Are you arguing that we're still suffering some direct economic effects from 2008? Where? What? How? That makes no sense at all.
And here is the proof that no-one, let alone yourself, should listen to you on any opinion you have on economics AT ALL.
Unless you go back to school and take a mixed economics and humanities degree that covers History and Logic.
Why do you think some Asian governments have "25 year plans" that cover periods of time when they KNOW they'll be long out of power? Because they know the actions they take now will still have economic and social consequences rippling down in 25 years and beyond.
Which would be a great reason for you to have read all the words I wrote and noticed the word "direct" in there. Otherwise, according to your own logic, we could blame our current economic state on anything we want that has happened over the last 25 years. But that's kinda useless, isn't it? By "direct", I mean the direct effect of the sudden loss of value of the mortgage backed securities in the investment market (and specifically the financial portion of that market).
We're not currently dealing with banks struggling because they hold too much of those devalued assets and can no longer borrow or lend money as a result, are we? Thus, the "direct economic effects" from 2008 have long since passed. This is certainly the case in the US, where banks are back to making record profits, the market just hit 13000 again, and by all normal indicators should be firing away and growing like gangbusters.
What we're not seeing in the US is employment and GDP growth coming back. The actual financial industry has been pretty much recovered for the last year and a half. We should have seen an accompanying recovery in jobs and production, but that has been slowed. IMO, it's been slowed because of the recovery act. Between the cost of the act itself (and others), and the various regulations and mandates within those laws, the combined effect has been to discourage job creation in the private sector.
And that's exactly the area we have not recovered in. Now, I'm sure that other countries are having other problems, but I'm only speaking directly about the US and discussing the effect of the stimulus spending on our recovery (or lack thereof). I fully acknowledge that other countries, who already have out of control social spending and the boat anchor that places on their own economic growth and recovery, will also tend to have sluggish recovery. But that's their norm. It's not the norm for the US.