The could have been heroes.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/economy/g20s-plan-for-deficit-cutting-draws-fire-from-paul-krugman/article1622050/
June 28, 2010
12
----------
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/bruce-bartlett-misstates-the-problem/#comment-195331
　
July 5, 2009,
Bruce Bartlett misstates the problem
　
The problem is that the Obama administration was much too optimistic about how quickly stimulus spending would affect the economy.
　
Krugman "Um, that’s totally false."
-------------
　
58. July 6, 2009 11:03 am
　
Spending more to cure an over spending problem has a historical success rate of 0.
The result of more stimulus will have an even more pronounced affect on driving down the dollar.
The adverse affect of a devalued dollar on the core of the US economy, consumer spending, isn`t creating jobs. Time for a new plan.
==============
12 months later,,,
Spending more to cure an overspending problem is not an economic plan.
Stimulus is spending borrowed money on stuff you wouldn't buy when you had the cash.
12 months later and still no sign of the [promised stimulus created private sector investment, could be its time for a new plan or better late than never.
12 months later and still no plan to spur business confidence and the resulting jobs.
Meanwhile the media high jacked the G-20 with none stop coverage of a handful of "thugs" but are really just vandals.
Well done, no questions as to why it took a billion dollars to carry out a mass arrest.
No coverage on what the peaceful protestors proposed, the Robin Hood Tax.
The G-20 did nothing but admit stimulus was a bad idea and how to pass on "restoring public finances" to future generations.
The could have been heroes with a simple mention of the RHT and given business the direction and rules to start creating wealth.
The could have been heroes.