An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Let’s Save or Create Even More Jobs!

The latest tale of woe regarding administration claims of jobs “saved or created” by the porkulous bill comes to us from Massachusetts. The lede to this story pretty much says it all.

While Massachusetts recipients of federal stimulus money collectively report 12,374 jobs saved or created, a Globe review shows that number is wildly exaggerated. Organizations that received stimulus money miscounted jobs, filed erroneous figures, or claimed jobs for work that has not yet started.

The Globe’s finding is based on the federal government’s just-released accounts of stimulus spending at the end of October. It lists the nearly $4 billion in stimulus awards made to an array of Massachusetts government agencies, universities, hospitals, private businesses, and nonprofit organizations, and notes how many jobs each created or saved.

But in interviews with recipients, the Globe found that several openly acknowledged creating far fewer jobs than they have been credited for.

Lest you think Massachusetts is some errant point off the edge of the bell curve, stop by this article by Ed Morrissey with a full list of “liberal media” links to another ten states where these wild eyed exaggerations have failed to hold water under even mild scrutiny. The other late additions are Colorado and Washington state. Here’s just one example of your tax dollars (in the trillions) at work:

Two child-development centers — one in Colorado Springs and the other in Saguache County — reported they had created or saved more than 292 jobs combined. However, the money — totaling about $650,000, or $2,226 a job — was used to give employees cost- of-living raises. Only three new jobs were created.

Boy, it’s sure a good thing we rushed that bill through. Otherwise, who knows how those people would have gotten a raise?

  • JeffersonDavis
    I personally don't like to hear the government say "create jobs".
    That's not their job in the first place.

    They can save all the jobs they want. But the creation of actual jobs belongs in the hands of commerce, not government.
  • ProfElwood
    Since the government can't create wealth, it all amounts to pulling water from the bottom of the tank, pouring into the top, and announcing, with great fanfare, that they're filling up the tank.
  • I agree that the white house has vastly overplayed its hand regarding the "saved or created" numbers. However, I need some clarification: My initial impression was that the numbers the white house put out where based on some complex economic formula, and not just adding up self-reported numbers. Yes, I know that amounts to an educated (if that) guess, but at least that's better that self-reported numbers. So, my question is: can someone provide some evidence that the white house relied solely on these self-reported numbers? I'm not an Obama fan, but honestly I have a hard time believing he could be that dumb or stoop so low (take your pick on which one it was).
  • ProfElwood
    Although I haven't done a bit of research (I'm getting tired), it's all a shell game, since no one can track the damage done to the economy when the money has to be extracted from it, and even that point in time can't really be pinned down. As far as stooping so low, you do understand that he's a politician, right? He didn't invent anything new here. I'm sure he's got scores of economists who can vouch for him, although they each would come up with a different method of calculating that number, were they not allowed to talk to each other.
  • Dr J
    AD, I don't think you're getting into the spirit of the thing. It's not about how many jobs were literally saved or created, it's about feeling good that we stimulated the economy.
  • "I'm sure he's got scores of economists who can vouch for him"

    But that's my question. Did he actually ask economists to estimate a number, or did he just add up the self-reported numbers? I'd at least have some respect for the first approach (although the range of numbers that economists would come up with would be wide, I suspect), but the second seams like something a second-grader would think up ("How many more children were born because of the child tax credit? Let's ask the parents!")

    I should point out at least one reason why just counting up the numbers is flawed: If I were a business owner, and I got a big check from the government, and then later I was asked, "how many jobs did you create with that money?", there would be more than just a little temptation to fudge on the up-side. If I tell them I created no jobs, I might think there would be less chance of getting any more big checks from the government anytime soon. So there's at least one reason (even if all of the reporting inconsistencies that have been reported could be resolved) why relying on self-reported numbers is fundamentally flawed.
  • Dr J
    Did he actually ask economists to estimate a number, or did he just add up the self-reported numbers?

    Of course there is no serious effort to tally the jobs, Dad. Nor will there be. Nor will there be a call for one from the left.

    Accountability is simply too much to ask for.
  • You're right Dr. J, all of these fancy numbers just get in the way of what is really important: the quantity of people that have been helped.
  • EEllis
    And no teenaged girls were forced to dress as a prostitute to find out this info. I guess thats a step up.
  • ProfElwood
    "what is really important: the quantity of people that have been helped."

    You're almost there. It's the quantity of HIS people (contributors and voters) that have been helped.

    Next up: Shocking allegations that some federal educational programs don't work as well as advertised.
  • Dr J
    Likewise devout Christians are disinclined to go looking too hard for the garden of Eden or for proof that prayer works. Like John Morely said, "Where it is a duty to worship the sun it is pretty sure to be a crime to examine the laws of heat."
  • dgfunk
    Thank God we will never know what would have happened if the stimulus bill had not passed.
  • DLS
    "I'm sure he's got scores of economists who can vouch for him"

    Krugman, as often as needed...
  • DLS
    Apparently, when Obama returns from his trip to eastern Asia, he'll host a big meeting that will encourage, enlist, or conscript the private sector to do what he promised and failed to provide from the stimulus effort, the creation and saving of millions of jobs. It's time for the private sector "to do its part."

    Never mind real issue, about federal failure, as well as the failure of states long in need of reform of what is happening in a number of states to cost jobs and be counterproductive to recovery.

    http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/news_room_d...
  • DLS
  • DLS
    "Accountability is simply too much to ask for."

    Don't expect it at the "jobs summit." If anything, expect the private sector to be blamed for unemployment.
  • DLS
    I wasn't kidding about the "jobs forum" (actually, an "economic forum").

    Let's just hope this isn't just a pale imitation of the Clinton economic "round table" at Little Rock years ago. (Hmmm. How much in tax increases, and what new taxes, does this nation so greatly "need"?)

    Never mind that it's an effective admission of failure, and of other problems.

    (Real help, or out-of-touch-elite, public-opinion-manipulative, "symbolic"-BS PR?)

    http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/20...


    And meanwhile, let's not see other meddling...

    http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/...

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_ge...

    http://www.freep.com/article/20091112/BUSINESS0...
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC