Annachie wrote:2009 HR 1105, been reading the summary.
It really needs a summary of the summary.
Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
I think it needs to be written in English rather than Politish-Attornish.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by CRC » Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:20 pm | |
CRC
Posts: 131
|
I think it needs to be written in English rather than Politish-Attornish. |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by gcomeau » Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:28 pm | |
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
Yes, a right wing think tank with their own agenda of being against government interference in the economy put out a paper saying government interference in the economy didn't work. shocking. In the meantime as already pointed out in this thread, the non partisan CBO analysis: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files ... 5-arra.pdf "Estimating the law’s overall effects on employment requires a more comprehensive analysis than can be achieved by using the recipients’ reports. Therefore, looking at recorded spending to date along with estimates of the other effects of ARRA on spending and revenues, CBO has estimated the law’s impact on employment and economic output using evidence about the effects of previous similar policies and drawing on various mathematical models that represent the workings of the economy. On that basis, CBO estimates that ARRA’s policies had the following effects in the first quarter of calendar year 2011: They raised real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.1 percent and 3.1 percent, Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.6 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points, Increased the number of people employed by between 1.2 million and 3.3 million, and Increased the number of full-time-equivalent jobs by 1.6 million to 4.6 million compared with what would have occurred otherwise, as shown in Table 1. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers.) The effects of ARRA on output peaked in the first half of 2010 and have since diminished, CBO estimates. The effects of ARRA on employment and unemployment are estimated to lag slightly behind the effects on output; CBO estimates that the employment effects began to wane at the end of 2010 and continued to do so in the first quarter of 2011." |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by Tenshinai » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:05 am | |
Tenshinai
Posts: 2893
|
Did you bother to read what i wrote at all? Because your "answer" is pretty much a big "huh?" and little else as it does not in any way answer what i wrote. |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by CRC » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:31 am | |
CRC
Posts: 131
|
Actually I did read what you wrote. its ok to post your opinions and its ok for me to add some other pertinent opinions and facts that might be advantageous to those who read your post, then read my post, then form their own opinions. So basically I just added a bit of new information to your post that has a different point of view that you do. Does every counter-post have to start off with "Jane you ignorant slut..." (with apologies to Dan and SNL crew...)? |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by CRC » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:02 pm | |
CRC
Posts: 131
|
Of course I quoted a right wing think tank. What's wrong with that? Oh, I forgot, right wing think tanks should not exist. Alternate views are not allowed. Sorry, I forgot my place in your world view. (Even though your 2011 CBO report actually agrees, in part, with the 'right wing" think tank hypothesis.) Its interesting why you quoted the 2011 version of the CBO report. Why didn't you quote the 2015 version? (https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49958) What is significant about the 2015 version is how all of the 2011 impact estimates were revised downward. What is also significant is that the 2015 version provides the COST of the measures employed to the taxpayer - present or future. So taking the numbers and doing the math provides some interesting data. For example - the ARRA COSTS per FTE job in each year ranged from almost $600k per year FTE at the worst case to around $36k per year FTE in the best base for 2012: Cost per FTE Job 2009 - $596,666.67 to $137,692.31 2010 - $445,555.56 to $85,319.15 2011 - $241,666.67 to $40,277.78 2012 - $235,000.00 to $36,153.85 2013 - $370,000.00 to $74,000.00 2014 - Infinity to $95,000.00 That's a lot per job...regardless of your perspective. Now the numbers for the GDP increase actually look better in favor of the ARRA - Amount GDP was increased by: 2009 - 58.16 to 261.72 2010 - 104.58 to 612.54 2011 - 60.76 to 349.37 2012 - 15.38 to 123.04 2013 - 15.79 to 63.16 2014 - 0 to 32.38 Total over the time frame - 254.67 to 1442.21 So essentially one can argue that the $828B spent on the ARRA between 2009 and 2014 increased the GDP by $254.67B at a low estimate or $1442.21 at a high estimate. At the high, the $828B spent would be a bargain, but at the low it would be a disastrous investment. Those in favor of government spending will quote the high number, those against it will quote the low number. Now I do find one thing in the 2011 report to be rather interesting. Its Table 2. This lists the estimated output multipliers for each of the Title Provisions. In this table, the CBO is basically agreeing with the hypothesis of the Hoover.org paper in that Division B outputs (tax cuts, direct payments to people, transfers to states, etc.) actually have a less than 1 to 1 impact. (One exception is 2 year tax cut which has a high of 1.5) Division B contained almost half of the total costs of the ARRA. Division A contained the purchase of goods provisions - although the 'direct purchase' can be disputed somewhat for some of the provisions. I can't trace down where CBO got these multipliers from, but I do find them intriguing. But once again this entire discussion is on the ARRA and completely discounts, ignores and attempts to take Obama off the hook for the rise in the debt due to the actual Budget acts that Obama signed starting in March 2009. As a parallel, Trump has yet to sign any budget actions to date. |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by Annachie » Sat Mar 25, 2017 6:08 pm | |
Annachie
Posts: 3099
|
Why are you continuously bringing up the CBO projections?
