What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why the AJA is a bad idea

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
May 9, 2010
Reaction score
It seems the numbers do not add up, even if we actually accept the numbers the White House is giving us. Obama wants us to spend 3% of our GDP to create a 2% uptick in the GDP. For the math challenged out there (I am thinking of you rdean) that means we will experience a net drain on our economy.

Can anyone explain how making things worse makes them better?

At a White House press conference on Thursday, President Barack Obama said the legislation he has proposed to create jobs could "grow the economy as much as 2 percent." However, the White House estimates that the plan itself will cost $447 billion -- or 2.97 percent of the 2011 GDP of $15.012 trillion that is currently projected by the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. (See chart: GDP Chart from BEA.xls.) The president also said at the press conference that his plan could create "as many as 1.9 million" jobs. If that is true, based on the plan's estimated $447 billion cost, those jobs would cost an average of $235,263 to create.

Obama Says Jobs Plan Can Grow GDP as 'Much as 2%'--But WH Estimates It Will Cost 3% | CNSnews.com


Diamond Member
May 6, 2007
Reaction score
North Carolina
I asked the Libs on this board several times why Bush spending money was bad but Obama spending it twice as fast was good. As I recall the consensus was" well golly gee dummy, Bush spent it over seas, Obama is spending it in Country"

USMB Server Goals

Total amount

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List