NY Times's Jackie Calmes Again Insists on Success of Obama's 'Stimulus'
New York Times White House reporter Jackie Calmes, a consistent defender of Obama’s fiscal philosophy (and even the lack of one), announced on Thursday yet another “major address” by President Obama: “Obama to Press Committee on Jobs.”
President Obama will deliver a major address soon after Labor Day seeking to pressure a special Congressional committee to propose new measures to promote job creation as well as larger long-term deficit cuts than mandated, aides said Wednesday.
Calmes likened Obama’s newly found deficit-reduction “ambition” to “tax increases on the wealthy.”
As for deficit reduction, Mr. Obama suggested that he would call in his speech for the bipartisan 12-member Congressional committee that was created by his debt-reduction deal with Republicans this month to be more ambitious about deficit-reduction than its formal charge requires -- including tax increases on the wealthy, which Republicans oppose.
....
In a memorandum to House Republicans on Wednesday, Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the majority leader, said their agenda must include “stopping the discussions of new stimulus spending with money that we simply do not have.” He accused the president of waging “class warfare” -- Republican code for Mr. Obama’s proposed tax increases on high incomes.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican minority leader, criticized “job-killing tax increases” and said, “Continuing the spending spree on failed stimulus programs won’t shrink the deficit.”
Calmes again insisted Obama’s economic “stimulus” had been successful, albeit not enough to have actually done much good:
Many economists argue that while temporary spending and tax cuts add to deficits initially, such measures can increase tax collections, reduce costs for safety-net programs and ultimately keep deficits smaller than otherwise by spurring business activity and lowering unemployment. How economists would judge Mr. Obama’s proposals will depend on their details; contrary to Republicans’ claims, economists generally judged his 2009-10 stimulus program to have helped, but to have been insufficient to overcome the deep downturn.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
But what if 2009 Stimulus deterred the alien invasion of Earth?
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 3:31pm.
Paul Krugman said that we need the threat of an alien invasion to stimulate the economy. What if all the "shovel-ready" stuff detered an actual alien attack? Then wouldn't it reasonable to assume the stimulus hurt the economy?
Pretty unbelieveable.
Submitted by JLin on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 3:44pm.
Remember Gorachev's press guy Vladimir Posner? These people remind me of him. Totally oblivious to reality and committed to the Party line. So sad.
Tax increases. Pfeh...
Submitted by JLin on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 3:48pm.
Democrat tax increases always hurt the Middle Class worse than the rich. That (middle America) is where the big dollars are really at. The Left are adept at building the case that they are "taxing the rich" but that straw man lie is becoming more evident to the average American.
Many errors
Submitted by CobraMan on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 4:08pm.
"Many economists argue that while temporary spending and tax cuts add to deficits initially, such measures can increase tax collections, reduce costs for safety-net programs and ultimately keep deficits smaller than otherwise by spurring business activity and lowering unemployment."
Are those the same economists that are continually surprised at the actual state of the Economy? Yea, like I'm going to trust the judgement of the economists that have erred more times than a College Graduate in a spelling bee.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Allow me to nitpick
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 4:41pm.
Calmes: ". . . How economists would judge Mr. Obama’s proposals will depend on their details; . . ."
In other words, their politics.
Calmes: ". . . contrary to Republicans’ claims, economists generally judged . . . "
'Generally judged?" Is that the most positive perspective one can put on their conclusions?
Calmes: ". . . his 2009-10 stimulus program to have helped, but to have been insufficient to overcome the deep downturn."
OK. So, economist will agree that when Washington dumps $800 billion on special interest programs, at least some of it (how much?) does some short term good -- it creates some jobs, at least temporarily.
The real matter isn't about benefits to a few; it's about how the effects stack up against (a) the targeting of the grants; (b) fraud, waste, cronyism, and abuse (which was rampant), and (c) the acceleration of the growth of our national debt, which led to the devaluation of our Treasury bonds.
The good news is that Obama and Reid cannot possibly get a wasteful "jobs" package through because the Republicans will point out that it's just a new "brand" for a second stimulus.
Obama's stimulus was a
Submitted by deerjerkydave on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 5:44pm.
Obama's stimulus was a complete success. It did precisely what it was designed to do...pay off the union thugs who got him elected.
------------------------
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. -James MadisonMajor address
Submitted by dmaley1714 on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 8:05pm.
what exactly is the definition of a major address, will he be in th oval office, or th ROse garden to give the same tired speech of investments in education, clean energy and the jobs of the future. Which means more money to big education, big union and of course big goverment.
Here's the single,
Submitted by big.league.slider on Sat, 08/20/2011 - 2:36am.
Here's the single, indisputable fact that sums up the "success" of Obama's stimulus: $250,000 per job.
Using that established metric, even a reporter from the NY Times (including Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman) should be able to quickly calculate the impact on jobs from any new stimulus spending. I'll even put it in the form of a word problem: Let's say we need to create 14,000,000 new jobs at $250,000 each. How many trillions of dollars will President Obama need to print?
The N Y Times credibility
Submitted by Barack Must Go on Sat, 08/20/2011 - 7:43am.
The N Y Times credibility level is about the same as that of Barack Obama these dayz......nonexistent.
She thinks everything is
Submitted by jessieH on Sat, 08/20/2011 - 9:09am.
She thinks everything is fine, just because she still has her job.