Shocker - Stimulus Dollars Not Reaching Worse-off States


Story in USA Today here pointing out the fact that individual states in the US that have the highest unmeployment and have been hit the hardest by the recession have recieved the fewest stimulus contracts and dollars. The reason? Plain old-fashioned government inefficiency. Remember after the election when the Obamanation proclaimed literally that "failure to act on an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into a long-lasting recession that might prove irreversible"?

From the USA Today article -
"In Michigan, for example — where years of economic tumult and a collapsing domestic auto industry have produced the nation's worst unemployment rate — federal agencies have spent about $2 million on stimulus contracts, or 21 cents per person. In Oregon, where unemployment is almost as high, they have spent $2.12 per capita, far less than the nationwide average of nearly $13."

Remember when the facts started to come out on the stimulus plan's spending timeframe of the $787 billion? The fact that many of the 'infrastructure' dollars wouldn't be spent for years? And the above from USA Today is a surprise? Have we gone mad? Remember, no one in Congress even had time to read the bill, much less forecast or study forecasts as to when the dollars would reach projects and constituents.

Again from the USA Today - "The $787 billion recovery package was intended to help turn around the economy using federal money to create jobs, especially in places where the recession has taken the most severe toll. Most of that money goes directly to states to pay for work such as highway repairs, but federal agencies also will spend billions of dollars to do everything from fixing runways and improving national forests to cleaning up nuclear waste."

Remember folks, when it comes to liberalism/progressivism/socialism/statism that it's not the result that matters, it's the intention. And liberals will never be held accountable for the results of their actions because they care. And that's all that counts in media, academia, and the left in the populace.

USA Today again - "The first waves of that money flowed unevenly in large part because some federal agencies have moved more swiftly than others to sign contracts for projects funded by the stimulus.... Obama said Wednesday that the stimulus had created or saved 150,000 jobs in its first 100 days. Overall, however, the economy shed more than 1.2 million jobs in March and April, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics."

We were made to feel that in pure Messianic immaculate economic conception mentality that the Obamanation's stimulus social spending bill that no one read would defy the law of economics. That He would transcend the typically prehistorically-slow grinding gears of our bloated bureaucracies and that all would rise to His occasion. Alas it is not true. And the Obamanation believes that the stimulus has created 150,000 jobs? And in the same period of time the US economy has lost close to 1.5 millions jobs? That's incredible! Wait, why doesn't that add up to me? How can an economy both lose 1.5 million jobs, yet 'create' 150,000? Really? I'm sorry here but anyone with 2nd grade math skills can see past this. Remember too folks that many of the Obamanation's FDR lustings will actually prolong the recession that we are in. They have the great potential of skewing market forces and creating a further malaise. Everything that the administration and Democrats are proposing from socialized health care to global-warming tax schemes are anathema to job creation. We need a flourishing private sector with low regulatory hindrances and a general faith that our government won't change the rules at the last second. We need Reagan, we have his Nemesis......

10 comments:

  1. The beauty of quoting a statistic like the amount of jobs created or saved is that it sounds [marginally] good, and it's literally impossible to prove or disprove with any facts available to people. The best we can do is look at specific cases where the government claims great success, such as the poster child Catapillar plant, which Obama visited to tout the job savings, and then had to lay off the workers anyway. Or GM, which we're spending upwards of $100,000,000,000 of taxpayer money to save, and is going bankrupt next Monday. Now that's change we can believe in; Bush would have never wasted that much taxpayer money subsidizing obscene union benefits like that.

    ... although they both pumped hundreds of billions into the financial industry to subsidize their ridiculous compensation, and pay off their gambling debts, so it's not really that much change. It's the thought and bailout targets that count, I guess.

    On a related note, I did find it funny that Obama was claiming to have done the most significant changes to the country since FDR. Finally, an Obama statement that doesn't ring hollow, pandering, or blatantly false. FDR created the Great Depression, ignored the Constitution, and gave us lasting crippling massive unfunded debt obligations like Social Security; he certainly was responsible for the most destructive changes made by any president in the 20th century, and Obama's changes could have a similar impact. For once, it appears that Obama and I are on the same page.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nicely done. I'd read an article about a month ago how the funds were also being inappropriately funneled at the local level as well. A county with 4% unemployment in PA was receiving a majority of funds while another with 13% unemployment received nothing.

    Since Obama and MSNBC are pushing how the economy is turning around so quickly the Republicans should work to repeal the rest of the stimulus spending. After all, we passed the large bill because the economy was going to crash instantainiously and there was no other way, but since the first 6% of the bill has been so, so, so effective (cough...sarcasm) why spend the rest?

    We may see possitive GDP growth, but I believe the stimulus will prolong the high rates of unemployment that we are seeing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. see my post http://thelcomment.blogspot.com/2009/05/episode-60-jobs-baby-jobs.html on why I think jobs are still decreasing.

    I think the problem is two separtate issues here. The job loss is a result of company's value no longer based on speculation, but cold hard numbers. I don't think many companies had they value the stock ticker says it did, and as a result, stimulus or no stimulus, most compaines simply don't have th emoney to bring anyone back. Their past value was based on credit and imaginary numbers.

    I think we talked about this in you blog CGen, but the primar number to consider is net unemployment. If three areas go from 10% unemployment to 3% unemployment, then the states unemployment rate has decreased by 9%, even if another area still has a 13% unemployment rate. We don't know why this happens unless you live in the area... maybe the high unemployment area is not an easy place to grow comapanies, or it is a blue collar manufacturing town that had its workload outsourced.

    This is why I think the stimulus money should be redirected at what I call the academic class, the part of the workforce who hold degrees in higher education who are statistically more likely to become entrepreneurs. Private enterprise investment is the way out of the recession because the current economic model has reached its maximum potential long ago, and we need to be making new industries, not endlessly propping up old ones.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This does not surprise me. I am baffled by whats going on here in N.C. We are laying off teachers but yet we raised $1billion in the NC Educational lottery. Where in the hell is that money?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nick - I couldn't have said it better myself, re: Bush and GM, in the waning days of his presidency, he should have just let GM go into bankruptcy IMO, I agree that he would have eventually cut and run...I agree as well on FDR, history it seems is always to be ignored or at least obfuscated in the Obamanation's case. The correct history on the Great Depression and FDR is not good. As you say, the worst thing about FDR are the entitlement programs that you and I are going to have to pay a huge part of our income to and prop up....

    Conservative G - brillianty put! Indeed since that admin is now touting the fact that they think the economy is improving and moving along, we can't we rescind the rest of the stimulus? Makes sense, hope Repubs take that and run with it...

    The Law - I'm not sure I agree or disagree with your points, I totally agree that we need to let old industries whither on the vine - creative destruction is the only way to get our economy back on a competitive and prosperous path. I'll check out the link you provided and get back to you on that as well....

    Michelle - Nice to see you here! I'm not sure about your local NC economy, here in CA, many funds that were initially appropriated for specific things (gas tax for highways, etc) end up going to general government funding. Sounds like you may be seeing that in your state, I hope not as CA is a TERRIBLE model to go by. BTW, how close are you to Wilmington?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Law - I just walked away from the blog for 10 minutes or so and thought about your point on the 'academic class'. I can see the validity of your theme, in that the government (since they are going to spend the money), needs to foster entrepeneurism, start-ups and new industries, vs. projects that essentially 'dig holes and fill them back up with dirt.' I just don't think that our government should use the flawed Keynesian model of spending. But even though it is against my belief system, the funding of said academics vs dying industries is superior.....

    ReplyDelete
  7. You mean intentions don't count? Really? I thought attitude was everything...

    (sounds like something presidentbarryO would say, doesn't it? I'd better quit while I'm ahead. He's waaaaaay better @ his schtick than I am!)

    Hope you're having a great week!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Susannah - Yes, it's true, in re: to the Left that intentions are not judged by results. The intention is an end unto itself. In a day and age whereby they are adding a debt burden and future punitive tax code based only on intention, we are in a precarious position. Our economic system and liberties are at stake and being dismantled daily.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Much to think about and explore here. Thank you again for so much information. Anything any of you can add or point me too is greatly appreciated.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.