Thread: CBO: Obama's stimulus cost $4.1 million per job

Yes. That's right folks.

The "Choom Gang" leader's stimulus, so heralded by the loony left, cost the American taxpayer $4.1 million per job.

CBO: Obama stimulus may have cost as much as $4.1 million a job

Remind us again the consequences if Bushs' TARP & Reinvestment Act wasn't implemented ?

I don't care if it was $41 million per job. Each one is another Democrat voting person who looks to the labor of those in the private sector to support them. The more govt jobs there are then the closer we are to total rule by the govt and freedom will simply be a word in the dictionary.

Originally Posted by MolonLabe2009

Yes. That's right folks.

The "Choom Gang" leader's stimulus, so heralded by the loony left, cost the American taxpayer $4.1 million per job.

CBO: Obama stimulus may have cost as much as $4.1 million a job

The level of gullibility exhibited in this forum just astounds me.

Originally Posted by exotix

Remind us again the consequences if Bushs' TARP & Reinvestment Act wasn't implemented ?

The Tarp and stimulus had two different aims, and the OP is about how the stimulus cost around $4.1 million per job it created. What it is showing is that government spending is ineffective and many times a waste of resources. Plowing resources into certain areas of the economy creates bubbles, like the housing one.

Now lets think about this at a cost of $831 billion the stimulus, if you believe it was necessary, could have been used much more efficiently. There around 310 million citizens in the country and the government could have sent checks to every single one of them, man, women and child, worth about $2,700.
According to the census there are about 235 million people age 18 and over in the US. If the government sent them all checks it would have been about $3,550 each.
Either of these would have been much better ways to stimulate the economy as it would have gotten the money into the system quickly and it would have been into areas each person finds important so a better allocation of resources. Of course not allowing the politicians to dole it out mean that they can't use the money to repay friends and businesses that helped them get elected.

Now why don't you remind us why TARP and the stimulus were necessary, please use some good old fashioned analysis, not just one economist saying if we don't do this the world will implode, because you know I could find an economist who says the exact opposite.

Originally Posted by Crafty

The Tarp and stimulus had two different aims, and the OP is about how the stimulus cost around $4.1 million per job it created. What it is showing is that government spending is ineffective and many times a waste of resources. Plowing resources into certain areas of the economy creates bubbles, like the housing one.

What that is showing is how gullible the author of the OP is as well as anyone else who uncritically just believes this nonsense.

Originally Posted by Iriemon

The level of gullibility exhibited in this forum just astounds me.

Yes, I know that not every single penny of the stimulus went toward "creating jobs" there were tax cuts and other bs in it that doesn't specifically have the aim of direct job creation. Using the full $4.1 million is a bit disingenuous I agree. But you have to admit the stimulus has not been very effective at what its stated goal was to be. You don't stimulate an economy by letting politicians decide where to throw big gobs of money, it creates artificial markets that exist as long as the money flows and then disappear when it dries up. Many times the money does nothing but flow into the pockets of political contributors and big businesses with close ties to politicians.

I don't understand how democrats can continue to rail against big corporations controlling government through buying off politicians and then support bills like this that do nothing but strengthen that bond. I guess their hearts are in the right places and they want to believe it will do more good then harm. I find it to be a tad naive.

Originally Posted by MolonLabe2009

Yes. That's right folks.

The "Choom Gang" leader's stimulus, so heralded by the loony left, cost the American taxpayer $4.1 million per job.

CBO: Obama stimulus may have cost as much as $4.1 million a job

how many job were created creating that one job?

Originally Posted by Crafty

The Tarp and stimulus had two different aims, and the OP is about how the stimulus cost around $4.1 million per job it created. What it is showing is that government spending is ineffective and many times a waste of resources. Plowing resources into certain areas of the economy creates bubbles, like the housing one.

Now lets think about this at a cost of $831 billion the stimulus, if you believe it was necessary, could have been used much more efficiently. There around 310 million citizens in the country and the government could have sent checks to every single one of them, man, women and child, worth about $2,700.
According to the census there are about 235 million people age 18 and over in the US. If the government sent them all checks it would have been about $3,550 each.
Either of these would have been much better ways to stimulate the economy as it would have gotten the money into the system quickly and it would have been into areas each person finds important so a better allocation of resources. Of course not allowing the politicians to dole it out mean that they can't use the money to repay friends and businesses that helped them get elected.

Now why don't you remind us why TARP and the stimulus were necessary, please use some good old fashioned analysis, not just one economist saying if we don't do this the world will implode, because you know I could find an economist who says the exact opposite.

You have a point ... remind us again of the yet another record number of filibusters & obstructions by conservatives to the Stimulus ... and to this day ... after the Banks got their bailouts ?

Originally Posted by Crafty

Yes, I know that not every single penny of the stimulus went toward "creating jobs" there were tax cuts and other bs in it that doesn't specifically have the aim of direct job creation. Using the full $4.1 million is a bit disingenuous I agree.

How would it be "ingenuous" to use $4.1 million at all? Did you even read the article before blindly accepting that figure as true? If so, didn't you pick up the obvious distortion they used?

But you have to admit the stimulus has not been very effective at what its stated goal was to be. You don't stimulate an economy by letting politicians decide where to throw big gobs of money, it creates artificial markets that exist as long as the money flows and then disappear when it dries up. Many times the money does nothing but flow into the pockets of political contributors and big businesses with close ties to politicians.

Why would anyone admit that? The stimulus, even given almost half of it was wasted on tax cuts, created millions of jobs. More importantly, it injected some confidence into the economy at a time the economy was in freefall and panic.

I don't understand how democrats can continue to rail against big corporations controlling government through buying off politicians and then support bills like this that do nothing but strengthen that bond. I guess their hearts are in the right places and they want to believe it will do more good then harm. I find it to be a tad naive.

I'm not aware that the stimulus money went disproporationately to political supporters.