From the article:
Now, thus far over that period we've created or saved over 150,000 jobs, cut taxes for 95 percent of working families, increased unemployment benefits for laid-off workers, provided fiscal stabilization relief -- that's particularly important, given states' fiscal conditions -- to 26 states, made funds available for over 4,000 transportation projects, projects that put people back to work.
There is so much stuff packed into that paragraph that I hardly know where to start. Is the 150,000 jobs they claim to have created some part of the unemployment numbers that were lower that expected or are these the new DHS agents that are going to be used to track down all the right wing extremists out there blowing up buildings and flying airplanes into them?
Increased unemployment benefits? Most of those workers have been on the job for 20+ years and have paid much more into the system than they are getting out of it. If they'd had that extra money in their pockets all those years and used it wisely they would be better off than they are now.
I've seen some of the transportation projects. You can look here to see what the money is spent on in your area. There are some roads being widened or extended in my area and nobody knows why. They have no traffic to speak of on them now. The obvious reason is that they had to meet some conditions somewhere to get the money to spend. They picked whatever roads they needed to just to spend the money.
Here is another little bit:
The act enabled over 1,100 health centers in 50 states and eight territories to provide extended, expanded service to approximately 300,000 patients of these health centers. The Health and Human Services program will create jobs and support health center efforts to improve access to quality, comprehensive, and affordable care.Just looking at this I have to wonder how many of these projects are in places where hospitals are struggling because they are overwhelmed by illegals?
Here is another bit:
The plan will hire or keep over the next 100 days on the job approximately 5,000 law enforcement officers. These funds are going to be used to hire new officers while also retaining our veteran force.I think we've heard this before. Remember the clinton gun ban of 1994? It was supposed to put 100,000 LEOs on the streets. It actually provided the funding to hire them but the states had to pick up the bill after a short time. That worked out well.
Start 200 new waste and water systems in rural America. Another dimension of this plan is to go beyond simply urban and suburban localities and to reach into rural America. These projects will replace outdated water mains and build waste-water treatment facilities for small communities.Actually, this will allow the federal government to have more influence in small communities. You know what I think of that.
One of my favorites:
Critical piece here: to create 125,000 summer youth jobs, very much part of the summer agenda here. Empowering our young people through meaningful summer employment, keep them off the streets, provide them with valuable work experience.I've got a better idea on this: Seal the border and deport illegals, then lower the minumum wage. I don't have kids at the age where they are trying to find jobs yet, but all of the people I've talked to with kids looking for jobs say the same thing: It's hard for a teenager to find a job because they've all been taken by illegals. I'm sure some of them are legal immigrants instead of illegals, but the point is that businesses that used to hire teenagers now hire low wage adults. All of the adult citizens that have lost their jobs over the last year or two may be competing for those same jobs as well.
Another question is exactly how are they going to create these jobs? I assume that they will come up with some project that nobody really wants done, then pay teenagers $12/hour to do it and not let anyone over the age of 19 get the job.
I think my favorite part so far is this little exchange:
Q Jared, can you give us a little better accounting on the 150,000 jobs that have been created or saved? And you guys -- it's a number I now have heard a couple of times. What is the accounting on that?
MR. BERNSTEIN: Just as I described. We know how fast the plan is spending out. We know which sectors -- and it's actually -- if you go back to the Romer-Bernstein report, you'll see that we actually have estimates by sector, by industry, but also by energy, construction, and infrastructure, tax cuts --
Q So the 150,000 are just based on these estimates so far on what you guys projected out of how this money would be spent?
MR. BERNSTEIN: Correct.
Q So we don't know exactly -- so you guys --
MR. BERNSTEIN: The 150,000 jobs is -- it comes precisely out of the methodology I was just describing; that is, we have -- we know spend-out, we know the types of spend-out, so therefore we can assign multipliers to different parts of the plan. For example, tax cuts generate a smaller multiplier than direct government spending. Once you know the spend-out and the type of spending that you're engaged in, then you can derive an estimate of how many jobs you believe you created relative to what would have occurred in the job market were you not doing that spending.
And let me just make one other point about this. This is -- I want to be very clear about this -- this is a absolute tried and true economic methodology. In fact, there's simply no other way to make this kind of estimate. You have to have an estimate of what would have occurred in the absence of your stimulus plan in order to come up with the jobs that you've created or saved. Every macro model, whether it's Federal Reserve or private forecasters, engages in these kinds of exercises.The BS is obvious to me. I can't believe there is anyone that doesn't see it. The methodology is clear: just make up numbers to make the government look good. Tax cuts generate a smaller "multiplier" than direct government spending. That's why the Soviet Union worked out so well.
Let me just make one other point about this. This is -- I want to be very clear about this -- this is an absolute truth. Any time a left wing politian says "I want to be very clear about this" then he is fixing to shovel a steaming load of manure your way. The absolute tried and true economic methodology that is actually tried and true is to keep the government out of the economy. Government policy got us here and to think that more government interference will help is ludicrous.
The more I read the harder I laugh. The people of the United State of America actually elected a man President who would have a weasle like this on his staff? What is wrong with us. Check this part out:
Q Can a estimate also -- you said that you've spent about a billion dollars a day, so obviously -- minus $800 billion, there's about $700 billion left to be spent of the stimulus. Is that a fair -- assume that it's --
MR. BERNSTEIN: Just to be precise, it's actually a matter of obligating about a billion dollars per day and we're up to about $135 billion in terms of obligations.
Q Obligated, not necessarily spent yet.
MR. BERNSTEIN: Correct. Spend-out is closer to $44 billion.
Q How much this summer are you obligating now for this specific 600,000 --
MR. BERNSTEIN: We're unable to make that estimate at this point.
Q Those summer jobs, that 125,000, are you counting that towards the 600,000 jobs that you're going to be saving or creating?
MR. BERNSTEIN: Yes.
Why won't the guy just come out and say "I don't know what I'm talking about. Just give us the money."???? We haven't spent the money. We've just obligated it. That's sort of like saying "I've got $10,000 obligated to a credit card, but I haven't spent any of it."
It just keeps getting better:
Q Okay. Are you also going to be counting that towards the 3.5 total goal?
MR. BERNSTEIN: That is -- yes, the 3.5 is an estimate of jobs created or saved by the end of next year.
Q What you're obviously acknowledging are temporary jobs over the summer, which will last three months of the summer --
MR. BERNSTEIN: Oh, it's a good question, you're right.
Q -- how that's getting counted in the 3.5.
MR. BERNSTEIN: Thank you. That's a good question. The 3.5 million jobs are what economists call full-time equivalent jobs. So those 125,000 would not count as a full 125. Two part-time jobs count as one full-time equivalent job.
I've got to stop. I would be laughing but I think I need to cry.
Go read it. It will make you angry.