CBO: Stimulus bill created up to 2.1 million jobs

[Stuart G]

Source: MSNBC

CBO: Stimulis Bill Created 2.l million jobs.
updated 37 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The massive stimulus package passed last year to blunt the impact of the worst U.S. recession in 70 years created up to 2.1 million jobs in the last three months of 2009, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday.

The package boosted the economy by up to 3.5 percent and lowered the unemployment rate by up to 2.1 percent during that period, CBO said.


The report comes as President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats are pushing further measures to bring down the 9.7 percent unemployment rate before the November congressional elections




Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35543310/ns/business-economy_at_a_crossroads/

[pinto]

1. This data and the hypocrisy of the (R) on the Recovery Act funds are a good 1-2 punch for us.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7770713

:kick:

[Stuart G]

2. Let see how the Republicans respond to this. nt

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mithreal]

4. Stop that bullshit.

Now that they have the means to do so, the moderators are doing their part by tightening civility enforcement a bit. Some behaviors that have been common in the past are now more likely to get your post deleted. One such behavior is the use of unflattering names to refer to groups of DUers. This has had a particularly corrosive effect on discussions of Present Obama's legislative agenda, where it has become common to refer to people as "Obama apologists," "Obama haters," and the like. This type of name-calling is both inflammatory and unnecessary. Instead, use more respectful and specific phrasing like "Obama's critics" or "Obama's defenders" (Or better yet, "critics of President Obama's ___________ proposal" or "supporters of President Obama's ___________ proposal").

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Skinner/347

[Raston]

11. The real bullshit is when political correctness impedes honesty

So we can't talk about:

www.ihateobama.com
www.zazzle.com/i+hate+obama+gifts
www.myspace.com/ihateobama

People who are Obama haters.. um,.. hate Obama. I appreciate that the above is written into DU doctrine, but is this whole site not about changing the system? Maybe the moderators need to think about this a little harder.

I'm a bush-hater; I don't 'dislike bush' or 'sincerely think that bush is an unpleasant person', I hate him and everyone who elected him during the second election. Feel free to delete this post in response, but I assure you such behavior is more about being politically correct and its resulting impact on the truth.


- Raston

"If you're not angry, you're not paying attention."

[Mithreal]

15. No offense, but are you being purposefully obtuse?

The policy is about calling people to the left of Obama and who are critics, but who are still supporters, calling them "Obama haters."

[Raston]

18. Obtuse? Could I get any more direct?

You replied to the previous post saying "stop the bullshit", and I'm telling you that your sensitivity is both inappropriate and simplistic. I never said you had to agree with me.



- Raston

"If you're not angry, you're not paying attention."

[Mithreal]

19. Understood. With regards to your angle, I agree we shouldn't ignore the Regressive haters.

That is separate and distinguishable.

[JNelson6563]

50. What we have here is a failure to communicate

Seeing that Raston only has 29 posts I have to believe he/she was unfamiliar with the that whole issue here and is probably not well acquainted with the different factions here and the meaning those terms have here.

Of course, they know now. :-)

Julie

[Mithreal]

56. Very likely. And I misread and misunderstand often enough.

[Oregone]

14. Was this even Obama's bill?

I thought it was the backwards bastard child of the Senate & House

[Mithreal]

16. Everything that works, the leader of the party gets to claim some credit

[Mithreal]

5. Good start. How many economists thought this was ever enough?

[progressoid]

6. The CBO?

Isn't that the group that Repubs always quote as non-partisan? :eyes:

[Stuart G]

7. I have looked around at a few spots...this story isn't even in top news..

It is business news only..

The main Republican talking point has been proved to be a lie, and it isn't even top news. Futhermore the fact that this jobs bill created that many jobs should also be important...Fuck the main stream media..

Maybe as the day goes on this will become very important..Let's see.

[Oregone]

8. Stimulus is not going to be zero-sum...

So this shouldn't be surprising. The real question: how many jobs would of been created if you doubled the stimulus and took out all the tax cuts. :)

[Mithreal]

9. Right. Who knew if we spent money to create jobs, that jobs would be created.

Sure looks like a headline to me.

[Oregone]

12. Its a headline because people denied it and convinced themselves otherwise

Of course, there was a net job loss during this time, which helped reinforce this misunderstanding. The stimulus did fail to keep demand/production levels at baseline (so it did fail in some regard if this was its intention as it should of been). If you look at the early work on the stimulus, it wasn't meant to be injected into an economy undergoing a recession as severe as the US went through. They "guessed" the numbers wrong (though many economists had a much clearer picture).

But at the end of the day, if the Stimulus was a mere $70,000 to fix potholes in a road, it would of resulted in positive job creation no matter what. That doesn't mean it would of fixed the economy though, or appropriately addressed the economic recession. Those are a whole other set of questions that, thanks to the idiotic GOP, never get asked.

Sometimes, I swear, these parties help each other by putting out easily refutable premises that hide the bigger picture.

[Mithreal]

17. Agreed

[Abq_Sarah]

10. Full report here:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11044/02-23-ARRA.pdf

Director's comments: http://cboblog.cbo.gov/

[flyarm]

21. this is what the CBO says.........big discrepancy in the numbers !

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/

CBO report says..


snip:

CBO’s Estimates of ARRA’s Impact on Employment and Economic Output

Looking at recorded spending to date as well as estimates of the other effects of ARRA on spending and revenues, CBO has estimated the law’s impact on employment and economic output using evidence about how previous similar policies have affected the economy and various mathematical models that represent the workings of the economy. On that basis, CBO estimates that in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2009, ARRA added between 1.0 million and 2.1 million to the number of workers employed in the United States, and it increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by between 1.4 million and 3.0 million. Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers.

CBO also estimates that real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) was 1.5 percent to 3.5 percent higher in the fourth quarter than would have been the case in the absence of ARRA.

Data on actual output and employment during the period since ARRA’s enactment 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 2009 were lower than CBO had projected at the time of enactment. But in CBO’s judgment, that outcome reflects greater-than-projected weakness in the underlying economy rather than lower-than-expected effects of ARRA.

Limitations of Recipients’ Estimates

CBO’s estimates differ substantially from the reports filed by recipients of ARRA funding. Those recipients reported that ARRA funded nearly 600,000 fulltime-equivalent (FTE) jobs during the fourth quarter of 2009. Such reports, however, 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):

Some of the reported jobs might have existed in the absence of the stimulus package, with employees working on the same activities or other activities.
The reports filed by recipients measure only the jobs created by employers who received ARRA funding directly or by their immediate subcontractors (so-called primary and secondary recipients), not by lower-level subcontractors.
The reports do not attempt to measure the number of jobs that may have been created or retained indirectly as greater income for recipients and their employees boosted demand for products and services.
The recipients’ reports cover only certain appropriations made in ARRA, which encompass about one-fifth of the total amount spent by the government or conveyed through tax reductions in ARRA during the fourth quarter; the reports do not measure the effects of other provisions of the stimulus package, such as tax cuts and transfer payments (including unemployment insurance payments) to individuals.
Consequently, estimating the law’s overall effects on employment requires a more comprehensive analysis than the recipients’ reports provide.

[Mithreal]

26. Thanks for posting that.

[FailureToCommunicate]

13. But, but, new Senator Centerfold said stimulus gave us "zero jobs, not one"...

[flyarm]

20. 4 million Jobs have been lost since Obama took office.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-12-03-obama-jobs_N.htm
Obama puts renewed focus on job creation

By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY
12/4/2009

WASHINGTON — Even before Barack Obama took the oath of office, his economic advisers projected that without hundreds of billions of dollars in government spending, the U.S. economy could lose another 3 million to 4 million jobs on top of the 3.1 million lost in 2008.
It turns out they were optimistic. Even with the $787 billion stimulus package that Obama signed in February, more than 4 million jobs have been lost in 2009, the worst year for job losses since World War II. The jobless rate that advisers projected would peak at 8% has topped 10%.

snip:
"Though the job losses we were experiencing earlier this year have slowed dramatically, we're still not creating enough new jobs each month to make up for the ones we're losing," Obama said last week. "For families and communities across the country, this recession will not end until we completely turn that tide."


**{b]see chart at link..Under Obama presidency we have lost the most number of jobs compared to Eisenhower,JFK,Johnson,Nixon,Ford,Carter,Reagan,GHBush,Clinton and GWBush{/b]
The closest was Jimmy Carter. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics


Now I do not blame him..I just think he has done a horse shit job creating jobs and I have a huge beef with him putting the fox in the chicken coop with His Goldman Boys that he has given jobs to who fucked this nation and he put them back in charge to fix it?? bullshit ..they are still raping this nation..on the backs of the middle class and poor!

