Comments on: Greece Facing “Titanic” Problem http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/ Sun, 27 May 2012 09:27:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Anonymous http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309722 Anonymous Fri, 19 Feb 2010 05:54:00 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309722 Talk about our Federal Govt waste of taxpayer money and their need to cut spending, "...according to USA Today, when the economic downturn began the U.S. Department of Transportation had just one employee making over $170,000. A year and a half later, it has 1,690."  from a recent Mark Steyn op-ed.  In California, the top budget crisis issue is our public employee union pension obligations and retirement benefits.   The growth of the public employee sector, along with their CEO pay structures and benefits far outstrips any of our other wasteful spending.  And it is wasteful.   If it weren't we wouldn't have such long wait lines for those coveted jobs, while Californians suffer 12% plus unemployment, and the nation, nearly 10%.  They'll never cut it themselves.  Question is, how will we make them do it?  If not us, who will make them do it? Talk about our Federal Govt waste of taxpayer money and their need to cut spending, “…according to USA Today, when the economic downturn began the U.S. Department of Transportation had just one employee making over $170,000. A year and a half later, it has 1,690.”  from a recent Mark Steyn op-ed.  In California, the top budget crisis issue is our public employee union pension obligations and retirement benefits.   The growth of the public employee sector, along with their CEO pay structures and benefits far outstrips any of our other wasteful spending.  And it is wasteful.   If it weren’t we wouldn’t have such long wait lines for those coveted jobs, while Californians suffer 12% plus unemployment, and the nation, nearly 10%.  They’ll never cut it themselves.  Question is, how will we make them do it?  If not us, who will make them do it?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309328 Anonymous Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:38:06 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309328 ms, What exactly are you talking about? Obama has taken a ton of steps to turn this economy around and every credible economist says the stimulus did what it was suppose to do and there is increasing evidence every day that this economic turnaround is real. The economy is coming back faster than most thought. Not sure what you are talking about when you say failed to act for 5 months. What are you talking about? The economy? Right out of the gate Obama passed the largest single stimulus in global history and biggest middle class tax cut. They also rescued Detroit, which saved a lot of jobs, maybe a million, and a big part of the industrial base of this country. It looks like the govt may get its money back with a profit from detroit by mid-summer. etc. etc. All they have been doing is acting on the economy and trying to bail the country out from the Republican recession and mess. It probably hurt their healthcare push, as they had to focus on the economy instead of the Obama agenda on energy, healthcare, education, environment, etc.  Healthcare? Too soon to write off. Reconciliation looks increasingly probable. The public option may even come back. So far we have 11 senators who yesterday pushing for a public option and reconciliation. It is 100% admirable that Obama has even tried to fix healthcare. You would have gotten zero focus on healthcare, if McCain and the Republicans were in there. I hardly think the independents turned into the Tea partiers. The Tea partiers are so far away from being independents it is not even funny. They represent a far right-wing agenda. I suggest you read this NYT article from yesterday. Tea partiers are largely; birthers, John Birchers, the patriot movement, militias, etc. etc. The extremes of your society, hardly independents. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/us/politics/16teaparty.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/us/politics/16teaparty.html</a> It is funny, why is it that the Tea Partiers are only now concerned about big government and the debt, when we did not hear a peep out of these people during the Bush years? Few other presidents increased government, the debt, and treaded on the constitution more than Bush and the Republicans. Why are they concerned now when Obama is trying to fix the Republicans mes?. Complete  BS. A movement funded by corporations (insurance companies, etc.) to oppose healthcare. a complete faux grass roots movement. all their money and media comes from corporations and lobbyists. Where do you think Freedom Works gets their money? ms,

What exactly are you talking about?

Obama has taken a ton of steps to turn this economy around and every credible economist says the stimulus did what it was suppose to do and there is increasing evidence every day that this economic turnaround is real. The economy is coming back faster than most thought.

Not sure what you are talking about when you say failed to act for 5 months. What are you talking about? The economy? Right out of the gate Obama passed the largest single stimulus in global history and biggest middle class tax cut. They also rescued Detroit, which saved a lot of jobs, maybe a million, and a big part of the industrial base of this country. It looks like the govt may get its money back with a profit from detroit by mid-summer. etc. etc. All they have been doing is acting on the economy and trying to bail the country out from the Republican recession and mess. It probably hurt their healthcare push, as they had to focus on the economy instead of the Obama agenda on energy, healthcare, education, environment, etc. 

Healthcare? Too soon to write off. Reconciliation looks increasingly probable. The public option may even come back. So far we have 11 senators who yesterday pushing for a public option and reconciliation. It is 100% admirable that Obama has even tried to fix healthcare. You would have gotten zero focus on healthcare, if McCain and the Republicans were in there.

I hardly think the independents turned into the Tea partiers. The Tea partiers are so far away from being independents it is not even funny. They represent a far right-wing agenda. I suggest you read this NYT article from yesterday. Tea partiers are largely; birthers, John Birchers, the patriot movement, militias, etc. etc. The extremes of your society, hardly independents.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/us/politics/16teaparty.html

It is funny, why is it that the Tea Partiers are only now concerned about big government and the debt, when we did not hear a peep out of these people during the Bush years? Few other presidents increased government, the debt, and treaded on the constitution more than Bush and the Republicans. Why are they concerned now when Obama is trying to fix the Republicans mes?.

Complete  BS. A movement funded by corporations (insurance companies, etc.) to oppose healthcare. a complete faux grass roots movement. all their money and media comes from corporations and lobbyists. Where do you think Freedom Works gets their money?

]]> By: ms http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309278 ms Thu, 18 Feb 2010 03:14:34 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309278 Come on, viewed in the context of the larger economy determinants this is cheap Obama publicity!  Barack has single-handedly destroyed his own credibility by failing to act for 5 months to "sell" the concept (he's clueless or at best lacks knowledge of what he wanted to convey as "best healhtcare plan") of a public option!  He scared voters by his silence and lack of Communication (his specialty or perhaps it's just rhetoric) and ignored not only his base but the independents who were turned by his incompetence and silence and lack of spine into...Tea Partiers!  Come on, viewed in the context of the larger economy determinants this is cheap Obama publicity!  Barack has single-handedly destroyed his own credibility by failing to act for 5 months to “sell” the concept (he’s clueless or at best lacks knowledge of what he wanted to convey as “best healhtcare plan”) of a public option!  He scared voters by his silence and lack of Communication (his specialty or perhaps it’s just rhetoric) and ignored not only his base but the independents who were turned by his incompetence and silence and lack of spine into…Tea Partiers! 

]]> By: prime obot http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309152 prime obot Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:26:58 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309152 Oh, and don't let me forget the original stimulus bill, which was negotiated over a period of weeks at the very beginning of the Obama presidency, and watered down way more than it should have been, until Congress progressives were extremely irritated by Obama's "fetish for bipartisanship" -- only to get precisely zero votes from the Republicans. This at a time when the global economy was on the verge of outright collapse. The Democrats and Obama have plenty of problems. But the GOP is a joke.    Oh, and don’t let me forget the original stimulus bill, which was negotiated over a period of weeks at the very beginning of the Obama presidency, and watered down way more than it should have been, until Congress progressives were extremely irritated by Obama’s “fetish for bipartisanship” — only to get precisely zero votes from the Republicans. This at a time when the global economy was on the verge of outright collapse.

The Democrats and Obama have plenty of problems. But the GOP is a joke.   

]]> By: prime obot http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309151 prime obot Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:25:15 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309151 You've got to be kidding. You mean, the six months that the Democrats wasted in endless "negotiation" with Senate Republicans over health care didn't constitute "trying bipartisanship?" Or the entitlement reform proposal, which was a Republican idea that Obama adopted, then got slapped in the face when they turned around and voted it down? Or the two months that Senate Democrats spent negotiating a jobs bill with the GOP, adopting almost all of their business tax cuts, only to have the talks collapse a few hours after the Senate Democratic leadership finally announced that they had a deal? Your assertions about bipartisanship have zero basis in reality. It is sheer fantasy to assert that the Republicans have ever had any intention of being bipartisan. Their intention is to destroy the Obama presidency. And that, by the way, is the only reason that they are popular in any way on NQ.    You’ve got to be kidding. You mean, the six months that the Democrats wasted in endless “negotiation” with Senate Republicans over health care didn’t constitute “trying bipartisanship?” Or the entitlement reform proposal, which was a Republican idea that Obama adopted, then got slapped in the face when they turned around and voted it down? Or the two months that Senate Democrats spent negotiating a jobs bill with the GOP, adopting almost all of their business tax cuts, only to have the talks collapse a few hours after the Senate Democratic leadership finally announced that they had a deal?

Your assertions about bipartisanship have zero basis in reality. It is sheer fantasy to assert that the Republicans have ever had any intention of being bipartisan. Their intention is to destroy the Obama presidency. And that, by the way, is the only reason that they are popular in any way on NQ.   

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309145 Anonymous Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:44:55 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309145 LD, But, what is the definition of "stimulus". It is to stimulate the economy. The bill did exactly what it was suppose to do. To keep the economy from tail spinning and to stop the bleeding. It was not suppose to deal with long term unemployment or as you say the outter innings. How can you argue the fact that we went from 700,000 job losses a month and about -6% GDP growth a quarter to no job losses and nearly 6% GDP growth in the recent 4th quarter. A remarkable turnaround for an economy that was tail-spinning out of control. The stimulus helped to turn this around. And in the end the stimulus may have cost nothing, as who knows what the costs would have been if we let the economy continue to spin downward and we lost another 2 to 3 million jobs? What would have been the cost the the economy and to dig us out of the deeper hole? The stimulus has also has likely brought the tax receipts back to the government that were depressed because of the economic downturn back quicker, so in the end the stimulus may have cost far less than the actual dollar cost. Basic economics you borrow and spend in a recession and you save and pay down debt during good times. Obama has admitted that this stimulus and other rescues will ultimately add $1 trillion to the deficit. Do you think it was worth it? At lease we are spending to save the economy, as opposed to Bush who added $5 trillion to the deficit and had absolutely nothing to show for it. Not one job created over 8 years. In addition, 40% of this stimulus will help long-term growth, as it is going into infrastructure, education, energy, etc. Things that will help the economy over the long-term. To me the stimulus was an investment at a crucial moment that was well worth it. How can you say otherwise, no matter what inning you think we are in? what was the alternative Larry? By the way the stimulus did not explode the deficit as you say. First of all the CBO said in a January 2009 report, before Obama took over, and which does not include any of Obama's programs including the stimulus, that the 2009 deficit was going to be $1.2 trillion. It came in at $1.4 trillion. At most you can say that of the 2009 deficit Obama was responsible for maybe $200 billion. The rest was going to be there whether Obama was elected President or not. And in fact much of the deficit over the next three years would have still been there even if McCain was elected, unless he drastically cut spending, which would have been a disaster in an economic downturn. The stimulus its was only $787 billion over 2 to 3 years. So at most that adds say $200 - 300 billion a year, which is maybe 15-20% of the deficit in anyone year. So it hardly blew out the deficit. The biggest cause of the deficit, about 40% by most estimates, was the decline in tax receipts to the government from the Bush recession. I would argue that the game has been going on since mid-2007, when the credit crunch began. We have been in this recession for 2 1/2 years. Most recession, especially one of this magnitude last longer, as long as 5 years. So it is all the more remarkable that the economy is now growing again. We could have a double dip, but there are absolutely no indicators pointing toward that. Just today: "U.S. housing starts and industrial production increased more than economists projected in January, government data showed, adding to evidence growth is accelerating in the world’s largest economy.     “The fundamentals are trending in the right direction,” said Hank Smith, who helps oversee $6 billion as chief investment officer of Haverford Trust Co. in Radnor, Pennsylvania. “The economic data continues to trend to the positive, corporate profits by and large exceeded expectations and some of the global uncertainty about sovereign debt has been taken away. We have an unprecedented worldwide recovery going on.”" And by the way for all most the entire last year the Obama adminstration has continually said that they will focus on deficit reduction in the second half of his first term, as we get out of this recession. That seems perfectly logical to me. I ask LD, what would you have have done differently? LD,

But, what is the definition of “stimulus”. It is to stimulate the economy. The bill did exactly what it was suppose to do. To keep the economy from tail spinning and to stop the bleeding. It was not suppose to deal with long term unemployment or as you say the outter innings. How can you argue the fact that we went from 700,000 job losses a month and about -6% GDP growth a quarter to no job losses and nearly 6% GDP growth in the recent 4th quarter. A remarkable turnaround for an economy that was tail-spinning out of control. The stimulus helped to turn this around.

And in the end the stimulus may have cost nothing, as who knows what the costs would have been if we let the economy continue to spin downward and we lost another 2 to 3 million jobs? What would have been the cost the the economy and to dig us out of the deeper hole? The stimulus has also has likely brought the tax receipts back to the government that were depressed because of the economic downturn back quicker, so in the end the stimulus may have cost far less than the actual dollar cost.

Basic economics you borrow and spend in a recession and you save and pay down debt during good times.

Obama has admitted that this stimulus and other rescues will ultimately add $1 trillion to the deficit. Do you think it was worth it? At lease we are spending to save the economy, as opposed to Bush who added $5 trillion to the deficit and had absolutely nothing to show for it. Not one job created over 8 years. In addition, 40% of this stimulus will help long-term growth, as it is going into infrastructure, education, energy, etc. Things that will help the economy over the long-term.

To me the stimulus was an investment at a crucial moment that was well worth it. How can you say otherwise, no matter what inning you think we are in? what was the alternative Larry?

By the way the stimulus did not explode the deficit as you say. First of all the CBO said in a January 2009 report, before Obama took over, and which does not include any of Obama’s programs including the stimulus, that the 2009 deficit was going to be $1.2 trillion. It came in at $1.4 trillion. At most you can say that of the 2009 deficit Obama was responsible for maybe $200 billion. The rest was going to be there whether Obama was elected President or not. And in fact much of the deficit over the next three years would have still been there even if McCain was elected, unless he drastically cut spending, which would have been a disaster in an economic downturn. The stimulus its was only $787 billion over 2 to 3 years. So at most that adds say $200 – 300 billion a year, which is maybe 15-20% of the deficit in anyone year. So it hardly blew out the deficit. The biggest cause of the deficit, about 40% by most estimates, was the decline in tax receipts to the government from the Bush recession.

I would argue that the game has been going on since mid-2007, when the credit crunch began. We have been in this recession for 2 1/2 years. Most recession, especially one of this magnitude last longer, as long as 5 years. So it is all the more remarkable that the economy is now growing again. We could have a double dip, but there are absolutely no indicators pointing toward that.

Just today:

“U.S. housing starts and industrial production increased more than economists projected in January, government data showed, adding to evidence growth is accelerating in the world’s largest economy.

    “The fundamentals are trending in the right direction,”
said Hank Smith, who helps oversee $6 billion as chief
investment officer of Haverford Trust Co. in Radnor,
Pennsylvania. “The economic data continues to trend to the
positive, corporate profits by and large exceeded expectations
and some of the global uncertainty about sovereign debt has been
taken away. We have an unprecedented worldwide recovery going
on.””
And by the way for all most the entire last year the Obama adminstration has continually said that they will focus on deficit reduction in the second half of his first term, as we get out of this recession. That seems perfectly logical to me.

I ask LD, what would you have have done differently?

]]> By: Docelder http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309138 Docelder Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:21:54 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309138 The "stimulus" number was a tit for tat. Bush gave Wall Street about that much and so the democrats wanted theirs. But, I would agree that the only jobs it influenced were government jobs. Instead they could have gave an 800 billion tax recess to businesses that hire  or that expand and actually maybe the private sector would have hired more people outside of government. I don't hate government, I like streets and trash service, but realize that government relies on the private sector for funding. More government jobs, just takes more away from the private sector in perpetuity. That doesn't make me a tea bagger. That is just common sense. If we all worked for the government, we as a nation would go broke really, really fast. Unless the government figures out how to make money aside from printing it. I think this is a part of what is happening here. The “stimulus” number was a tit for tat. Bush gave Wall Street about that much and so the democrats wanted theirs. But, I would agree that the only jobs it influenced were government jobs. Instead they could have gave an 800 billion tax recess to businesses that hire  or that expand and actually maybe the private sector would have hired more people outside of government. I don’t hate government, I like streets and trash service, but realize that government relies on the private sector for funding. More government jobs, just takes more away from the private sector in perpetuity. That doesn’t make me a tea bagger. That is just common sense. If we all worked for the government, we as a nation would go broke really, really fast. Unless the government figures out how to make money aside from printing it. I think this is a part of what is happening here.

]]> By: Docelder http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309133 Docelder Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:05:10 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309133 He hasn't tried bipartisanship. He talked about it a lot. But he never did it. He let Nancy and Harry drive and they used the brute force of numbers. Now that that force id disappearing, he will either use soft power or he will fail. This could be his greatest opportunity. "Could be" being the key term. It really is up to him. He hasn’t tried bipartisanship. He talked about it a lot. But he never did it. He let Nancy and Harry drive and they used the brute force of numbers. Now that that force id disappearing, he will either use soft power or he will fail. This could be his greatest opportunity. “Could be” being the key term. It really is up to him.

]]> By: prime obot http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309132 prime obot Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:58:21 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309132 Actually, let me also disagree with you on this: your assertion that Obama should "use bipartisanship" to be successful. Nonsense. He has tried way too hard to be bipartisan. Bipartisanship requires Republican partners who will negotiate in good faith and actually want to reach agreements. Obama and the Democrats have none. The Republicans are now voting down initiatives that they themselves proposed a few short weeks ago. They voted down the entitlements commission that they proposed, once Obama said yes to it. They just rejected the jobs bill which by the time they were finished "negotiating," contained mostly the business tax cuts that they themselves had insisted on. The Republicans are not responsible members of government. They are evil and power-mad and bent on Obama's destruction, not the good of the American people. If you are unwilling to accept this, then you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.    Actually, let me also disagree with you on this: your assertion that Obama should “use bipartisanship” to be successful. Nonsense. He has tried way too hard to be bipartisan. Bipartisanship requires Republican partners who will negotiate in good faith and actually want to reach agreements. Obama and the Democrats have none. The Republicans are now voting down initiatives that they themselves proposed a few short weeks ago. They voted down the entitlements commission that they proposed, once Obama said yes to it. They just rejected the jobs bill which by the time they were finished “negotiating,” contained mostly the business tax cuts that they themselves had insisted on.

The Republicans are not responsible members of government. They are evil and power-mad and bent on Obama’s destruction, not the good of the American people. If you are unwilling to accept this, then you’re part of the problem, not part of the solution.   

]]> By: prime obot http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309131 prime obot Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:55:19 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309131 I'm sorry, this is just wrong. First of all, at least 2/3rds of the stimulus has already been spent, probably more. Second of all, it is without question the consensus of virtually all mainstream economic research that the stimulus did work, and saved probably a couple million jobs from vanishing, much of them in the public sector. This is just a matter of simple math: several hundred billion dollars were pushed into budgets that were then spent on projects and kept people employed. Another few hundred billion went into tax cuts (not that the Tea Party morons acknowledge or even understand that Obama passed one of the largest middle class tax cuts in U.S. history). It is difficult to argue about unseen effects -- we can never know for sure what would have happened to the U.S. and global economy if two successive presidents (one Republican, one Democrat) hadn't done these enormous bailouts and stimulus packages. But to assert baldly that they failed is sheer idiocy.  I’m sorry, this is just wrong. First of all, at least 2/3rds of the stimulus has already been spent, probably more. Second of all, it is without question the consensus of virtually all mainstream economic research that the stimulus did work, and saved probably a couple million jobs from vanishing, much of them in the public sector. This is just a matter of simple math: several hundred billion dollars were pushed into budgets that were then spent on projects and kept people employed. Another few hundred billion went into tax cuts (not that the Tea Party morons acknowledge or even understand that Obama passed one of the largest middle class tax cuts in U.S. history). It is difficult to argue about unseen effects — we can never know for sure what would have happened to the U.S. and global economy if two successive presidents (one Republican, one Democrat) hadn’t done these enormous bailouts and stimulus packages. But to assert baldly that they failed is sheer idiocy. 

]]> By: Larry Doyle http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309108 Larry Doyle Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:07:39 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309108 The bill has yet to be paid. The funds were all borrowed which has exploded our deficit. You write as if this is all over. We are in the second to third inning and the game has been going on for two years.  The bill has yet to be paid. The funds were all borrowed which has exploded our deficit. You write as if this is all over. We are in the second to third inning and the game has been going on for two years. 

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309080 Anonymous Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:32:55 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309080 LD, You like to write about all this negative stuff, but why not write about this article (see link below)? Why not a real objective post on the stimulus? How it is working and has already done a significant amount for the economy in terms of jobs and GDP growth, with still the majority of it yet to be spent. And then you can put your spin on it and tell use whether you think it was worth it or not? <strong>Judging Stimulus by Job Data Reveals Success</strong> By <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/david_leonhardt/index.html?inline=nyt-per" rel="nofollow">DAVID LEONHARDT</a> Published: February 16, 2010 "Just look at the outside evaluations of the stimulus. Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/moodys_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" rel="nofollow">Moody’s</a> <a href="http://economy.com/" rel="nofollow">Economy.com</a>. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/congressional_budget_office/index.html?inline=nyt-org" rel="nofollow">Congressional Budget Office</a>, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative." " Around the world over the last century, the typical <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/credit_crisis/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier" rel="nofollow">financial crisis</a> caused the jobless rate to rise for almost five years, according to <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/rogoff/files/Aftermath.pdf" rel="nofollow">work</a> by the economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. On that timeline, our rate would still be rising in early 2012. Even that may be optimistic, given that the recent crisis was so bad. As <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/ben_s_bernanke/index.html?inline=nyt-per" rel="nofollow">Ben Bernanke</a>, Henry Paulson (Republicans both) and many others <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/washington/19cnd-cong.html" rel="nofollow">warned</a> in 2008, this <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/r/recession_and_depression/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier" rel="nofollow">recession</a> had the potential to become a depression. Yet the jobless rate is now expected to begin falling consistently by the end of <em>this</em> year. For that, the stimulus package, flaws and all, deserves a big heaping of credit. “It prevented things from getting much worse than they otherwise would have been,” <a href="http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/AnalystBio/AnalystBioDetail191.htm" rel="nofollow">Nariman Behravesh</a>, Global Insight’s chief economist, says. “I think everyone would have to acknowledge that’s a good thing.” <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/business/economy/17leonhardt.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/business/economy/17leonhardt.html</a> LD,

You like to write about all this negative stuff, but why not write about this article (see link below)? Why not a real objective post on the stimulus? How it is working and has already done a significant amount for the economy in terms of jobs and GDP growth, with still the majority of it yet to be spent. And then you can put your spin on it and tell use whether you think it was worth it or not?

Judging Stimulus by Job Data Reveals Success
By DAVID LEONHARDT

Published: February 16, 2010

“Just look at the outside evaluations of the stimulus. Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody’s Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative.”

” Around the world over the last century, the typical financial crisis caused the jobless rate to rise for almost five years, according to work by the economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. On that timeline, our rate would still be rising in early 2012. Even that may be optimistic, given that the recent crisis was so bad. As Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson (Republicans both) and many others warned in 2008, this recession had the potential to become a depression.

Yet the jobless rate is now expected to begin falling consistently by the end of this year.

For that, the stimulus package, flaws and all, deserves a big heaping of credit. “It prevented things from getting much worse than they otherwise would have been,” Nariman Behravesh, Global Insight’s chief economist, says. “I think everyone would have to acknowledge that’s a good thing.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/business/economy/17leonhardt.html

]]> By: Docelder http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309070 Docelder Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:10:25 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309070 There are two ways Obama can take the coming shift in the political winds. One is to go with them, acknowledge that things take time to change and maintian his course but at a more reasonable pace. The other way is to try and force his will through executive orders. This would be disastrous for him. I think he should go the way of Clinton and use soft power and bipartisanship and be successful. Somehow though I think he will go for the executive power instead. I got this from the news today, Obama saying the stimulus has "saved" us. Here we were all thinking we still were in trouble. The stimulus hasn't even been spent as of yet. If Obama doesn't have it in him to acknowledge that people are still hurting and that bailing out Wall Street hasn't helped real people, or that bailing out Detroit and banks hasn't made jobs for anybody outside of India and China... then he will  continue to fail. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61G38U20100217 There are two ways Obama can take the coming shift in the political winds. One is to go with them, acknowledge that things take time to change and maintian his course but at a more reasonable pace. The other way is to try and force his will through executive orders. This would be disastrous for him. I think he should go the way of Clinton and use soft power and bipartisanship and be successful. Somehow though I think he will go for the executive power instead. I got this from the news today, Obama saying the stimulus has “saved” us. Here we were all thinking we still were in trouble. The stimulus hasn’t even been spent as of yet. If Obama doesn’t have it in him to acknowledge that people are still hurting and that bailing out Wall Street hasn’t helped real people, or that bailing out Detroit and banks hasn’t made jobs for anybody outside of India and China… then he will  continue to fail.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61G38U20100217

]]> By: prime obot http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309042 prime obot Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:10:38 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309042 Once again, I agree with most of what you've written. I agree that Obama's proposed policies have been poorly sold, and weakly argued for. I don't agree that he tried to do too much too soon: we absolutely needed the bailouts, absolutely needed the stimulus, absolutely needed an aggressive war policy in Afghanistan, and absolutely, urgently need major, comprehensive health care reform. Obama inherited a house on fire. On balance, he has done a decent job; America hasn't collapsed. But in a number of very important respects he has been a FAR weaker president than I would have expected (there, PUMAs, I said it). But it isn't too late -- the Democrats can still prove themselves worthy of leadership by rolling over the Republicans and passing health care this year by themselves. It's clearly the only way anything decent will come out of Congress. I also agree with you that Clinton was actually helped by having the Gingrich Congress pushing him toward the center (on the budget, on welfare reform, on free trade). In retrospect, though, that was a much more "bipartisan" time. I have zero faith in the Republican Party today to pursue anything other than Obama's complete and utter destruction. They are nothing but a negative force in American politics today, and I despise them with every fiber of my being.  Once again, I agree with most of what you’ve written. I agree that Obama’s proposed policies have been poorly sold, and weakly argued for. I don’t agree that he tried to do too much too soon: we absolutely needed the bailouts, absolutely needed the stimulus, absolutely needed an aggressive war policy in Afghanistan, and absolutely, urgently need major, comprehensive health care reform. Obama inherited a house on fire. On balance, he has done a decent job; America hasn’t collapsed. But in a number of very important respects he has been a FAR weaker president than I would have expected (there, PUMAs, I said it). But it isn’t too late — the Democrats can still prove themselves worthy of leadership by rolling over the Republicans and passing health care this year by themselves. It’s clearly the only way anything decent will come out of Congress.

I also agree with you that Clinton was actually helped by having the Gingrich Congress pushing him toward the center (on the budget, on welfare reform, on free trade). In retrospect, though, that was a much more “bipartisan” time. I have zero faith in the Republican Party today to pursue anything other than Obama’s complete and utter destruction. They are nothing but a negative force in American politics today, and I despise them with every fiber of my being. 

]]> By: Docelder http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/42313/greece-facing-titanic-problem/#comment-1309037 Docelder Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:02:15 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=42313#comment-1309037 One other thing that has devestated us rightly or wrongly. We don't even need to go into what outcomes would have been. Too much is changing at once which has caused uncertainty and instability. In other words, the change has been proposed so quickly and has been so poorly sold that it has caused fear and uncertainty in and of itself. I remember an old analogy about the wagon trains that settled the West. They never stopped the trains for anything, even to change a wheel. they could change one wheel and the wagon could roll along carefully on three while the one was being fixed. But, we have tried to change all the wheels at once causing us to stop completely. This was a tactical mistake and the fear of losing the power and the need to do everything fast has itself led to a loss of that very power. Something else to learn from. I need to think about an answer to the Clinton years, but in short I think Clinton benefitted from the republican house. It became easy to do the right thing. Maybe Obama can benefit in the same way. If so, we would all benefit. One other thing that has devestated us rightly or wrongly. We don’t even need to go into what outcomes would have been. Too much is changing at once which has caused uncertainty and instability. In other words, the change has been proposed so quickly and has been so poorly sold that it has caused fear and uncertainty in and of itself. I remember an old analogy about the wagon trains that settled the West. They never stopped the trains for anything, even to change a wheel. they could change one wheel and the wagon could roll along carefully on three while the one was being fixed. But, we have tried to change all the wheels at once causing us to stop completely. This was a tactical mistake and the fear of losing the power and the need to do everything fast has itself led to a loss of that very power. Something else to learn from. I need to think about an answer to the Clinton years, but in short I think Clinton benefitted from the republican house. It became easy to do the right thing. Maybe Obama can benefit in the same way. If so, we would all benefit.

]]>