Happy birthday, Stimulus!

February 17, 2012

Today is the third anniversary of the passage of President Obama’s Stimulus Pokulus bill, which was supposed to have us at below 6% unemployment by now. How’s that working out?

Whatever. Let’s not quibble over small details, such as being utterly, humiliatingly wrong. Instead, this is a time to celebrate Porkulus’ many accomplishments — the jobs and wealth created. How our (borrowed from China) money was wisely spent. Stories such as this one:

In an effort to stabilize the city’s real estate market, a federal stimulus program has spent nearly $1.5 million on eight Modesto homes that ended up being worth less than $1 million.

Example: Taxpayers paid $223,641 to buy and fix up a foreclosed south Modesto house that was built in 1992. But when the city’s 16-month renovation project was done, the home appraised and sold for only $114,000.

The government lost $109,641 on that just completed deal.

Taxpayers also have spent $109,494 to buy and renovate a 1948-vintage two-bedroom home in Modesto’s airport neighborhood. That house has appraised for only $55,000, and a buyer has yet to be found.

The federally funded Neighborhood Stabilization Program is being managed by the city of Modesto, which plans to resell an additional 18 or more rehabilitated homes this year.

The eight refurbished Modesto homes have cost taxpayers, on average, 34 percent more than appraisers determined they were worth after repairs were complete. That’s an average of $61,487 each.

In investing, that’s called “value destroyed.” And, as of the article’s writing, they weren’t finished!

Happy birthday, Porkulus! Just think of what President Obama can do with four more years!

via Elizabeth Emken for Senate

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Advertisements

Dear Republicans: This is a club, learn to use it

May 16, 2011

Because if you don’t hammer Obama every day from now until Election Day with the fact that his stimulus plan caused a net loss of 500,000 jobs, you don’t deserve to win:

Our benchmark results suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs. State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment. The majority of destroyed/forestalled jobs were in growth industries including health, education, professional and business services.

(Emphasis added)

That’s from a study (PDF) by economists at Ohio State. In other words, we borrowed and spent nearly one trillion dollars (that’s $1,000,000,000,000) on the assurance of President Obama and the (Social) Democrats that doing so would stimulate the economy, create new jobs, and restore prosperity. Instead, we bought a bunch of pork-barrel projects and waste that only made unemployment worse. We’d have been better off if Obama and Congress had done nothing.

That monument to incompetence alone should cost them the 2012 election.

You’ve been handed a club, Republicans: use it.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


It’s official

December 7, 2010

President Obama’s pork-laden monstrosity stimulus program was an absolute failure:

Wilson’s study makes an important contribution to this debate by focusing on state-by-state comparisons. A large portion of stimulus funding at the state level was based on criteria that were entirely independent of the economic situation that states faced. For example, the number of existing highway miles was used to calculate additional transportation spending.

The study uses this resulting variation in state-level stimulus funding to determine what impact ARRA funding had on employment — including both the direct impact of workers hired to complete planned projects, as well as any broader spillover effects resulting from greater government spending. Administration economists have repeatedly emphasized the importance of this indirect employment growth in driving economic recovery.

The results suggest that though the program did result in 2 million jobs “created or saved” by March 2010, net job creation was statistically indistinguishable from zero by August of this year. Taken at face value, this would suggest that the stimulus program (with an overall cost of $814 billion) worked only to generate temporary jobs at a cost of over $400,000 per worker. Even if the stimulus had in fact generated this level of employment as a durable outcome, it would still have been an extremely expensive way to generate employment.

In other words, on the advice —nay, the insistence!— of the President and (Social) Democratic leadership, we borrowed and blew over $800 billion dollars… for nothing! Well, except for unused airports, frozen fish sperm, and coke for monkeys, among other things.

Actually, it was less than nothing, for the study shows how assistance to state Medicaid programs actually cost jobs:

Interestingly, federal assistance to state Medicaid programs appears to have decreased local and state government employment. One possibility is that requirements to maintain full Medicaid benefits in order to receive federal aid proved sufficiently expensive that state governments pushed though additional rounds of layoffs in non-health related areas.

Oh, well done, you geniuses. Go ahead, pat yourselves on the back. Trusted by the voters to heal a sick economy, you acted like drunken sailors in a brothel on payday and actually made it worse. And now we’re stuck with your hangover. High fives and group hugs all around!!

It’s no wonder the voters took you to the woodshed last month. It is a wonder they didn’t have you shot.