[truthisfreedom]

22. That does NOT tell the story. This chart tells the exact story of what's happened.

Look at the facts.

[Oregone]

43. That chart doesn't tell the rosey story you think it does

Thats like showing a list of speeds some guy is driving in his car as he heads away from his home. While he may alter his speed and slow down, he will never get closer to home until he actually puts the car in reverse. In totality, despite the trends and pretty colors corresponding to change in the admin, that graph just shows a whopping net job loss with no positive gains (besides Nov 2009 which has been wiped out)

[quaker bill]

49. True in a sense but not complete

The chart does not show that which is unknown, but altogether reasonable to suspect. There is no evidence that the car was about to slow down on its own. There is pretty solid evidence to believe that the bars would simply gotten longer and longer without intervention.

An economy composed of 330 million people does not turn on a dime. The trendline is in the right direction, and consistently so, with minor variation as would be expected on any sampling process. I think the graphic is quite impressive, and will only be more so in coming months as the bars point upward more consistently. In any trauma situation, the first thing you do is stop the bleeding, the graphic shows just exactly this.

[paulflorez]

62. More like a spaceship heading for the sun trying to stop and go in reverse.

If you were on a spaceship heading for the sun and it slowed down until it was close to stopping without being incinerated, wouldn't you think that's a big improvement?

If not, how would you feel if the spaceship wasn't slowing down or was actually speeding up?

And who would you blame, the guy who took the spaceship to that top speed, pushing it to the point where the spaceship actually started falling apart and the retrorockets would be ineffective, or the guy that took over, started the retrorockets to slow the damn thing down?

It took less time to reach a point of job creation than it did to reach the peak of job loss. I think that is a huge improvement.

[Oregone]

63. Or another example: bleeding a pig out

Eventually when the blood stops coming out, that pig will be in no better condition for a conversation than before, but rather, have no more blood left to give

In fact, there really is no way to pin the decelleration of layoffs on economic improvements, or simply upon the fact that businesses have adjusted to their new workforce & efficiency numbers (iow, there is no fat left to cut).

Id like to take the positive approach and assume the trends in losses have slowed due to improvements. But, in the context of the poster who is trying to reveal the entire picture with their little graph, what they think the graph is revealing really isn't the whole picture. The conditions are still in screwed mode and there is still suffering. More people suffer now--millions at that--than when Obama took office. So until that graph shows consistent positive growth, there is no reason for elation.


"It took less time to reach a point of job creation"

That point still has not been reached

[truthisfreedom]

23. LOOK AT THIS CHART PEOPLE!

[Mithreal]

24. That chart is cool, but I have a couple comments that would like to have responses.

1. People like myself saw Bush destroying America and the economy collapsing. After Obama was elected we actually felt confident enough to use some of our precious savings to begin our own little stimulus program. One example, we replaced our nearly 30 year old gas furnace with a 95% American Standard that we paid a little extra for choosing an all union company with a better service plan for $6700. We also started buying a lot of other things for the house because we wanted to stimulate the local economy and had been savers and practically scared to do anything but during the Bush years. Confidence is a big part of this recovery is what I am saying, but we ate into our savings significantly but tried to only buy high quality things that would last. What this chart means to me is a lot of people felt the confidence and hope.

2. What does the chart look like for other Presidential turnover years during recessions?

3. How much of this is due to stimulus?

4. The underlying causes, 30+ years of conservative economic policies, have not been addressed.

[Oregone]

25. Thats not really the point of celebration

It it Obama's responsibility to create area above the line that is equal or greater than the area below the line. The ebbing of the losses is but a step, but eventually net job creation needs to put Americans back to work again. Until that happens, there will be a lot of suffering (so I suggest, the sooner the better)

[flyarm]

27. Look at the chart in my link..that is what people feel and will see come election time!

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-12-03-obama-jobs_N.htm

Jobs Gained /lost for the first 10 months for presidents since Truman ( in millions)

Harry Truman -2.0
Dwight Eisenhower + 0.1
John Kennedy +.08
Lyndon Johnson +1.6
Richard Nixon +1.9
Gerald Ford -2.0
Jimmy Carter +3.3
Ronald Reagan +0.4
GH Bush +1.6
Bill Clinton +2.2
George W. Bush -1.3
Barack Obama -4.2

[Number23]

28. You know how you can tell this is pretty good news?

A) the low number of recs and this appears to even be getting unrecs and b) By the fact that the same tired names on this site that will trash EVERYTHING Obama (some of whom have already posted damn near ten times in this thread trying to discredit it) have decided that 2.1 million new jobs is not enough.

"WHY wasn't it 2.TWO million jobs??!" :eyes: Sweet Lord in Heaven....

Kicked and rec'd

[Oregone]

29. I really don't see any comments trashing Obama

Thats a confused method of determining good news

[Number23]

31. That's not even close to what I said.

I said the same tired names who can't run fast enough to trash Obama have posted NUMEROUS times in this thread hoping to discredit it.

[Mithreal]

34. Just name names.

[Number23]

35. lol Anyone reading the list of posters in this thread can see who it is easily enough

[Mithreal]

38. Sorry, I don't live with your worldview.

[Oregone]

39. I honestly cannot

But to regard one of your posts, 2+ million jobs is not enough and no one should be satisfied with that. Until the net job growth is greater than zero, there is suffering and more the government should do centrally to stimulate demand & production. At the time of the crafting of the stimulus, many notable economists were saying that the amounts and focus was not enough to offset the GDP withdraw and bring production back to baseline (or above). They proved to be correct, but now is the time to address this short coming and mend the economy (rather than just stop its gradual decline)

[Oregone]

36. "By the fact that the same tired names on this site that will trash EVERYTHING Obama"

:wtf:


Regardless, at the end of the day, its not really about Obama is it? Its about how people are affected by a government policy. People need to stop obsessing about a man and start focusing on policy

[Number23]

40. "People need to stop obsessing about a man and start focusing on policy"

I could NOT agree more and eagerly await that happening on this site. When someone burns calories trying to find fault with 2.1 million new jobs being created, it's obvious something other than policy is the issue.

Since you and Mithreal seem to be simply squatting in this thread and running some sort of bizarre (and mildly humorous) tag team on anyone who posts in it, I'll leave you both to it.

[Oregone]

41. I can only fault 2+ million jobs as not being enough when there was ample opportunity to create more

In an isolated context, 2.1 million jobs is purely joyous news. In the event where even more could have been created if the political will existed, and the country experienced a decline even greater than that, well, its nothing but a step in the right direction (which could have been too slow while human suffering persisted).

I'm not running any type of "tag team". That is absurd. But everyone needs to realized there is still an incredibly high jobless rate and suffering in the economy. Despite the created jobs, there is a net job loss. If anything, this needs to 1) prove to everyone that stimulus can create jobs and 2) encourage people to support more extensive stimulus on the way to a healthy economy.

Excuse me for attempting to take a reality based stance on this issue.

[Mithreal]

42. You made me laugh. Cheers to you for that.

[liberation]

48. If we are going to stop obsessing about things then...

... then I also propose we cut it out with all these appeals to victim status, goal posts in perennial motion, and subjective qualification on what and how can or can't be discussed. Because those items are really not that impressive from an intellectually honest point of view.


Without context 2 million jobs created is indeed a very positive piece of news. However, we also need to look at what those numbers mean in the overall status of our economy. Once we start seeing positive job creation, for sure we can start opening the bubbly. However, these news should be used by this admin to hammer the GOP and their obstructionism, instead they will be used by Rahm et al to squash any sort of dissent among the Dem ranks.

Also, if you notice... a lot of criticism of Obama is at a policy level, not a personal one. I find it hilarious that most of the defense of Obama has been done under a purely personal appeal while completely ignoring said pieces of policy that some of the critics on this site are pointing out over and over. Policies which are way too close to neo-liberal and moderate persuasions for some of us libs in this site. So I find the whole appeal to "focus on policy" deliciously hypocritical.

[Mithreal]

32. Who would unrec this?

How can anyone post on this without understanding that complexity of any issue often involves positive and negative. Please just tell people to not try and understand the full extent of any truth and that only positive angles are allowed. If you had anything to contribute to the discussion that involves countering whatever imagined negative spin you seem to see, I guess you would have given it.

Your perception matters, but is it really honest when it only acknowledges the light of a situation. I come here for open and honest discussion among fellow progressives and I am aware that some of what I think is offensive to those who are more fragile. I don't mean that as a slight. Your enthusiasm matters to our party especially given it is an election year. What are we to do, those who are looking for truth, not afraid to sound unreasonable, and wanting to engage debate? Go somewhere else?

