For those of you who think Obama has not helped create or save jobs...

[Billy000]

1) The Stimulus: created around 2 million jobs. According to Moody Analytics, it "significantly softened the recession."

What is Obama's actual record on creating jobs? | syracuse.com

2) According to this site that cites empirican research, it is likely the Recovery Act's benefits significantly outweighed the costs:

Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject - The Washington Post

3) The results of Obama extending unemployment benefits under his stimulus plan reduced the fall of GDP by 18.3% and saved 1.6 million jobs

ETA News Release: US Labor Department study underscores positive impact of unemployment insurance [11/16/2010]

4) 114,407 teaching jobs have been created or saved

Education Jobs Fund - Official Website

5) The GM, Crysler bailout added about 45,000 and saved about 1 million:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/one_year_later_autos_report.pdf

(^^^The White House is citing the Bureau of Labor Statistics in this article)


I found other independent research showing "possible economic progress" under Obama's stimulus, but I know you cons would be quick to jump all over any information like that. For now, though, this should settle the argument that Obama "has done nothing." If you would all just stop watching Fox News (or MSNBC), you may just have an informed opinion about Obama.

 

[The T]

Most Federal/Gubmint and Union afilliated jobs.

We get it already.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's amazing that some people still buy the "saved or created" business. Even the WH isn't pushing that crap anymore.
The stimulus was the biggest failure in public policy since the WIN button. Even by the administration's own accounting it failed.

 

[Billy000]

Most Federal/Gubmint and Union afilliated jobs.

We get it already.

You obviously didn't even read the aricles. Either that, or...

 

[The T]

It's amazing that some people still buy the "saved or created" business. Even the WH isn't pushing that crap anymore.
The stimulus was the biggest failure in public policy since the WIN button. Even by the administration's own accounting it failed.

It was such a success that he had to ask for more...

 

[Billy000]

It's amazing that some people still buy the "saved or created" business. Even the WH isn't pushing that crap anymore.
The stimulus was the biggest failure in public policy since the WIN button. Even by the administration's own accounting it failed.

Everyone agrees the stimulus didn't go far enough, but to label it a "failure" is simply not true.

 

[Jarhead]

1) The Stimulus: created around 2 million jobs. According to Moody Analytics, it "significantly softened the recession."

What is Obama's actual record on creating jobs? | syracuse.com

2) According to this site that cites empirican research, it is likely the Recovery Act's benefits significantly outweighed the costs:

Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject - The Washington Post

3) The results of Obama extending unemployment benefits under his stimulus plan reduced the fall of GDP by 18.3% and saved 1.6 million jobs

ETA News Release: US Labor Department study underscores positive impact of unemployment insurance [11/16/2010]

4) 114,407 teaching jobs have been created or saved

Education Jobs Fund - Official Website

5) The GM, Crysler bailout added about 45,000 and saved about 1 million:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/one_year_later_autos_report.pdf

(^^^The White House is citing the Bureau of Labor Statistics in this article)


I found other independent research showing "possible economic progress" under Obama's stimulus, but I know you cons would be quick to jump all over any information like that. For now, though, this should settle the argument that Obama "has done nothing." If you would all just stop watching Fox News (or MSNBC), you may just have an informed opinion about Obama.

It makes me laugh when I see people cite these stats and articles.

NO ONE SIAD TAKING A TRILLION DOLLARS AND GIVING IT TO PEOPLE SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE WOULD NOT RESULT IN PEOPLE GETTING HIRED.

The question that was presented was....will it prove to be more cost effective AND time efficient if we do nothing and let the private sector do what it has done for decades...and what it has done so that 91% of the people ARE working (people seem to forget about the 91% opf Americans that have jobs).....

But the irony?

Despite a trillion dollars borrowed and spent and 3 years have passed....poeople are still doing their best to show SOME sort of positive news out of it.

 

[Claudette]

It was an unmitigated expensive disaster.

And what the hell is a "saved" job??

 

[Billy000]

1) The Stimulus: created around 2 million jobs. According to Moody Analytics, it "significantly softened the recession."

What is Obama's actual record on creating jobs? | syracuse.com

2) According to this site that cites empirican research, it is likely the Recovery Act's benefits significantly outweighed the costs:

Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject - The Washington Post

3) The results of Obama extending unemployment benefits under his stimulus plan reduced the fall of GDP by 18.3% and saved 1.6 million jobs

ETA News Release: US Labor Department study underscores positive impact of unemployment insurance [11/16/2010]

4) 114,407 teaching jobs have been created or saved

Education Jobs Fund - Official Website

5) The GM, Crysler bailout added about 45,000 and saved about 1 million:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/one_year_later_autos_report.pdf

(^^^The White House is citing the Bureau of Labor Statistics in this article)


I found other independent research showing "possible economic progress" under Obama's stimulus, but I know you cons would be quick to jump all over any information like that. For now, though, this should settle the argument that Obama "has done nothing." If you would all just stop watching Fox News (or MSNBC), you may just have an informed opinion about Obama.

It makes me laugh when I see people cite these stats and articles.

NO ONE SIAD TAKING A TRILLION DOLLARS AND GIVING IT TO PEOPLE SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE WOULD NOT RESULT IN PEOPLE GETTING HIRED.

The question that was presented was....will it prove to be more cost effective AND time efficient if we do nothing and let the private sector do what it has done for decades...and what it has done so that 91% of the people ARE working (people seem to forget about the 91% opf Americans that have jobs).....

But the irony?

Despite a trillion dollars borrowed and spent and 3 years have passed....poeople are still doing their best to show SOME sort of positive news out of it.

You are deliberately ignoring the content of these sources.

 

[Jarhead]

It's amazing that some people still buy the "saved or created" business. Even the WH isn't pushing that crap anymore.
The stimulus was the biggest failure in public policy since the WIN button. Even by the administration's own accounting it failed.

Everyone agrees the stimulus didn't go far enough, but to label it a "failure" is simply not true.

If an owner of a baseball team bought a player with a reputation of being a slugger for 5 million a year and signed him to a 3 year contract....and at the end of his thrid year, he averaged 10 HR's a year, 30 RBI's a year and batted .230...

Would you think the owner saw him as a failure or as "not doing enough"?

 

[Billy000]

It's amazing that some people still buy the "saved or created" business. Even the WH isn't pushing that crap anymore.
The stimulus was the biggest failure in public policy since the WIN button. Even by the administration's own accounting it failed.

Everyone agrees the stimulus didn't go far enough, but to label it a "failure" is simply not true.

If an owner of a baseball team bought a player with a reputation of being a slugger for 5 million a year and signed him to a 3 year contract....and at the end of his thrid year, he averaged 10 HR's a year, 30 RBI's a year and batted .230...

Would you think the owner saw him as a failure or as "not doing enough"?

Your weak analogy does nothing to dispute the information in my OP.

 

[Jarhead]

1) The Stimulus: created around 2 million jobs. According to Moody Analytics, it "significantly softened the recession."

What is Obama's actual record on creating jobs? | syracuse.com

2) According to this site that cites empirican research, it is likely the Recovery Act's benefits significantly outweighed the costs:

Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject - The Washington Post

3) The results of Obama extending unemployment benefits under his stimulus plan reduced the fall of GDP by 18.3% and saved 1.6 million jobs

ETA News Release: US Labor Department study underscores positive impact of unemployment insurance [11/16/2010]

4) 114,407 teaching jobs have been created or saved

Education Jobs Fund - Official Website

5) The GM, Crysler bailout added about 45,000 and saved about 1 million:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/one_year_later_autos_report.pdf

(^^^The White House is citing the Bureau of Labor Statistics in this article)


I found other independent research showing "possible economic progress" under Obama's stimulus, but I know you cons would be quick to jump all over any information like that. For now, though, this should settle the argument that Obama "has done nothing." If you would all just stop watching Fox News (or MSNBC), you may just have an informed opinion about Obama.

It makes me laugh when I see people cite these stats and articles.

NO ONE SIAD TAKING A TRILLION DOLLARS AND GIVING IT TO PEOPLE SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE WOULD NOT RESULT IN PEOPLE GETTING HIRED.

The question that was presented was....will it prove to be more cost effective AND time efficient if we do nothing and let the private sector do what it has done for decades...and what it has done so that 91% of the people ARE working (people seem to forget about the 91% opf Americans that have jobs).....

But the irony?

Despite a trillion dollars borrowed and spent and 3 years have passed....poeople are still doing their best to show SOME sort of positive news out of it.

You are deliberately ignoring the content of these sources.

No...I am not.

I am well aware of what the stimulus did.

I am also well aware of what the stimulus didnt do.

I think you are looking at things at face value and not reading into the long term reulsts.

Short term?

Sure...borrow 100 and give a man 100 bucks to hire a man for 100 bucks and yes, a man will be hired.

It is not rocket scinece.

 

[Jarhead]

Everyone agrees the stimulus didn't go far enough, but to label it a "failure" is simply not true.

If an owner of a baseball team bought a player with a reputation of being a slugger for 5 million a year and signed him to a 3 year contract....and at the end of his thrid year, he averaged 10 HR's a year, 30 RBI's a year and batted .230...

Would you think the owner saw him as a failure or as "not doing enough"?

Your weak analogy does nothing to dispute the information in my OP.

My very realtive analogy was not in response to your OP. It was a response to your statement where you said the stimulus did not go far enough, but it was not a failure.

Stay with the program...it is why we "quote" what we are responding to.

 

[Jarhead]

It was an unmitigated expensive disaster.

And what the hell is a "saved" job??

A saved job is a job that someone could not afford to keep paying for until the tax payer gave him the money to contiue paying for it.

 

[Billy000]

If an owner of a baseball team bought a player with a reputation of being a slugger for 5 million a year and signed him to a 3 year contract....and at the end of his thrid year, he averaged 10 HR's a year, 30 RBI's a year and batted .230...

Would you think the owner saw him as a failure or as "not doing enough"?

Your weak analogy does nothing to dispute the information in my OP.

My very realtive analogy was not in response to your OP. It was a response to your statement where you said the stimulus did not go far enough, but it was not a failure.

Stay with the program...it is why we "quote" what we are responding to.

Well, the problem with your analogy is that it is very disproportionate to the results of the stimulus package.

 

[The Rabbi]

the administration promised that if we did not pass the stimulus the UE rate would go above 8%. If we did it would be below 7%. The result has been a UE rate over 9% for most of this administration.
If that isn't a failure I'm not sure what is.

 

[The T]

If an owner of a baseball team bought a player with a reputation of being a slugger for 5 million a year and signed him to a 3 year contract....and at the end of his thrid year, he averaged 10 HR's a year, 30 RBI's a year and batted .230...

Would you think the owner saw him as a failure or as "not doing enough"?

Your weak analogy does nothing to dispute the information in my OP.

My very realtive analogy was not in response to your OP. It was a response to your statement where you said the stimulus did not go far enough, but it was not a failure.

Stay with the program...it is why we "quote" what we are responding to.

True story

 

[Jarhead]

Your weak analogy does nothing to dispute the information in my OP.

My very realtive analogy was not in response to your OP. It was a response to your statement where you said the stimulus did not go far enough, but it was not a failure.

Stay with the program...it is why we "quote" what we are responding to.

Well, the problem with your analogy is that is very disproportionate to the results of the stimulus package.

lol....I see...disporportionate....gotcha.

 

[The T]

the administration promised that if we did not pass the stimulus the UE rate would go above 8%. If we did it would be below 7%. The result has been a UE rate over 9% for most of this administration.
If that isn't a failure I'm not sure what is.

This too.

It was such a rousing success...he had to have more...

 

[The T]

It was an unmitigated expensive disaster.

And what the hell is a "saved" job??

Saved Job is another job with the Gubmint or one presided over by the moneychangers that money launder to the Democrat Party... in the Unions that didn't have to be cut.

Nevermind the private sector. They have to be destroyed.