Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I am guessing Libs will be telling us to believe this Foxnews story but not the other ones.
I am guessing Libs will be telling us to believe this Foxnews story but not the other ones.
WHERE ARE THE JOBS???
CBO’s Estimates of ARRA’s Impact on Employment and Economic Output
Looking at recorded spending to date as well as estimates of the other effects of ARRA on spending and revenues, CBO has estimated the law’s impact on employment and economic output using evidence about how previous similar policies have affected the economy and various mathematical models that represent the workings of the economy. On that basis, CBO estimates that in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2009, ARRA added between 1.0 million and 2.1 million to the number of workers employed in the United States, and it increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by between 1.4 million and 3.0 million. Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers. CBO also estimates that real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) was 1.5 percent to 3.5 percent higher in the fourth quarter than would have been the case in the absence of ARRA.
Data on actual output and employment during the period since ARRA’s enactment are not as helpful in determining ARRA’s economic effects as might be supposed, because isolating the effects would require knowing what path the economy would have taken in the absence of the law. Because that path cannot be observed, the new data add only limited information about ARRA’s impact. Economic output and employment in 2009 were lower than CBO had projected at the time of enactment. But in CBO’s judgment, that outcome reflects greater-than-projected weakness in the underlying economy rather than lower-than-expected effects of ARRA.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office study also said the $862 billion stimulus added between 1.5 to 3.5 percentage points to the growth of the economy in 2009.
As reported on FoxNews.com
FOXNews.com - CBO Says Stimulus Bill Created Up to 2.1 Million Jobs
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office study also said the $862 billion stimulus added between 1.5 to 3.5 percentage points to the growth of the economy in 2009.
As reported on FoxNews.com
FOXNews.com - CBO Says Stimulus Bill Created Up to 2.1 Million Jobs
First, the CBO does not do any research or anaysis on its own. It is required to use the numbers given to it by Congress and/or the Administration in power and measure that against certain other fixed criteria to arrive at an opinion. So, if the President or a Congressional leader tells the CBO to use such and such a number, the CBO has to accept that number as a fact.
That doesn't mean that the number is automatically wrong,.
It does suggest that people who want to know the truth of something should back up the CBO numbers with another credible source.
But let's assume that the CBO is right about the number of jobs created/saved. If they are right, and it is correct that roughly $176 billion of the stimulus package has been spent to date, each job saved cost us well over $60,000 each. And the fact is--even those in Congress admit this--most of those jobs 'saved' were government jobs. Most private sector jobs were temporary or part time.
During the same 12-month period, the average non-farm wage was $22.45/hr or about $46,700/year and those losing their jobs every month averaged in the hundreds of thousands. If we start from zero in January 2009, 14 million Americans lost their jobs between then and January 2010.
I wonder how they enjoy knowing that the federal government spent more than $60,000 per job to save some government jobs while they were losing theirs?
And how different would the picture have looked if that $176 billion had been spent giving tax relief to those who employ people and expand and grow the economy? Would a growing economy have significantly put a dent in that 14 million unemployed figure? Would it have then replenished those government treasuries and also saved the government jobs?
The CBO can't tell us that because nobody in government is giving them those numbers to work with.
We're not getting our monies worth folks, even as the CBO continues to up the amount that will be spent on the stimulus package. If they squander the rest as they have squandered the first $176 billion, all we will have to show for it is a national debt that will already diminish quality of life for our grandchildren, if not our great grandchildren.
Reference to back up some of my numbers:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office study also said the $862 billion stimulus added between 1.5 to 3.5 percentage points to the growth of the economy in 2009.
As reported on FoxNews.com
FOXNews.com - CBO Says Stimulus Bill Created Up to 2.1 Million Jobs
Let's have some fun with the numbers.... again. Let's assume an average job pays $50k for 5 years. That's $250,000. Are you with me so far? Now answer this: How many jobs should be created with $862 billion?
$862 billion / $250,000/Job = 3.5 million jobs.
Why is the number so low? We're short 1.4 million jobs.
First, the CBO does not do any research or anaysis on its own. It is required to use the numbers given to it by Congress and/or the Administration in power and measure that against certain other fixed criteria to arrive at an opinion. So, if the President or a Congressional leader tells the CBO to use such and such a number, the CBO has to accept that number as a fact.
Actually, for the most part, that is not the case. While the CBO does incorporate some data supplied to them by Congress or Administrations, most of their data comes from sources without being filtered.
From their site:
"Sources of Information and Peer Review Practices
CBO uses the rich data sources available from the government's statistical agencies. Those sources include the national income and product accounts, the census of manufacturers, the Statistics of Income, the Current Population Survey, and various national health surveys. CBO also uses information provided by relevant government agencies and industry groups to meet specific needs. To answer some questions, CBO uses available analytic models or develops them on its own.
CBO employs standard methods of economic analysis and closely follows professional developments in economics and related disciplines. CBO frequently seeks outside experts' advice on specific analytic matters, such as the outlook for agriculture production, spending projections for Medicare and Medicaid, and business prospects in the telecommunications industry. For its economic forecasts, CBO draws on the advice of a distinguished panel of advisers that meets twice a year.
All CBO estimates and analytic products are reviewed internally for technical competence, accuracy of data, and clarity of exposition. CBO studies also are reviewed by outside experts, Although outside advisers provide considerable assistance, CBO is solely responsible for the accuracy of the estimates and analyses that it produces. In keeping with its nonpartisan status and its mandate to provide objective analysis, CBO does not make policy recommendations in any of its analyses."
Congressional Budget Office - Preparing and Distributing Estimates and Analyses
That doesn't mean that the number is automatically wrong,.
It does suggest that people who want to know the truth of something should back up the CBO numbers with another credible source.
But let's assume that the CBO is right about the number of jobs created/saved. If they are right, and it is correct that roughly $176 billion of the stimulus package has been spent to date, each job saved cost us well over $60,000 each. And the fact is--even those in Congress admit this--most of those jobs 'saved' were government jobs. Most private sector jobs were temporary or part time.
During the same 12-month period, the average non-farm wage was $22.45/hr or about $46,700/year and those losing their jobs every month averaged in the hundreds of thousands. If we start from zero in January 2009, 14 million Americans lost their jobs between then and January 2010.
In total, with jobs gained included, that figure is in fact grossly inaccurate. The total job losses since the start of the recession are estimated to be a bit over 8 million.
I wonder how they enjoy knowing that the federal government spent more than $60,000 per job to save some government jobs while they were losing theirs?
And how different would the picture have looked if that $176 billion had been spent giving tax relief to those who employ people and expand and grow the economy? Would a growing economy have significantly put a dent in that 14 million unemployed figure? Would it have then replenished those government treasuries and also saved the government jobs?
That was tried by Reagan in 1981.
It took 2 1/2 years for the economy to recover using that exact method. During those 2 1/2 years, unemployment continued to rise until it finally crested and started to fall again in late 1983.
It's been a little over a year since the Obama administration took over, and we've been seeing many improvements already, all pointing at the fact that the recovery has already begun.
Stimulus money can be targeted to specific portions of the economy that need assistance, rather than just blindly losing a whole bunch of revenue and hoping everything will turn out OK.
The CBO can't tell us that because nobody in government is giving them those numbers to work with.
We're not getting our monies worth folks, even as the CBO continues to up the amount that will be spent on the stimulus package. If they squander the rest as they have squandered the first $176 billion, all we will have to show for it is a national debt that will already diminish quality of life for our grandchildren, if not our great grandchildren.
Reference to back up some of my numbers:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
As stated earlier, the CBO uses many sources not associated with the Administration or Congress.
In addition, we have not seen the full long-term effects of the stimulus.
WHERE ARE THE JOBS???
Not really sure how your graph is indicative of the CBO estimate being wrong.
Without the stimulus we would have lost 10+ million jobs instead of 8+ million jobs.
I am guessing Libs will be telling us to believe this Foxnews story but not the other ones.
Yeah, or you could take a break from your propaganda for a minute to listen to the non-partisan source of the story, the Congressional Budget Office...
Nah, why would you want to do that?
And the story was originally reported by the AP, and run on FoxNews.com.
I think the headline should be "saved" 2.1 million jobs.
LWC, your own source admits that the CBO uses the numbers given to them by the government. If Obama tells them that $200 million or billion or whatever will be saved from cuts in Medicare, CBO is required to take them at their word and use those numbers in their calculations. They are not allowed to say that there isn't a chance of a snowball in hell of it working like you say it will work. They have to use the numbers the government furnishes to them. They are not allowed to develop their own.
There is a world of difference between the economic forecasts the CBO engages in and the analysis that it does to score a spending appropriation bill.
