Obama Lied, v. IIII

The plan:

We know how that turned out.

Obama and his staff claimed that the stimulus worked perfectly.

“We have rescued this economy from the worst of this crisis,” Obama said at the White House. “We acted because failure to do so would have led to catastrophe. We acted because we had a larger responsibility than simply winning the next election. We had a responsibility to do what was right.”

The measure “was never intended to save every job,” he said. “Businesses are the true engine of growth [and] always will be. But during a recession … what government can do is provide a temporary boost.”

But unemployment numbers continued to be anemic.

Then we got the “if we’d done nothing” speeches. If we’d done nothing, MORE jobs would have been lost. After the “Summer of Recovery” we got this:

It’s true that it could have been lots worse, which has been the White House’s top argument during most of the summer. If we had done nothing, frustrated Obama staffers tell reporters, we’d be much worse off, with employment topping 15 or even 16 percent by now. In a posting on the White House blog, outgoing chief economic adviser Christina Romer called the latest statistics better than expected. “Against the backdrop of some unsettling economic data in the past few weeks, today’s numbers are reassuring that growth and recovery are continuing.”

What we have here is a president claiming that the stimulus and continued spending is directly related to job creation.

I say Obama is a liar. Vernoique de Rugy calls it “ugly modeling.” Po-tay-to/Po-ta-to.

In February, the Goldman Sachs economist Alec Phillips predicted on ABCNews.com that a Republican proposal in the House of Representatives to cut $61 billion from the federal budget in fiscal year 2011, would, if enacted, shave two full percentage points off America’s gross domestic product in the second and third quarters of this year. A few days later, The Washington Post described a new study by Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics and an architect of the 2009 stimulus package, a.k.a. the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Zandi’s amazing verdict: The spending cuts would destroy 700,000 jobs by the end of 2012.

Yea, it will destroy 700,000 if you use bad models to compute the figure. To spread doom and gloom and label the Republicans as job killers who only care about those millionaires and billionaires. Democrats want to continue to spend and spend, and demagogue any attempts of restraint.

Another problem with these analyses: Economists of all persuasions have proven to be really bad at predicting the future, especially when it comes to jobs. Take the stimulus. Forecasters at the White House and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted the stimulus package would create more than 3 million jobs. And in August 2010, the CBO estimated that the stimulus had indeed created between 1.4 million and 3.6 million extra jobs, thrilling supporters of economic intervention. But unemployment stubbornly remained around 10 percent.

Nice fuzzy math there. Created (or SAVED!) between 1.4 and 3.6 million jobs. Truth is, there is no way of knowing jobs “created or saved” by stimulus. The only thing we know for sure is that we spent a crapload of money that we’ll have to pay off somehow.

We have tried spending a lot of money to jump-start the economy, and it has failed. Now we need to cut spending and lift the uncertainty paralyzing economic activity. That approach will not just be more fiscally responsible. It will also empower individuals and entrepreneurs. And they are the only ones who can bring on a real recovery.

Indeed. The democrat’s spending is aimed at economic “justice” and that it their first priority. Who see the federal budget as our “values statement” as a nation. San Fran Nan:

“The federal budget should be a statement of our values, our national morals, and our priorities.”

In reference to the the 2010 $3.44 TRILLION budget resolution passed by the House of Representatives in 2009 Nancy had this to say:

… “Today, for the first time in many, many years, we have a president’s budget … that is a statement of our national values.”

“What is important to us as a nation is reflected in this budget. It’s a very happy day for our country.”

These people are not grown ups.

Margaret Thatcher was dead on – The trouble with socialism, and the democrat’s method of social spending, is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.

We’re past that point. We’ve run out.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized

3 Comments on “Obama Lied, v. IIII”

  1. MJ Says:

    Created or saved is consulting term that is used to justify bad modeling. When the variation in the model produces a result that states between 1.4-3.6 million, you pretty much know they’re just making it up.

    If he gets asked about the stimulus during the election cycle, and that’s a big IF, he’ll either have to lie, or say ‘it could have been worse.’ He’ll probably lie knowing that no one will call him on it.

  2. MJ Says:

    Oh, and by the way the cost, even at 3.6 million jobs is $277K per.

  3. Car in Says:

    A bargain. We got 9% unemployment out of the deal.

    McDonalds is hiring. Happy days Meals are here again.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: