Comments on: I can’t sell you a Boston condo if don’t have a job

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 22:46:16 +0000

anon2,

So you proposed that without the stimulus the unemployment rate would look exactly the same as it is now?

I’m not inferring that Obama and the Fed underestimated, but your criticism seems to suggest they should have spent more if we logically conclude that things were worse off then anyone expected.

By: Rob

Rob — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:56:02 +0000

The recession has shown even the most pessimistic economist was too optimistic including myself. Many politicians and economists thought that he was over reacting by proposing such a large stimulus program. “Scare tactics” is a common phrase many critics used to describe Obama’s plan. Even Obama’s “scare tactic” was not scary enough. Obama has great intention but poor execution. This recovery will continue to be mild. Normal V-shape recovery would suggest that we should have about 6% GDP growth, but this recovery will not be normal. We have multiple negative forces facing the U.S. economy in 2010: new wave of mortgage resets, expiration of favorable tax treatment for dividend and capital gains, and looming trade war with China.

By: anon2

anon2 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:09:53 +0000

Um, remember back when team Obama was originally pitching the stimulus? They had a nice chart showing what unemployment would look like in the future (i.e., now) with and without the stimulus. Google it. It is a good indicator of how much faith you should put in their assurances now. That is to say, they promised way more than was delivered, and I wouldn’t expect this time to be any different.

By: JohnG

JohnG — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:18:00 +0000

I can’t sell you a Boston condo if don’t have a job?

Not having a job wasn’t barrier to buying a home a few years ago, so maybe thing are getting back to “normal”?

I stongly dislike the term “or saving jobs”. It’s garbage.