[quote]hedo wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
hedo wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
hedo wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
hedo wrote:
The IMF says it could be a lot worse and we are probably at the end of the recession.
Where the hell did you get this from? Oh, a blog…
Bother checking the IMF website? (biggest link at the very top)
[i]World Growth Grinds to Virtual Halt, IMF Urges Decisive Global Policy Response
January 28, 2009
* IMF revises world growth down to lowest rate since World War II
* Stresses need for stronger international policy response to the crisis
* Banking sector must be unclogged to get economies moving again
[/i]
Funny stuff. Sadly though you expect to be taken seriously.
The IMF quotes you selectively edit don’t say anything about the stimulus.
Selective editing might have worked for you when the media was in your pocket but it falls short now.
If you can’t add to the conversation why don’t you and the rest of the sheep get back to your circle jerk.
The question remains is this a stimulus or a spending bill that answers liberal desires while weakening the economy and prolonging the downturn like the New Deal did.
Providing for increased spending for medicare and unemployment benefits, while noble, isn’t going to create jobs. Spending money on highway projects that may begin in 2 years likewise doesn’t do anything right now.
Tax cuts have an immediate effect. Spending is what got us here. Psuedo-economic theory that doesn’t work in practice will only make things work.
Regardless the Democrats own this now 100%. The media will have nobody to blame but the Dems in two years. They’ll try but only the most foolish moonbats will buy it.
Did you even try to read the link?
It’s one thing to say, “I don’t agree with this point.” It’s quite another to have some ideological blinders on that you just skipped that part. (psst. in the part you quoted above it was in the “policy response” part 
[i]2. Macroeconomic stimulus?both monetary and fiscal?to support demand.
On monetary policy, many central banks have taken strong actions to cut interest rates and improve credit provision. The IMF still sees some room to lower interest rates, as inflation pressures are subsiding, but the room is diminishing rapidly, and has disappeared altogether in some countries. Moreover, deflation is now a risk. In present circumstances, the effectiveness of low interest rates to support activity is likely to be constrained as long as financial conditions remain disrupted. Therefore, central banks will need to rely increasingly on unconventional measures to unlock key (high-spread, low-liquidity) credit markets.
On fiscal policy, many countries have announced and are already implementing sizeable stimulus. The key here is to design packages that provide maximum boost to demand, which argues for measures to increase spending. However, fiscal deficits are widening sharply because of the cyclical downturn and the impact of asset price declines on revenues, as well as stimulus measures and the cost of financial sector rescues. To prevent an adverse market reaction, the IMF says policymakers need to strengthen fiscal frameworks and commit to credible longer-term policies that reverse the deficit buildup as economies recover.
Space for easing
Blanchard also stressed that there is no “one-size-fits-all” policy mix. Some countries have more fiscal and monetary space than others. “In this respect, it is welcome that some emerging economies now have more space for policy easing than in previous downturns and are making use of it,” he said.[/i]
Idealogical blinders…from you. Your satire is rich.
It’s not a stimulus bill it’s a spending bill. The “Pelosi, Reid, Obama spending bill” nothing more.
So first you didn’t bother to read the IMF site (even after it was linked), then, when you realize it says the opposite of what you thought it did, you claim that “the stimulus package comes from liberals so it’s bad!”
…did I get that right?
Want to contribute to the conversation? Try reading and trying to understand the arguments of the major players first. Or, I suppose, you can keep reading blogs and yelling “THAT SIDE IS BAD, MY SIDE IS GOOD!” without thought… it makes for funny reading
I started the conversation genius. You tried to derail it.[/quote]
How is correcting you on what the IMF thinks about a financial crisis “derailing it”?
How is posting articles directly from the IMF and economist “derailing”?
[quote]
Kind of like Pelosi and Reid when people wanted to debate the merits of the largest spending bill in history. Commisar Pelosi granted 8 hrs. of discussion before she called the other party members to ratify it.
It’s not a stimulus package it’s a spending bill. I know your a democratic hack but what part of spending money we don’t have is good for us again? I know it requires thougt. [/quote]
I’ve already posted the reasons the IMF listed above. Have you bothered to read it?
Again, it might be a good idea to at least TRY to understand what the IMF thinks… Feel free to disagree with them if you’d like, but misrepresenting their views (in your first post) does not “contribute”
…and this conversation has been going on before you began a thread, big guy.