Yes, it is crazy that Japan had to institute 12 stimulus bills. Hopefully, we can get it right the second time. Yes, the final stimulus aided in ending the recession, even if the recession ended years after the passage of the bill.
You still haven't provided any evidence that a country can come out of a recession without government help (spending, tax cuts, etc). > COPYRIGHT 2002 Asia Pulse Pty Ltd > SYDNEY, Nov 13 Asia Pulse - *A quick military strike on Iraq would be the > best stimulus for a global economic recovery, Citigroup's international > president Stanley Fischer said yesterday. * > > Mr Fischer said a sustainable recovery, particularly in the United States, > would not occur until uncertainties surrounding Iraq and its weapons are > resolved. > > An early and successful war waged by the US on.. > --http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-26669332_ITM *War spending provides plenty to stimulate economy* > Posted 3/31/2003 8:43 PM > According to the *Commerce Department, half of the economy's growth during > the final three months of last year was due to increased federal spending, > two-thirds of it for defense*. And another spending spurt is coming: The > administration last week requested $75 billion for the military campaign in > Iraq through this fall. > --http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-03-31-our-view_x.htm > One thing I get asked fairly often is whether the Iraq war is responsible > for our economic difficulties. The answer (with slight qualifications) is > no. > > Just to be clear: I yield to nobody in my outrage over the way we were lied > into a disastrous, unnecessary war. But economics isn't a morality play, in > which evil deeds are always punished and good deeds rewarded. > *The fact is that war is*, in general,* expansionary for the economy*, at > least in the short run. World War II, remember, ended the Great Depression. > *The $10 billion or so we're spending each month in Iraq mainly goes to > US-produced goods and services, which means that the war is actually > supporting demand. Yes, there would be infinitely better ways to spend the > money. But at a time when a shortfall of demand is the problem, the Iraq war > nonetheless acts as a sort of WPA, supporting employment directly and > indirectly.* > http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/an-iraq-recession/ My point about Iraq is that it helped take us out of the recession we were in, by spending a large amount money on Iraq. I'm not trying to state that the US somehow orchestrated Iraq in order to end the recession. That would be absurd. (and if that's what you understood from my previous comments, I could understand how you ROFL'd, lol) I'm trying to say that when our Pentagon spends billions of dollars on weapons, research, contracts and the like, it will stimulate the economy. Those posts above should back that up. You're right that both Reagan and Bush included massive tax cuts that aided in end their recessions. Which, is Specter can now support this stimulus package! He was part of a committee (along with another Republican from Maine, Collins, one democrat and Lieberman, whatever he decides is his that day) that compromised, to include some tax cuts and to cut some spending. -Lance On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Jarrad Reiner <[email protected]> wrote: > First of all, it's crazy that Japan implemented 12 stimulus bills at all. > Insane!! Secondly, the recession did not end with the last stimulus bill, > but dragged on for several more years. It's absurd to give japan's > government any credit when it took several additional years after the last > of 12 stimulus packages to beat the recession. > > None of your cutnpaste quotes validate your point about the Iraq war ending > the recession.. Just because the occurred in the same time period proves > nothing. Even correlation (which has not been shown) does not prove > causation. > > Both Reagan and Bush implimented massive tax cut during their recessions, > which helped usher in economic growth...but you forgot to mention those. > > Jarrad > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 9, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Lance McCulley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The recession ended. Japan's government helped end it. They poorly > implemented the plan, and couldn't decide on a single strategy, which is why > it took so long to work. Point proven. > <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/world/asia/06japan.html?pagewanted=1> > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/world/asia/06japan.html?pagewanted=1 > <http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/21/news/economy/yang_japan.fortune/> > http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/21/news/economy/yang_japan.fortune/ > > ROFL...The Iraq invasion DID NOT PULL US OUT OF THE 2001-2002 RECESSION. >> I've never even heard that before, not even from my LEFTIST Wacko Fringe >> buddies at work. Still ROFL.... >> > Laugh all you want. The point is, our recession started because of the > internet boom bubble bursting. It deepened due to the 9/11 attacks. It ended > at the end of 2003, not coincidentally, after the invasion of Iraq when > manufacturing starting seeing turn around in the markets. Yes, our spending > money on Iraq saved us from an even deeper recession. > > *The 2003 invasion of Iraq, from March 20 to May 1, 2003*, was spearheaded >> by the United States, backed by British forces and smaller contingents from >> Australia, Spain, Poland and Denmark. >> > -- <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq > > Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have >> begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the >> Dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was relatively unscathed by >> the NASDAQ's crash until the September 11, 2001 attacks, after which the >> DJIA suffered its worst one-day point loss and biggest one-week losses in >> history up to that point. The market rebounded, only to crash once more in >> the final two quarters of 2002. *In the final three quarters of 2003, the >> market finally rebounded permanently*, agreeing with the unemployment >> statistics that a recession defined in this way would have lasted from 2001 >> through 2003. > > -- <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession#United_States> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession#United_States > > When was the last time a recession ended without government intervention? > Hell, even Reagan ended his recession with deficit > spending...<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1980s_recession#Recovery> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1980s_recession#Recovery > I'll give you a little hint--it hasn't happened. No recession, that I can > find, has ever ended without government intervention. > > -Lance > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Jarrad Reiner < <[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> The Japan "equation" was first begun by you on Feb. 4, 2009. I merely >> turned it against you. You cite they didn't spend it fast enough for >> success, yet they seemed to spend it fast enough to require additional >> bailouts (12 total) during their recessionary years, where they spent so >> much it ended up equaling their total GDP. Yet, the recession did not end >> until several years after the last bailout. >> But If your worried about spending the stimulus fast enough, worry some >> more: The House Version (only version to be passed) will barely spend 21% >> of the funds this year. <http://readthestimulus.org/cbo_charts.php> Now >> thats according the Congressional Budget Office. >> >> To accurazie your statement: I'm convinced that the GOVERNMENT doing >> nothing is better than the GOVERNMENT spending upwards of a $TRILLION >> dollars THEY DO NOT HAVE, of which only *12%* actually go to something >> resembling GROWTH STIMULUS. >> >> ROFL...The Iraq invasion DID NOT PULL US OUT OF THE 2001-2002 RECESSION. >> I've never even heard that before, not even from my LEFTIST Wacko Fringe >> buddies at work. Still ROFL.... >> >> You win a basketball game by having your TEAM (the American people) fight >> for every loose ball, every rebound, take high percentage shots, move the >> ball to the open man, make free throws and play "condom" style defense. YOU >> DO NOT WIN by calling on the "BUILDING MANAGEMENT" (government) to enter the >> game for your 5 best players while allowing them (who are not ball players) >> to call their own plays, make their own substitutions, and play their own >> brand of defense. >> >> >> Jarrad >> >> >> >> On Feb 9, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Lance McCulley wrote: >> >> This particular something has not been tried, and your pathetic attempt to >> equate our two countries is driving me batty. When the stimulus was passed, >> the spending didn't ensue. Thus, the point of stimulus, to spend, never >> occurred at the desired rate, canceling any good that could have come from >> it. >> >> *Myths and truths about Japan's stimulus >> >> * >>> >>> Conservative critics like the Wall Street Journal's editorial board have >>> been using Japan's experience as evidence to be wary of stimulus packages >>> altogether. In an editorial last month entitled "Barack Obama-san," the >>> Journal listed all of Japan's stimulus attempts, and then intoned: "Not to >>> spoil the party, but [stimulus spending] is not a new idea...How do you say >>> 'good luck' in Japanese?" >>> >>> However, as in any reading of history, the closer you look the more >>> nuanced the lessons. For many, the moral of the story isn't that Japan erred >>> in deciding to use fiscal policy to fix their economy -- its failure was in >>> the execution. >>> >>> For one thing, there was dubious logic behind too many of Japan's >>> infrastructure projects. "It was the epitome of bridges to nowhere," says >>> economist Ed Lincoln, director of the Center for Japan-U.S. Business and >>> Economic Studies at New York University. "There was apparently a $2 billion >>> bridge built to an island of 800 people." >>> >>> And even before the financial crisis hit, Japan was wasting money on >>> pork-barrel projects, *so by the time the Japanese ramped up spending in >>> the 1990s, they had run out of worthy projects to fund*. The United >>> States, by comparison, has a long list of needy spots. (Witness the >>> Minneapolis bridge collapse in 2007.) >> >> >>> >> Finally, any action by the government needs to be done swiftly and >>> decisively. >>> >>> The Japanese government's efforts were spread over several years but it >>> was as if its leaders couldn't pick one strategy and stick to it. *After >>> passing a series of stimulus packages in the early 1990s, the economy showed >>> signs of improving; by 1995, GDP was growing at roughly an annual rate of >>> 2.5%.* >>> >>> And *then the government took a fateful step*. Worried about its growing >>> debt, Japan *raised its consumption tax* two percentage points, to 5%, >>> in 1997. And the economy, by now also hobbled with deflation, sunk into a >>> recession. >> >> -- <http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/21/news/economy/yang_japan.fortune/> >> http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/21/news/economy/yang_japan.fortune/ >> >> But, you won't hear it, you're too convinced that doing _nothing_ is >> better than doing nothing. Exactly, what evidence is this based on? >> >> You agree that WWII is what ended the Great Depression. Well, we spent >> hundreds of millions of dollars. It was unprecedented at the time, but it >> worked. When we were in a recession in 2001-2003, what got us out of it was >> spending hundreds of billions of dollars on the Iraq invasion. Again, >> spending worked. >> >> Where's the evidence that doing nothing will create much needed jobs? >> Sorry Jarrad, but I'm not willing to do _nothing_ on the hopes that >> something will come of it, and neither is Sen. Specter, a Republican. What >> you are suggesting is plain arrogant foolishness. You wouldn't argue that >> you can win a basketball game by standing on the sidelines. So, what makes >> you think that sitting on the sidelines during the most economic troubling >> time of our generation, is a good idea? >> >> -Lance >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Jarrad Reiner < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yes, we're all familiar with the tired pathetic excuse "we have to do >>> something".Except this particular something has been tried many times >>> before; See Japan (mid 1990's) >>> >>> Jarrad >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Feb 9, 2009, at 2:12 PM, Lance McCulley wrote: >>> >>> I am supporting the economic stimulus package for one simple reason: The >>>> country cannot afford not to take action. >>>> The unemployment figures announced Friday, the latest earnings reports >>>> and the continuing crisis in banking make it clear that failure to act will >>>> leave the United States facing a far deeper crisis in three or six months. >>>> By then the cost of action will be much greater -- or it may be too late. >>>> Wave after wave of bad economic news has created its own psychology of >>>> fear and lowered expectations. As in the old Movietone News, the eyes and >>>> ears of the world are upon the United States. Failure to act would be >>>> devastating not just for Wall Street and Main Street but for much of the >>>> rest of the world, which is looking to our country for leadership in this >>>> crisis. >>>> >>> --<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/08/AR2009020801710.html> >>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/08/AR2009020801710.html >>> -Lance >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Politically Opinionated Outspoken People Expounding Religion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pooper?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
