Skip to main content

View Diary: Job growth clocks in at disappointing 120,000, far below forecasts. Unemployment rate falls to 8.2% (167 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not necessarily. The point of having a... (6+ / 0-)

    ...bigger stimulus is to kick-start the economy into sustained, vigorous growth. If you don't spend enough, then there is only a short-term or weaker boost, not enough to really get things going full steam, which then dwindles before the growth engine really revs up.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Fri Apr 06, 2012 at 06:59:50 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Sustained Vigorous Growth Doing What? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      guinea, SoCalLiberal

      Nobody has answered this question.

      How does the U.S. economy create sustainable 'high paying' jobs for a critical mass of its own citizenry in jobs which creates new wealth or adds significant value?

      I still don't see where that comes from. What we are talking about here is creating 300,000 or 400,000 jobs a month for twelve or eighteen months at a whack.

      Doing what?

      I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

      by superscalar on Fri Apr 06, 2012 at 07:23:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The obvious answer would be solving big problems. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        schnecke21, wsexson

        We need huge investment in Energy Independence.  We need significant investment in STEM education mentoring.  We need some investment in civil infrastructure, both repair of physical and adding new, like high speed rail and high speed internet.

        None of those things happened.  ARRA spent a hard minority of dollars on solving these problems.

        -7.75 -4.67

        "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

        There are no Christians in foxholes.

        by Odysseus on Fri Apr 06, 2012 at 10:19:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  To Do Most Of This (0+ / 0-)

          Requires that the government collect money from the citizenry in the form of taxes. To pay these taxes on an ongoing basis somebody has to be creating new wealth or adding significant value to an existing product or process.

          Extraction, home building, high value added manufacturing, this is what I am referring to when I ask 'Doing what?'.

          I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

          by superscalar on Fri Apr 06, 2012 at 11:47:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Borrowing is cheap. The government could have... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Odysseus

            ...invested in upgraded and new infrastructure creation on a massive scale, say of a level comparable to World War II, This would have created millions of jobs, boosted demand, helped people avoid foreclosures that have kept housing prices down and given us a leg-up in green energy and rebuilding of everything from our education system to or rail system.

            Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

            by Meteor Blades on Fri Apr 06, 2012 at 08:47:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Considering the rate of GDP contraction in '08... (0+ / 0-)

      ...compared to what it was believed to be by those in Washington, if I recall Paul Krugram correctly, in the end, none of the considered stimulus amounts were remotely adequate to initiate the Keynesian self-sustained stimulus cycle according to theory.

      I seem to recall Paul Krugam suggesting that the stimulus would have needed to be $2T - $3T. With a timulus of $1.2T, unemployment would be lower, but with the lag time from initiating construction projects, unemployment might be below 8% today, but not by much.

      •  Romer's proposed $1.8 trillion never got... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cpresley

        ...to the president's ears.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Fri Apr 06, 2012 at 09:50:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, yes, I understand that. (0+ / 0-)

          And there were many reasons for that, including the fact that the Administration was oblivious to the real rate of GDP contraction.

          But even with $1.8T, which in a real world would have been whittled down to say $1.2T, you're still very far from that $2T to $3T band you needed to be in.

          In order to even be talking about what the stimulus could have accomplished, we need to be in that $2T to $3T range, which no one was discussing at the time.

          All this leads me to conclude that even with a bigger stimulus, the net effect today would be harldy any different.

          Instead of wondering what if Romer's $1.8T had gotten to Obama's desk, wonder about what would be if the Government had calculated a 9% GDP contraction.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site