NP Rank:
Stimulus jobs - another Clunker?
In typical bureaucratic fashion, President Obama's economic recovery plan is showing signs of being another clunker. Government reports seem out of line with reality. The massive bureaucracy of government, once again shows how not to do things.
A report Thursday from the Associated Press related to stimulus spending for businesses, is excerpted here:
An early progress report on President Barack Obama's economic recovery plan overstates by thousands the number of jobs created or saved through the stimulus program, a mistake that White House officials promise will be corrected in future reports.
The government's first accounting of jobs tied to the $787 billion stimulus program claimed more than 30,000 positions paid for with recovery money. But that figure is overstated by least 5,000 jobs, according to an Associated Press review of a sample of stimulus contracts.
The AP review found some counts were more than 10 times as high as the actual number of jobs; some jobs credited to the stimulus program were counted two and sometimes more than four times; and other jobs were credited to stimulus spending when none was produced.
The data partially reviewed by the AP for errors included all the data presently available, representing all known federal contracts awarded to businesses under the stimulus program.
The AP's review was not an exhaustive accounting of all 9,000 contracts, but homed in on the most obvious cases where there were indications of duplications or misinterpretations. Here are some of the findings:- Colorado-based Teletech Government Solutions on a $28.3 million contract, reported creating 4,231 jobs, although 3,000 of those workers were paid for five weeks or less.
- The Toledo, Ohio-based Koring Group received two FCC contracts, again for call centers. It reported hiring 26 people for each contract, or a total of 52 jobs, but cited the same workers for both.. The jobs only lasted about two months.
The AP's review identified nearly 600 contracts claiming stimulus money for more than 2,700 jobs that appear to have similar duplicated counts.
- Barbara Moore, of the Child Care Association of Brevard County in Cocoa, Fla., reported that the $98,669 she received in stimulus money saved 129 jobs at her center, though the cash was used to give her 129 employees a 3.9 percent cost-of-living raise. She said she needed to boost their salaries because some workers had left "because we had not been able to give them a raise in four years."
- Officials at East Central Technical College in Douglas, Ga., said they now know they shouldn't have claimed 280 stimulus jobs linked to more than $200,000 to buy trucks and trailers for commercial driving instruction, and a modular classroom and bathroom for a health education program. The 280 were not jobs, but the number of students who would benefit.
- The San Joaquin, Calif., Regional Rail Commission reported creating or saving 125 jobs as part of a project to lay railroad track. Because the project drew from two pools of money, the commission reported the jobs twice, bringing the total to 250 on the report. (that number has since been revised to 74)
On Friday, ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper wrote:
Posting its results late this afternoon at Recovery.gov, the White House claimed 640,329 jobs have been created or saved because of the $159 billion in stimulus funds allocated as of Sept. 30.
Officials acknowledged the numbers were not exact, saying that states and localities that reported the numbers have made mistakes.
Ed DeSeve, senior advisor to the president for Recovery Act implementation, said he'd been "scrubbing" the job estimates so much since they came it at the beginning of the month that he now has "dishpan hands and my fingers are worn to the nub."
The White House argues that the actual job number is actually larger than 640,000 - closer to 1 million jobs when one factors in stimulus jobs added in October and, more importantly, jobs created indirectly, such as "the waitress who's still on the job," Vice President Biden said today.
So let's see. Assuming their number is right -- 160 billion divided by 1 million. Does that mean the stimulus costs taxpayers $160,000 per job?
Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic advisor to the vice president, called that "calculator abuse."
He said the cost per job was actually $92,000 -- but acknowledged that estimate is for the whole stimulus package as of the end of 2010.
From the government website, I get the $158,705,328,811 allocated. If ABC is using those numbers, with the ONE MILLION job figure used by the White House, then they are correct. That does work out to $160,000 per job.
However, using the 640,329 jobs created or saved, as shown on their website, and abusing my calculator rather severly, the cost is $247,000.00 per job.
Assuming that the earlier AP story is correct - and the Administration seems to agree that it is, then the real cost per job may be much higher.
Cash for Clunkers = $24,000.00 government cost per car sale.
Stimulus Package = $ 165,000.00 - 250,000.000 per job?
Again, from the government website, the cost per capita, for the stimulus package is $35,031.00 . That is the cost is for every man, woman, and child in this country.
Not being a politician or government bureaucrat, I have to ask.
Why?
NowPublic on Facebook
Crowd Power
-
Hugh Askew
Omaha, Nebraska, United States
Recommendations (34)
-
Rory Cripps
New Port Richey, Florida, United States -
Barry ORegan
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada -
LCoastMom
On a beach, in Sunny, California,
-
PIM of SPAIN
San Pedro de A, Malaga, Spain -
Uwe Paschen
Narita, Chiba, Japan -
Susan Marie Kovalinsky
Ledgewood, New Jersey, United States -
Mritunjay
Mumbai, Maharashtra, India -
Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke
Redwater, Alberta, Canada




Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (8)
at 10:56 on November 1st, 2009
Who knows what goes on in the minds of Obama-rama-dali-lama followers. Perhaps elementary math is in order?
at 11:16 on November 1st, 2009
Hugh: Good story! Cash for clunkers and the $8000 first time home buyers stimulus may have helped and according to the WSJ they boosted the GDP. But this jobs saved and created spiel, coming from the Obama Administration, is simply preposterous and is not at all helpful to the American people--or the Obama Administration for that matter . . . .
at 12:19 on November 1st, 2009
Certainly any money put in the economy is going to help make up for all the money destroyed, or pulled out of, the economy.
Question is, how much are we spending to create that "help"?
$160,000.00 to 250,000.00 per job? Are we putting politicians to work, or teachers?
at 14:22 on November 1st, 2009
I can see how your calculator worked overtime, I have a headache. Need some stimulus.
at 14:33 on November 1st, 2009
The truth of Bailouts is visible from the CIT group filing Chapter 11 today. :(
at 15:35 on November 1st, 2009
Let not get confused here, keeping jobs was not the really a stimulus it was a bailout of a different sort. Placing money in the banks and insuring bank accounts was the stimulus. The excuse for keeping jobs was a political ploy that the government is trying to keep unemployment down and people in jobs. Those kept employed buying power is just like a rain drop on an elephants back.
Governments always dabble when economies recess, most of the time the things they do are token (oh look we are getting involved finding and providing solutions).
The only real value of the stimulus was to speed up the confidence of the investors of whom sold stocks and shares and stopped investing and lending. Investment is the total answer to a recessions recovery money needs to go back into the system after panic takes it out.
New jobs can only be created after a recovery and that is the reality.
at 16:09 on November 1st, 2009
"Let not get confused here, keeping jobs was not the really a stimulus it was a bailout of a different sort. Placing money in the banks and insuring bank accounts was the stimulus."
Think you may be wrong on that Babel-Fish.
The bank accounts are covered by the FDIC - that program has been in operation for decades, and is not a part of any new government program.
TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) was set up last fall by then President Bush to bail out failing financial institutes. It seems to have worked well as a source of money for large banks to lend to the Fed, for a profit, of course.
This 'stimulus' article looks at the Obama/Pelosi/Reid clunker passed last spring. Known variously as the "Recovery Act", or "Porkulus", depending on your view of it's content and intent. Its estimated cost is $787 billion ($ 787,000,000,000.00).
at 09:12 on November 2nd, 2009
However from which angle it is reviewed it still is a scam as described before.
To answer Rory and all others in doubt about the GDP figures recently released: The published growth rate 3.5%is a lie, and I'll explain that as follow:
The government released GDP figures showing rosy 3.5% growth in the third quarter. But don’t be fooled: the books were cooked. This time by the cash for clunkers boondoggle, the first time home buyers tax credit, and other forms of worthless stimulus.
According to The Wall Street Journal, “fully 2.2 percentage points of the third quarter's 3.5% growth figure related to vehicle purchases and residential construction, both juiced by government support. Federal spending added 0.6%.”
The Bureau of Economic Analysis says car sales shot up 157.6% quarter on quarter. That means cash for clunkers accounted for 1.66% of total GDP.
So subtract fake demand (1.66%) from the official GDP figure (3.5%), and you’re left with 1.84% GDP growth. Not so great after all…
And if you take away other forms of stimulus, the GDP picture appears even darker. According to Gluskin Sheff’s David Rosenberg, GDP would have been flat or negative sans stimulus.
One may ask himself what the hell is government doing? Which is a very good question too!