Why are you trying to compare anything to them? Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ still not dead. |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by Tenshinai » Sat Mar 25, 2017 6:22 pm | |
Tenshinai
Posts: 2893
|
You might want to try to be a little bit less obscure then, because it read pretty much like you were trying to argue against my post and just completely failing. I was mostly scratching my head wondering what you were trying to do. |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by CRC » Sun Mar 26, 2017 5:42 pm | |
CRC
Posts: 131
|
Actually, what I was trying to do, and what has enamored me to these particular forums, was have discussions on political issues similar to those on Weber's books. Very few of those are confrontational and the differing POVs, contributions and speculations sometime quite entertaining. Unfortunately the same approach to discussing Safehold's next arc, or the fate of the Mandarins, or WTFO vampires in space don't seem to apply to politics. A bit of a shame actually... |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by CRC » Sun Mar 26, 2017 5:56 pm | |
CRC
Posts: 131
|
For projections, the CBO is probably the best known 'non-partisan' analytic organization. Everyone else is going to be labeled as right wing, left wing, up wing, down wing, etc. Of course the CBO has a horrendous record of projecting expenses or costs. But then, so does pretty much everyone else. (A good example is the projected 10 year costs of Medicare Part D in 2003 vs. reality.) But in the case of my last post, I was not looking at projections per se. (More like lies, damn lies and statistics actually.) But actuals, or at least one interpretation of actuals. The COB report in 2015 looks at the past impact the ARRA had via actual cost numbers and ranges of estimated impacts. Within the uncertainties you can at least do some basic math to figure out the pluses and minuses. |
Top |
Re: What has Trump done right so far? | |
---|---|
by gcomeau » Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:15 pm | |
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
Of course they can exist, and of course they are allowed. But they have an agenda. They aren't an objective arbiter of what was occurring, they exist for the PURPOSE of promoting one specific view of events. So of course their analysis is going to say their view is right. The entire reason they exist is to say their view is right. Which is why things like the CBO exist. To give us neutral analysis. And that neutral analysis says it looks like the stimulus worked just fine. If you want an honest opinion on whether cats are good or bad, you don't ask the American Association for the Advancement of Dogs.
Minor revisions only. The reality that the stimulus clearly worked is unchanged. Which is the only point of disagreement with your right wing think tank analysis that matters for this topic.
We already knew the cost. It was *in the bill*.
No, not really. Not when the purpose is to get that money circulating in the economy. Also known as ECONOMIC STIMULUS. The POINT is to spend money. Do you really still not understand that?
And those who are honest will recognize that both best and worse case outcomes are put there only to cover low probability hedges against ALL the data being wrong in the same direction, by the most it could statistically be expected to be wrong by. Which is extremely unlikely so long after the events the analysis is being performed on, and say the real effect was most likely somewhere in the middle. And somewhere in the middle looks just fine to me.
Which is the one thing *I* agreed with them on too. And which Democrats agree with them on. And which the GOP does NOT. If you don't know who keeps insisting on tax cuts as stimulus in American politics you have been buried in an underground bunker somewhere for the last 30 years with no outside media access.
As a sop to the Republicans to try to get them to vote for the damn thing.
HE'S NOT FIGHTING AN ECONOMIC EMERGENCY. He was handed a relatively healthy economy from Obama. There is no reason to sign emergency spending legislation outside the normal budget cycle. |
Top |