"net effect, nil" ?
Clearly you don't understand how the multiplier works, or maybe even what it is! But then, you're an engineer, not an economist.
Why don't you argue with the Congressional Budget Office?
CBO studied various options that could offer some economic pop over the next two years. Extending the Bush tax cuts ranked last. Topping the list were increased aid to the unemployed, reduced employers' and workers' payroll taxes and the full or partial expensing of investment costs.( I'd like to point out these are the things Obama got in the tax deal)
Most of what that guy says in the article I'm sure you'll agree with. But you just can't seem to wrap your brain around the concept that poor people spend their money to buy necessities. That money then gets spent by someone else, and then someone else. Thus a million spent by the government (and yes, I fucking understand it came from somewhere!) in unemployment benefits turns in to several million over the course of a year. It grows the economy more quickly than tax cuts to wealthy people who are not spending (at least right now).
Corporate America is sitting on a ton of cash right now, but they are not going to invest anything in expansion or hiring until there are signs of consumer demand. Consumers are still spooked so the government needs to give demand a kick start.