Stimulus

Oh Look, Another CBO Report on the Effects of the Stimulus!

|

Don't worry, it's two-ply.

Once again, the Congressional Budget Office reruns the same models that it used to estimate that the stimulus would create jobs and finds that, to the surprise of no one, that the model still says that the stimulus creates jobs. Hooray for the stimulus! Nevermind that the CBO's director has confirmed that these reports do not serve as independent checks on the real-world effects of the spending, it's news!

NEXT: Awful Things Most Liberals Don't Believe Anymore

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Garbage in, garbage out.

    1. But, but… THE MULTIPLIER!
      THE MAGICAL MULTIPLIER!

  2. Geez, someone wipes their ass with only singles? C-notes are much less abrasive.

    1. That’s a common misperception. Small bills change hands much more frequently and thus become very soft.

      1. But $20s and $100s give you a better chance of a little free cocaine to rub on your butthole.

        1. Good advice. SF thinks of everything.

        2. That’s what hot sauce is for. Didn’t you get Whatever’s memo?

          1. The cocaine is to sooth the pain when it gets too bad. Much easier than trying to lap up some milk with your anus.

      2. Only the bills, though. The golden presidential coins don’t work at all.

        1. Well, not for wiping your butt anyway.

  3. The stimulus did create some jobs, and did stimulate the economy to some degree. The CBO also notes that it was temporary.

    You give a trillion dollars for people to spend, they will spend it. But what then? That’s why it was a bad idea, it was like taking a cold tablet for the flu. Yeah, it stops your runny nose today, but what about tomorrow?

    Stimulus is only good for the short term, which is why it’s a bad idea. We needed a long term solution.

    1. We needed a long term solution.

      You mean something that won’t just get us to the midterms, but will last at least up to November 2012? I’m totally on board with that!

    2. So you think assuming every dollar spent had a 1.(something)x multiplier effect on GDP is totally legit?

      1. Don’t know.

        But I do believe if you give people a large amount of money to spend and they spend it, it will stimultate the enconomy until the money runs out.

        1. It may stimulate spending, not necessarily production.

          1. I would think to stimulate production you need longer term spending. Which is why, at best, you get a short term uptick with the Obama spending law.

        2. What about the large amount of money you took from some other people to be able to pass out the Robin Hood goodies? Does that “destimulate” the economy? Or does the stimulus thingy have some kind of magic one-way valve in it?

      2. The good news is that there is in fact a government spending multiplier effect.

        The bad news is that the real value of it is in the neighborhood of .98 or .99, so it’s actually a de-multiplier.

    3. The stimulus did create some jobs, and did stimulate the economy to some degree. The CBO also notes that it was temporary.

      Have you suffered brain damage recently? Seriously are you a fucking idiot?

      Perhaps you are simply misinformed. Here watch this video of unemployment nation wide.

      If you still believe what you wrote after you watch this then you are an idiot.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfBZnyJg0Bw

      1. Yeah, yeah, the CBO is untrustworthy hacks.

  4. A piping-hot bowl of stupid for you.

    The article pre-supposes that unemployment can only be solved by the government. Just the sort of bias talked about in the journalism thread.

    Don’t miss the comments. The comments are the best part.

    1. I actually stopped reading when they told me that if I don’t except their flawed premise I should stop reading.

      1. You did well. I read past that point. I’m pretty sure it shaved a couple of IQ points.

        1. Never blow off a valid END IF statement.

      2. UH, the article said “If the Obama administration BELIEVED….” they have a moral obligation to do whatever they can to lower unemployment. As everything we’ve seen out of this administration indicates that their hubris is exceeded only by King Canute’s advisors, I suspect that the premise is sound.

    2. rationalrevolution
      In regard to the people talking about the crisis of work, yes this is correct, but it is also solvable.

      This whole problem was predicted by Karl Marx 150 years ago, that was the whole point of Marxism, to propose ways that shared ownership of capital could avoid the problems of reliance on labor as technology made labor increasingly obsolete. Unfortunately the various Communist revolutions of the 20th century screwed everything up and gave Marxism a black eye.

      L’sigh.

      1. In other words, Marxism would work if only the right people were in charge. Presumably Harvard grads.

        1. No, no, Marxism works if only you have the right kind of those not in charge. Marxist thinking is very simple, after all, which is why teenagers and Democrats can master it easily. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to be in charge of a good Marxist society.

          No, the problem is always with the God-damned takers of orders, who insist on not following them to the letter, when it violently conflicts with their self-interest or seems self-evidently stupid, or…er…who insist on following them when they’re clearly mistaken and any right-thinking patriot would know better.

          Just give us a better class of human cattle and the Worker’s Paradise will be easy to set up.

          1. Just give us a better class of human cattle and the Worker’s Paradise will be easy to set up.

            Oh, if only I had more time.

      2. Marxism only works if technology never improved. Alas, it always does.

    3. Did any of them resort to the “every credible economist agrees with us” routine?

      I’ve seen a lot of the lefty talking heads on TV peddle that one for quite some time now.

      1. every credible economist agrees with us

        And a credible economist is one who agrees with us.

    4. Thanks-a-lot for posting that link. Now I am really depressed. We are doomed.

  5. The article pre-supposes that unemployment can only be solved by the government.

    The government is best positioned to know where to put the holes. They see the big picture, you know.

    1. The holes are in their heads, so of course the view is better.

  6. “I take exception to your flawed premises. Good day.”

  7. The model hasn’t changed.

    The inputs haven’t changed.

    Wotta surprise. The outputs didn’t change, either.

    1. psht, the model clearly isn’t based on chaos theory.

  8. the model clearly isn’t based on chaos theory.

    We’d be better off if we replaced the CBO with a random number generator.

    1. And your evidence that this has not already been done is…what?

  9. I can’t decide whether I prefer being lied to straight up by the CBO about these numbers in terms of there relationship to the real world or that even more retarded term of jobs “created or saved”.

    It’s about choices people.

  10. Now, it’s “lives touched by the stimulus”, which can be viewed like being touched by an uncle at a family reunion…

    1. Show me on the doll where the Stimulus touched you.

  11. Yeah, the CBO sucks, keep that in mind the next time they dispute Obama’s health care numbers.

    1. Yes, the real cost is likely going to be much higher than the CBO predicts.

  12. “Once again, the Congressional Budget Office reruns the same models that it used to estimate that the stimulus would create jobs and finds that, to the surprise of no one, that the model still says that the stimulus creates jobs.”

    It also found that it increased happiness, kindness to animals, and penis length AND girth. Now, please go happily pork your increasingly satisfied woman, thanks to the folks in Washington.
    NOTE, small penised people who remain small penised due to their lack of hope, remain unhappy.

  13. Crap, posted this self delusion on the wrong thread:

    “What needs to happen on the policy front in order to build momentum?

    In the first place, small businesses need access to more bank credit to create jobs. Banks feel conflicted by calls from the Obama administration to increase lending while regulators are instructing them to add to their reserves…

    The White House also should press Congress to pass legislation modernizing Cold War-era restrictions on exports of technology products and services that are already commercially available from our allies…And if the White House is serious about doubling exports by 2015, it needs to push trade deals with South Korea, Colombia and Costa Rica through Congress.

    Congress also should pass legislation to temporarily extend the Bush tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of this year…

    Another must-do: by 2012, Congress needs a credible long-term plan in place to reduce the deficit…

    Washington has to focus like a laser on helping businesses create jobs, while the rest of us should avoid talking ourselves out of a recovery by dwelling on the doom and gloom. The U.S. economy has already adapted to serious imbalances in record time: There’s ample reason to believe in its dynamism in the months and years ahead.”

    Yeah, good luck with that.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.