Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Our Tax Dollars at Work & ‘Scattered Showers of Actual Journalism’ Sighted Recently

Recent headline:  640,329+ jobs ‘saved or created’ using $207.3 billion of the stimulus so far.  We’ve all seen this and heard it.  Unfortunately, there is a real problem with it:  Math.  That pesky math.

Simple math yields the following: This “success” has only cost the taxpayers $323,749 per job.

Hmmmm.  Now I’m not a CPA, an Economist, or a CFP, but I am capable of simple division and what-if thought processes.  I know of two small local businesses that would have expanded their business, paid off debt (stabilizing the business) AND hired 3 people with $323,000 each.  In other words- the small *local* businesses would be three times more productive.  With $323,000 I would start my own business and hire two other people, creating three jobs and starting a new company. 

So with roughly 1 million dollars, the private sector could stabilize two businesses, start one, and create 10 jobs locally.  Or Uncle Sam can “save or create” three.  Scale this out into the entire country.  Which would you prefer?

So… this is the big feather in the cap of this administration? This is “success?”  Why is this being touted as “better results sooner than they would have expected” according to Geithner as he was interviewed by David Plouffe on Meet The Press this week.

[ circa 6 minutes into clip the good stuff starts.] 

All this while our unemployment (and I’m talking U3, not the more accurate U6 currently at almost 17%) jumped from 7% to 10%?  Remember, when the stimulus bill was being debated, we needed to pass it right away or the unemployment rate would have jumped to 9% if we did nothing but it could be contained at 8% if we passed the stimulus?  Well since then, *after* the stimulus, the U3 has blasted past the “worst” to 10% and is still climbing.This is a nationall average. Michigan has a catastrophic U3 of 15.3% unemployment.  Yikes!

By the way, David- I’m glad that you are finally asking the tough questions.  Keep it up and people might actually start watching Meet The Press again!

So why the yay-team-victory rhetoric?  I guess they figure that the public is stupid and can’t do math.  But then one must ask~ where is the press on this?  Why is this not a headline?  I’m at a loss.  Seems a bit strange.  I’m just sayin…

According to the AP though, the numbers *are* strange.  Let’s take one little example.
According to the White House report, 935  jobs were saved at the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council.  Which is weird, because only 508 people work there… so… how were more jobs saved than were actually created?  There’s so many more, but hey.  Who’s asking?  Finally, the AP is.  You go guys!

Finally, the Press seems to be getting a clue.   Between the AP and David Plouffe, there seems to be some momentum.  Keep it up, guys and gals- you’re on the right track! 
Remember, the printed newspapers (except for the WallStreet Journal) are all crashing and burning due to people simply not giving a rip about the absence of actual reporting and stopping their subscriptions. 

People are hungry for the truth.  The reason that no one buys papers anymore is because they’re not worth buying!  The content is all slanted garbage and partial facts intentionally printed out of context.  And people are catching on.

So hopefully these ‘scattered showers’ (catchy phraseology courtesy of Stu Burguiere and Pat Gray) of Actual Journalism will build to the Hurricane that we need.  And maybe, just maybe- when the Press reclaims their objectivity and is truly the 4th branch of the government here in the US and the watchdogs for the people keeping an eye on the goings-on in DC we will also see a return to people buying papers.  It will also mean a return to an informed, interested, and responsible public.  And really, that can only be good for our nation.  Education is always the key to enlightenment.

We’re watching the press… and haven’t given up all hope.  Keep it up and bring us more of this!

sources: AP, WSJ, FoxNews

No comments: