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 table below compares the White House's February 2009 projection of the number of jobs that would be created by the 2009 stimulus law (through the end of 2010) with the actual change in state payroll employment through November 2009 (the latest figures available). According to the data, 49 States have lost jobs since the stimulus was enacted
Let me start by saying I don't think the stimulus did everything the administration hoped it would have by this point. However, I think you're misrepresenting its intent. It was always claimed the stimulus package would mainly save jobs while at the same time create a few others. That doesn't mean there would be a net gain in jobs. The correct measure of its success would be how many additional jobs would have been lost had the stimulus not been passed. I'm not an economist, so I'm not going to propose how one would go about calculating that.
Let me start by saying I don't think the stimulus did everything the administration hoped it would have by this point. However, I think you're misrepresenting its intent. It was always claimed the stimulus package would mainly save jobs while at the same time create a few others. That doesn't mean there would be a net gain in jobs. The correct measure of its success would be how many additional jobs would have been lost had the stimulus not been passed. I'm not an economist, so I'm not going to propose how one would go about calculating that.
Obama started out saying that it would create 4 million jobs, Then it changed to 3.5 million to 3 million to save or create jobs. Remember with the stimulus we werent suppose to go above 8% unemployment.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) released (http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=163483 - broken link) a list of 222 economists who believe that getting federal spending under control is the only way to create jobs and return America to economic prosperity. Contrary to President Obama and his supporters, these economists (http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/12-16-09_Economist_Policy_Statement.pdf - broken link) believe that additional stimulus spending can only further America's economic woes.
Boehner Releases List of 222 Economists Who Support Reining In Federal Spending – vs. More "Stimulus" – to Create Jobs | Republican Leader John Boehner (http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=163483 - broken link)
Obama started out saying that it would create 4 million jobs, Then it changed to 3.5 million to 3 million to save or create jobs. Remember with the stimulus we werent suppose to go above 8% unemployment.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) released (http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=163483 - broken link) a list of 222 economists who believe that getting federal spending under control is the only way to create jobs and return America to economic prosperity. Contrary to President Obama and his supporters, these economists (http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/12-16-09_Economist_Policy_Statement.pdf - broken link) believe that additional stimulus spending can only further America's economic woes.
Boehner Releases List of 222 Economists Who Support Reining In Federal Spending – vs. More "Stimulus" – to Create Jobs | Republican Leader John Boehner (http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=163483 - broken link)
And I'm sure Obama could find 222 economists who believe federal spending via a stimulus package is the only way to create jobs and return America to economic prosperity.
Economists can say some crazy things. If you remember in 2001 right when Bush took over Alan Greenspan warned about the dangers of TOO LITTLE federal debt and the budget surplus left by the previous administation. Then, in 2009 at the beginning of Obama's term, Greenspan was warning about the dangers of TOO MUCH federal debt in light of the record debt Obama's administration was inheriting.
I don't understand why everyone (Obama supporters and detractor) expects (expected) some lightening-quick economic recovery. The whole time Obama was running he stated that no matter who was elected, even himself, the economy would continue to get worse before it got better and that a recovery would occur in a matter of years, not months. He never said that 9 months into his 4 year term everything would be repaired and in a better state than when he assumed office on Jan 20th, 2009.
I don't understand why everyone (Obama supporters and detractor) expects (expected) some lightening-quick economic recovery.
He sold the stimulus as something that needed to be done NOW, IMMEDIATELY, to save the country from a depression. There was/is nothing stimulative in the bill, at all.
The table below compares the White House's February 2009 projection of the number of jobs that would be created by the 2009 stimulus law (through the end of 2010) with the actual change in state payroll employment through November 2009 (the latest figures available). According to the data, 49 States have lost jobs since the stimulus was enacted
Also, lets not forget most of the stimulus is set to roll out in 2010. If at this time next year things are not any better you will have a point until then we need to wait and see.
He sold the stimulus as something that needed to be done NOW, IMMEDIATELY, to save the country from a depression. There was/is nothing stimulative in the bill, at all.
This is wrong. You forget out GDP was UP for the first time in 2 years.
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.