Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are 2.5M less people working now than when the Stimulus was passed. The White House can spin as much nonsense as they want about jobs SAVED or created, but employment overall is down.
And there is a reason why: Obamanomics is an Epic Fail which has Made Things Worse.
Then tell us how many more or less people would be working had there been no stimulus.
And be specific.
There are 2.5M less people working now than when the Stimulus was passed. The White House can spin as much nonsense as they want about jobs SAVED or created, but employment overall is down.
And there is a reason why: Obamanomics is an Epic Fail which has Made Things Worse.
Link?
I think it is hilarious that anyone even argues that it worked... it hasn't. We're worse off for sure.. and getting worserer and worserer.
There are 2.5M less people working now than when the Stimulus was passed. The White House can spin as much nonsense as they want about jobs SAVED or created, but employment overall is down.
And there is a reason why: Obamanomics is an Epic Fail which has Made Things Worse.
Link?
Here you go. Look it up yourself.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
There are 2.5M less people working now than when the Stimulus was passed. The White House can spin as much nonsense as they want about jobs SAVED or created, but employment overall is down.
And there is a reason why: Obamanomics is an Epic Fail which has Made Things Worse.
Then tell us how many more or less people would be working had there been no stimulus.
And be specific.
5.1M more people would have jobs if the Stimulus had not been passed.
According to the Romer report on the stimulus, by the end of Q2-2011, if the stimulus were not passed, unemployment would be at 7.5%.
Based upon stats from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I did a simple analysis which assumes:
Labor force participation rates remain the same as February 2009 (the month the stimulus was passed). I applied this rate to the eligible population base, calculated unemployment, and then netted the total employed. Note, as the June 2011 figures have not been released, I'm using May as a proxy. The net changes in column (d) are (c) minus (a).
Voila. 5.1M more jobs.
Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 - Economic Policies for the 21st Century
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamadoc.html
Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
I already did.
139 million working in 2009, 139 million working in 2011.
Then tell us how many more or less people would be working had there been no stimulus.
And be specific.
5.1M more people would have jobs if the Stimulus had not been passed.
According to the Romer report on the stimulus, by the end of Q2-2011, if the stimulus were not passed, unemployment would be at 7.5%.
Based upon stats from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I did a simple analysis which assumes:
Labor force participation rates remain the same as February 2009 (the month the stimulus was passed). I applied this rate to the eligible population base, calculated unemployment, and then netted the total employed. Note, as the June 2011 figures have not been released, I'm using May as a proxy. The net changes in column (d) are (c) minus (a).
Voila. 5.1M more jobs.
Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 - Economic Policies for the 21st Century
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamadoc.html
Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
I already did.
139 million working in 2009, 139 million working in 2011.
You need to look at the monthly totals. When Obama took office, the level was 142.2M. I will correct my figure to 2.3M jobs lost as I had been using the February figures.
5.1M more people would have jobs if the Stimulus had not been passed.
According to the Romer report on the stimulus, by the end of Q2-2011, if the stimulus were not passed, unemployment would be at 7.5%.
Based upon stats from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I did a simple analysis which assumes:
Labor force participation rates remain the same as February 2009 (the month the stimulus was passed). I applied this rate to the eligible population base, calculated unemployment, and then netted the total employed. Note, as the June 2011 figures have not been released, I'm using May as a proxy. The net changes in column (d) are (c) minus (a).
Voila. 5.1M more jobs.
Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 - Economic Policies for the 21st Century
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamadoc.html
Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
How sad that you think it's funny that 5.1M people are needlessly unemployed.
That's True Liberal Compassion.
There are 2.5M less people working now than when the Stimulus was passed. The White House can spin as much nonsense as they want about jobs SAVED or created, but employment overall is down.
And there is a reason why: Obamanomics is an Epic Fail which has Made Things Worse.
Then tell us how many more or less people would be working had there been no stimulus.
And be specific.
5.1M more people would have jobs if the Stimulus had not been passed.
According to the Romer report on the stimulus, by the end of Q2-2011, if the stimulus were not passed, unemployment would be at 7.5%.
Based upon stats from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I did a simple analysis which assumes:
Labor force participation rates remain the same as February 2009 (the month the stimulus was passed). I applied this rate to the eligible population base, calculated unemployment, and then netted the total employed. Note, as the June 2011 figures have not been released, I'm using May as a proxy. The net changes in column (d) are (c) minus (a).
Voila. 5.1M more jobs.
Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 - Economic Policies for the 21st Century
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamadoc.html
Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
I already did.
139 million working in 2009, 139 million working in 2011.
You need to look at the monthly totals. When Obama took office, the level was 142.2M. I will correct my figure to 2.3M jobs lost as I had been using the February figures.
And the stimulus took effect on January 20th, 2009?
You are cracking me up. Please!!! Stop!!!
5.1M more people would have jobs if the Stimulus had not been passed.
According to the Romer report on the stimulus, by the end of Q2-2011, if the stimulus were not passed, unemployment would be at 7.5%.
Based upon stats from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I did a simple analysis which assumes:
Labor force participation rates remain the same as February 2009 (the month the stimulus was passed). I applied this rate to the eligible population base, calculated unemployment, and then netted the total employed. Note, as the June 2011 figures have not been released, I'm using May as a proxy. The net changes in column (d) are (c) minus (a).
Voila. 5.1M more jobs.
Revisiting Unemployment Predictions | e21 - Economic Policies for the 21st Century
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamadoc.html
Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
How sad that you think it's funny that 5.1M people are needlessly unemployed.
That's True Liberal Compassion.
You need to look at the monthly totals. When Obama took office, the level was 142.2M. I will correct my figure to 2.3M jobs lost as I had been using the February figures.
And the stimulus took effect on January 20th, 2009?
You are cracking me up. Please!!! Stop!!!
I said when Obama took office. The stimulus was passed the next month.
And I did my analysis to get to the 5.1M based on end of February data, after the stimulus was passed.
The 7.5% unemployment prediction was the Obama Economic Advisors' estimate of what unemployment would be without the stimulus. You can read it for yourself.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_obamadoc.html
How sad that you think it's funny that 5.1M people are needlessly unemployed.
That's True Liberal Compassion.
The stimulus was all tax cuts and borrowed money. There is no way the stimulus was a drag on the economy. The stimulus created or saved 3 million jobs.
You're making the argument that a do-nothing strategy would have first of all created or saved THOSE 3 million jobs,
and then created 2 million more on top of that? That's mental.
How? Where? Why?
Where would they have been working? In what industries, sectors? Where would all the state employees that would have been laid off without state/local governments getting stimulus been working?
Where would the construction workers who worked on road jobs etc., paid for by the stimulus been working had there been no stimulus? Who would have hired them and why?
Use your head for once.
How sad that you think it's funny that 5.1M people are needlessly unemployed.
That's True Liberal Compassion.
The stimulus was all tax cuts and borrowed money. There is no way the stimulus was a drag on the economy. The stimulus created or saved 3 million jobs.
You're making the argument that a do-nothing strategy would have first of all created or saved THOSE 3 million jobs,
and then created 2 million more on top of that? That's mental.
How? Where? Why?
Where would they have been working? In what industries, sectors? Where would all the state employees that would have been laid off without state/local governments getting stimulus been working?
Where would the construction workers who worked on road jobs etc., paid for by the stimulus been working had there been no stimulus? Who would have hired them and why?
Use your head for once.
I'd rather not use my head the way you do. Shoving it up the ass is not very comfortable.
The stimulus is a drag on the economy just the same way an individual have 25 credit cards charged to the max experiences a drag on lifestyle as all of his income goes to debt service.
We've already borrowed so much from the future that we can't avoid the economic hangover we are enduring. All Obama did was Make It Worse.
The stimulus is a drag on the economy just the same way an individual have 25 credit cards charged to the max experiences a drag on lifestyle as all of his income goes to debt service.
We've already borrowed so much from the future that we can't avoid the economic hangover we are enduring. All Obama did was Make It Worse.
The stimulus is a drag on the economy just the same way an individual have 25 credit cards charged to the max experiences a drag on lifestyle as all of his income goes to debt service.
We've already borrowed so much from the future that we can't avoid the economic hangover we are enduring. All Obama did was Make It Worse.
But, we're not spending all our income on debt service. No where near it. Not on the Federal level any way, so, where is this drag you're talking about?