« Coming Soon to a Theater Near You | Main | Breaking: The Boy Was Never in the Balloon »

But at What Cost?

According to the NY Times (emphasis mine):

Businesses that got stimulus contracts directly from the federal government reported creating or saving 30,383 jobs so far, according to data published Thursday by the Obama administration.

The jobs reported on Thursday represent the first time that the government has reported actual figures as opposed to estimates. But they come from a small slice of a sliver of the program: the roughly $16 billion worth of stimulus contracts awarded directly by federal agencies, of which about $2.2 billion has been spent so far.

[ . . . ]

By themselves, the new job figures are unlikely to shed much light on the question of how well the stimulus program is accomplishing the goal that President Obama set: saving or creating 3.5 million jobs over two years. The rising unemployment rate, which is now at 9.8 percent, has fueled criticism in recent weeks that the stimulus program is not creating enough jobs.

I don't see that there's much mystery here. How else are you supposed to judge whether an actual jobs number squares with a projected jobs number except by looking at those numbers "by themselves"? As if there's some other magic formula to invoke which would explain away that vast discrepancy between what was expected to happen and what actually happened. If a person is unemployed, it's not a job "created or saved" is it?

And how much are each of these jobs costing taxpayers? Again we are awash in suspense. The jobs "created or saved" were the result of $16billion worth of stimulus contracts. If that's true, that works out to over $500,000 per job. Surely we could have just given each of those 30,000+ people a quarter of a million dollars apiece and saved $8billion? The article says though that only $2.2billion was actually spent. But spent by whom? If it was already spent by the government but not yet spent by the contractors, then it's irrelevant, since for the purposes of what it has cost the taxpayer, it's already out the door. If they mean instead that despite $16billion being authorized, only $2.2billion have been spent by the government, then why didn't they say that since it lowers the cost per job to somewhere around $70,000 per if that's actually the case.

I guess in the end, the takeaway from this is that this new jobs number is awfully small when juxtaposed with the 3.5 million projection, and awfully expensive when juxtaposed with the overall dollars authorized to be spent under the stimulus bill.

Which sounds just about like what we should have expected from a government promise to spend our way out of a financial downturn.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (4)

The definition of what a 's... (Below threshold)

The definition of what a 'saved' job is, is totally subjective. Thus they could even claim a billion jobs were 'saved' and there would be no MSM/CNN 'fact-check' to prove it one way or another.

Remember how we were consis... (Below threshold)

Remember how we were consistently told that the economy during the Bush administration was teh vurst evar?

Doesn't look like it now, does it?

This link - The Geography of Jobs - is a visual representation of jobs created, and jobs lost. Takes about 45 seconds, uses data from the BLS and state labor agencies (via Moody's Analytics).

You can see when Katrina hit - looks like a bomb went off. After that, when the gas prices rose, and rose - you can see Detroit get hammered. And then - it looks like a nuclear war breaks out.

Link found at Instapundit. The nuke war comment was his, btw - looks more like a slasher film to me, blood splattered all over the place.

If Obama's serious about getting the economy back on its' feet - he won't do it by taking tax money, grinding it through the government, then shoving it out to fund government jobs. Government doesn't produce - it's a net money sink. It CAN borrow to temporarily boost the money supply - but we're at the point the creditors are calling, wanting to know when the next payment's going to be sent.

He's going to have to do something pretty darn radical (at least, to HIS thinking) to get things going again. Will he figure it out in time?

Obama's ideas run to govern... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Obama's ideas run to government intervention and...more government intervention.

When corrected for either inflation or money supply the economy is flat and there has been no real recovery.

If anyone asks why you think the recovery will be temporary it is simply because here is no real evidence of substantial recovery yet. Once there is something that shows it is more than just all the money Obama has printed simply finding a place to go THEN we will have a recovery.

I heard the NPR take on thi... (Below threshold)

I heard the NPR take on this on the way home tonight, and it is amazing how they even verified this was all smoke (and no mirrors) AND still they tried to sound rosy about the stimulus approach.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy