scottsoperson
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2009
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 11
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
yap, the nonpartisan congressional budget office says obama underestimated the numbers created or saved.
So do me and everyone a favor..... STFU about the stimulus.
You obviously have nothing constructive to say.
Dilemma time, on the one hand we have something form (Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) official maintaining it's virtually impossible to glean such an estimate of the true impact of the stimulus.") from " earlier this year".
On the other hand we have a report from the CBO, that is from this week(current); now who to believe?
Myself, I will have to stick with the CBO report and relegate" earlier this year"to ancient history as for as economic reports go. :2wave:
Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output as of September 2009
---------
Limitations of Recipients’ Estimates
Recipients report that about 640,000 jobs were created or retained with ARRA funding through September 2009. However, such reports do not provide a comprehensive estimate of the law’s impact on employment in the United States. That impact may be higher or lower than the reported number for several reasons (in addition to any issues about the quality of the data in the reports). First, it is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package.
-------------
CBO has also examined incoming data on output and employment during the period since ARRA’s enactment. However, those data are not as helpful in determining ARRA’s economic effects as might be supposed, because isolating the effects would require knowing what path the economy would have taken in the absence of the law. Because that path cannot be observed, the new data add only limited information about ARRA’s impact. Economic output and employment in the spring and summer of 2009 were lower than CBO had projected at the beginning of the year.
On “Jobs Created or Saved” and the CBO
By Joseph Lawler on 12.1.09
Yesterday the CBO released, as mandated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, the stimulus bill), an analysis commenting on the reports filed by recipients of stimulus funds. I have argued in the past that interpretation of such analyses is difficult, and that the Obama administration's public interpretations have not demonstrated a corresponding level of exactitude. Now I see that the same left-of-center economists who dismissed my previous argument are presenting yesterday's CBO report as confirmation of their beliefs that the stimulus saved or created about 1 million jobs and that the administration is free to advertise "created or saved" numbers as if they could point to each specific job.
Nevertheless, I take yesterday's CBO report as affirmation both that 1) the number of jobs created by the stimulus cannot be determined without making judgment calls about the underlying economic model and that 2) the administration is on shaky ground when it claims to have evidence of hundreds of thousands of jobs created or saved.
--------
Here's how the CBO comes up with the employment numbers. Instead of trying to count the reported jobs and extrapolate from those numbers, they look at the total amounts spent by the government so far, and then estimate the effects of those expenditures using evidence from similar policies in the past and sophisticated macroeconomic models.
One key assumption in the stimulus’s formulation is that these government expenditures have a multiplier effect -- that they increase consumption and output both directly and indirectly. That means that each dollar the government spends or gives back as a tax cut not only raises the consumption of the worker employed using that dollar or the recipient of the tax rebate, but also raises the consumption of others as the recipients spend their extra money.
-----
The important thing is to note that the assumptions from these sources regarding multipliers and the effects of stimulus on employment and GDP have not changed since the CBO's February forecast (pdf) of the effects of the stimulus. The range of predictions generated using these models was a dismal failure: the low estimate of employment in the fourth quarter of 2009 without the stimulus was 142.4 million, and the baseline was 141.6 million. The latest BLS report put employment well below either of these numbers, at 138.2 million.
If the models underlying these assumptions could yield an initial prediction that was so far off the mark, why should we unquestioningly use the exact same models for the key assumptions in re-creating the counterfactual baseline, as CBO has done?
---------
we need a tax hike on the rich to pay for all the disabled vets.
No we don't....We need to stop spending like drunken Liberals.
so strucky doesn't want to help the disabled vets. supporting the troops.
what should we stop spending on?
And scottoperson appears to be a troll.
Jeez I dont know.....TARP,Stimulus,the Bush medicaid prescription plan....etc,etc,etc.
yes i am.
hoover would have been against tarp.
I know you are,only a troll would tell a current member of the military that he doesn't want to support disabled vets and support the troops.
hoover would have been against tarp.
so you say.
so you support a tax hike
to give the disabled vets decent service via the va?
A congressional report released last month warned that rising caseloads of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are overwhelming vet centers, undermining the quality and timeliness of care.
The number of veterans treated at vet centers for post-traumatic stress disorder more than doubled in a recent nine-month period, according to the report. Also, many vet centers responded to the rising workload by limiting services or establishing waiting lists.
Hoover's stance on the economy was based largely on volunteerism. From before his entry to the presidency, he was a proponent of the concept that public-private cooperation was the way to achieve high long-term growth.
from your link.
Hoover's stance on the economy was based largely on volunteerism. From before his entry to the presidency, he was a proponent of the concept that public-private cooperation was the way to achieve high long-term growth.
from your link.