Skip to content

Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 – Economic Policies for the 21st Century

June 8, 2011

Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 – Economic Policies for the 21st Century.

Just take a look at the graph.

Awesome. Glad we had that recovery plan of Obama’s.

And don’t worry. Everything is a-ok in the U.S.

It’s FUNemployment! YAY!

  1. Michael permalink
    June 8, 2011 5:24 pm

    So let me get this straight… You are bashing the Obama Administration for getting the final unemployment numbers a bit wrong by prediction (still less than the 2-3% higher that independent economists say would have happened without it), but you trumpet a plan that says that 2 1/2% employment is going to happen (Ryan’s), despite the fact that that kind of rate is pure fantasy.

    Dissemble much?

  2. June 9, 2011 7:30 am

    Independent economists? Like Krugman? Gotcha.

    It’s like the snake oil salesman telling the bald man that “Yeah, my tonic didn’t keep you from going bald, but look at it this way, it saved enough hair for you to have that nice comb over!”

  3. Michael permalink
    June 9, 2011 5:56 pm

    No, not counting a guy like Krugman.

    Notice you failed to address Ryan’s impossible joblessness number. But it won’t matter because he’ll never have to prove it because it’ll never pass, but, as you defend the plan, I am curious nonetheless.

    “Christina Romer, the outgoing head of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, never really recovered politically from her January 2009 forecast that the stimulus would keep the unemployment rate below 8%. In fact, by the time Obama signed the Recovery Act into law on Feb. 17, 2009, it already had breached that level.”

    So, in effect, you are attacking a number that was already surpassed before the law could come into effect… Kind of weak, don’t you think? It’s like blaming a doctor for not saving a patient who died while he was in medical school.

    Oh, since we are talking predictions, and you are on the 8% like a dog on a mailman’s shorts, how about this one:

    “Tax relief will create new jobs. Tax relief will generate new wealth. And tax relief will open new opportunities.”

    “So, to recap: The Bush tax cuts were followed by low GDP growth, negative median wage growth, and little job growth. Even before the Great Recession, growth in the Bush business cycle was the weakest since World War II. And the cuts cost about $2.6 trillion between 2001 and 2010, according to the Economic Policy Institute—adding to a debt future generations of taxpayers will pay for, plus interest.
    By Bush’s own metrics, then, the tax cuts were a failure. But perhaps that is because Bush chose such absurd metrics and made such silly promises about tax cuts’ economic omnipotence in the first place. To state the obvious, tax cuts are not magic. They can help a strong economy get stronger or help a weak economy pick up some steam. They also have a direct impact on the government budget. But they cannot goose employers into adding millions of jobs, pay for themselves, and arrest the growth of government, all while delivering everyone cupcakes. So perhaps the best we can say about the Bush tax cuts is that they did exactly what we should have expected them to do.”

  4. texan2driver permalink
    June 9, 2011 6:27 pm

    So, if we hadn’t taken over a trillion dollars out of the economy before putting some/most of it back in, we would have had a higher unemployment rate, a bigger housing bubble, deeper recession, etc.? Just as Ryan claiming his plan will give 2.5% unemployment is unknowable, supporters of the Obama stimulus both then and now can’t possibly know what would have happened. As said above, snake oil salesmen. Over two years down the road from the original “stimulus,” it appears that all it has accomplished is delaying the inevitable. and perhaps making it worse.

  5. James permalink
    June 9, 2011 7:37 pm

    Rule of life:
    The more complex something is, the less likely the forknowledge of the outcome for a given action.
    The more sure someone is that their action (with something complex) will result in a specific outcome, the more caution should be taken before taking that action. (see…well, too many historical instances to list…)

    Basically, the more sure someone is that their action will fix things, the less likely I am to trust them…

  6. Michael permalink
    June 10, 2011 10:26 am

    2 1/2% unemployment?? When has that EVER happened? Seriously. Do the research, look at the math. It is as crazy as Pawlenty’s -1% unemployment.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: