The reason the "stimulus" didn't work is that it costs more to the economy to produce the money that was spent to "stimulate" it than the economic benefits of that spending could produce.
And yes, 8 years ago people did predict what happened, exactly, namely look at the archives of http://mises.org and you will find articles predicting this result.
The problem is, it doesn't fit the political desires.
If you really want to stimulate the economy, by getting more money being spent, simply cut taxes and cut inflation. (Which means cutting government spending). You cut monetary inflation and taxation and individuals and businesses will have more money at the end of the day to spend on things.
Unfortunately, cutting government spending doesn't fit the "lets promise people free health care and education to get elected" agenda.
The Bush "stimulus" didn't work either. We had a housing bubble, but that wasn't exactly a net positive for the economy.
The problems is the "Science" of economics has been compromised to the point where people aren't even aware of the predictions that this would fail (you weren't for instance).... because what passes for economics is more akin to rationalizations for political policies, rather than a science. (outside of places like the Chicago and Austrian schools.)
And yes, 8 years ago people did predict what happened, exactly, namely look at the archives of http://mises.org and you will find articles predicting this result.
The problem is, it doesn't fit the political desires.
If you really want to stimulate the economy, by getting more money being spent, simply cut taxes and cut inflation. (Which means cutting government spending). You cut monetary inflation and taxation and individuals and businesses will have more money at the end of the day to spend on things.
Unfortunately, cutting government spending doesn't fit the "lets promise people free health care and education to get elected" agenda.
The Bush "stimulus" didn't work either. We had a housing bubble, but that wasn't exactly a net positive for the economy.
The problems is the "Science" of economics has been compromised to the point where people aren't even aware of the predictions that this would fail (you weren't for instance).... because what passes for economics is more akin to rationalizations for political policies, rather than a science. (outside of places like the Chicago and Austrian schools.)