- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 19,883
- Reaction score
- 5,120
- Location
- 0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
Vote b*tches.
The only important issue is that our GDP will remain the strongest on the global front when the dust settles. :mrgreen:
Can you elaborate on that a bit please. Are you saying that the stimulus helped with GDP, and was positive, or simply that our economy will recover and be stronger than any other, or something else entirely?
Can you elaborate on that a bit please. Are you saying that the stimulus helped with GDP, and was positive, or simply that our economy will recover and be stronger than any other, or something else entirely?
No, actually, I am saying that if we remain number one in GDP and don't fall behind in economic output and quality of life, I'll consider it a success.
The bold red is a redundancy. Economic output and GDP are the same measure rof
Of course, you already knew that and it is irrelevant :lamo
OK, do you have anything else you need to say?
False, if that were the case there would be no such thing as a bull market. TARP I and TARP II were miserable failures as predicted.I say we wait about 5 years.
The economic failure in 2008 occurred in less than a year, recovery always takes much longer.
Fair enough. Success would be at minimum a stable market, this one is bouncing all over the place. Rampant success would be a smaller bull market with fewer bubbles and consistent daily gains, probably not gonna happen. Failure would be a "jobless recovery" or at worst a rudderless economy bouncing all over the place.....check on both counts.In order to say something is a "success" or "failure" you need to define what success is. Then, of course, you also need to ask the question: Regardless of whether success was acheived was it worth it?
No, actually, I am saying that if we remain number one in GDP and don't fall behind in economic output and quality of life, I'll consider it a success.
GDP is not representative of either economic output or quality of life IMO. Look at Greece and Argentina. I know that you're not relating them - I'm just wondering what GDP is representative of as far as the economy. I think while in some cases it is representative of how well people in that society live but not today. There are too many countries with what would seem like great GDPs who are just drowning in debt and have unemployment which would make American unemployment rates seem like a joke in comparison. I'll admit my knowledge of just how the economy works in most cases is inept but I do not think GDP is really that great of an indicator for quality of life.
I did not need to say anything. Just pointing out your errors in regards to the subject matter. :2wave:
Fair enough. Success would be at minimum a stable market, this one is bouncing all over the place. Rampant success would be a smaller bull market with fewer bubbles and consistent daily gains, probably not gonna happen. Failure would be a "jobless recovery" or at worst a rudderless economy bouncing all over the place.....check on both counts.
You have to define the goal of the stimulus in order to determine whether or not it failed.
Actually the whole point of this thread was to put the "Stimulus failed, therefore more tax cuts" crowd between a rock and hard place. More then a few users here offered tax cuts as an alternative to the stimulus without realizing that the stimulus had a large portion as tax cuts.
Perhaps they think there wasn't enough tax cuts. I don't really know, but if you want others to answer your question you have to define the goal of the stimulus.