Member Rara Avis
That's why some states refused stimulus money. They knew the bind it would put them in when the free dollars stopped coming.
Really? Isn't that about like refusing to go to work because no one will guarantee you a job for the rest of your life? Why take a job that might not last forever, after all?
I prefer to think that some states refuse Federal money because they don't like the inevitable conditions that are tied to the money. The Feds, for example, can't Constitutionally regulate traffic laws; they can and have, however, tied a 55 mph speed limit to Federal funding of roads. State Rights haven't just been eroded, they've been bought on the open market. That at least a few states aren't selling is good news.
I'd never considered you an advocate of "Do something, even if it's wrong", Ron
Define "wrong," Mike.
If you see a guy laying face down in a deep mud puddle, there's not a whole lot of things you can for him that would be wrong. There might be some things I'd like to see more than others, but I'm not really going to fault you for saving his life.
The one thing you don't want to do, of course, is stand there for fifteen minutes thinking about what you should do.
I don't find it hard at all. It can all be measured by one thing....unemployment.
I have two words for you, Mike: Lagging indicator. Measuring the success or failure of an economic policy by unemployment figures is a bit like a night out with the boys. Just because you're not currently standing at the urinal, doesn't mean you necessarily have to still be thirsty? Your trips to the bathroom are a lagging indictor of how much you drank. The falling down parts are even more of a lagging indicator.
Contractors kept or created 30,000 jobs because of stimulus
Let's not tell just part of the story, Mike.
That 30K number represents the results of only 2 percent of reporting and that only for government construction contracts. Two percent obviously isn't going to represent a valid cross section, so a comparison between Rhode Island and Colorado is probably a little premature. The Administration would like us to do the math (30,383 jobs divided by 2.03 percent) and predict a job savings of 1,494,463 -- but personally I think that prediction would also be premature. We don't have enough data yet to do more than hope.
The more important point to keep in mind is that this report targets only direct jobs. That construction worker whose salary came out of government coffers worked only about forty hours a week. The rest of the time, he was probably out spending money that kept several other people working to service his needs. The single mom working lunches at his local dinner is every bit as much a recipient of Federal money as the construction worker. But she doesn't get counted in this report. And the landlord she pays with her tips? He doesn't get counted, either.
BTW, threadbear -- the roads and high rises being built by stimulus dollars hardly qualify as nothing being produced. It's called infrastructure for good reason? If you really want to see no financial value added to the market, you might want to explore what happens without transportation. It ain't pretty.
In my opinion, the success or failure of Federal stimulus can only be measured by consumer confidence. Not unemployment, which notoriously lags economic realities. But if you really insist on looking at unemployment numbers, please, let's look at the full picture instead of just a sliver of it. Unemployment ain't great. Even that, however, is at least headed in the right direction.