Via Gay Patriot and Hot Air.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Stimulating Los Angeles: Porkulus’ cost per job

September 18, 2010

It’s already an old story with the 2009 “stimulus package,” but this report on the number of jobs created here in Los Angeles by Porkulus and what they each cost is just appalling:

More than a year after Congress approved $800 billion in stimulus funds, the Los Angeles city controller has released a 40-page report on how the city spent its share, and the results are not living up to expectations.

“I’m disappointed that we’ve only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million,” said Wendy Greuel, the city’s controller. “With our local unemployment rate over 12 percent we need to do a better job cutting red tape and putting Angelenos back to work.”

According to the audit, the Los Angeles Department of Public Works spent $70 million in stimulus funds — in return, it created seven private sector jobs and saved seven workers from layoffs. Taxpayer cost per job: $1.5 million.

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation created even fewer jobs per dollar, spending $40 million but netting just nine jobs. Taxpayer cost per job: $4.4 million.

They’d have earned a better return on their investment (with our money) by going to Vegas and betting it all at the roulette wheel.

Heckuva job, Mr. President.

(And, hey, wasn’t Sheriff Joe supposed to keep watch to make sure the money wasn’t wasted? I’d swear I remember something about that… )

via The Flash Report


Don’t ever complain to me about the money spent on Iraq, again

September 1, 2010

For years –years!– under George W. Bush, the Democrats and their Leftist allies cried rivers of crocodile tears over the money being spent to first liberate, then stabilize that land. They claimed so often and so loudly to be worried about the debts incurred and the deficits run, that they convinced the electorate that they would actually be better stewards of the public’s money, and partly for that were given control of Congress in 2006.

Well, have a look at this:

In less than two years, the Democrats have made spending on the war in Iraq look like pocket change:

As President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009.

According to CBO numbers in its Budget and Economic Outlook published this month, the cost of Operation Iraqi Freedom was $709 billion for military and related activities, including training of Iraqi forces and diplomatic operations.

The projected cost of the stimulus, which passed in February 2009, and is expected to have a shelf life of two years, was $862 billion.

The U.S. deficit for fiscal year 2010 is expected to be $1.3 trillion, according to CBO. That compares to a 2007 deficit of $160.7 billion and a 2008 deficit of $458.6 billion, according to data provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.

In 2007 and 2008, the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product was 1.2 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively.

That’s $709 billion spread over seven years, compared to $862 billion in one-third the time.

In return for our money*, in Iraq we overthrew a brutal, murderous dictator and helped establish what has a good chance to become the first stable Arab democracy ever in the heart of the Middle East, a nation that could, with luck, patience, and skill, become a strong ally against terrorism and the plans of the religious fascists in Tehran. We also crushed al Qaeda in Iraq, forcing it to waste lives and resources there, and exposing its brutality for all the Arab world to see.

In return for the stimulus package, we got… unemployment higher than promised and that may turn structural, a feeble economic “recovery” that threatens to go into another recession, mind-boggling deficits and debt to foreign powers, and, by admission from the President’s own economic adviser, a failure.

You tell me which money was better spent.

And I don’t ever again want to hear a (Social) Democrat complain about the costs of “Bush’s war,” or about fiscal responsibility in general.

*(No, I am not discounting or monetizing the lives lost in Iraq. Any casualties in war are tragedies, however necessary. But this discussion is strictly about the money spent and the Democrats’ rank hypocrisy when they posed as champions of fiscal responsibility.)

via Fausta.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Real or fake? Spot the stimulus project!

August 14, 2010

The Rebel Economist returns to YouTube with a video in which she asks passersby if the projects she describes really received taxpayer money under the Stimulus bill:

Aren’t you glad we borrowed $787 billion for these?  Doh


Your stimulus dollars at work

August 10, 2010

Sean Mahoney is running for Congress from New Hampshire’s 1st district and has a question for incumbent Carole Shea Porter (D-Gimme Your Money): Just what did we get for all the debt incurred with the $787 billion stimulus package your party passed? To provide an example from their own district, Mahoney tells the tale of New Hampshire’s own bridge to nowhere:

Let’s emphasize a couple of points (just in case YouTube is having troubles, again): the bridge is not a bridge – it’s more of a pier, stopping in the middle of the river. $150,000 of our tax dollars were paid to resurface a “bridge” no one uses; the real bridge is 100′ further down the river. (Visit Big Government for photos.) Meanwhile, about a third of New Hampshire’s real bridges are in need of real repair.

Now, aren’t you happy we borrowed all that money from China so that Carole Shea Porter could get New Hampshire its own bridge to nowhere?

If you are, how about making a donation – to Sean Mahoney?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)