3rdnlng Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 (edited) http://townhall.com/tipsheet/townhallcomstaff/2012/07/13/doe_officials_calls_loan_program_that_produced_solyndra_an_enormous_success "Some bureaucrats never learn. David G. Frantz, the Acting Executive Director of the Department of Energy Loan Program, recently called the guaranteed loan program responsible for the Solydra fiasco an “enormous success” during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on Thursday. During the hearing, Congressman Cliff Stearns asked David Frantz, “Don’t you agree that the Loan Guarantee Program has had a rough record?” Frantz quickly responded, “Quite to the contrary, sir, I think it’s been an enormous success.” Edited July 29, 2012 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Heeeeeeere LA LA LA... You know you want to post in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) http://townhall.com/tipsheet/townhallcomstaff/2012/07/13/doe_officials_calls_loan_program_that_produced_solyndra_an_enormous_success "Some bureaucrats never learn. David G. Frantz, the Acting Executive Director of the Department of Energy Loan Program, recently called the guaranteed loan program responsible for the Solydra fiasco an “enormous success” during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on Thursday. During the hearing, Congressman Cliff Stearns asked David Frantz, “Don’t you agree that the Loan Guarantee Program has had a rough record?” Frantz quickly responded, “Quite to the contrary, sir, I think it’s been an enormous success.” If you understand what the goal was, then you know that it was a success. http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/bg071712dAPR20120717034539.jpg Edited July 30, 2012 by Gary M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 If you understand what the goal was, then you know that it was a success. http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/bg071712dAPR20120717034539.jpg Gotcha. I'd think there would be more outrage over such an outrageous statement by Frantz though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Just think of how much that $500M stimulated the economy! Just like food stamps, er, SNAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Well there actually were some successes in there now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 Well there actually were some successes in there now You mean the companies that only had layoffs and didn't go bankrupt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 You mean the companies that only had layoffs and didn't go bankrupt? I don't have a link I read it in a book recently but I'm sure there is some stuff to google but there were quite a few successes. One I remember had to do with batteries. Apparently we are good battery makers now lol Ok I found the stat apparently we have gained 30 new battery plants and in 2 years went from producing 2% to 20% of the worlds batteries and are on track to supply 40% of the batteries by 2014. So there's one. For what it's worth. American made batteries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 I don't have a link I read it in a book recently but I'm sure there is some stuff to google but there were quite a few successes. One I remember had to do with batteries. Apparently we are good battery makers now lol Ok I found the stat apparently we have gained 30 new battery plants and in 2 years went from producing 2% to 20% of the worlds batteries and are on track to supply 40% of the batteries by 2014. So there's one. For what it's worth. American made batteries. From the article linked in the OP: Ener1 – The battery maker, #67 on the White House list of 100 Projects that are Changing America, received a $118.5 million stimulus grant - BANKRUPT A123 – The battery maker received a $249 million DOE stimulus grant - LAYOFFS I know this above is anecdotal but it would be interesting to see if government grants really have much to do with a company's success. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 I don't have a link I read it in a book recently but I'm sure there is some stuff to google but there were quite a few successes. Funny thing about liberal programs. Every time someone is critical of them, liberals whip out a couple of choice cuts of meat from the fat of the pig and say "See....it was worth it." As if a 2700-page heath care reform law that doesn't reform health care was the only way we were ever going to make it possible for 26-year-old "kids" to stay on their parent's program. Alternately, for every battery success story there are a dozen embarrassing stories of, Solyndras, grape genetics and John Murtha airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 What's pathetic to me is when conservative attack the stimulus as an example of big government gone wrong and use it to further their anti-government agenda. The stimulus worked plain and simple it put a floor under the recession to prevent it from spiraling into a complete depression and saved us an immediate 2% unemployment. The crash didn't happen b/c of the government spending the crash occurred b/c there was to little government oversight and no restraint on risky loans w/ out sufficient capital to back them up. The stimulus (which btw was mainly tax cuts and loan to local governments) only had about 1/3 of direct investment and most of that was in roads and bridges etc...not clean energy companies that everybody fixates on who watches FOx all day. The downturn hurt fewer people b/c of the stimulus which supplemented wages w/ tax cuts, saved public jobs, and created jobs through infrastructure projects and to some degree yes it did have incentives to create private sector jobs in clean energy manufacturing some of which failed. But on the whole, the stimulus worked and it was government doing it and the problem that made it necessary was created by the vaunted free market which apparently is infallible and requires not regulation, oversight, or government involvement at all. Anyway I'm really not here to argue that the government can pick the winners. Nobody will argue that. All I'm saying is that the stimulus itself worked, only a portion of it went to the things you so often criticize, and not every one of those companies failed anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 What's pathetic to me is when conservative attack the stimulus as an example of big government gone wrong and use it to further their anti-government agenda. The stimulus worked plain and simple it put a floor under the recession to prevent it from spiraling into a complete depression and saved us an immediate 2% unemployment. The crash didn't happen b/c of the government spending the crash occurred b/c there was to little government oversight and no restraint on risky loans w/ out sufficient capital to back them up. The stimulus (which btw was mainly tax cuts and loan to local governments) only had about 1/3 of direct investment and most of that was in roads and bridges etc...not clean energy companies that everybody fixates on who watches FOx all day. The downturn hurt fewer people b/c of the stimulus which supplemented wages w/ tax cuts, saved public jobs, and created jobs through infrastructure projects and to some degree yes it did have