I Don't Think the Stimulus is Working

[Foxfyre]

Wonder why the stimulus package that was supposed to create so many good jobs that the unemployment rate wouldn’t go past 7.5% hasn’t created many good jobs and the unemployment rate continues to be stuck around 9.5%? Meanwhile Europe’s economy continues to boom. Even Germany that normally has high unemployment rates can boast a 7.5% rate this summer.

So what’s wrong?

Well some of the projects the stimulus money has gone for:

A half million dollars for new windows at the Mt. St. Helens visitors center in Amboy, Washington. The building has been closed since 2007 and there are no immediate plans to reopen it

$6.9 million dollars for repairs to an 1846 brick fort marooned on Dry Tortuga at the end the Florida Keys. Few people can visit this remote national park unless they hire a seaplane or take a four-hour round-trip boat ride.

Creating a museum in an abandoned train station in Glasboro, NJ, at the cost of $1.2 million

$2 million dollars to send researchers from the California Academy of Sciences to islands in the Indian Ocean to study exotic ants

A study of dog domestication at Cornell University with a price tag of $296-thousand dollars

$141-thousand dollars to send students from Montana State University to China to study dinosaur eggs

$762-thousand dollars to create interactive choreography programs at the University of North Carolina. Dancers would wear electronic monitors to analyze their movements.

$89-thousand dollars to replace sidewalks in Boynton, Oklahoma that were just replaced five years ago. One of them goes nowhere near any houses or businesses and leads directly into a ditch.

Source: Republicans: Stimulus Money Spent on Wasteful Projects | Foxnews.com

One analysis I’ve seen that so far what private sector jobs have been created have been at a cost exceeding $300,000 per job.

But Obama and the Dems in Congress refuse to consider using unspent stimulus money to cover costs of extending unemployment insurance which the Republicans have asked for in lieu of increasing the deficit even more.. Instead they accuse the Republicans of blocking extension of unemployment insurance.

Honestly people. Don’t you think we should expect better of our government than this?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's working! It's pushing us to the brink of disaster just like it's supposed to

 

[Rozman]

I saw the President the other day patting himself on the back (again) for saving the USA from the brink.He's going on and on about what a great job he's done turning the economy around and for seven straight months we have had positive numbers on jobs created.Ed Schultz of MSNBC the All positive All Obama news network says the President has turned the economy around.

Why does it seem that we are not a lot better off....
One answer may be....

WE ARE NOT MUCH BETTER OFF THEN WE WERE TWO YEARS AGO ! ! !

 

[Foxfyre]

Even though my gut tells me to be wary and all the warning signs are there, I don't want to believe CrusaderFrank.

And Rozman, I not only believe we are no better off than two years ago, I emphatically believe that we are much worse off because we are spending ourselves into bankruptcy while installing legislation that will ensure that no recovery from that will ever be possible.

But when you see the kinds of nonsensical ways the stimulus money is being spent and that almost none of it has gone for the kinds of jobs that actually stimulate the economy, it is maddening.

Whatever happened to all that critical infrastructure that was supposed to be addressed? There aren't fossils in America that could be studied so at least the money would be spent here?

And why isn't even the Political Class outraged at the absurdity of all this given the devastating effects it is having and will have?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Obviously, we need.....





More Stimulus!

 

[Foxfyre]

Well some of our fearless leaders certainly seem to think so Mad. Do you suppose we can expect different results?

 

[boedicca]

Just as an individual cannot solve his debt problem by taking out more credit cards and charging them to the max, it follows that a country cannot solve a deficit and debt crisis by quadrupling the former and vastly increasing for latter while committing to vast new spending programs in the future.

 

[mudwhistle]

I saw the President the other day patting himself on the back (again) for saving the USA from the brink.He's going on and on about what a great job he's done turning the economy around and for seven straight months we have had positive numbers on jobs created.Ed Schultz of MSNBC the All positive All Obama news network says the President has turned the economy around.

Why does it seem that we are not a lot better off....
One answer may be....

WE ARE NOT MUCH BETTER OFF THEN WE WERE TWO YEARS AGO ! ! !

Why is it no matter how many jobs are reported to have been lost or gained the unemployment rate still remains around 9.5%. Even the White House admits that many of the jobs lost this year will never be replaced.

Last week nearly 500k new applicants filed for unemployment. Why didn't it go up then?

Because of the manner that unemployment is counted. They don't use actual reports but instead use a computer projection generated out of thin air....this is why they continually revise the figures months later after the real figures are compiled.

What is the actual rate today?

Answer: The unemployment rate is continually rising and the source of the figures cannot be trusted anymore because of the political ramifications involved. The unemployment rate should be 20% or more...but that will never be reported. I wouldn't be surprised to see aggressive action or even a lawsuit from the White House if it ever was.

 

[Foxfyre]

Amen to that Boedicca. One of the first rules of economic management is that you cannot spend yourself rich. That is true of individuals. And it is true of countries.

I have to give the Dems kudos for at least digging in their heels and protesting this:

Senate Democrats lashed out at the Obama administration on Wednesday, saying its stimulus wind energy program creates jobs overseas instead of in the U.S., and they're calling for the administration to put a stop to it.

"Today, we are demanding the Obama administration suspend this program immediately," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

The program has already spent $2 billion, funding enough projects to power 2.4 million homes. Any wind farm created in the U.S. is eligible for stimulus money to put up wind turbines, regardless of where those massive structures are made. Each turbine costs about $3 million, and reaches 40 stories into the sky.

An investigation by ABC News and the Investigative Reporting Workshop found that 79 percent of the program's money has gone to foreign companies, money that Schumer said was "federal tax dollars, the stimulus, which was sold as jobs in America."
Obama's Stimulus Money Spent Overseas, Jobs in China - ABC News

The problem is that the Administration already has the money and authority to spend it. And they haven't been all that responsive to public opinion so far.

 

[boedicca]

I saw the President the other day patting himself on the back (again) for saving the USA from the brink.He's going on and on about what a great job he's done turning the economy around and for seven straight months we have had positive numbers on jobs created.Ed Schultz of MSNBC the All positive All Obama news network says the President has turned the economy around.

Why does it seem that we are not a lot better off....
One answer may be....

WE ARE NOT MUCH BETTER OFF THEN WE WERE TWO YEARS AGO ! ! !

Why is it no matter how many jobs are reported to have been lost or gained the unemployment rate still remains around 9.5%. Even the White House admits that many of the jobs lost this year will never be replaced.

Last week nearly 500k new applicants filed for unemployment. Why didn't it go up then?

Because of the manner that unemployment is counted. They don't use actual reports but instead use a computer projection generated out of thin air....this is why they continually revise the figures months later after the real figures are compiled.

What is the actual rate today?

Answer: The unemployment rate is continually rising and the source of the figures cannot be trusted anymore because of the political ramifications involved. The unemployment rate should be 20% or more...but that will never be reported. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lawsuit from the White House if it ever was.

The unemployment rate isn't rising because so many people have QUIT LOOKING FOR WORK.

Shadow Stats does an analysis to adjust for this. Real unemployment is 22%

Alternate Unemployment Charts

 

[AquaAthena]

"But Obama and the Dems in Congress refuse to consider using unspent stimulus money to cover costs of extending unemployment insurance which the Republicans have asked for in lieu of increasing the deficit even more.. Instead they accuse the Republicans of blocking extension of unemployment insurance."

Yes and isn't that just the corker?? The Left is out there condemning Republicans as the party of no, and leaving out that they wanted those extensions paid for, from existing stimulus monies, rather than what is left of the poor taxpayer's paychecks. No personal accountability at all. The Dims are desperate. They are lying, race-baiting and still of course, blaming Bush. It is all they do and all they have.....

 

[mudwhistle]

I saw the President the other day patting himself on the back (again) for saving the USA from the brink.He's going on and on about what a great job he's done turning the economy around and for seven straight months we have had positive numbers on jobs created.Ed Schultz of MSNBC the All positive All Obama news network says the President has turned the economy around.

Why does it seem that we are not a lot better off....
One answer may be....

WE ARE NOT MUCH BETTER OFF THEN WE WERE TWO YEARS AGO ! ! !

Why is it no matter how many jobs are reported to have been lost or gained the unemployment rate still remains around 9.5%. Even the White House admits that many of the jobs lost this year will never be replaced.

Last week nearly 500k new applicants filed for unemployment. Why didn't it go up then?

Because of the manner that unemployment is counted. They don't use actual reports but instead use a computer projection generated out of thin air....this is why they continually revise the figures months later after the real figures are compiled.

What is the actual rate today?

Answer: The unemployment rate is continually rising and the source of the figures cannot be trusted anymore because of the political ramifications involved. The unemployment rate should be 20% or more...but that will never be reported. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lawsuit from the White House if it ever was.

The unemployment rate isn't rising because so many people have QUIT LOOKING FOR WORK.

Shadow Stats does an analysis to adjust for this. Real unemployment is 22%

Alternate Unemployment Charts

It's even higher then that. Count all of the folks working part-time instead of full-time then it goes even higher.

The BLS "Official Unemployment Rate".........: 9.5%
The real unemployment rate..........................: 12.99%
The total un- and under employment rate......: 18.33%
The total under-incomed rate.........................: 29.70%

American residents "officially" unemployed..............: 14,599,000
American residents really unemployed.....................: 20,742,000
American residents both un- and under- employed..: 29,271,000
American residents under-incomed..........................: 47,428,000
Welcome to The Wise Voice of Experience | American Economic Recovery | Moderate Political Solutions

Liberals will hate this fact and scream "LIAR" at anyone who dares to show the real figures.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If we accept as true the examples provided by Fox, it is clear that they are some of the more egregious and silly expenditures of stimulus funds. And, of course that is the intent of Fox, not to inform but to put forth their political agenda.
But consider, most of those projects spent funds on goods and services, and isn't that stimulating the economy? People & Business earn income, which was spent on rent, food and other goods and services and taxes were paid and returned to local, state and Federal coffers. No matter how silly the OP wants this to appear it did what it was autorized to do.
I see, everyday, construction sites where workers and heavy machinary, manufactured goods - steal and concrete - are being used as part of the American Recovery and Reconstruction Act to build and improve roads, bridges and transportation systems, parts of our infrastructure ignored for decades and in decay.

Remember, as President Obama said today, "if you get into a car and want to go forward, put the car in D; if you wish to go backwards, select R.

 

[Foxfyre]

"But Obama and the Dems in Congress refuse to consider using unspent stimulus money to cover costs of extending unemployment insurance which the Republicans have asked for in lieu of increasing the deficit even more.. Instead they accuse the Republicans of blocking extension of unemployment insurance."

Yes and isn't that just the corker?? The Left is out there condeming Republicans as the party of no, and leaving out that they wanted those extensions paid for, from existing stimulus monies, rather than what is left of the poor taxpayer's paychecks. No personal accountability at all. The Dims are desperate. They are lying, race-baiting and still of course, blaming Bush. It is all they do and all they have.....

Well I did give the Dems credit for at least one glimmer of sanity in my previous post.

But it does seem to me to make a whole lot more sense to use stimulus money to keep food on the table of out-of-work Americans instead of sending it to China or other places.

From CBS:

The $1.9 million spent to photograph ants in foreign countries has created two jobs created so far. That's better than other ant research stimulus projects: $451,000 has created one job, $276,000 spent on another created six one-hundredths of a job, and the $800,000 spent on a different one created no jobs.

The $144,000 spent to study the behavior of monkeys on cocaine created four-tenths of a job.

To study why monkeys respond to unfairness cost $677,000 - and has created no jobs yet - except maybe for the monkeys.

Still, Obama Administration economists say all the projects have valid goals, and the Recovery Act has put three million people back to work.
Stimulus Projects that Created No Jobs - CBS Evening News - CBS News

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

But consider, most of those projects spent funds on goods and services, and isn't that stimulating the economy?

No. It's simply redistributing money from one place to another. If we had a stimulated economy we wouldn't have unemployment in the teens.

 

[Greenbeard]

Even Germany that normally has high unemployment rates can boast a 7.5% rate this summer.

Germany? They seem to be doing okay thanks in part to their stimulus. Oh, you're talking about the American stimulus not working.

Anyway, the story of the political history of the stimulus is fairly clear. First, we leaned toward the smaller end of proposed stimulus packages.

Upon entering the White House in the winter of 2009, President Obama asked his economic team to come up with potential solutions to the economic crisis he had inherited. According to a lengthy profile of that team by the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza, Christina Romer, the chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, outlined three different-sized stimulus packages. The first was $600 billion. The second: $800 billion. The third would be $1.2 trillion.

Romer's work was supported by the weight of historical analysis. The former Berkeley professor was a leading expert on the government's response to the Great Depression. But when her memo finally made its way to Obama's desk, the $1.2 trillion package was missing. At the meeting, Lizza reported, "there was no serious discussion to going above a trillion dollars." [...]

Indeed, despite being tarred for penning a memo that suggested unemployment wouldn't rise above eight percent, Romer was one of the most vocal proponents of an "overwhelming" response to the unemployment crisis, fiscal concerns be damned.

Or, as the folks over at Free Exchange recounted it at the beginning of this year:

Let me repeat one particular figure: the American economy lost over 2.1 million jobs during the first three months of 2009. Between November of 2008 and March of 2009, employment fell by 3.4 million. And as of March of 2009, the economy had lost nearly a million more jobs than the official statistics were showing. Think about that, then think about this, from a New Yorker piece on Larry Summers, dating to last October:

The most important question facing Obama that day was how large the stimulus should be. Since the election, as the economy continued to worsen, the consensus among economists kept rising. A hundred-billion-dollar stimulus had seemed prudent earlier in the year. Congress now appeared receptive to something on the order of five hundred billion. Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate, was calling for a trillion. Romer had run simulations of the effects of stimulus packages of varying sizes: six hundred billion dollars, eight hundred billion dollars, and $1.2 trillion. The best estimate for the output gap was some two trillion dollars over 2009 and 2010. Because of the multiplier effect, filling that gap didn’t require two trillion dollars of government spending, but Romer’s analysis, deeply informed by her work on the Depression, suggested that the package should probably be more than $1.2 trillion...

When the meeting broke up, after four hours of discussion, interrupted only briefly when the President brought out a cake and led the group in singing “Happy Birthday” to Orszag, there was still indecision about how big a stimulus Obama would recommend to Congress. Summers, Romer, Geithner, Orszag, Emanuel, and Jason Furman huddled in the corner to lock down the number. Emanuel made the final call: six hundred and seventy-five to seven hundred and seventy-five billion dollars, with the understanding that, as the bill made its way through Congress, it was more likely to grow than to shrink. The final legislation was for seven hundred and eighty-seven billion dollars.
​

With the too-optimistic data she had in hand, Christina Romer estimated that a $1.2 trillion package would be justified, and a package worth roughly $800 billion was ultimately approved.

And of course this month we found out that the recession was actually worse than thought:

A YEAR into America’s recovery the view backwards continues to sharpen—and darken. The Commerce Department’s latest GDP figures show an economy that lost momentum in the second quarter of 2010. But they also include revisions to data going back to the beginning of 2007, covering the whole of the recession. And the recession was worse than previously believed. [...]

But the data revisions may provide the bigger story. The updates show an economy that was weaker going into the recession than previously believed, and which declined much more steeply in the immediate wake of 2008’s financial crisis (see chart). These changes confirm the recession as the worst of the post-war years. Economic activity now appears to have declined by 4.1% from peak to trough, easily outstripping the 3.7% dip observed in the downturn of 1957-58 (in 1981-82 the drop was just under 3%). The decline in real GDP in 2009 was far and away the worst annual performance since 1946, when America was dismantling its wartime economy. [...]

The new data might reasonably absolve the Democrats of at least some blame for the economy’s continued listlessness. A deeper-than-believed recession helps explain why the first unemployment forecasts by the White House proved too rosy, and why the stimulus plan has failed to bring down the jobless rate. The hole was simply deeper than it appeared. But voters may prove unsympathetic. What has not been altered is the scope of the employment crisis. If the Democratic leadership allowed over-optimistic GDP numbers to distract them from the obvious trouble in the labour markets, then they now have no one but themselves to blame for their party’s long electoral odds.

And let's not forget an important structural component of the stimulus package. Obama, in attempting to both keep a campaign promise and attract Republican support, wanted (and ultimately got) more than a third of the stimulus to be tax cuts. Here's the WSJ in January 2009:

WASHINGTON -- President-elect Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are crafting a plan to offer about $300 billion of tax cuts to individuals and businesses, a move aimed at attracting Republican support for an economic-stimulus package and prodding companies to create jobs.

The size of the proposed tax cuts -- which would account for about 40% of a stimulus package that could reach $775 billion over two years -- is greater than many on both sides of the aisle in Congress had anticipated. It may make it easier to win over Republicans who have stressed that any initiative should rely more heavily on tax cuts rather than spending.

That's nice, a pre-emptive compromise carrot to attract some Republican support. The only problem is that tax cuts aren't very good stimulus (not surprisingly, Congressional Republicans had it exactly backwards and catering to them is a fool's errand). Their multiplier isn't as good as some other uses of money, as the CBO's 2009 letter to Judd Gregg showed:

So what do we have? A package that was on the small end for the economic situation they thought it was addressing, a recession now (in 2010) revealed to be a much larger economic downturn than they knew when they were running the numbers (meaning the stimulus package looks that much smaller in hindsight), and a stimulus package filled with tax cuts that are more popular than stimulative.

That said, what did the stimulus do? It obviously stopped the hemorrhaging that was occurring at the start of 2009 and most analysts estimate it added a number of jobs to the economy:

Just look at the outside evaluations of the stimulus. Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody’s Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative.

But now instead of precipitously dropping we're very slowly--too slowly--crawling upwards. What we had was big enough to be the boost needed for the economy to stop the fall and reverse course but it wasn't big enough to be the shot in the arm needed for sustained rapid growth.

 

[Wry Catcher]

On Feb. 13, 2009, Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 at the urging of President Obama, who signed it into law four days later. A direct response to the economic crisis, the Recovery Act has three immediate goals:

Create new jobs and save existing ones
Spur economic activity and invest in long-term growth
Foster unprecedented levels of accountability and transparency in government spending
The Recovery Act intends to achieve those goals by:

Providing $288 billion in tax cuts and benefits for millions of working families and businesses
Increasing federal funds for education and health care as well as entitlement programs (such as extending unemployment benefits) by $224 billion
Making $275 billion available for federal contracts, grants and loans
Requiring recipients of Recovery funds to report quarterly on how they are using the money. All the data is posted on Recovery.gov so the public can track the Recovery funds.

I suggest those who want to be informed read the link to Recovery.gov and not take Fox News and Foxfyer as the final word. Cherry picked stats and facts may fool some of the people all of the time (a shout-out to CrusaderFrank and Stepanie) but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

 

[Meister]

If we accept as true the examples provided by Fox, it is clear that they are some of the more egregious and silly expenditures of stimulus funds. And, of course that is the intent of Fox, not to inform but to put forth their political agenda.
But consider, most of those projects spent funds on goods and services, and isn't that stimulating the economy? People & Business earn income, which was spent on rent, food and other goods and services and taxes were paid and returned to local, state and Federal coffers. No matter how silly the OP wants this to appear it did what it was autorized to do.
I see, everyday, construction sites where workers and heavy machinary, manufactured goods - steal and concrete - are being used as part of the American Recovery and Reconstruction Act to build and improve roads, bridges and transportation systems, parts of our infrastructure ignored for decades and in decay.

Remember, as President Obama said today, "if you get into a car and want to go forward, put the car in D; if you wish to go backwards, select R.

High unemployment and rising debt, wry. Yes.....the stimulus has worked wonders.
The price to earnings is staggering with the stimulus. There is no way you can spin that no matter how catchy your D's and R's are. Your a blind fool, wry

 

[Samson]

If we accept as true the examples provided by Fox, it is clear that they are some of the more egregious and silly expenditures of stimulus funds. And, of course that is the intent of Fox, not to inform but to put forth their political agenda.
But consider, most of those projects spent funds on goods and services, and isn't that stimulating the economy? People & Business earn income, which was spent on rent, food and other goods and services and taxes were paid and returned to local, state and Federal coffers. No matter how silly the OP wants this to appear it did what it was autorized to do.
I see, everyday, construction sites where workers and heavy machinary, manufactured goods - steal and concrete - are being used as part of the American Recovery and Reconstruction Act to build and improve roads, bridges and transportation systems, parts of our infrastructure ignored for decades and in decay.

Remember, as President Obama said today, "if you get into a car and want to go forward, put the car in D; if you wish to go backwards, select R.

High unemployment and rising debt, wry. Yes.....the stimulus has worked wonders.
The price to earnings is staggering with the stimulus. There is no way you can spin that no matter how catchy your D's and R's are. Your a blind fool, wry

SPIN:

"It could be Worse"---April, 2010

"Its Bush's Fault"-----June, 2010

"Republicans have no ideas"------August, 2010

"Solving Problems is Hard"----October, 2010

"Republicans are Obstructionists"------December, 2010

 

[Foxfyre]

On Feb. 13, 2009, Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 at the urging of President Obama, who signed it into law four days later. A direct response to the economic crisis, the Recovery Act has three immediate goals:

Create new jobs and save existing ones
Spur economic activity and invest in long-term growth
Foster unprecedented levels of accountability and transparency in government spending
The Recovery Act intends to achieve those goals by:

Providing $288 billion in tax cuts and benefits for millions of working families and businesses
Increasing federal funds for education and health care as well as entitlement programs (such as extending unemployment benefits) by $224 billion
Making $275 billion available for federal contracts, grants and loans
Requiring recipients of Recovery funds to report quarterly on how they are using the money. All the data is posted on Recovery.gov so the public can track the Recovery funds.

I suggest those who want to be informed read the link to Recovery.gov and not take Fox News and Foxfyer as the final word. Cherry picked stats and facts may fool some of the people all of the time (a shout-out to CrusaderFrank and Stepanie) but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

So we ignore the reports from Fox, CBS, ABC and elsewhere and believe the administration when they tell us they're doing a great job?

You're serious about that aren't you.