"It Worked"

On what basis can the President say that "it worked"? What metric can his supporters point to in order to support this statement? Is the Romney campaign right to mock this claim?

LowDown said:

On what basis can the President say that "it worked"? What metric can his supporters point to in order to support this statement? Is the Romney campaign right to mock this claim?

Click to expand...

The president can say it worked on the basis of CBO reports and the reports of many independent economists who say that the stimulus shortened the recession, reduced unemployment, and boosted GDP growth. But, OTOH, one dude apparently had to declare bankruptcy, so....

AdamT said:

The president can say it worked on the basis of CBO reports and the reports of many independent economists who say that the stimulus shortened the recession, reduced unemployment, and boosted GDP growth. But, OTOH, one dude apparently had to declare bankruptcy, so....

Click to expand...

If you call GM "one dude" then yea you're right.

The bottomline is that liberals are going pick on shallow stats like the stabilization of GDP and unemployment. They're doing this because traditionally, the GOP has been the party of big business, and that means utilitarian quantitative analysis.

The problem is these are very distant statistics, and they don't explain much. They don't tell you how GDP has developed by sector, nor do they tell you what kind of jobs people are doing. Perhaps Romney would be better off if he engaged in a sector by sector analysis of the economy, and showed Americans that the predominant expansion of the economy has taken place in government related sectors: health care, education, and social work. In other words, administration is expanding, but stuff to administer over is contracting.

Liberals also, ironically, ring of rugged individualism, the very thing that liberals accuse conservatives of being harsh over. They're sadomasochistic in suggesting that the working class is expected to take its lumps in struggling, and that government should give people a chance to take their lumps. The people are just so desperate that they clamor for jobs, jobs, jobs. It's weird really when you think about it. People want government to give them something to do in exchange for money so they can recharge themselves so they can keep on doing. It's like people want to be turned into zombies.

The sad part about this is many liberals have abandoned the Republican party because of this exact attitude. They view government as a balance of power savior. If people are going to take their lumps, they might as well take them with some mercy...

...and we wonder why foreigners call Americans stupid.

dontworrybehappy said:

If you call GM "one dude" then yea you're right.

Click to expand...

GM declared bankruptcy when Bush was still in office, long before the stimulus was passed. I don't believe anyone has ever suggested the stimulus caused GM's bankruptcy because that would be, at best, chronologically unlikely.

dontworrybehappy said:

If you call GM "one dude" then yea you're right.

Click to expand...

If you think GM could have avoided total anihilation without Obama then you need to think better.

The ad just points to the fact that Romney is a ****ing liar. Here is what President Obama said:



Remarks by the President at a Campaign Event | The White House

Daktoria said:

The bottomline is that liberals are going pick on shallow stats like the stabilization of GDP and unemployment.

Click to expand...

These are shallow stats huh?

AdamT said:

If you think GM could have avoided total anihilation without Obama then you need to think better.

Click to expand...

Who said anyone but unions wanted him to help GM. What an arrogant bastard, to take our money and do that. We said for over 8 years there was too much spending, and here the SOB Mr Hopey-Changey is pouring more good money after bad.

poweRob said:

These are shallow stats huh?

Click to expand...

Yessir. Mah apologies for stating the obvious.

Here's a more comprehensive list in case you haven't studied econ:

List of Economic Indicators

American said:

Who said anyone but unions wanted him to help GM. What an arrogant bastard, to take our money and do that. We said for over 8 years there was too much spending, and here the SOB Mr Hopey-Changey is pouring more good money after bad.

Click to expand...

Well, I think that GM, and all of its parts suppliers, and the states where it builds cars, and in fact it's top domestic competitor -- Ford, all wanted him to help GM. And a lot of other people, besides. People, for example, who saw the fallout from Lehman's collapse and who understood that the collapse of GM and Chrysler, with the million+ jobs they support, at the height of the recession, would have catastrophic repercussions for the whole country.

pbrauer said:

The ad just points to the fact that Romney is a ****ing liar. [...]

Click to expand...

Absolutely. However, we already knew that since he has been running the Fox edit of "you didn't build that", making the same insanely dishonest claim that Fox is making.

Now, making fun of a candidate's gaffe is one thing (e.g., Mitt likes to fire people), but editing a candidate's words out of context to make him say something that he did not -- well, that's just lying on a rather epic scale. That's stuff that proven liars Breitbart and O'Keefe do. And now a GOP presidential candidate is doing it. It is simply mind boggling that he would do it, and even more mind boggling that some suckers believe it.

Given these developments, I'm waiting to see Mitt in a pimp outfit :mrgreen:

pbrauer said:

The ad just points to the fact that Romney is a ****ing liar. Here is what President Obama said:

"There’s only one way to grow our economy for the long run. That’s what we’re fighting for. That is what this election is about. That’s why I’m running for a second term as President. (Applause.)

I’m running because I believe you can’t reduce the deficit -- which is a serious problem, we’ve got to deal with it -- but we can’t reduce it without asking folks like me who have been incredibly blessed to give up the tax cuts that we’ve been getting for a decade. (Applause.) I'll cut out government spending that’s not working, that we can’t afford, but I’m also going to ask anybody making over $250,000 a year to go back to the tax rates they were paying under Bill Clinton, back when our economy created 23 million new jobs -- (applause) -- the biggest budget surplus in history and everybody did well.

Just like we’ve tried their plan, we tried our plan -- and it worked. That’s the difference. (Applause.) That’s the choice in this election. That’s why I’m running for a second term."​

Remarks by the President at a Campaign Event | The White House

Click to expand...

So when he said "our plan" he was referring to tax rates as they were under Clinton, and how the economy grew remarkably during that period? I was curious what the context was of the words used at the beginning of the video because like almost every political ad, no context is provided. So he was speaking on deficit reduction and "our plan" was referring to Clinton tax rates in the 90s, fair enough and whoever made that ad is obviously trying to twist the truth.

However, Obama should make no claim to deficit reduction he's not running on Clinton's economic success he has to run on his own record. Until he can implement his plan, ie a return to Clinton era taxes and reduce the deficit than he can't claim anything has worked, it may have been good in the 90s but that was the past and the same factors that existed then may not produce the same results today. I mean if he thought it was such a great plan that worked, why wasn't it accomplished or at least pushed for in his first term? Fact is, taxes rates didn't move in that direction and the deficit increased so he can't claim anything works until he makes it work in the here and now.

LowDown said:

On what basis can the President say that "it worked"? What metric can his supporters point to in order to support this statement? Is the Romney campaign right to mock this claim?

Click to expand...

The CBO graph suggests we started climbing out of the Bush Trench almost immediately after Obama took office and the Stimulus was enacted.

AdamT said:

Well, I think that GM, and all of its parts suppliers, and the states where it builds cars, and in fact it's top domestic competitor -- Ford, all wanted him to help GM.

Click to expand...

Sure.

But, theres a difference between "helping" and giving the company a $45 billion tax break or overturning two centuries of established contract law by subjugating bondholders to that of unsecured creditors.

ZIRP4EVA said:

Sure.

But, theres a difference between "helping" and giving the company a $45 billion tax break or overturning two centuries of established contract law by subjugating bondholders to that of unsecured creditors.

Click to expand...

In this case helping meant doing all of those things, because doing less would not have been effective.

Wiseone said:

[...] However, Obama should make no claim to deficit reduction he's not running on Clinton's economic success he has to run on his own record. [1] Until he can implement his plan, ie a return to Clinton era taxes and reduce the deficit than he can't claim anything has worked, [2] it may have been good in the 90s but that was the past and the same factors that existed then may not produce the same results today. [3] I mean if he thought it was such a great plan that worked, why wasn't it accomplished or at least pushed for in his first term? Fact is, taxes rates didn't move in that direction and the deficit increased so he can't claim anything works until he makes it work in the here and now.

Click to expand...

1. He can't implement his plan; the Republicans will not permit it. However, he messed up big time by not letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire the first time around... I can understand the reluctance to increase taxes in a recession, but that was the only way to get it done. And he could have blamed it on the Republicans. Then the Tea Party got swept into power and the GOP simply went bat **** crazy... Congress will probably never again raise taxes or otherwise increase revenue, and therefore the country is doomed to eventual bankruptcy or a prolonged if not perpetual depression (pretty much same thing). Enjoy your life now; it will become quite grim in the next few decades.

2. True. However, given the current historically low level of taxation, it is likely than an increase in tax rates would result in an increase in revenues, current struggling economy aside.

3. He spent all his political capital on healthcare reform. In hindsight, even though they accomplished a lot, that was a strategic error for several reasons (including the current bat **** craziness of the GOP).

AdamT said:

The president can say it worked on the basis of CBO reports and the reports of many independent economists who say that the stimulus shortened the recession, reduced unemployment, and boosted GDP growth. But, OTOH, one dude apparently had to declare bankruptcy, so....

Click to expand...

Rewriting two centuries of law will never lead to an effective outcome.

Bronson said:

Click to expand...

Now you are saying that the CBO is merely a ministry of propaganda. Too funny.

Karl said:

2. True. However, given the current historically low level of taxation, it is likely than an increase in tax rates would result in an increase in revenues, current struggling economy aside

Click to expand...

I think its probable people would be more open to the idea of higher tax rates if they felt those asking for it could be trusted to spend the money wisely. Obama and the current crop of leftists in Congress are simply not the vessel by which tax hikes are going to happen. Not after whats happened the last 5+ years.

poweRob said:

Now you are saying that the CBO is merely a ministry of propaganda. Too funny.

Click to expand...

CBO Data can easily be manipulated because the CBO only calculates data based on the information and parameters given to them. For example they originally calculated that Obamacare would cost 900 billion over the first 10 years. That number has now been revised to 2.5 trillion. You're hiding behind a strawman because you can't grasp basic economics. Here let me clue you in:

1. 15% Real Unemployment
2. A net loss of jobs under Obama. 700K more women unemployed than the day Obama took office
3. 5 trillion in new debt
4. Yea trillion+ deficits
5. No serious budget proposed
6. Has yet to seriously meet with his jobs council
7. Has completely ignored his debt commission
8. 8%+ unemployment for his entire presidency
9. More people on food stamps than ever before
10. People unemployed the longest since the Great Depression
11. Millions have dropped out of the Labor Market entirely
12. 1.5% gdp (Obama's average gdp% is historically at the bottom of the barrel

I could go on and on and you're running around with your clown shoes on acting like the CBO claims the economy is booming or something and everything is fine. It's hilarious.

Bronson said:

CBO Data can easily be manipulated because the CBO only calculates data based on the information and parameters given to them. For example they originally calculated that Obamacare would cost 900 billion over the first 10 years. That number has now been revised to 2.5 trillion. You're hiding behind a strawman because you can't grasp basic economics. Here let me clue you in:

Click to expand...

Yes lets clue you in...

1. 15% Real Unemployment

Click to expand...

Funny how "real unemployment" all of a sudden is more important to the right and GOP than the official unemployment, when "real unemployment" was mocked under Bush.

2. A net loss of jobs under Obama. 700K more women unemployed than the day Obama took office

Click to expand...

Not exactly true and highly biased. It is funny that the right and GOP suddenly count government jobs in this statistic, when they claim that government jobs are not real jobs. And considering most states and local areas are run by the GOP, and women take up a large if not majority of government jobs.. and that these states and local government have been cutting and cutting thanks to Tea Party and GOP policy... then you have the nerve to blame 700k unemployed women on Obama when it is the GOP that is behind the cutting of government jobs?

3. 5 trillion in new debt

Click to expand...

Yes, and again out of context. Quite a lot of this "new debt" is the result of policies of the previous administration. And funny how there were no complaints about debt loads when it was Bush doubling the debt load and Reagan tripling it.. hypocrisy anyone? Any bets on "debt" not becoming a problem again if Romney is elected?

4. Yea trillion+ deficits

Click to expand...

Yea we know, it is in the GOP talking points you are writing this from.

5. No serious budget proposed

Click to expand...

Like any budget would get any fair chance in the partisan cluster**** called the US congress. And it goes both ways... the GOP budget proposals are just as unserious if not more. The Ryan plan... a gift voucher for the rich.

6. Has yet to seriously meet with his jobs council

Click to expand...

LOL the usual bullcrap... something you cant quantify so just sling it out there. How can you "seriously" meet something.. either you meet someone or you dont.

7. Has completely ignored his debt commission

Click to expand...

No he has not. He has chosen not to follow some of the recommendations.. big difference.

8. 8%+ unemployment for his entire presidency

Click to expand...

Which is good considering it mess he was left by Bush. And lets not forget unemployment is a lagging indicator.. by at least 3 months if not 6.

9. More people on food stamps than ever before

Click to expand...

Also more people in the US than ever before.. wonder if that has an impact..And wonder if the out sourcing and cutting of jobs in the public sector has anything to do with it?

10. People unemployed the longest since the Great Depression

Click to expand...

Yes, does not help when you have the party of NO blocking everything.

11. Millions have dropped out of the Labor Market entirely

Click to expand...

Yes, that happens. People get older, people leave the country, women leave the labour market to make babies or take care of family.

12. 1.5% gdp (Obama's average gdp% is historically at the bottom of the barrel

Click to expand...

Considering the state of the rest of the world, it aint bad at all. Considering the cluster**** of an economy the last administration left, then getting the economy restarted is not easy, especially with one party only saying NO all the time.

I could go on and on and you're running around with your clown shoes on acting like the CBO claims the economy is booming or something and everything is fine. It's hilarious.

Click to expand...

I could go on as well and debunk pretty much everything you claim. But lets leave it at this.

AdamT said:

The president can say it worked on the basis of CBO reports and the reports of many independent economists who say that the stimulus shortened the recession, reduced unemployment, and boosted GDP growth. But, OTOH, one dude apparently had to declare bankruptcy, so....

Click to expand...

Is it your opinion that the economy is booming?

LowDown said:

On what basis can the President say that "it worked"? What metric can his supporters point to in order to support this statement? Is the Romney campaign right to mock this claim?

Click to expand...

This is exactly the ad that that will win the election for Romney. It's like the countdown ad from the 1964 campaign.