Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The results suggest that though the program did result in 2 million jobs “created or saved” by March 2010, net job creation was statistically indistinguishable from zero by August of this year. Taken at face value, this would suggest that the stimulus program (with an overall cost of $814 billion) worked only to generate temporary jobs at a cost of over $400,000 per worker. Even if the stimulus had in fact generated this level of employment as a durable outcome, it would still have been an extremely expensive way to generate employment.
The estimated jobs multiplier for total nonfarm employment is large and statistically significant for ARRA spending (as measured by announced funds) through March 2010, but falls considerably and is statistically insignificant beyond March. The implied number of jobs created or saved by the spending is about 2.0 million as of March, but drops to near zero as of August.
So much for the 2-3 million "created or saved" bogus criteria for counting jobs. Basically, NO impact at all on the job front, which is not hard to figure out if pay any attention at all to the monthly jobs numbers.
What a disaster, a waste of $1+ trillion and a great narrative for 2012.
If anyone thinks the GOP will give him a break on this monumental failure, think again. It will be an issue in 2012 just as it was in 2010.
New Fed study suggests net job creation from Porkulus was … zero
Quote:
Now that we’re heading back towards 10% having never gotten below 9%, that should certify the program as a flop. The White House and its defenders claim that no one knew how bad the economy was at that point (January 2009), but that’s simply not true. We had already lost over 3 million jobs by that time, and we were losing 600K a month or more by then.
This paper analyzed the employment impacts of fiscal stimulus spending, using statelevel
data from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) enacted in February
2009. Cross-state IV/GMM results imply that ARRA spending created or saved about 2.0
million jobs,...
Have any 'suggested' results from an unbiased source? Judging by the O-P-I-N-O-N-S expressed on this site, it obviously isn't.
What's wrong? The SF Fed not good enough for you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
The key word that you need to reflect on is Net.
From your link:
This paper analyzed the employment impacts of fiscal stimulus spending, using statelevel
data from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) enacted in February
2009. Cross-state IV/GMM results imply that ARRA spending created or saved about 2.0
million jobs,...
Have a nice day.
Not so nice when you LEAVE OFF the next part, here;
Quote:
The estimated jobs multiplier for total nonfarm employment is large and statistically significant for ARRA spending (as measured by announced funds) through March 2010, but falls considerably and is statistically insignificant beyond March. The implied number of jobs created or saved by the spending is about 2.0 million as of March, but drops to near zero as of August.
Let me translate that for you; The estimated impact of 2 million, temporary jobs, that are NOW GONE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin
Never mind, he's already been prove wrong as is usual.
Read a little further, but it WILL hurt. Of course you won't do that.
Quote:
Taken at face value, this would suggest that the stimulus program (with an overall cost of $814 billion) worked only to generate temporary jobs at a cost of over $400,000 per worker.
What a friggin deal! Ye-haw!!
Of course, you can't fool most of the American people - who clearly know obama's stimulus failed badly. I mean, it didn't achieve ANY of it's stated goals.
They actually needed a "study" to figure that out? \
What gets me is the libs are so hot and heavy on class envy and against corporate welfare but they failed to see that the Trillion + spent in stimulus was nothing more than paybacks to chronies of Senators. I guess if it gets libs votes to hell with our debt, right?
This also proves that cutting taxes would have no effect on job creation. Both methods have the same result, providing $$$ to entities that would hopefully create those supposed increase in jobs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
