Public Confidence In Stimulus Package's Effectiveness Ebbs, Poll Finds

Washington Post:

Barely half of Americans are now confident that President Obama's $787 billion stimulus measure will boost the economy, and the rapid rise in optimism about the state of the nation that followed the 2008 election has abated, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Read the whole story: Washington Post

Comments

[MuchMadness]

Even if Herbert Hoover had wanted to adopt Keynesian measures in 1930, he might not have been able to get congress to go along. When unemployment hit 25% in 1933, that's when the public realized that the old rules could no longer apply.

The question for President Obama is how bad does the American public think things are now? Are they ready to listen to FDR, or will they keep thinking that a Hooverite approach is best.

[jesseandrews]

Study your history the new deal did not work, it was the world war that got us out of the depression.

[MuchMadness]

To me, easing misery is a legitimate function of government. Sometimes it is impossible to have a good economy. When the private sector is broken and not competent to repair itself, sometimes all that government can do is prevent a complete collapse.

[GiveUsFree]

Are you an authority on the matter? The New Deal did work. It reduced unemployment down to below 10% until FDR attempted to balance the budget and screwed it up again.

[TJCole]

It sure did work it lowered unemployment from 25% to around 10-12% then FDr pulled back which set things back...

Stop learning your history from Fox News...

[FernandoRuiz]

And World War II was one giant government stimlulus as well. It was the New Deal on speed. The government successfully took over entire sectors of the economy while fighting a 2 front war. Its you that doesnt know his history. If the New Deal failed, then why was FDR elected to 4 presidential terms? And why was he succeeded by Harry Truman, a Democrat? Dont you think the public would have voted FDR out if the New Deal had failed?

[Tommygun264]

Take your own advice and study history. After the institution of the New Deal and BEFORE America entered WWII the unemployment rate dropped from 25% to 10%.

[desertman]

Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians, reads a manifesto published by the Cato Institute, and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s.

More government spending did not solve Japan’s ‘lost decade’ in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

[FernandoRuiz]

Where did you plagiarize that from?

[CornSyrupAwareness]

Your talking points are stale. FDR pulled back on stimulus by listening to opinions like yours and the economy struggled until WWII, but before that it certainly worked. Japan had a lost decade because they were too focused on roads and bridges as their stimulus. But Japan already had a very nice and upgraded infrastructure. Thus they build many bridges to nowhere, which are a recipe for economic disaster. We have a infrastructure built in the first half of the 20th century, we could use A LOT MORE stimulus than what's already been approved. Put down the Fox news for a second and read a book.

[myvoice09]

Well said, desertman!

[DofG]

President Obama has previously stated that employment will be the last indicator that shows the health of the economy. Unfortunately, to many Americans don't have a real understanding of Capitalism beyond their nearsighted involvement. This allows the politicians and punditry to exploit that ignorance.
Our economic system is a pyramid where the apex represents the biggest owners of capital-money, material, services, and collective labor. The biggest players can buy the most influence when things are going well to maintain their position in the economic food chain, usually at someone else's expense. And when things go systemically bad, they are the first to get "bailed out"! The middle class and the working poor, also have capital; but it is mostly individual labor. These groups mostly depend on the "owners" of larger shares of capital for their livelyhood.

In other words, when the "big fishes have replenished themselves", there maybe a job to be found. But nothing will ever go back to the way it was before! This is the side effect of Capitalism that few will talk about; because it is always in a blind state of underminding its own foundation!

[jesseandrews]

No you do not have an idea of economics just like Obama does not, if you make 1600 dollars a month you do not spend 3000 dollars you will go bankrupt or in debt for ever, you have to cut spending and help small buisness to get the economy going again. Cut all taxes to a lower level. Taxing just the rich makes everyone poor. A poor man never hires another to work, only the rich and buisness hire people.

[MuchMadness]

Your analogy is flawed. Monetary policy and fiscal policy are both legitimate tools of government. Incidentally, Ronald Reagan by his actions supported a massive increase in the national debt. He rarely even presented a balanced budget to congress, and he made no serious effort at all to stop congress from going on a spending spree. President Clinton was far more fiscally conservative than President Reagan.

[GiveUsFree]

You have a slave mentality. Let me ask you this. How do you propose lowering taxes on a government that is practically broke and needs the revenue to pay unemployment, because your rich people (you love) laid off people even when they concentrated more wealth in 8 years than at any other time in our country's history? And they continued to outsource jobs, because their bonuses were not big enough. GTF out of here with your boot licking nonsense.

[tisfilm]

Bravo! You-know-all-of-it.

[FernandoRuiz]

Im sorry but reading your comments its just funny to see how little you really know about economics. You talk about deficits and how bad they are, but cutting taxes directly leads to deficits. Since when has taxing the rich ever made the population as a whole poorer? In fact the opposite is true. Right now the income gap between the average American and the top 1 percent is higher than it was right before the Great Depression, with the vast sum of wealth concentrated in the hands of a few and the rest of the country working longer hours for less money. Americans are working longer hours than ever and for the first time in decades have seen the median income decline after years of it being stagnant. You need to stop touting GOP talking points and actually read a book

[Lilith33]

Year/Rate/TMTR/On amount over $

1913 7 500,000
1914 7 500,000
1915 7 500,000
1916 15 2,000,000
1917 67 2,000,000
1918 77 1,000,000
1919 73 1,000,000
1920 73 1,000,000
1921 73 1,000,000
1922 58 200,000
1923 43.5 200,000
1924 46 500,000
1925 25 100,000
1926 25 100,000
1927 25 100,000
1928 25 100,000
1929 24 100,000
1930 25 100,000
1931 25 100,000
1932 63 1,000,000
1933 63 1,000,000
1934 63 1,000,000
1935 63 1,000,000
1936 79 5,000,000
1937 79 5,000,000
1938 79 5,000,000
1939 79 5,000,000
1940 81.1 5,000,000
1941 81 5,000,000
1942 88 200,000
1943 88 200,000
1944 94 200,000
1945 94 200,000
1946 86.45 200,000
1947 86.45 200,000
1948 82.13 400,000
1949 82.13 400,000
1950 84.36 400,000
1951 91 400,000

[jesseandrews]

Please the so call stimulus was a joke to get money to his cronies that got him in office, he has paid the banks, the unions but not the middle class and poor no he is about the big money, all you liberals voted for him so when he fails do not cry.

[tisfilm]

For reason, most GOP governor won't take Fed money to cause slow down
I guess.

[jesseandrews]

Please wake up, he is not doing anything good for America, the so called public plan will cause rationing of health care and people loosing their health care.

[stalingrd]

I'm looking forward to loosing my non-existent health care.

[Tommygun264]

The "rationing of health care" is a straw man argument. Health care is already rationed, by faceless bean counters working for the insurance companies whose only concern is making a profit. Last fall I went into the emergency room and was immediately diagnosed with an enlarged spleen which could rupture and prove fatal at any moment, but because the removal of a spleen that isn't in some way damaged is an uncommon procedure, I was warehoused in constant pain just short of two weeks while my doctors awaited approval for my treatment from home office administration. It might have taken longer if a friend had not contacted the administrators and threatened legal action. You need to stop gulping down the insurance industry's drivel and wake up.

[tisfilm]

You need wake up! you have been coma for 8 years!

[MuchMadness]

Rationing of health care is a good thing. All good things that are not in an unlimited supply must be rationed in some way. In fact, prices are rationing mechanisms.

[Lilith33]

We ahve rationed care...eve­r waited for a specialist?
Ever had a houscall? they have them in france and england.

[DemoMom]

Are we supposed to be surprised by this?
1. The Republicans (notably John "love my tan" Boehner) get way too much airtime to criticize everything that this administration is trying to do. They are not coming up with any other realistic proposals - it's just "no, no, no, no and hell no" all the time. It's no wonder that people think things are not working.
2. The average Joe (or Jane) has the attention span of a gnat. They are not willing to wait for proposals to work their way through the system - they want answers and solutions yesterday.
3. The 24-hour news cycle creates news instead of just reporting it. Look at Fox and its plethora of "commentators" - they, like their GOP henchmen, spend their entire time putting down President Obama. Even when these stimulus efforts begin to work, Fox will be the last to admit it.
Negative, negative, negative all the time - I'm sick of it.

[jesseandrews]

That is because this admin is a joke, they are out to pay the special interest and big money contributors that got them elected.

[GiveUsFree]

You know not what you speak of.

[Lilith33]

President Obama Compares Big Banks, AIG, to Suicide Bombers
March 18, 2009 10:46 PM
Bigger banks, however, "Citicorp or Bank of America or, you know, Wells Fargo that controls 70 percent of the banking system, and all of them are weakening, you can't afford to have all those banks all at once start going under. Even though the deposits might be guaranteed, you've got the entire economy resting on that credit."

The president said, "It was the right thing to do, even though it's infuriating, even though it makes you angry because you're thinking, 'I was responsible and these folks are irresponsible and somehow I'm paying for them.' The same is true with AIG. It was the right thing to do to step in."

"Here's the problem," Mr. Obama said, "It's almost like they've got -- they've got a bomb strapped to them and they've got their hand on the trigger. You don't want them to blow up. But you've got to kind of talk them, ease that finger off the trigger."

[Beachchick]

The stimulus wasn't big enough.

[PatrickJ08]

I agree, but its very close to what FDR spent ($500 billion after adjusting for inflation, assuming I did it right). I expect good things. People are always impatient.

[Theo67]

I have 100% confidence in President Obama, and am waiting until at least early next year to see the full effects of the Stimulus bill. No-one knew how to solve this problem, and we may have to make some adjustments - we knew that going in. The fact that there are signs of progress, the fact that there is increased consumer confidence­... that's good. I know that this could get much worse, or at least continue to decline before it starts to improve. This administration did not create this mess - they are trying to solve it, and I'm grateful for that. I have friends who have benefited personally from the stimulus plans, the mortgage programs, the unemployment extensions - so I know it's working.

What I don't understand is why the media hasn't investigated how we got into this mess to begin with. They haven't pursued the lies that got us into the war, or the real reasons behind the deficits - aside from the one article from the New York Times article. The people are still optimistic about the stimulus - I choose to ignore the naysayers. They simply realize that the tide is turning against them, and these are the last kicks of a dying horse.

[Marcospinelli]

Because Obama is "looking forward, not back."

Obama is blocking investigations and prosecutions.

You should know that.

Do you have a job?

[ccclj]

Learn the difference between economic stimulus and economic growth...

[desertman]

You mean you can't legislate prosperity?

[jesseandrews]

You need to wake up, if not soon then it will be to late, what is the good of having everything when the dollar will be weak and gas, electric and food will sky rocket, and inflation will kill any growth.

[totalliberal]

Yes of course, because America expects results after the 4th commercial break. What a country.

Maroons.

[Aaryn Richard]

We need to stop propping up these corporations and stop thinking that Keynesian economics is the real deal to help us. Let us reimagine ourselves and our economy!! Watch "Zeitgeist the Movie" (it gets a little hokie in the middle, but it's interesting).

I'm often reminded of the amazing dialogue between the Chinese ambassador and CJ Graig (_The West Wing_), when he says to her: "The American dream [it appears] is not a moral dream, but a financial dream; and we have learned well from you." What a stunning observation: we have foresaken our freedoms for money, and we all wonder why we're in this mess. Please, stop corporate greed and plunder. Use your dollar as your vote!

[Gretel1or2]

Instead of conducting useless polls, the media should be down in the states checking with the governors and other heads of state to find out what they are doing with money and holding THEM accountable at this point. OBama did his part, he signed the bill and the money has been sent to the states. Instead of hounding him, the media should be asking people like Gov Sanford why is he taking days off to hike while South Carolina is languishing in need of stimulus money?? The media is asking the wrong questions about the wrong people.

[Marcospinelli]

Do you have a job?

How about kids to feed?

Tuitions to pay/pay-off?

What about a mortgage?

Parents, grandparents? How are their retirements going?

What about your own pension plans?

Gas is going up again -- All prices will be rising, too.

Are you greasing the economy with that discretionary spending left over after you pay your monthly bills?

How's your health holding up?

[Keurgui]

Please stop dreaming. This poll makes no sense. We'll see the effect of the stimulus by the end of the year, frist quarter next year. They pass the bill but the money needs to get there.

[ccclj]

then that would be a spending bill and not a stimulus. The purpose of a stimulus is to get as much money , through jobs, spending etc, back into the economy ASAP. It is to stop the bleeding hence his fairy tale claim that he needed it passed ASAP to stop unemployment at 8%. He was played by Reid and Pelosi and in turned mortgaged our futures on his spending wet dream!

[Gretel1or2]

What about the heads of state who are wasting time not allocating the money quickly - that is not Obama's job. Obama did his part by having that bill signed in February 2009. They are the ones who should be hounded now. As I said, people like Gov Sanford is busy hiking at a crucial time after trying his level best to avoid taking the stimulus money. Things like that create unnecessary delays.

[LemonMeringue]

FDR took 4 years to get the economy going again with his stimulus program.

[ccclj]

FDR had 25% unemployment when he started. Obama had 6.4%

[desertman]

WWII got the economy going again.

[helen]

The stimulus cannot bring the economy out of the doldrums. We're talking a 10-trillion dollar economy that has deflated. How can anyone reasonably expect to resurrect it with 7% spending on "infrastru­cture"... Not possible.

It will simply take time to rebuild our manufacturing and production industries. And there are no short cuts.

[Marcospinelli]

Patience is a virtue only the employed can afford.

Do you have a job?

How about kids to feed?

Tuitions to pay/pay-off?

What about a mortgage?

Parents, grandparents? How are their retirements going?

What about your own pension plans? How close are you to retiring?

Gas is going up again -- All prices will be rising, too.

Are you greasing the economy with that discretionary spending left over after you pay your monthly bills?

How's your health holding up?

[Troubledwawa]

From the article:

"The survey found the favorability ratings of congressional Republicans at their lowest point in more than a decade. Obama also has significant advantages over GOP lawmakers in terms of public trust on dealing with the economy, health care, the deficit and the threat of terrorism, despite broad-based Republican criticism of his early actions on these fronts. "

It doesn't sound like the GOP's criticism is making to much head way with the people.

[Gretel1or2]

That's why the media has to now do the job of undermining confidence in Obama, because when it is seen as coming from the Republicans, the public does not buy it.

On ABC now they are claiming that it is because Obama's opposition is so weak that he is able to accomplish anything!! They are trying to imply that he's not that competent.

[Troubledwawa]

How about if we look at some other sources...

On one hand, we have Larry Summers and Tim Geithner telling us everything is hunky dory.

Somewhere in the middle, and on rare occasion in the last 2 months, we've heard from Ben Bernanke that he thinks the economy will bottom sometime at the end of the year, and that we may need another stimulus.

And on another hand, we heard Fedex give a dismal forecast during their quarterly report last week (a transportation indicator).
- We heard the World Bank today say the world economy will contract 2.9% this year.
- Later today, Toyota gave a forecast of the US automobile market as "not transparent", and they don't know what is going to happen.
- And lastly, the S + P 500 broke through it's 50 DMA in a rather convincing fashion this morning (a really big bear indication).

Hey, it's up to you what hand you believe. That's your right.

I'm just not seeing the intentional undermining, that's all.

[Freesia2]

That sounds about right. First thing I noticed was that the poll is done by the Washington Post and ABC. ABC has long been, if not in the tank for the GOP, let's just say they like each other's shoes. And the Washington Post has become the soap box for the likes of Krauthammer, Kristol and Wolfowitz. (And just fired Froomkin because he wouldn't toe the GOP line on torture.)

Like you said there, their job is to undermine and create controversy. Not cover it - manfacture it. And since the new GOP thing is to have the likes of Lindsey Graham out implying Obama is more or less a whimp (and listening to Lindsey flutter that out is an experience speaking of torture) it makes sense that their media friends would be trying to paint Obama as ineffectual.

I'm so sick of the media. I rarely bother with newspapers any more and I'm thinking of selling my television. But I'd miss Colbert and Olbermann.

[Nonamnesiac]

The American people know what Obama doesn't -- guns and butter don't work. You lose the war and you fail domestically. Obama has become more of a warmongerer than his war criminal predecessor and failed to show the discipline to immediately and safely withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead he still has Bush-level troops and contractors in Iraq and has escalated beyond Bush in Afghanistan. He can't do both guns and butter successfully and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are gunboat diplimacy not in the interests of the United States or anyone else.

Secondly, the people are suffering because of voodoo economics/­Rubinomics and Obama obviously believes in voodoo economics/­Rubinomics (unbridled deregulation, unbridled free trade, priviatization, aloofness or worse to unions, guns and butter) when one sees he chose to fix the economy the people who broke it, all of whom enriched themselves using voodoo economics.

The people understand his positions on guns and butter and on real reregulation and renegotiating NAFTA and its progeny are phony, simply designed to appear as if he is anti-war and wants to fix the economy. As a result, they are losing confidence in him and as guns and butter fail and he refuses to get out immediately and safely and divert those resources to the domestic front they will lose more faith.

[ThinkDeeper1]

I believe that Obama will recognize his HUGE mistake in allowing Tim G. and Larry S. to drive the train instead of giving directives on what he wanted them to do. The banks should have been "temporarily" nationalized, the board members and CEO fired, the stockholders made to deal with the results of the risks they took and we should have dismantled the banks selling the still viable assets to the highest bidder. This would boast confidence enormously.

It was so deceitful for the democrats and republicans to scare the American people into believing that "nationalizing" the banks was a permanent takeover by the government and effectually "socializing" our financial system. This was the furthest thing from the truth and another "poilitical" scare tactic. The elite bankers own Congress and "EVERYTHING" they wanted, they got quickly. I've never seen our Congress move on middle class or lower class issues as quickly as they did for the bankers. How many YEARS did it take to get the "minimum wage" increased? Now, ask yourself, "how many DAYS did it take to pass the $750 billion dollar T.A.R.P. bailout for the bankers?"

[Gretel1or2]

This thread is not about the banks. It's about the effectiveness of the stimulus package, a bill which was signed in February 2009 for the purpose of preventing the excessive loss of jobs. Less than 25% of the stimulus money has been used, so why is there a poll??

The timing of this poll is suspect and I believe it's designed to undermine the people's trust in OBama in light of the health care reform he is trying to sell to the public.

[Marcospinelli]

Obama isn't trying to sell the public health care reform.

[skymuffin]

Actually, it is about the banks. They're not lending very much. They're taking cash offers for houses over making loans. So, the stimulus money that has been set aside to help people who want to buy a first home (or who haven't bought one in 3 years), who have a modest income, are having a hard time competing with speculators. The $8,000 stimulus for qualifying homeowners is part of the stimulus package and would mean jobs and purchases to improve property, usually a foreclosed home.