Stimulus jobs certainly do exist

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yeah, but I'd fine-tune it using only real monies and real jobs (not "expected" or "saved")

First-quarter start-up I can cut some slack to for necessary administrative (although you don't have to, you can include the entire costs of the program).

problem is, if they only used the actual jobs that were created, the cost per job would be even higher. so, i can understand why they'd push to have as high a job number as possible.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

problem is, if they only used the actual jobs that were created, the cost per job would be even higher. so, i can understand why they'd push to have as high a job number as possible.

Only 25% disbursed, just only about a year into a multiple-year program. Too soon to judge the program as a failure, IMO.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Only 25% disbursed, just only about a year into a multiple-year program. Too soon to judge the program as a failure, IMO.

all i did was the math, i guess everyone can judge if one job is worth between 125k and 250k to produce. wonder how many years that person will have to be employed for the govt to even break even. on that investment?
the problem is, when times are booming, the govt is supposed to take advantage of the fact that they don't have to support a lot of unemployed workers, and won't feel a strain on benefits-which gives them an opportunity to save. that way, the gov has a nest egg in lean times so that they can come to the rescue, without adding to an untenable situation. ooops. the last few years are a failure of colossal proportions, and it's not looking to get any better. speaking of which....scuds mentioned obama breaking his campaign promise regarding the armenian genocide. what about his vow for a more ethical govt? another promised change that we'll have to do without. oh, and earmarks? read on....


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...389494288.html





don't care for the wall street journal? there's always the washington post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...rss=rss_nation



"This constant claim by members that there is no link is specious, because we can see the link," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a nonprofit group. Sloan referred to data showing that well-targeted defense industry donations are routinely followed by earmarks or other legislative benefits.

Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonprofit group that has criticized earmarks, has noted that 68 percent of the companies and universities that wanted earmarks and contributed to Senate defense appropriators this year got them, whereas 48 percent of those who did not make contributions got them. A similar outcome occurred in the House defense subcommittee, said Laura Peterson, a senior policy analyst at the group.