incentives to create private sector jobs in clean energy manufacturing some of which failed. But on the whole, the stimulus worked and it was government doing it and the problem that made it necessary was created by the vaunted free market which apparently is infallible and requires not regulation, oversight, or government involvement at all. Anyway I'm really not here to argue that the government can pick the winners. Nobody will argue that. All I'm saying is that the stimulus itself worked, only a portion of it went to the things you so often criticize, and not every one of those companies failed anyway. Once you get to redefine the definition of worked after seeing the performance of the stimulus, of course it worked. If the stimulus is your idea of something working, hopefully you never have a job in private industry. Those are not the kind of results private employers are looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 The stimulus worked plain and simple it put a floor under the recession to prevent it from spiraling into a complete depression and saved us an immediate 2% unemployment. Says who? Mark Zandi? Some other proponent of the Stimulus Bill? And by what metrics? The only answer you ever hear is "The economy was about to head into a Depression if it wasn't for the Stimulus" That's the only BS answer you ever hear, and its the only answer that they can give because it's not measurably quantifiable. It's not plain and simple, the best way we can measure it is by looking at what the W.H promised and where we are today. They said we would be under 6% unemployment today, is that where we are? No, the economy is getting worse by just about every economic measure, "plain and simple". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Says who? Mark Zandi? Some other proponent of the Stimulus Bill? And by what metrics? The only answer you ever hear is "The economy was about to head into a Depression if it wasn't for the Stimulus" That's the only BS answer you ever hear, and its the only answer that they can give because it's not measurably quantifiable. It's not plain and simple, the best way we can measure it is by looking at what the W.H promised and where we are today. They said we would be under 6% unemployment today, is that where we are? No, the economy is getting worse by just about every economic measure, "plain and simple". The stimulus wasn't designed to fill enormous hole we were in, but it hoped to put a floor on it and most economic studies do show it worked in doing that including CBO studies. It worked to help us deal with the meltdown if you don't want to believe it nothing will change your mind that's fine. I disagree. And most of the TARP money has been paid back ... nobody is a fan of having to do any of this. All I'm saying is to point at the government and blame them for the meltdown is insane, all they did was help in some measure clean it up. But of course that's what the GOP does anyway. POint at the government and find a way to blame them for the meltdown and call the reaction to it as a failure. NEvermind that BEFORE the meltdown through tax cuts and increased spending the GOP doubled the national debt (before the meltdown mind you) and regularly voted to raise the debt ceiling to do so...it was only after the meltdown when we needed it most and Democrats were in power did this all become so out of style Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) The stimulus wasn't designed to fill enormous hole we were in, but it hoped to put a floor on it and most economic studies do show it worked in doing that including CBO studies. It worked to help us deal with the meltdown if you don't want to believe it nothing will change your mind that's fine. I disagree. And most of the TARP money has been paid back ... nobody is a fan of having to do any of this. All I'm saying is to point at the government and blame them for the meltdown is insane, all they did was help in some measure clean it up. But of course that's what the GOP does anyway. POint at the government and find a way to blame them for the meltdown and call the reaction to it as a failure. NEvermind that BEFORE the meltdown through tax cuts and increased spending the GOP doubled the national debt (before the meltdown mind you) and regularly voted to raise the debt ceiling to do so...it was only after the meltdown when we needed it most and Democrats were in power did this all become so out of style No, that is the revisionist history version of what it was suppose to do. What it was suppose to do was not have the economy reach over 8% unemployment and have us below 6% unemployment by this point and time. What matters are the projections beforehand, not afterwards Oh and TARP, not the same thing Edited July 30, 2012 by WorldTraveller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 No, that is the revisionist history version of what it was suppose to do. What it was suppose to do was not have the economy reach over 8% unemployment and have us below 6% unemployment by this point and time. What matters are the projections beforehand, not afterwards Oh and TARP, not the same thing So it's a failure b/c it did work, just not as well as we all hoped? And TARP is relevant b/c the entire anti-government movement vilifies government spending to help cope with the crisis...therefore the fact that TARP is largely paid back undercuts that notion. TARP was BUSH anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) No, TARP is not relevant, and the idea that TARP funds were able to get repaid because of Stimulus is a faith based argument, that has no basis in fact. And who cares that TARP was Bush, what does that have to do with the Stimulus Bill being a failure? Nothing Also, GDP Growth for 2010 2.4% , 2011 1.8% And now 2012, on pace to be around 1.5% We are moving in the wrong direction Edited July 30, 2012 by WorldTraveller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 No, that is the revisionist history version of what it was suppose to do. What it was suppose to do was not have the economy reach over 8% unemployment and have us below 6% unemployment by this point and time. What matters are the projections beforehand, not afterwards Oh and TARP, not the same thing So it's a failure b/c it did work, just not as well as we all hoped? And TARP is relevant b/c the entire anti-government movement vilifies government spending to help cope with the crisis...therefore the fact that TARP is largely paid back undercuts that notion. TARP was BUSH anyway... I shouldn't be surprised by this response. This is the same thinking that says Obamacare is good because it did something. Not what it was initially intended to do (lower health care costs), but it did "work" because accomplished something (set up a framework for the future). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 We've always been at war with Eastasia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 "We're moving in the wrong direction and it's b/c of the stimulus which independent and CBO stuides showed helps. We can't know what would have happened absent stimulus but I don't like what is going on now so the stimulus failed." That's basically what I'm hearing. It's pretty retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts