Page 23 of 63 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 628

Thread: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

  1. #221
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    Let's hope it goes over better and smoother than the New Deal
    How did that work out btw?

  2. #222
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    You don't seem to.



    So you're saying we could have a multiplier effect by giving people money or with stimulus jobs?
    You could make the same argument just by giving people money. No need to create worthless projects.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  3. #223
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    You could make the same argument just by giving people money. No need to create worthless projects.
    But then you wouldn't create as much wealth upfront.

    Either way, you agree there is a multiplier effect, right?

  4. #224
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    But then you wouldn't create as much wealth upfront.

    Either way, you agree there is a multiplier effect, right?
    Same as consumer spending.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  5. #225
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    I know what the multiplier effect is, give me a break. You could accomplish the same thing though just giving people money, so don't give me this multiplier effect stuff.
    And you actually believe this comment debunks the multiplier?

    Now the most efficient stimulus would be to simply increase food stamp benefits because those are shown to be spent immediately, and carry a multiplier value of 1.69. Creating a job when the economy is massively shedding them is the logic behind fiscal stimulus, with the focus of creating/upgrading infrastructure. Not only will someone be put to work, will this person begin a higher order of consumption (income dependent); but a new bridge can now be utilized to even further support future economic interests. A new hospital, research center, library, school, etc... only creates greater prospects for the long run. Therefore more than just those building the "whatever" profits (implicit and explicit profit).

    Just giving people money creates a much weaker multiplier effect. Can you explain why Tony?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #226
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    How did that work out btw?
    Some good, some bad, some pointless. :\ I'm not really an expert on it, but I know some people here are...or think they are.

  7. #227
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    And you actually believe this comment debunks the multiplier?
    I'm not trying to debunk the multiplier, just showing that money is better spent by consumers and producers.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  8. #228
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    01-21-10 @ 02:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    744

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Are we discussing the keynesian multiplier?

    Or are we discussing funny math?

    Or are these actually one in the same?

  9. #229
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    I'm not trying to debunk the multiplier, just showing that money is better spent by consumers and producers.
    The bold is a vital aspect of the fiscal multiplier.


    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219
    Just giving people money creates a much weaker multiplier effect. Can you explain why Tony?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #230
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Same as consumer spending.
    Exactly. You're agreeing with me as far as I can tell.

Page 23 of 63 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •