recession,” while men are still 2.1 million jobs short.

The August Jobs Report notes the unemployment rate for women was 6.8 percent, almost a full percentage point less than the 7.7 percent rate for men, with 68 million women in the workplace today versus 67.9 million in DEC 2007 when the recession began.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-13-13 4:20 PM

"....Time to complain about how high a bill is when you are spending the money...NOT when the bill comes due..."

That's funny, because when they complain when the left wants to spend the money you and the others on the left claim that it's not the time to talk about it then either. LOL!

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-14-13 7:57 AM

PhilJulian..."The truth is that increased government spending is sometimes necessary to stimulate a failing economy. "

AMEN Sir!!!!

Exactly. Many who comment here just do not seem to understand that this was not just a 'recession'..we were on the brink of a Great Depression. One that if not adverted would have pushed our entire Country, and perhaps the entire global economy, into a deep depression greater than the Great one (one that many of grew up hearing horrific stories about)

DKexpat has posted many articles and books and videos on the 2008 crash. Looks like few, including this paper, has bothered to take a look.

Thanks Phil for being objective and looking at the overall picture!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-14-13 8:06 AM

PR24601 "we have no idea what would have happened if Washington hadn't pushed us further towards bankruptcy with over $1T in "stimulus". "

You obviously have not bothered to read ANY fact based report on this issue. They KNOW what would have happened if this issue was not addressed IMMEDIATELY. Why do you think McCain 'suspended' his campaign to return to DC? Why do you think that the stimulus that Bush proposed got bipartisan support and was passed within hours?

Again, I refer back to numerous references that many of us, including DKexpat and myself, have provided that gave REAL FACTS (unlike opinions) on this issue.

I think the biggest mistake was for our government not to be honest and clear with all of us just how severe and devastating the situation was in 2008. If they had NO one would be doubting how we had to have the stimulus, bail out the banks (even saying that makes me ill inside), and auto industry.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-14-13 8:13 AM

DarkStar..."For the first seven months of 2013, the deficit was $489 billion. That is $231 billion less than the budget shortfall for the comparable period last year.

The decrease is almost entirely due to revenue increases. Revenues rose $200 billion and spending decreased only $11 billion."

That is how they did it. YES the deficit is GOING DOWN!

You can accept these FACTS or you can listen to opinions which ignore them. Your choice

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 40 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web