$278,000 per Stimulus job

[IDBillzFan]

link to actual report

See chart on page 5, for those of you who think this is all just a little right-wing partisan hackitude.

[....lybob]

See chart on page 5, for those of you who think this is all just a little right-wing partisan hackitude.

I want you to use the report to support your statement

trillion dollars were handed out, primarily to union idiots

or use the figures I provided in my previous link.

[Wacka]

 

My expectation about the level of unemployment (and I made a presentation about this) was that it would not reach the peak of the 1981-2 Reagan/volcker recession, which was 10.8%. My argument was that the 1981-2 recession was engineered by the FED through high interest rates in order to wring inflation out of the economy--monetary policy was tight and fiscal policy was loose. In this case, they (monetary and fiscal policies) used everything including the kitchen sink to prevent the global meltdown. Unemployment peaked at 10.1% in this one.

 

Here in CA it was and still is over 12%. If you take the real unemployment, its more like 18-20%.

[....lybob]

Here in CA it was and still is over 12%. If you take the real unemployment, its more like 18-20%.

 

you're right real employment is 18-20% but if you use that number you have to compare it to real unemployment at different times. California is taking a beating only Nevada is worse.

 

Unemployment Rates for States

Monthly Rankings

Seasonally Adjusted

May 2011p

Rank State Rate

1 NORTH DAKOTA 3.2

2 NEBRASKA 4.1

3 NEW HAMPSHIRE 4.8

3 SOUTH DAKOTA 4.8

5 OKLAHOMA 5.3

6 VERMONT 5.4

7 HAWAII 6.0

7 IOWA 6.0

7 VIRGINIA 6.0

7 WYOMING 6.0

11 KANSAS 6.6

11 MINNESOTA 6.6

13 MARYLAND 6.8

14 NEW MEXICO 6.9

15 MONTANA 7.3

15 UTAH 7.3

17 ALASKA 7.4

17 PENNSYLVANIA 7.4

17 WISCONSIN 7.4

20 MASSACHUSETTS 7.6

21 MAINE 7.7

22 ARKANSAS 7.8

23 NEW YORK 7.9

24 DELAWARE 8.0

24 TEXAS 8.0

26 INDIANA 8.2

26 LOUISIANA 8.2

28 OHIO 8.6

28 WEST VIRGINIA 8.6

30 COLORADO 8.7

31 ILLINOIS 8.9

31 MISSOURI 8.9

33 ARIZONA 9.1

33 CONNECTICUT 9.1

33 WASHINGTON 9.1

36 OREGON 9.3

37 IDAHO 9.4

37 NEW JERSEY 9.4

39 ALABAMA 9.6

40 NORTH CAROLINA 9.7

40 TENNESSEE 9.7

42 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 9.8

42 GEORGIA 9.8

42 KENTUCKY 9.8

45 SOUTH CAROLINA 10.0

46 MICHIGAN 10.3

46 MISSISSIPPI 10.3

48 FLORIDA 10.6

49 RHODE ISLAND 10.9

50 CALIFORNIA 11.7

51 NEVADA 12.1

[IDBillzFan]

Here is another painful article (this one from Forbes)breaking down the wastefulness of the stimulus bill.

 

Eisenach and Caves looked at three areas that received stimulus funds, in the form of loans and direct grants, to expand broadband access in Southwestern Montana, Northwestern Kansas, and Northeastern Minnesota. The median household income in these areas is between $40,100 and $50,900. The median home prices are between $94,400 and $189,000.

 

So how much did it cost per unserved household to get them broadband access? A whopping $349,234, or many multiples of household income, and significantly more than the cost of a home itself.

 

Sadly, it’s actually worse than that. Take the Montana project. The area is not in any meaningful sense unserved or even underserved. As many as seven broadband providers, including wireless, operate in the area. Only 1.5% of all households in the region had no wireline access. And if you include 3G wireless, there were only seven households in the Montana region that could be considered without access. So the cost of extending access in the Montana case comes to about $7 million for each additional household served.

 

How amazingly embarrassing this is going to get over the next 12 months.

[....lybob]

Here is another painful article (this one from Forbes)breaking down the wastefulness of the stimulus bill.

 

 

 

How amazingly embarrassing this is going to get over the next 12 months.

Eisenach and Caves looked at three areas that received stimulus funds, in the form of loans and direct grants, to expand broadband access in Southwestern Montana, Northwestern Kansas, and Northeastern Minnesota. The median household income in these areas is between $40,100 and $50,900. The median home prices are between $94,400 and $189,000.

 

So how much did it cost per unserved household to get them broadband access? A whopping $349,234, or many multiples of household income, and significantly more than the cost of a home itself.

 

Sadly, it’s actually worse than that. Take the Montana project. The area is not in any meaningful sense unserved or even underserved. As many as seven broadband providers, including wireless, operate in the area. Only 1.5% of all households in the region had no wireline access. And if you include 3G wireless, there were only seven households in the Montana region that could be considered without access. So the cost of extending access in the Montana case comes to about $7 million for each additional household served.

 

some people would say the large number of people who's access to broadband consisted of DSL with 42KB/sec data transfer rates , and a whole state with top data transfer rate in few places of 3Mbps being upgraded to 50-100Bbps were also served - but I guess to you and the writer broadband is broadband - but some people appreciate the upgrade

“With this technology, we will have rapid analysis; our tribal members will have access to state-of-the-art medical care and services; an x-ray or can be taken and read by a radiologist at a facility miles away,” says Tex Hall, the nation’s chairman. “Our providers will talk to physicians at clinics like Mayo in Rochester, Minnesota, about critical-care patients; our dialysis patients will have immediate access to nephrologists 200 miles away and we will be able to monitor a diabetic patient from their home. Importantly this will be state of the art, no slow upgrades, no fuzzy images; we will have real-time second-by-second network monitoring.”

[Magox]

Who is "we" and who was it that told this to "we"?

 

My perspective is that government deficits and stimulus helped stabilize and prevent this recession from becoming a depression. As I stated here in September 2008, we would find out if monetary and fiscal policies could prevent the US and global economies from melting down, and they did. Without those interventions, this would have been worse than the 1930s. Prior to the collapse in 1930, only the business sector was signficantly over-leveraged. In this crisis, households, businesses, and financial firms were all significantly over-leveraged. The FED bailed out the banking sector, and large federal deficits have helped create surpluses in the business sector. It's the household sector that continues to be a drag on the economy as it is still deleveraging.

 

Also, much of the federal stimulus has been offset by state and local government contractions.

 

My expectation about the level of unemployment (and I made a presentation about this) was that it would not reach the peak of the 1981-2 Reagan/volcker recession, which was 10.8%. My argument was that the 1981-2 recession was engineered by the FED through high interest rates in order to wring inflation out of the economy--monetary policy was tight and fiscal policy was loose. In this case, they (monetary and fiscal policies) used everything including the kitchen sink to prevent the global meltdown. Unemployment peaked at 10.1% in this one.

What are you talking about? " Who is "we" and who was it that told this to "we"?"

 

Is this a joke? I'll play along though, we being the people that they , they being the Obama administration, was trying to sell this stimulus bill to before they passed it.

 

 

Your "perspective" is a rerun we have all heard many times AFTER the Obama's administrations stimulus objectives weren't met. So sorry, yours or the Obama administrations perspective doesnt mean a damn thing considering it came after failure of the stimulus bill. It would be one thing if they had stated their goals beforehand and they had been met, or at least would of come close to the projections.

 

Also, the unemployment rates of 81 and today is not an apples to apples measurement. I dont have the time to get into it right now, but lets just put it this way, todays unemployment rate is much more understated than it was in 81.

Yo

[IDBillzFan]

some people would say the large number of people who's access to broadband consisted of DSL with 42KB/sec data transfer rates , and a whole state with top data transfer rate in few places of 3Mbps being upgraded to 50-100Bbps were also served - but I guess to you and the writer broadband is broadband - but some people appreciate the upgrade

Are you somehow under the impression that it should cost $7.2 billion to provide dialysis patients immediate access to nephrologists 200 miles away?

 

Few things are more ridiculous...on both sides of the aisle...then when simple-minded people try to justify spending $7.2 billion by pointing to a few dialysis patients and say "See, it's worth it." Because when people like me criticize the costs, simple-minded people like yourself chime in with "You're just selfish and only care about yourself."

 

So let me save you the trouble: I'm not that selfish, but I'm also not that stupid to blow that kind of money when the country is in such dire straits right now.

 

But hey...what's $7.2 billion among friends, right?

[....lybob]

Are you somehow under the impression that it should cost $7.2 billion to provide dialysis patients immediate access to nephrologists 200 miles away?

 

Few things are more ridiculous...on both sides of the aisle...then when simple-minded people try to justify spending $7.2 billion by pointing to a few dialysis patients and say "See, it's worth it." Because when people like me criticize the costs, simple-minded people like yourself chime in with "You're just selfish and only care about yourself."

 

So let me save you the trouble: I'm not that selfish, but I'm also not that stupid to blow that kind of money when the country is in such dire straits right now.

 

But hey...what's $7.2 billion among friends, right?

less than the 18b loss in iraq

[DC Tom]

less than the 18b loss in iraq

 

Ironic that even before I saw this post I was going to comment that the stimulus bill is to Democrats as the Iraq invasion is to Republicans: an ill-considered, expensive, indefensible action that neither side could adequately justify beforehand, nor is willing to admit never achieved its stated goals...but only because resources were inadequate.

 

You're all retards.

[IDBillzFan]

less than the 18b loss in iraq

Do you never tire of justifying bad behavior with bad behavior?

[....lybob]

Do you never tire of justifying bad behavior with bad behavior?

nope

 

do you ever tire of presenting your bias and skewed articles with numbers twisted and tortured to make a partisan hack attack.

[GG]

Ironic that even before I saw this post I was going to comment that the stimulus bill is to Democrats as the Iraq invasion is to Republicans: an ill-considered, expensive, indefensible action that neither side could adequately justify beforehand, nor is willing to admit never achieved its stated goals...but only because resources were inadequate.

 

You're all retards.

 

Yet with all those wars, DoD spending (% of GDP) is lower than post WWII averages, never mind comparing the spending with other war years.

[....lybob]

Ironic that even before I saw this post I was going to comment that the stimulus bill is to Democrats as the Iraq invasion is to Republicans: an ill-considered, expensive, indefensible action that neither side could adequately justify beforehand, nor is willing to admit never achieved its stated goals...but only because resources were inadequate.

 

You're all retards.

This may be the finest place in all the world to get your retard on, you will never lack companionship with your peers- As for you Tom what can be said of an Intelligent man who has spent 10 years and 29,000 posts engaged with idiots, at best a pathetic cry for help but more likely the deepest of psychopathologies.

[3rdnlng]

This may be the finest place in all the world to get your retard on, you will never lack companionship with your peers- As for you Tom what can be said of an Intelligent man who has spent 10 years and 29,000 posts engaged with idiots, at best a pathetic cry for help but more likely the deepest of psychopathologies.

 

What's your expertise in the real estate and mortgage industries?

[erynthered]

What's your expertise in the real estate and mortgage industries?

 

 

[/dev/null]

What's your expertise in the real estate and mortgage industries?

3.5 years

[DC Tom]

As for you Tom what can be said of an Intelligent man who has spent 10 years and 29,000 posts engaged with idiots, at best a pathetic cry for help but more likely the deepest of psychopathologies.

 

Again with the thinking it's some overbearing investment of my time to post "You're an idiot" eight times a day. I understand that it might take you a half an hour or more to type a three-word sentence...for me, let's see...

 

You're an idiot.

 

Three seconds. That's one full calendar day out of the past ten years spent posting on this board. I'm betting you spend more time in a month trying to velcro your Keds.

[Nanker]

link to where the money went.

[TPS]

What are you talking about? " Who is "we" and who was it that told this to "we"?"

Is this a joke? I'll play along though, we being the people that they , they being the Obama administration, was trying to sell this stimulus bill to before they passed it.

Sorry, since I don't pay much attention to what politicians promise, I really don't remember their promises. I really had no idea who the hell "we" were.

 

Your "perspective" is a rerun we have all heard many times AFTER the Obama's administrations stimulus objectives weren't met. So sorry, yours or the Obama administrations perspective doesnt mean a damn thing considering it came after failure of the stimulus bill. It would be one thing if they had stated their goals beforehand and they had been met, or at least would of come close to the projections.

Ok, I'll play. If you can find another post where I stated "my perspective" AFTER obama's objectives weren't met, I'll buy you a bottle of wine.

 

Also, the unemployment rates of 81 and today is not an apples to apples measurement. I dont have the time to get into it right now, but lets just put it this way, todays unemployment rate is much more understated than it was in 81.

The historical data series is consistent.