• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CBO: Stimulus hurts economy in the long run

1Perry said:
It wasn't war spending that ended it. It was the positive belief in the country after the war that ended it.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. There was a recession right at the end of WWII. Positive market psychology DID NOT trump actual dollar spending that went away when the war ended.

The decline in government spending at the end of World War II led to an enormous drop in gross domestic product, making this technically a recession. This was the result of demobilization and the shift from a wartime to peacetime economy. The post-war years were unusual in a number of ways (unemployment was never high) and this era may be considered a "sui generis end-of-the-war recession".[34]
Click to expand...
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
1Perry said:
It wasn't war spending that ended it. It was the positive belief in the country after the war that ended it.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is true. I think the spending really played a larger role. Don't dispute attitude certainly helps, but without the infuse of money, it is unlikley the attitude could have carried us.
 
AdamT said:
Really? Is that what you would say if most doctors diagnosed you with cancer?
Click to expand...

Apples, and Pick up trucks. If I were to be diagnosed with anything I would be able to question the docs that drew that conclusion, and see what their data was that took them to that point. Not just take it on faith just because you say so.

Or most scientists concluded that a food aditive was carcinogenic?
Click to expand...

Again, I would think that the scientists would make themselves, and their data known. Which btw, how many things have we heard over the years to be bad for us concerning food, only to have them later say that they weren't as bad as they thought? Alot.

Or if the vast majority of climatologists had concluded that anthropogenic global warming was a real problem?
Click to expand...

I'd laugh, because the case so far is not that. I mean look, even the wording you use says "was".... What happened? did it clear up?....hahaha....

Pointing out that most experts say X, Y, or Z is not intended to stifle debate.
Click to expand...

It is when it relies only on your say so.

It is simply a fact relevant to the debate.
Click to expand...

Not based on what you alone say. Now maybe if you posted something credible, then it could be studied, but no, you don't have exclusivity to 'fact'....

It only offends you because you generally find yourself inexpertly arguing points that most experts do not support.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that you had to be 'expert' in everything in order to offer an opinion on this site. That is interesting, in order to consider your word expert then, could you provide us with your bona fides then?

j-mac
 
AdamT said:
And the real answer: it was the massive stimulus from the war effort, coupled with the fact that we were the only remaining industrial power who's factories weren't bombed to oblivion.
Click to expand...

The money spent on the war effort was scattered all over Europe and the Pacific. Indeed, people feeling good about things and going to work making refrigerators, televisions and the sort made a big impact.
 
finebead said:
Yes, show us how the psychology of the people had more impact than $800 billion in stimulus. I want to see this one.
Click to expand...

The country thrived after the war. Unemployment went up after the $800 billion stimulus. It's not that difficult outside of those who for some odd reason think that the government should just spend, spend, spend, the world around them be damned.

People were struggling all through the war when the government was spending all of that money.
 
Boo Radley said:
I don't think that is true. I think the spending really played a larger role. Don't dispute attitude certainly helps, but without the infuse of money, it is unlikley the attitude could have carried us.
Click to expand...

Things were not good for many during the war while the government was spending all of this money. The infusing stopped with the war. We thrived because of the many businesses hiring and building things.
 
1Perry said:
You disagree that people were feeling positive about the country after the war? I have to prove that to you?
Click to expand...

That is not the point. I agree people felt better about the end of the war. You said those positive feels led to a good economy, and that the govt. spending in the war did not. I showed you were wrong, since there was a recession right when the war ended, and a "huge drop in GDP".

You have not supported your position, in fact you have never in this thread provided any support for any of your statements to me, just off the cuff remarks, all of which I have refuted, with support. The immediate aftermath of the ending of WWII was a huge drop in GDP:
The decline in government spending at the end of World War II led to an enormous drop in gross domestic product

Govt spending was much more important than market psychology, we can clearly see that.
 
cpwill said:
and in the short run... but hey, movement in the right direction, and (politically) a welcome realization of reality by the CBO.
Click to expand...

How does Washington Times spin count as 'Breaking News.'

There needs to be a forum for 'Breaking Editorial and Propaganda' for a all Washington Times and Fox News stories.

Otherwise, viewers of the BN forum may get confused and believe they're reading an actual factual news story.
 
finebead said:
That is not the point. I agree people felt better about the end of the war. You said those positive feels led to a good economy, and that the govt. spending in the war did not. I showed you were wrong, since there was a recession right when the war ended, and a "huge drop in GDP".

You have not supported your position, in fact you have never in this thread provided any support for any of your statements to me, just off the cuff remarks, all of which I have refuted, with support. The immediate aftermath of the ending of WWII was a huge drop in GDP:
The decline in government spending at the end of World War II led to an enormous drop in gross domestic product

Govt spending was much more important than market psychology, we can clearly see that.
Click to expand...

Hey finebead, how you been? I have a question for you. My understanding is that WWII spurred a huge manufacturing effort to sustain our military, and if what you say is true that we suffered a recession immediately following the war due to that dropping off, then what pulled us out? Could it be that an equally strong demand for goods such as houses, cars, durable goods, textiles, ag products etc. all manufactured in this country did that trick? If so then it was American business, and manufactured goods that spurred economic growth, not government nannyism.


j-mac
 
1Perry said:
Things were not good for many during the war while the government was spending all of this money. The infusing stopped with the war. We thrived because of the many businesses hiring and building things.
Click to expand...

They hired because money had been spent and there was an expectation that there would be buying. It's fundamental that business will not spend, no matter what you give them, without someone having the money to buy the product.

BTW, things are never instant. I put in money now, people don't immediately start buying. People shoudl never expect instant results.
 
AdamT said:
And the real answer: it was the massive stimulus from the war effort, coupled with the fact that we were the only remaining industrial power who's factories weren't bombed to oblivion.
Click to expand...
So you agree that FDR's economic policies had nothing to do with it.
 
14 pages wasted on propaganda pretending to be 'news'.

The far-righties are too easily taken in...
 
hazlnut said:
14 pages wasted on propaganda pretending to be 'news'.

The far-righties are too easily taken in...
Click to expand...

Far righties? Why is it that I never hear you talking about the "leftists" on this thread and the brainwashing that doesn't allow a "leftist" to actually believe data and thus facts?
 
hazlnut said:
14 pages wasted on propaganda pretending to be 'news'.

The Liberal Progressives are too easily taken in...
Click to expand...


Doh, see what I did there? Now, do you have anything intelligent to add?


j-mac
 
Conservative said:
Far righties? Why is it that I never hear you talking about the "leftists" on this thread and the brainwashing that doesn't allow a "leftist" to actually believe data and thus facts?
Click to expand...
Because he's not really a moderate.
 
Conservative said:
Noticed that months ago. Seems that many so called moderate/centrist/independents cannot admit that they really are progressive/liberals
Click to expand...


All one has to do is educate themselves as to the Progressive movement in the US to see why...It is never popular in a free society for a group to attempt to destroy it.


j-mac
 
Conservative said:
Noticed that months ago. Seems that many so called moderate/centrist/independents cannot admit that they really are progressive/liberals
Click to expand...


All one has to do is educate themselves as to the Progressive movement in the US to see why...It is never popular in a free society for a group to attempt to destroy it.


j-mac
 
The conservative brain trust ^^^^^^.

You gotta laugh. :lol:
 
Yes, let's all keep discussing this propaganda piece as if it has any legitimacy.
 
j-mac said:
All one has to do is educate themselves as to the Progressive movement in the US to see why...It is never popular in a free society for a group to attempt to destroy it.


j-mac
Click to expand...

You mean drink the koolaid. Far too many on both sides do that. We don't need more. :coffeepap
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom