General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT: What the Stimulus Accomplished
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/opinion/sunday/what-the-stimulus-accomplished.html?_r=0What the Stimulus Accomplished
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
FEB. 22, 2014
Of all the myths and falsehoods that Republicans have spread about President Obama, the most pernicious and long-lasting is that the $832 billion stimulus package did not work. Since 2009, Republican lawmakers have inextricably linked the words failed and stimulus, and last week, five years after passage of the Recovery Act, they dusted off their old playbook again.
snip//
So the American Jobs Act was killed, and so was the infrastructure bank and any number of other spending proposals that might have helped the country. The presidents plan to spend another $56 billion on job training, education and energy efficiency, to be unveiled in his budget next month, will almost certainly suffer a similar fate.
This may be the singular tragedy of the Obama administration. Five years later, it is clear to all fair-minded economists that the stimulus did work, and that it did enormous good for the economy and for tens of millions of people. But because it fell short of its goals, and was roundly ridiculed by Republicans and inadequately defended by Democrats, who should have trumpeted its success, the presidents stimulus plan is now widely considered a stumble.
snip//
The legacy of that policy, detailed by the White House last week in its final report on the effects of the stimulus, affects virtually every American who drives, uses mass transit, or drinks water. It improved 42,000 miles of road, fixed or replaced 2,700 bridges, and bought more than 12,000 transit vehicles. It cleaned up water supplies, created the school reforms of the Race to the Top program, and greatly expanded the use of renewable energy and broadband Internet service.
Its probably too late for the White House to persuade skeptics about its program, but its assessment echoes the views of many independent economists and the independent Congressional Budget Office. The Recovery Act was not a failed program, the C.B.O.s director, Douglas Elmendorf, told annoyed Republican lawmakers in 2012. Our position is that it created higher output and employment than would have occurred without it.
Government spending worked, helping millions of people who never realized it. And it can work again, whenever lawmakers agree that putting people to work is more important than winning ideological fights.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)SunSeeker
(51,787 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,769 posts)Amonester
(11,541 posts)... the top 1%.
Well, at least millions had or kept jobs they barely benefit from.
okaawhatever
(9,478 posts)Amonester
(11,541 posts)okaawhatever
(9,478 posts)99%. It benefited the 1%, for example people used their payroll tax break to buy things at Wal Mart and Wal Mart made profit for the 1% but what are we supposed to do, not give the money to the 99% because they will buy things that benefit mega corps?
Amonester
(11,541 posts)"Well, at least millions had or kept jobs they barely benefit from."
The point is, I don't blame Obama for this, but the millionaires in Congress who block everything, mostly Republicans.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)okaawhatever
(9,478 posts)allowed 300k teachers, nurses and police who would have been laid off due to a shortage in state revenue. Those people paid their bills and bought things. Do we allow those people to be laid off because when they buy things and pay their mortgage it helps the 1%?
babylonsister
(171,107 posts)Sounds like more than the 1% to me.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)And more.
Of course it would mean more taxes... (to those who can afford them, and the 1-10% bracket could easily).
malaise
(269,260 posts)but that is hardly news
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)It was known at the beginning that the stimulus was too small by at least half. But the administration refused to even propose a stimulus large enough. (negotiating with themselves again). Then they made promises on what it would do, only to then negotiate away the key parts that would have actually achieved those results. Ultimately, they accepted a deal where it would only slow down the rate of unemployment and keep it below 10% or so. So it was a half measure that didn't actually reverse anything, but merely "slowed down the bad".
So it isn't surprising that people aren't exactly celebrating the results. And the administration was left making the argument that "it coulda been worse", which in essence is an admission that it was bad.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)daybranch
(1,309 posts)Is the President speaking up now or is he hoping that we can all just get along? I wonder??
Sometimes I wish the President was a little more straight forward and did not always seem so poll driven.
We recognize his risk aversion, and as he says make him do it. Sad but true. I am really glad he is being forced by populist progressives to get rid of that austerity nonsense.
Without a phenomenal effort on the parts of democrats , the damage of catering to austerity idiots will last decades.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)The editorial itself mentions all of Obama's subsequent efforts for more stimulus programs. He mentioned them all of the time for awhile back in 2009 and 2010.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Yes, it worked.