[humbled_opinion]

30. I Think Everyone here is missing the point

and the angst in the electorate and the alignment of how the Repukes are going to run the 2010 Congressional elections and capture the anger of the teabaggers.

The main debates in the electorate right now are about DEBT and Defecit, sure everyone understands that the Banks royally screwed up by over leveraging on the housing market and most hate the fact that taxpayers were called upon to bail them out however, government spending is the key.

Repukes fully intend to remind the electorate that it was Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who took over CONGRESS in January 2007 and that a Democratic majority controlled CONGRESS and has been running the show since January 2007. Congress is the appropriator of funds it is the spender of the peoples money. Presidents can't do it. Look for charts that show increased federal spending all done by the Democrats. Look for campaign adds that will create a narrative of how much better off you were in the years before 2007.

Be warned that every time Obama said he inherited a defecit is going to be shown right next to Nancy Pelosi and Harry reid saying this is who left it to him.

be prepared because Democrats are about to inherit the blame for the Whole damn mess.

[Mithreal]

33. +1

[AlbertCat]

46. and capture the anger of the teabaggers.

The ironies are:

The Teabaggers are a small small group.

The only people who care whether they are angry or not are Congresscritters.

Everyone but Congress and the MSM doesn't care what Teabaggers think.

Voters will only be persuaded to vote against Dem Reps and Senators if they continue to capitulate to the whims of this tiny minority. Incumbents of both parties who continue to listen to the "we're all screwed" minority instead of the majority of Americans of all political persuasions will be in trouble. Those outrageous Town Hall riots were great spectacles, but make no mistake: it was Blue Dog Conserva- Dems and Joe Lieberman who messed the Health Care Bill all on their own. They would've done it with or without the circus of Teabaggers.

[humbled_opinion]

59. Yes,

I wanted to believe that without the Teabags and had we got 1 or 2 moderate Republicans that most of our Blue Dogs would have easily fallen in line and in fact passed a more comprehensive bill one that had the groundwork toward universal health care.

I just can't wrap my mind around how diverse the Democratic party really is that it actually has members that are so far to the right is scary but when you think about it in terms of what is left it means that all of the Repukes are fringe Rightwingers.

[bamacrat]

37. Liars!!!!!

I feel like we are about to see that scene from "Liar, Liar" where Jim Carrey is in court and he objects to something because it's really bad for his case.

Fletcher: Your honor, I object!
Judge: Why?
Fletcher: Because it's devastating to my case!
Judge: Overruled.
Fletcher: Good call!

Except the good call part won't happen.

[koshkoro]

44. Statistics are misleading

These stimulus numbers don't feel right. Perhaps 2.1 million jobs were created thanks to the stimulus, but how many jobs will actually be sustainable. With consumer confidence as low as it is, and employers still talking about layoffs, due to slow sales, the jury is still out on whether there has been any sustainable job creation at all.

[humbled_opinion]

45. Sustainable?

Ever increasing expectations and requirements put on the Democratic President, wait not only do you have to create jobs you have to make sure the ones you create are permanent jobs. I don't remember other Presidents having to meet such a jobs requirement matrix. Is this something new?

[Puzzler]

47. It doesn't matter how many jobs the stimulus created...

... the GOP and the rest of the wingnuts will deny the statistics (just read some of the comments below the article). They are the party of 100% opposition. And this means denying anything and everything that could possibly be construed as a success for Obama.

[warm regards]

51. "Up to..."

;)

[Turbineguy]

52. Yes, but

as every Wingnut can tell you, the CBO is a notorious liberal institution funded by Soros and ACORN.

[Bluebear]

53. *awesome* stats!

[grahamhgreen]

54. Ending NAFTA and GATT, etc. would create tens of millions of jobs. nt

[Mithreal]

57. We're not looking back or renegotiating the past.

And instead of tweaking or fixing that, the Obama admin is looking at adding more of these agreements.

Funny how we hear the idea we can go back and fix stuff later. Got the same argument today from a certain Senator's chief of staff. Trust us, we can fix it later.

[flyarm]

61. and " later " never comes.........eom

[usregimechange]

55. kick!

[usregimechange]

58. kick

[usregimechange]

60. kick

[DisgustedInMN]

64. Wonderful..

...only 15 million of us left to go. Hip hip Hooooooooooray. :sarcasm: