Your link is a year old and the premise is misleading. The money you claim "wasn't spent" was still already tied up in projects, contracts, obligations, and subsidies. Even the AP reported in early 2011 that only 7billion of the 800B stimulus hadn't been accounted for.
The CBO has also said by the end of Q4 2013, only 400K jobs will be sustained by the Stimulus. That's a cost of more than 2 million per job.
Obama Advisor: Stimulus Will Impact the Economy Immediately - ABC News
Obama "Not as shovel ready as expected"
Obama: Shovel-Ready Not as Shovel-Ready as We Expected - YouTube
http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/publication/No_such_thing_as_shovel_ready_WP1118.pdf
Sure you did. You do every time you insist the Stimulus wasn't big enough.
Obama set aside a massive amount of Stimulus Funds for "Green Jobs". He basically acted like an Investment Banker in an effort to create an entirely new market of electric cars and Green Energy. It didn't work
Whoops
Not only that but there was no real net gain in economic activity because again, people who went and bought cars, were for the most part, people who were going to buy cars anyways.
A123 Systems sold at a loss to the taxpayer -
Chinese acquisition of A123 assets spurs debate on US support of clean energy - Business - The Boston Globe
Obama touting A123 as a "Stimulus Success"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPWLaw0i86s
Fisker -
Fisker failure hurts Delaware taxpayers twice | Times 247
Business: Washington Post Business Page, Business News
GM?s vaunted Volt is on the road to nowhere fast - Washington Post
Review & Outlook: The Solyndra Memorial Tax Break - WSJ.com
Government Spending is taking money out of the hands of private investors who would have otherwise invested that Capital more wisely than Government. It's called
Risk. Nobody claimed private investment is being "crowded out".
It's being taken away. Clearly you don't understand what Opportunity Costs and Negative Externalities even are. When you have a Fed that admits it's wasting 125B a year on "improper payments", then there is a problem with your rhetoric. We KNOW that 125B could have been put to much better use by someone other than the Feds. Now calculate the rest of the billions wasted on projects like Solyndra, Brightsource, ect.
Did Stimulus Dollars Hire the Unemployed? | Mercatus
Labor actually WAS crowded out with Stimulus money
There is also organizational capital lost from the company who lost the employee who switched jobs because of Stimulus Funding. They invested money in that employee (especially mid level IT/Database Administration ect), and will now have to fill the void, which costs additional capital. Again, this just proves beyond refute that you do not understand the concept of Opportunity Costs and Negative Externalities. My advice would be go back to school and take a basic economics class to get up to speed. Also a lot of that Stimulus money was used to employ temp workers. Not permanent workers. Firms just got more productivity out of their existing employees for the most part. Your premises are shortsighted and incorrect.
You're dodging. If you're not sure what I'm arguing than that is just more proof you do not comprehend basic economics. People on welfare/unemployment pay for goods and services with resources taken out of the private sector that would have otherwise been invested in other opportunities for growth. They don't contribute any productivity for that income. It's a shifting of resources. Not a creation of new wealth. Got it now? Good.
You can't just dismiss everything that doesn't conform to your ideology as "not making sense"
See above. Projection noted
That's not what Obama and the Democrats have claimed. You're trying to move the goal post.
Pelosi Unemployment - YouTube
So billions upon billions is taken out of the private economy (which creates jobs) to pay people for 99 weeks to sit on their a$$es and buy food at a grocery store. You're assuming that A) 99 weeks of unemployment is necessary B) 47 million on Food Stamps/Welfare is nec
Our trade deficit is mostly with China. Those are jobs that are NEVER coming back.
GDP growth Q2 2012 was only 1.3%. Maybe you want to believe in unicorns. I don't.
GDP Growth projections are way short of what Obama predicted they would be right now. He predicted 4.2%. The rosiest of predictions puts it at 2.5%
Rather odd? So comparing relatively identical economic policies between the 2 largest economic recessions in US history is "odd"? It says it right there. A multiplier of 1. Maybe you want to consider that "inconclusive" :lol: but unfortunately for you there is additional research that confirms I am indeed correct.
As someone who claims to be such an economic genius, surely you have read it? No?
FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate / UCLA Newsroom
Projection noted
Just dismiss anything that shatters your ideology. Shrug it off. Nothing to see here. Move along. (Dodge noted)
In other words you can't refute facts. You do realize that the % of Americans Employed that are working age is the about the same as it was 4 years ago right? That statistic right there destroys every false premise and deflection you've brought into this thread.
I have come to expect nothing less from you. Clearly you're ideological partisan who pretends behind a curtain of smugness, who obfuscates, deflects, dismisses inconvenient facts that tear apart his endless strawmen, and shrugs off anything that shatters his ideological nonsense.
Have a nice day :2wave: