One reaction to my post yesterday and the report was that government spending (G) doesn't result in increased demand. This is a patently false statement because the aggregate demand equation in the short-run is essentially the GDP equation restated.
If G becomes larger, then AD becomes larger. I would also restate I have not seen any evidence of government spending crowding-out private investment.
On a slightly divergent note, the stimulus bill has been criticized because it has not created jobs, but if you look at where the stimulus bill put money, the largest part that has currently paid is in tax cuts ($188 billion). I would argue that President Obama was wrong to seek some sort of commen ground with Republicans in the Senate that had him approving a bill that didn't put enough people back to work. Instead, the bill was meant to entice private industry to hire workers with a payroll tax holiday. This is an indirect process that has paid very limited dividends.
Finally, I'll close on this point. In the New York Times article John B. Taylor of the Hoover Institution is quoted as saying that the stimulus program had, "very little impact." Little impact, as he observes it, is still an impact. In this situation, when private investment had dried up and the gears of the economy had threatened to halt entirely policy measures were taken that averted a crisis.
It's fine to discuss the levels of impact of these measures, but I haven't heard any serious economist say they had absolutely zero positive impact on our economic situation.