• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

State jobs to be created or saved, transparency?

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
They just throw it together as they go. Their organized confusion is very transparent. When they let you know how many jobs were actually created/saved at election time, will you be suspicious?

Monday, May 11, 2009
"The Most Transparent Administration"
I happen to go to recovery.gov today and saw a chart of the jobs planned to be created or "saved" - they plan to create or "save" 106,000 jobs in Georgia. Not 105,000 and not 107,000 - precisely 106,000. How could their planning possibly be so precise? After staring at the data for a few minutes, I realized the terrible truth.

California - 396,000
Texas - 269,000
New York - 215,000
Florida - 206,000
Illinois - 148,000
Pennsylvania - 143,000
Ohio - 133,000
Michigan - 109,000
Georgia - 106,000
North Carolina - 105,000

Do you see the pattern?

Pull 3,500,000 jobs created or "saved" out of your ass. Then apportion this number to the 50 states (plus DC) according to their proportional share of the total US population and round to the nearest 1000.

I plotted the Obama jobs numbers against the population of each state (as of 7/1/2008) with the following result:

Untitled.jpg


The R-squared = 0.9984 means that 99.84% of the "jobs created or saved" assigned to each state can be explained by that state's population. The remaining 0.16% is probably explained by rounding.

http://oneconservativevoice.blogspot.com/2009/05/most-transparent-administration.html
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Here are the Obama projections for Unemployment, Stimulus vs. without stimulus. Are his economists good or what?

stimulus-vs-unemployment-april-thum.gif


As you can see, unemployment is currently in a little worse shape than Obama's economists predicted we would be without the "stimulus" bill.

Does this mean we can conclude that the $800 billion "stimulus" was a failure, that did nothing but drive the country deeper into debt? Does it mean that Obamanomics isn't "saving or creating" millions of jobs after all?

Does it suggest that the administration's wild, wasteful spending and impending tax increases are actually destroying jobs? Shouldn't someone at least think to ask these questions at Obama's next press conference?

During the "Bush recovery," no good could be found in a report that showed the unemployment rate stable, never mind one that showed it increasing (as is the case now). Indeed, even when the unemployment rate began declining under Bush, the MSM still wasn't satisfied; it began carping that the new jobs didn't pay high enough wages.

Where is the MSM? Probably reporting for GE and the benefits associated with universal health care and wind power.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Nearly three months after President Obama approved a $787 billion economic stimulus package, intended to create or save jobs, the federal government has paid out less than 6 percent of the money, largely in the form of social service payments to states.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/us/politics/13stimulus.html?_r=2
 
Top