"I mean technically every tax payer who gets a refund gets a check from the government, but (barring EIC) it shouldn't really count because that money was never the governments in the first place.
Which is why it isn't in the budget and therefore should not be part of the numbers being discussed here.
I had some friends who worked at AMD and were involved with this partnership. The thing I remember most was how different two companies could be. AMD and Motorola had two dramatically different design philosophies, polar opposites, it was not a pretty picture.
I've been asking this forever! If Diesel engines have better torque, why not using them in hybrids as power plant (in a similar way Direct UPSs work). After all, most power plants I know are diesel, not gasoline.
And on top of that...why reciprocating engines? Why not turbines since that is also the design of power plants and seems should be much more efficient. I understand why we use reciprocating engines in "direct drive" usage, but in hybrids, generate the electricity with a turbine and drive only using the electric motors is my thinking.
My solar installation doesn't have any batteries. I use micro-inverters instead of a bulk inverter and am still connected to the grid. So, during the day (when the ACs or dryer aren't running) I push power back and help run my neighbors' houses, at night, I pull from the grid to run the house. This way I don't have to replace batteries every 5-7 years and if some panels get shaded/have a problem, they don't pull down the entire array.
It would be highly unlikely to just disable a valid core, because if they were doing a fair amount of that, it would be better to make a new mask set that was JUST a 2 or 3 core processor.
You obviously don't realize how expensive your proposition is. A mask set for processors of this complexity cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is just for the glass, let alone the cost of actually laying out and qualifying the new glass! So let's say they can change the cost of manufacture/die (the dynamic cost) by a HUGE $10 (that is an incredible reduction on a per die basis), you have to sell tens of thousands of them to simply cover the cost of the glass!
As for the American taxpayers being 'on the hook' for new power plants that will only happen if the plants somehow default on their loans, something no nuclear power plant has done in American history...
I see someone else has posted the WPPSS story, I will add Marble Hill, which caused Wabash Valley Power Association to default on its loans from the REA.
Works at night. (Ground heat release.) Low maintenance, few moving parts, durable, doesn't require uncommon, imported elements or the same kind of energy inputted into its construction, doesn't make the ground under it useless. Politically this is easier to sell than relying on China for the arrays. Scaling photovolatics to the level needed to get to an all-day average of 200MW requires a lot more ongoing maintenance. This is easier for voters to understand, and looks 'cool' from the highway.:-)
Let's see, works at night with ground heat release...perhaps, but I am doubtful, their own drawing indicates a thermal gradient within the "chamber" caused by the "greenhouse effect," so any benefit of the ground thermal storage would seem to be quite low given the low rate of radiation as the required airflow cools the top layer and the thermal resistance of dirt is very high.
Low maintenance...perhaps, we'll let that slide for now.
Few moving parts...vs. photovoltaic? I think not since you can't go below zero in counts of physical items.
Durable...hmm, perhaps the materials are durable but I have no idea...they don't tell me what they are! I do know that the building I work in is all of 4 years old and has all kinds of leaks and problems...and it is tiny by comparison. This would be the largest area building ever built, by no small margin! The Dubai airport currently checks in as the biggest at not even 6% of this beast! So much for your low maintenance as well me thinks.
Doesn't require uncommon, imported elements or the same kind of energy inputted into its construction...how exactly are you going to move the materials to construct this monstrous structure there, let alone the over 2000 feet into the air? As for materials for construction, we have been producing solar cell materials for decades, it is essentially a commodity now and we don't have any idea what material they are going to build their tower out of do we?
Doesn't make the ground under it useless...this one made me laugh the most. How exactly is a 4 square mile greenhouse with untold winds at the core going to be used? Remember, the idea here is to raise the internal temperature significantly, so what are you going to do in there? Remember also that you can only access the land from the perimeter, and you can't put a lot of walls in there, they would disrupt the airflow. How is this useful land again vs. raised panel arrays that you could build any building you wanted underneath?
Politically this is easier to sell than relying on China for the arrays...okay, perhaps, and until a few days ago I could have said, oh really, but sadly they have announced that they had to turn to China for production as well.
Scaling photovolatics to the level needed to get to an all-day average of 200MW requires a lot more ongoing maintenance...huh? Why does maintenance go up with scale here? Add more panels to have peak production way past the current level of nearly 7x the production then! I already firmly believe their design will have a pittance the daytime production at night, so they won't be this magic, constant output station, just as panels aren't, you still need energy storage (again, I am not buying into the ground thermal storage) and you still don't have ANY moving parts!
This is easier for voters to understand, and looks 'cool' from the highway...I think you mean easier to fool voters into paying for, but yes, the coolness factor would certainly be there.
So of your ten points...I believe you only have two left standing, and both of those are pretty darn weak.
No that is wrong, please don't disseminate this sort of misinformation. The most efficient PV panels you can buy today are rated less then 20% efficiency, and that's per cell, a whole panel will be several percent lower. That's in ideal conditions - heat, inverters, charge controllers, batteries all knock a big chunk of that efficiency.
No, you are wrong...well, not exactly wrong, but you too are spreading mis-information. My solar panels on Monday produced energy for the day at ~900 Wh/m^2, and that is AC watts, so not your "ideal" number, a real number complete with conversion losses. My city's 30 year maximum flat panel solar radiation exposure for the month of January (from here) was 5.6 kWh/m^2-day. So let's assume Monday matched that maximum, that means my system hit 16% real world efficiency. I don't have the most efficient panels you can buy today, today's most efficient panels outperform mine by over 15%. That's now approaching the 20% quoted by the grandparent. I agree, it is incorrect to state "photovoltaics routinely exceed 20%" in the context of AC watts, but it is correct to state panels approach 20% and therefore cells exceed 20%.
And as I stated in another post, it sure looks to me like economically my panels are kicking the tar out of this idea in terms of cost and production.
OK, I haven't seen anyone look at this yet, but I may have missed it. I just put a solar array on my house, so the idea of electrical energy from the sun is fresh in my mind. Let's look at the numbers. They are looking at 200 MW for $750 M, or at a cost of $3.75/W. In doing this, they plan to use 4 square miles, and generate under 20 W/m^2. Now that is truly pathetic?! On a sunny day, my panels produce well over 130 W/m^2, and that is AC watts, therefore taking into account all the losses in the inversion. The cost of my installation was under $7/W, and is already done...making power! Today is a crumby, cloudy, cold day yet my panels are still producing ~24 W/m^2! Why is this even being discussed as an option??? Do they think they can increase their efficiencies? It seems to me they are going to be equally dependent on solar radiation as my panels are, yet my panels are crushing them in terms of output, now, today, let alone in a few years when the solar cells efficiencies are double what my panels' are. What does SCPPA know that I am missing????
But if you have a Middle Eastern look about you (even if you're a true-blue dyed-in-the-wool Honest-to-God AMERICAN) you will likely be hassled with extreme prejudice. And that's the way the majority want it, because everyone knows that you can pick out the terrorists just by looking.
Percentage of planes hi-jacked by non-Muslims in the past 30 years: Zero
In my perhaps under-educated opinion, the Muslim community has a huge problem on its hands, one only it can solve. Sure wouldn't mind hearing them admit and address it in any manner.
(BTW, I have this opinion about a lot of communities)
It is the debt and "entitlement" and social security obligations that are going to kill us down the road.
SS sucks, but it's only about 3% of your paycheck (it's part of the FICA tax). It doesn't even come out of your regular IRS taxes, in theory. And as I understand it, Federal welfare was cut way back in the Clinton years. There's still a lot of welfare spending, but I believe it's mostly at the State and local levels. Don't live in California and it shouldn't be that big a problem.
You obviously didn't listen to grandparent poster when they told you Google federal spending. If I take the federal government budget for 2009 and look at the total DoD spending it only comes to 21% of the budget. Conveniently that matches pretty well with Social Security spending. You seem to want to exclude that since "it's part of the FICA tax," which comes no where close to covering its (projected) cost. If federal welfare was cut way back, why is it still the single largest part of the federal budget, and we haven't even started including Medicare, Medicaid, and all the other welfare programs?
Bank Robber: thousands of dollars stolen, but they go to a maximum security prison
You forgot...(most likely) has a criminal record, claimed to or had a gun and held it to someone's head threatening to kill them, very high probability they will make an attempt to escape or harm other people....
ATM fraud ring: millions of dollars stolen, but they go to a medium security prison
Hurt approximately zero people, threatened approximately zero people with harm, but organized others to help with their deeds
Ponzi scheme: billions of dollars stolen, but they go to a minimum security prison.
Bilked lots of people out of money, but once contained does not represent a threat to escape nor anyone's safety
Bankers: trillions of dollars stolen, and they're given more by the government with a bonus on top
And yet you don't think the people in government who stole the money from us and gave it to the bankers should be in prison???
They start right up, they only take a few seconds to reach full brightness...
What sort are you using? We have many ceiling flood lights in our house and now that the temp has dropped (70 F) they take a few minutes (not seconds) to reach full brightness. The standard spiral style do come up immediately, but the floods definitely take a while now, which annoys my son to no end. I tell him to suck it up, they save us so much in power/lack of cooling needs during the summer (I'm a strong proponent of them, but have to disagree about start up times).
I don't care if you're left or right health care 'reform' was one of Obama's main election platforms so I think ObamaCare is a fitting term.
I see what you're saying, but since in practice only right-wingers use term, it is a useful shibboleth to tell who's who.
Hold the gosh darn phone! So if you are not in favor of having the government run health care, you now have to also be a bible thumping, gun toting wacko as well? I didn't sign up for that, so I guess I have to now like having the government run health care based on its wonderful track record? Get your polarized glasses off and realize that just because you don't like one (gigantic, gargantuan) thing Obama is up to, doesn't put you in the same camp with all the proper "right wing" wackos out there.
As of yesterday, we hit 4,344 US military deaths in Iraq since 2003.
In 2004, there were 83,000 preventable deaths in hospitals due to negligence or malpractice within the United States.
And could you please enlighten me as to how Washington DC is going to suddenly prevent 100% of these "preventable" deaths? If a doctor is going to practice "malpractice" medicine, where in the legislation are the statements that are magically going to make them stop?
I live is Southern AZ where Interstate 10 runs and a road which I am driving on often. Over the last few months I've noticed a steady flow of "oversize load"s on the freeway that contain rather large wind turbine components heading eastbound, presumably heading to TX from somewhere in CA.
Interesting, here in San Antonio on I-10, I see a lot of the components westbound. Actually, I see them on 1604 fairly often as well (the loop that connects I-35 to I-10 if you have a big load). I always figured they were headed to AZ.
Interesting, the link is for events from 1992-97, against former top officers, and is itself from 2002. Do you think the same people are still in charge? The corporation itself isn't necessarily sleezy, those who were running it were sleezy. It is entirely possible the "culture of corruption" still exists at the company, but I don't think this link really provides much evidence of that.
My HP(s) have worked just fine under Linux. When I replaced the original with a new one, I did have to do a bit of work to sort things out, but nothing nearly as painful as the chore of installing MBs of crap on the Windows box, that now can't shut down cleanly because of the HP crap that gets installed with the drivers.
The majority could amend, that is to say remove, the bill of rights just like they did with prohibition. Nothing ever really stops the majority.
I think you need to re-read the Constitution. Article 5 expressly states that first, to have an amendment proposal, fully 2/3 of the both houses of Congress must pass said amendment, or 2/3 of the state legislatures must call for a Constitutional Convention to propose amendments. After you have some how managed to get fully 2/3 of the representatives (at the state or federal level) to agree, you then must ratify the amendment with fully 3/4 of the states! A simple majority has no prayer of amending the Constitution, which is why there are only 28 amendments vs. the hundreds of laws passed by Congress (with a simple majority). In addition, articles and amendments to the Constitution can not be removed, only superseded, which is why there is still an 18th amendment in the Constitution.
As an American with exceedingly limited exposure to Africa's history/story, I would love to hear more about how you think the problems (I think we can agree they are problems) can/should be solved. I lead such a blessed life where I am, I can't imagine living under the (perceived) corruption of many African nations.
I would rather be illiterate, "innumerate" and have a short life span than to live in the kinds of conditions some people are currently living in. Having high infant mortality rates, rampant aids infections, lack of food since birth. Yes, people lived 35-40 years, but that's better than dying as a child due to hunger or aids.
Do you not see a problem with your statement there? "Lack of food since birth" sort of indicates to me that perhaps the birth shouldn't have occurred, no? If you can't feed yourself, WTF are you having kids? Who is to blame for this child's predicament? Is it someone living across the world, or the people that decided to get pregnant when there are not resources available to support another person?
This reminds me of Agent Smith's comments in The Matrix about humans being better classified as a virus than a mammal since we can't seem to contain ourselves to live with the resources available.
At no time since 1945 when Republicans have been in charge of both Congress and the White House have they ever reduced spending.
So let's take a quick look and see that you have reduced the period of time under scrutiny to 1953-55 and 2001-07, the only times during that period that Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House, so 8 of the 63 years you mention, also known as ~12% of the period, real useful there. Now let's look at the most recent period, starting in 2001. Let's see, we are in the middle of the bursting of the.com bubble, perhaps the single largest vaporization of "wealth" ever seen as the artificial run up of "money" during the 90s is realized to be artificial. Then, we have 9-11, a billion+ dollar attack on the United States the type of which had never been seen. Talk about rocking an economy as the World Trade Center is reduced to rubble within hours. Do you remember those days? The shock of this nation and the world? The fact that the United States did not roar into a deep recession at that point still amazes me. If the US could actually get proper fiscal conservatives into power, I believe the economy would explode and make China look (again) like peanuts. The problem is, nearly a majority of the voters are now on the receiving end of the government hand outs, why would they vote for someone that would take that away from them?
As an economist, the most shocking thing to me from this survey was the belief that Obama would be better for the economy long term. My perspective of the two candidates is that McCain will be more expensive in the short term (continued war expenditures) while Obama will be disastrous for the economy long term as he implements yet more entitlement programs, the type of spending that is nearly impossible to end and will therefore continue to be a drag on the economy for decades to come.
The Bush II years have seen tax cut after tax cut that were, in theory, supposed to result in increased growth and therefore reduced deficit.
And they worked beautifully! As others have already pointed out to you, they did increase growth and increase revenue (to the government via increased tax collections), the problem is, Dingus In Charge and the other thieves in Washington DC decided instead of actually using the addition revenue responsibly, they would spend it like drunken sailors on a port call. Way to shoot everyone in the foot there guys, nice work....bastards.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why it isn't in the budget and therefore should not be part of the numbers being discussed here.
I had some friends who worked at AMD and were involved with this partnership. The thing I remember most was how different two companies could be. AMD and Motorola had two dramatically different design philosophies, polar opposites, it was not a pretty picture.
And on top of that...why reciprocating engines? Why not turbines since that is also the design of power plants and seems should be much more efficient. I understand why we use reciprocating engines in "direct drive" usage, but in hybrids, generate the electricity with a turbine and drive only using the electric motors is my thinking.
My solar installation doesn't have any batteries. I use micro-inverters instead of a bulk inverter and am still connected to the grid. So, during the day (when the ACs or dryer aren't running) I push power back and help run my neighbors' houses, at night, I pull from the grid to run the house. This way I don't have to replace batteries every 5-7 years and if some panels get shaded/have a problem, they don't pull down the entire array.
You obviously don't realize how expensive your proposition is. A mask set for processors of this complexity cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is just for the glass, let alone the cost of actually laying out and qualifying the new glass! So let's say they can change the cost of manufacture/die (the dynamic cost) by a HUGE $10 (that is an incredible reduction on a per die basis), you have to sell tens of thousands of them to simply cover the cost of the glass!
Huh? Let's see, their other use of an apostrophe:
Godwin's: Possessive, correct
Where is the "other use of an apostrophe in your first sentence" that was incorrect?
I see someone else has posted the WPPSS story, I will add Marble Hill, which caused Wabash Valley Power Association to default on its loans from the REA.
I often wondered that about President Clinton....didn't exactly carry a lot of weight in these parts though.
Let's see, works at night with ground heat release...perhaps, but I am doubtful, their own drawing indicates a thermal gradient within the "chamber" caused by the "greenhouse effect," so any benefit of the ground thermal storage would seem to be quite low given the low rate of radiation as the required airflow cools the top layer and the thermal resistance of dirt is very high.
Low maintenance...perhaps, we'll let that slide for now.
Few moving parts...vs. photovoltaic? I think not since you can't go below zero in counts of physical items.
Durable...hmm, perhaps the materials are durable but I have no idea...they don't tell me what they are! I do know that the building I work in is all of 4 years old and has all kinds of leaks and problems...and it is tiny by comparison. This would be the largest area building ever built, by no small margin! The Dubai airport currently checks in as the biggest at not even 6% of this beast! So much for your low maintenance as well me thinks.
Doesn't require uncommon, imported elements or the same kind of energy inputted into its construction...how exactly are you going to move the materials to construct this monstrous structure there, let alone the over 2000 feet into the air? As for materials for construction, we have been producing solar cell materials for decades, it is essentially a commodity now and we don't have any idea what material they are going to build their tower out of do we?
Doesn't make the ground under it useless...this one made me laugh the most. How exactly is a 4 square mile greenhouse with untold winds at the core going to be used? Remember, the idea here is to raise the internal temperature significantly, so what are you going to do in there? Remember also that you can only access the land from the perimeter, and you can't put a lot of walls in there, they would disrupt the airflow. How is this useful land again vs. raised panel arrays that you could build any building you wanted underneath?
Politically this is easier to sell than relying on China for the arrays...okay, perhaps, and until a few days ago I could have said, oh really, but sadly they have announced that they had to turn to China for production as well.
Scaling photovolatics to the level needed to get to an all-day average of 200MW requires a lot more ongoing maintenance...huh? Why does maintenance go up with scale here? Add more panels to have peak production way past the current level of nearly 7x the production then! I already firmly believe their design will have a pittance the daytime production at night, so they won't be this magic, constant output station, just as panels aren't, you still need energy storage (again, I am not buying into the ground thermal storage) and you still don't have ANY moving parts!
This is easier for voters to understand, and looks 'cool' from the highway...I think you mean easier to fool voters into paying for, but yes, the coolness factor would certainly be there.
So of your ten points...I believe you only have two left standing, and both of those are pretty darn weak.
No, you are wrong...well, not exactly wrong, but you too are spreading mis-information. My solar panels on Monday produced energy for the day at ~900 Wh/m^2, and that is AC watts, so not your "ideal" number, a real number complete with conversion losses. My city's 30 year maximum flat panel solar radiation exposure for the month of January (from here) was 5.6 kWh/m^2-day. So let's assume Monday matched that maximum, that means my system hit 16% real world efficiency. I don't have the most efficient panels you can buy today, today's most efficient panels outperform mine by over 15%. That's now approaching the 20% quoted by the grandparent. I agree, it is incorrect to state "photovoltaics routinely exceed 20%" in the context of AC watts, but it is correct to state panels approach 20% and therefore cells exceed 20%.
And as I stated in another post, it sure looks to me like economically my panels are kicking the tar out of this idea in terms of cost and production.
OK, I haven't seen anyone look at this yet, but I may have missed it. I just put a solar array on my house, so the idea of electrical energy from the sun is fresh in my mind. Let's look at the numbers. They are looking at 200 MW for $750 M, or at a cost of $3.75/W. In doing this, they plan to use 4 square miles, and generate under 20 W/m^2. Now that is truly pathetic?! On a sunny day, my panels produce well over 130 W/m^2, and that is AC watts, therefore taking into account all the losses in the inversion. The cost of my installation was under $7/W, and is already done...making power! Today is a crumby, cloudy, cold day yet my panels are still producing ~24 W/m^2! Why is this even being discussed as an option??? Do they think they can increase their efficiencies? It seems to me they are going to be equally dependent on solar radiation as my panels are, yet my panels are crushing them in terms of output, now, today, let alone in a few years when the solar cells efficiencies are double what my panels' are. What does SCPPA know that I am missing????
Percentage of planes hi-jacked by non-Muslims in the past 30 years: Zero
In my perhaps under-educated opinion, the Muslim community has a huge problem on its hands, one only it can solve. Sure wouldn't mind hearing them admit and address it in any manner.
(BTW, I have this opinion about a lot of communities)
You obviously didn't listen to grandparent poster when they told you Google federal spending. If I take the federal government budget for 2009 and look at the total DoD spending it only comes to 21% of the budget. Conveniently that matches pretty well with Social Security spending. You seem to want to exclude that since "it's part of the FICA tax," which comes no where close to covering its (projected) cost. If federal welfare was cut way back, why is it still the single largest part of the federal budget, and we haven't even started including Medicare, Medicaid, and all the other welfare programs?
You forgot...(most likely) has a criminal record, claimed to or had a gun and held it to someone's head threatening to kill them, very high probability they will make an attempt to escape or harm other people....
Hurt approximately zero people, threatened approximately zero people with harm, but organized others to help with their deeds
Bilked lots of people out of money, but once contained does not represent a threat to escape nor anyone's safety
And yet you don't think the people in government who stole the money from us and gave it to the bankers should be in prison???
To me, you obviously don't get it.
You just made my day. That's my preferred nickname for the Redmond giant, but I seem to be the only one to use it in my circles.
(perhaps the most inane post I have ever made on /.)
What sort are you using? We have many ceiling flood lights in our house and now that the temp has dropped (70 F) they take a few minutes (not seconds) to reach full brightness. The standard spiral style do come up immediately, but the floods definitely take a while now, which annoys my son to no end. I tell him to suck it up, they save us so much in power/lack of cooling needs during the summer (I'm a strong proponent of them, but have to disagree about start up times).
Hold the gosh darn phone! So if you are not in favor of having the government run health care, you now have to also be a bible thumping, gun toting wacko as well? I didn't sign up for that, so I guess I have to now like having the government run health care based on its wonderful track record? Get your polarized glasses off and realize that just because you don't like one (gigantic, gargantuan) thing Obama is up to, doesn't put you in the same camp with all the proper "right wing" wackos out there.
And could you please enlighten me as to how Washington DC is going to suddenly prevent 100% of these "preventable" deaths? If a doctor is going to practice "malpractice" medicine, where in the legislation are the statements that are magically going to make them stop?
Interesting, here in San Antonio on I-10, I see a lot of the components westbound. Actually, I see them on 1604 fairly often as well (the loop that connects I-35 to I-10 if you have a big load). I always figured they were headed to AZ.
Interesting, the link is for events from 1992-97, against former top officers, and is itself from 2002. Do you think the same people are still in charge? The corporation itself isn't necessarily sleezy, those who were running it were sleezy. It is entirely possible the "culture of corruption" still exists at the company, but I don't think this link really provides much evidence of that.
My HP(s) have worked just fine under Linux. When I replaced the original with a new one, I did have to do a bit of work to sort things out, but nothing nearly as painful as the chore of installing MBs of crap on the Windows box, that now can't shut down cleanly because of the HP crap that gets installed with the drivers.
I think you need to re-read the Constitution. Article 5 expressly states that first, to have an amendment proposal, fully 2/3 of the both houses of Congress must pass said amendment, or 2/3 of the state legislatures must call for a Constitutional Convention to propose amendments. After you have some how managed to get fully 2/3 of the representatives (at the state or federal level) to agree, you then must ratify the amendment with fully 3/4 of the states! A simple majority has no prayer of amending the Constitution, which is why there are only 28 amendments vs. the hundreds of laws passed by Congress (with a simple majority). In addition, articles and amendments to the Constitution can not be removed, only superseded, which is why there is still an 18th amendment in the Constitution.
As an American with exceedingly limited exposure to Africa's history/story, I would love to hear more about how you think the problems (I think we can agree they are problems) can/should be solved. I lead such a blessed life where I am, I can't imagine living under the (perceived) corruption of many African nations.
Do you not see a problem with your statement there? "Lack of food since birth" sort of indicates to me that perhaps the birth shouldn't have occurred, no? If you can't feed yourself, WTF are you having kids? Who is to blame for this child's predicament? Is it someone living across the world, or the people that decided to get pregnant when there are not resources available to support another person?
This reminds me of Agent Smith's comments in The Matrix about humans being better classified as a virus than a mammal since we can't seem to contain ourselves to live with the resources available.
So let's take a quick look and see that you have reduced the period of time under scrutiny to 1953-55 and 2001-07, the only times during that period that Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House, so 8 of the 63 years you mention, also known as ~12% of the period, real useful there. Now let's look at the most recent period, starting in 2001. Let's see, we are in the middle of the bursting of the .com bubble, perhaps the single largest vaporization of "wealth" ever seen as the artificial run up of "money" during the 90s is realized to be artificial. Then, we have 9-11, a billion+ dollar attack on the United States the type of which had never been seen. Talk about rocking an economy as the World Trade Center is reduced to rubble within hours. Do you remember those days? The shock of this nation and the world? The fact that the United States did not roar into a deep recession at that point still amazes me. If the US could actually get proper fiscal conservatives into power, I believe the economy would explode and make China look (again) like peanuts. The problem is, nearly a majority of the voters are now on the receiving end of the government hand outs, why would they vote for someone that would take that away from them?
As an economist, the most shocking thing to me from this survey was the belief that Obama would be better for the economy long term. My perspective of the two candidates is that McCain will be more expensive in the short term (continued war expenditures) while Obama will be disastrous for the economy long term as he implements yet more entitlement programs, the type of spending that is nearly impossible to end and will therefore continue to be a drag on the economy for decades to come.
And they worked beautifully! As others have already pointed out to you, they did increase growth and increase revenue (to the government via increased tax collections), the problem is, Dingus In Charge and the other thieves in Washington DC decided instead of actually using the addition revenue responsibly, they would spend it like drunken sailors on a port call. Way to shoot everyone in the foot there guys, nice work....bastards.