Its not known how much the 12 stimulus plans hurt or helped in the long term. But we do know the goal of the stimulus' were to quickly end the recession with an explosion of insane spending. And spend they did. However, that spending, even when it artificially increased GDP was not enough to pull japan out of it's funk.
Now we can blame japan for not spending it fast enough, or spending it on worthless projects, or raising taxes, or lowering taxes....but my point is that the government SCREWED it up, every which way. Government interference in japan's case did nothing to bring a quick end to it. Our government has nothing on Japan's, and has already had round 1 of the bailouts and the stimulus package and is now preparing for round 2. Our government SCREWED UP round 1 not acheiving any of it's primary goals, and there is no reason I've seen to make me believe they won't do the same with round 2, or 3 or 4. Heck the stimulus package is so full of PORK, only 12% can even be consideres anythimg resembling growth stimulus. That's what government interference gets you. The new deal, japans 12 stimuli, even carter's Keynesian spending all failed their primary goals; to bring about a quick and decisive end to their prospective recessionary economies. But the price tag for this debacle is to big for it to help just a little. Even VP Biden admitted that even if the plan goes right (a huge if) there's still a 30% in his mind that it would fail. Government is consistently great at one thing....Screwing things up. Jarrad Sent from my iPhone On Feb 9, 2009, at 7:55 PM, Lance McCulley <[email protected]> wrote: > 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://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 >> >> 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 >> >> 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 >> 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]> >> 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. 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/ >>> >>> 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]> 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 >>>> -Lance >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > t;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 > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
