/dev/null Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stimulus-sav...set=&ccode= But that's my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Please, they're totally pulling these numbers out of their rear ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Yeah, that's probably accurate. Of course they are just ignoring the millions of jobs lost during the same period. It does really show the desperation and complete lack of shame of this administration to attempt to use the "but, but but...it could be worse!" tactic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 http://www.propublica.org/ion/stimulus/ite...fires-back-1029 We start today with an Associated Press story [1] that seems to have rattled the White House. The AP reports that the government “has overstated by thousands the number of jobs it has created or saved with federal contracts” from the stimulus. At question is the government’s assertion two weeks ago that federal stimulus contracts had created more than 30,000 jobs. The AP reports that the number is overstated by at least 5,000 jobs. According to the story, one company in Colorado said it had created 4,231 jobs thanks to the stimulus, when the real number was fewer than 1,000. The White House pushed back [2]. Ed DeSeve, a White House adviser on the stimulus, argued that the AP spotted just a few small problems, which the administration has already fixed for its next release of data, scheduled for Friday. “This story draws misleading conclusions from a handful of examples,” said DeSeve, who added that the errors are “not significant to the total job count” to be posted on Friday. http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Mj...TEyMWFmY2YxZDQ= White House vs. the Associated Press Pretty soon only MSDNC will be left on the approved list of White House news providers: The Obama administration on Thursday slammed a report from The Associated Press alleging the government had overstated by thousands the number of jobs it has created or saved with federal contracts under President Obama's $787 billion recovery program. The White House seized on an initial report from a government oversight board weeks ago that claimed federal contracts awarded to businesses under the recovery plan already had helped pay for more than 30,000 jobs. The administration said the number was evidence that the stimulus program had exceeded early expectations toward reaching the president's promise of creating or saving 3.5 million jobs by the end of next year. But the 30,000 figure is overstated by thousands — at the very least by nearly 5,000, or one in six, based on AP's limited review of some of the contracts — because some federal agencies and recipients of the money provided incorrect job counts. The review found some counts were more than 10 times as high as the actual number of jobs; some jobs were credited to stimulus spending when, in fact, none were produced. Within minutes of the publication of AP's story, the White House released a statement at 12:15 a.m. Thursday that it said was the "real facts" about how jobs were counted in the stimulus data distributed two weeks ago. "This story draws misleading conclusions from a handful of examples," Ed DeSeve, an Obama adviser helping to oversee the stimulus program, said. "Tomorrow, more than 100,000 recipient reports will be posted on Recovery.gov," DeSeve said. "Unlike the small number of reports reviewed by AP, these reports have been reviewed for weeks, errors have been spotted and corrected, and additional layers of review by state and local governments have further improved the data quality." Nevertheless, the White House said it is aware there are problems. In an interview, the advisor said agencies have been working with businesses that received the money to correct mistakes. It asserted that had been a test run of a small subset of data that had been subjected only to three days of reviews, that it had already corrected "virtually all" the mistakes identified by the AP and that the discovery of mistakes "does not provide a statistically significant indication of the quality of the full reporting that will come on Friday." Oh really? not significant, I guess they don't understand relativity. Let's see here, 6000 misstated jobs out of 30,000 isssssss? I guess that would put it at about 20%. Amazing this administration, they love to call people and businesses or industries out for what they consider to be spreading "misinformation" but when they do it, they criticize or try to discredit the news agencies or networks for doing so. Criticizing the Associated Press, Priceless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Yeah, that's probably accurate. Of course they are just ignoring the millions of jobs lost during the same period. It does really show the desperation and complete lack of shame of this administration to attempt to use the "but, but but...it could be worse!" tactic. The reality is they are completely ignoring the economy and focusing on health care. Period. They bought some time with the stimulus, barking how crucial it was and how paying off everyone who helped them get elected, including the marsh mouse and grape genetics folks, was going to keep unemployment at 8%. Gee. You mean all those handouts to donors didn't stop the bleeding? So unemployment is still going up, people have quit spending, the dollar is worth less than the single piece of toilet paper we're going to be rationed each day, AND the health care debate is STILL a worldwide embarrassment? Really? Seems like a good time to pull a number out of your ass and employ a completely useless phrase like "saved or created," which no one can actually debate. The embarrassment never ends with this group. Quick, someone dust off Joe Biden and get him to speak so we can stop paying attention to the other incredible dolts running DC. Hillary has to be simply spotting with excitement over this idiocy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frit0 Bandit0 Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Obama's Baghdad Bob Gibbs. Well, I -- there -- there were -- there was a reporting problem with one of the contracting numbers because that paperwork went up quite quickly. They've had a chance to go through the numbers over the past couple weeks and address any confusion or errors. This is paperwork directly from a project that money has been appropriated for, so I think the American people can have confidence in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Gee. You mean all those handouts to donors didn't stop the bleeding? So unemployment is still going up, people have quit spending, the dollar is worth less than the single piece of toilet paper we're going to be rationed each day, AND the health care debate is STILL a worldwide embarrassment? Really? Amazing, isn't it? Who would have thought that throwing billions of dollars around while threatening massive tax hikes aimed at the people who actually create jobs in economic recoveries wouldn't result in more jobs being created? Just wrapping up our company's 2010 budget. Number of new employees planned for next year: Zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Amazing, isn't it? Who would have thought that throwing billions of dollars around while threatening massive tax hikes aimed at the people who actually create jobs in economic recoveries wouldn't result in more jobs being created? Just wrapping up our company's 2010 budget. Number of new employees planned for next year: Zero. Yeah, but how many rainbow farting unicorns will you hire in 2010? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 As soon as someone explains precisely how you measure that a job was "created or saved" by government spending, I'll start to believe those numbers. Until then, statements like this are the fiscal equivalent of "Well, we threw some **** against the wall...and some of it stuck..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Yeah, but how many rainbow farting unicorns will you hire in 2010? Not sure yet. We're waiting for Obama to anoint an 'Employment Czar' so the government can mandate that for us. After all, I'm sure they know how to run our business better than we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Not sure yet. We're waiting for Obama to anoint an 'Employment Czar' so the government can mandate that for us. After all, I'm sure they know how to run our business better than we do. I know that they are considering a 'Jobs Saved Czar', after all they do need someone to effectively communicate that to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I remember Clinton boasting that he created something like 3 million new jobs during his reign. I believe him. I had six of them during his reign of terror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I don't know, guys. As long as you ignore the millions of jobs that we know have been lost in the meantime, it seems reasonable enough. So what if 530,000 people filed for initial unemployment this week? The stimulus package offset it, plus some. We're saved! You know what, this thread is just racist. That's what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I remember Clinton boasting that he created something like 3 million new jobs during his reign.I believe him. I had six of them during his reign of terror. I'd take Slick Willy & Co over this crowd of mad scientists in a second. At least he wasn't hell bent on driving the entire country into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frit0 Bandit0 Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I remember Clinton boasting that he created something like 3 million new jobs during his reign.I believe him. I had six of them during his reign of terror. That's worthy of a quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I'd take Slick Willy & Co over this crowd of mad scientists in a second. At least he wasn't hell bent on driving the entire country into the ground. If this administration has taught us anything it's that the only thing more important than what they're doing is what you call it. It's not a gaffe. It's "rhetorical flourish." It's not govermnent-run health insurance. It's a "consumer option." It's not "driving the entire country into the ground." It's "fundamentally transforming America." Stick to the proper label and this all goes down much easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 31, 2009 Author Share Posted October 31, 2009 Thus far none of the "Under Estimated" or "About Right" voters have defended their selection... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Thus far none of the "Under Estimated" or "About Right" voters have defended their selection... Well, maybe we should ask conner the "suxiest man alive" and pohsiB seviG daeH, and see what they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stimulus-sav...set=&ccode= But that's my opinion Even if their bogus numbers were correct, Americans were ripped off yet again... http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.c...gets-a-for.html "If the 1 million jobs save or created stat is true, which we know its not, but lets say it is, that means each job cost taxpayers $207,000 per job." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 "If the 1 million jobs save or created stat is true, which we know its not, but lets say it is, that means each job cost taxpayers $207,000 per job." For jobs that probably average about $35k in annual comp. Boy, that's some change we can believe in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts