Roman Around

combating liberalism and other childish notions

Posts Tagged ‘economic recovery’

WHY NOT A CENSUS EVERY YEAR?

Posted by Andrew Roman on June 4, 2010

And just think … ObamaCare hasn’t even taken effect yet. And the Bush tax don’t expire until after this year.

If the economy continues to improve like this, we ought to reach “sick” by Christmas.  Lucky us, the Messianic Age will be shifting into overdrive soon.

The “good” news, as peddled from the top, is: Unemployment is down (from 9.9% to 9.7%) and over 430,000 new jobs hit the books in May.

But numbers can be very deceptive.

Many Americans have simply given up looking for work all across Obamanation; And of the 431,000 jobs created, a little more than 90% of them were government census jobs.

Only 41,000 private sector jobs were created in May – about 150,000 less than expected.

The President, in Maryland (on his way to Louisiana), spewed optimistic: “This is the fifth month in a row that we’ve seen job gains. And while we recognize that the recovery is still in its early stages, and that there are going to be ups and downs in the months ahead – things never go in a completely smooth line – this report is a sign that our economy is getting stronger by the day.”

If he wants to see a “smooth line,” he ought to look at his poll numbers.

The President believes the economy is getting stronger by the day, but in May, private sector job growth dropped by 81% from the previous month. 

I’d hate to see what “getting worse” looks like.

The sad fact is that the temporary census-taker jobs responsible for Obama’s “stronger economy” were literally unproductive. Nothing was created. The economy was not made stronger by paying temporary government workers to count people. Taking private money out of the economy and (in effect) redistributing it to government employees has stimulated nothing.

The creation of government jobs is never – repeat never – an indication of how well the economy is doing. How can it be? Private businesses haven’t the ability to print money. Private businesses haven’t the ability to expand the tax burden on the rest of us. With each government job created, that’s more private sector money being removed from the economy. While the private sector has the ability to create genuine wealth, the government only has the ability to confiscate and redistribute it.

That’s what the Obama Stimulus Bill was all about: creating government jobs.

Note to the President: Why not have a census every year? We’ll be down to 8.5% unemployment quicker than you can say, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”
wordpress statistics

Posted in Big Government, Economy, Unemployment | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

THE OBAMA MILLION-JOB-FARCE

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 13, 2009

obama jobs savedLet’s say, for instance, you brought your car to a local mechanic and ultimately wound up getting horrible service. Aside from the aggravation and frustration, you’d probably feel as if you’ve been swindled out of your hard earned money.

Now for the sake of this discussion, let’s say that a year later, despite your better judgment, you decide to give that mechanic one more try, only to have a similarly negative experience. In both instances, the customer service was dreadful and you were made to feel like an inconvenience. To top it off, you were overcharged and made to wait far longer than you should have.

Would you ever go back?

How about an accounting firm charged with balancing the books for your small business? Let’s say for three years running, the firm had so mismanaged your ledgers – and ultimately your tax returns – that the IRS decided to audit you.

Do you stick with them, figuring the fourth year to be the one where everything will finally be set right?

Or do you kick them to the curb (which you probably should have done two years ago)?

And what about the federal government?

Let’s say they passed into law a $787 billion Stimulus bill that was supposed to, by definition, “stimulate” economic growth by creating as many as 3.7 million new jobs across the country. And let’s say after nine months or so, with only a percentage of the money “infused” into the economy, the federal government started claiming that their hyper-spending was working – that the money they “invested” in America was saving or creating a whole lot of jobs, just as promised.

And let’s say not too long after the federal government made such a claim, news reports started coming out refuting those government assertions as being “wildly exaggerated.”

Not “marginally incorrect.”

Not “inappreciably erroneous.”

Not “slightly off.”

But “wildly exaggerated.”

And let’s say that during this time period, unemployment figures were still on the rise.

And let’s say those miscalculations by the federal government were only one in a long line of grossly inaccurate claims made by them, ultimately costing the taxpayers trillions of dollars, creating an endless labyrinth of government bureaucracy, and rewarding inefficiency with more of the people’s hard earned money.

Would you then feel confident enough to trust them to run your health care delivery system?

(Keep in mind that the current government-run health delivery systems – Medicare and Medicaid – have been disgustingly mismanaged by the same federal government).

On one hand, President Barack Obama is now claiming that his Spendulous Bill has saved or created one million jobs. One million jobs. All the while, the unemployment rate is as high as it’s been in one-quarter century … and rising.

On the other, the Boston Globe – not exactly a buttress of conservatism – says that the messianic claims being peddled by Bammy, at least in Massachusetts, are “wildly exaggerated.”

While Massachusetts recipients of federal stimulus money collectively report 12,374 jobs saved or created, a Globe review shows that number is wildly exaggerated. Organizations that received stimulus money miscounted jobs, filed erroneous figures, or claimed jobs for work that has not yet started.

One of the largest reported jobs figures comes from Bridgewater State College, which is listed as using $77,181 in stimulus money for 160 full-time work-study jobs for students. But Bridgewater State spokesman Bryan Baldwin said the college made a mistake and the actual number of new jobs was “almost nothing.’’

In other cases, federal money that recipients already receive annually – subsidies for affordable housing, for example – was reclassified this year as stimulus spending, and the existing jobs already supported by those programs were credited to stimulus spending.

“There were no jobs created. It was just shuffling around of the funds,’’ said Susan Kelly, director of property management for Boston Land Co., which reported retaining 26 jobs with $2.7 million in rental subsidies for its affordable housing developments in Waltham. “It’s hard to figure out if you did the paperwork right. We never asked for this.”

Other examples from across the country illustrating the fairy-tale that is the Obama Million-Job-Farce include two Colorado child development centers that reported saving or creating 292 jobs. In actuality, the vast majority of the money was used to give cost-of-living raises. In all, only three new jobs were created.

Stimulus Package VermontIn Washington, 34,500 jobs were supposedly saved or created – 24,000 of which were teaching positions. Stimulus money was used to cover paychecks, hence the claim of having “saved” the jobs. Unfortunately for the Bammy-Number-Crunching Machine, none of those jobs were in danger of going away because the money needed to cover those salaries would have come out of the state general fund. Those teachers were already contracted to finish the school year.

In Danville, Virginia, $35,000 is said to have created or saved 50 jobs. That’s quite a claim. In truth, the money didn’t create a single job – nor did it save any – but it did improve fifty already existing jobs. It went for raises, training, and playground repair.

In the Columbus, Ohio School District, where 36 school administrators were supposedly on the brink of being laid off, it turns out that no one was on the brink of being let go. There were only two options for officials to choose from on the form they were required to fill out for receiving stimulus money: “created” or “saved.” Since the jobs already existed, the only choice left was “saved.”

Stimulus money is said to have saved the jobs of 473 teachers in North Chicago. Unfortunately, the district only employs 290 teachers.

As talk show host Mark Levin said on his radio program yesterday, if Barack Obama were on the witness stand and made the million jobs claim under oath, he’d be a perjurer.

And yet, the federal government will somehow suddenly get it right and be trusted to manage the health care needs of Americans.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Big Government, Economy, Obama Bonehead, politics, stimulus bill | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

OBAMACRATIC MATH

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 4, 2009

obama calculatorPresident Barack Obama and his party may have taken it on the chin last evening, but when it comes to defying the laws of science (i.e., walking on the water), and defying the tenets of reason (i.e., health care costs will not go up despite adding tens of millions to the insurance rolls), no one can touch him.

Add to that list, his ability to defy the laws of mathematics.

I admit to not knowing much about the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council. It doesn’t come up in conversation much here in New York City’s forgotten borough, Staten Island – although my Big Apple tax dollars are being funneled that way, so perhaps I should pay better attention.

A quick look at their website reveals that they are an “advocate for the poor since 1965.” Their mission statement says, in part, that they are “making the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 a reality in Southwest Georgia by helping socially and economically disadvantaged persons help themselves through a variety of programs.”

Good for them.

For those keeping score at home, there are a total of 508 people employed by the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council

That’s 508 total jobs.

But thanks to President Obama’s magical, all-healing, all-curing, all-saving $787 Stimulus Package, a total of 935 jobs were saved there.

That’s 935 jobs.

Yes, President Obama somehow saved 427 more jobs than actually exist at the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council.

Now that is success.

I know there is no Nobel Prize for Mathematics, but there needs to be one.

Brett J. Blackledge and Matt Apuzzo of the Associated Press write:

The Georgia nonprofit’s inflated job count is among persisting errors in the government’s latest effort to measure the effect of the $787 billion stimulus plan despite White House promises last week that the new data would undergo an “extensive review” to root out errors discovered in an earlier report.

About two-thirds of the 14,506 jobs claimed to be saved under one federal office, the Administration for Children and Families at Health and Human Services, actually weren’t saved at all, according to a review of the latest data by The Associated Press. Instead, that figure includes more than 9,300 existing employees in hundreds of local agencies who received pay raises and benefits and whose jobs weren’t saved.

That type of accounting was found in an earlier AP review of stimulus jobs, which the Obama administration said was misleading because most of the government’s job-counting errors were being fixed in the new data.

The administration now acknowledges overcounting in the new numbers for the HHS program. Elizabeth Oxhorn, a spokeswoman for the White House recovery office, said the Obama administration was reviewing the Head Start data “to determine how and if it will be counted.”

But officials defended the practice of counting raises as saved jobs.

“If I give you a raise, it is going to save a portion of your job,” HHS spokesman Luis Rosero said.

Huh?

I didn’t realize that giving someone a raise qualifies as having saved that job. Is that the same accounting technique that counts someone who may have been out of work for even one day as being included among the millions who have no health care insurance? Or those who smoked cigarettes for even six months as a teenager as being included among those who died from cigarettes?

And what does a “portion of your job” mean?

I’m confused.

Did the Stimulus Plan only save fractions of jobs? And if so, wouldn’t that mean that there were actually more than 935 jobs to begin with that enabled a total of 953 jobs to be saved in a place that really only employs 508?

And what if someone didn’t get a raise, but remained employed. That doesn’t count as a “saved job”?

We should ask President Obama. He’ll know what to do.
wordpress statistics

Posted in Big Government, Economy, stimulus bill | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

TALE OF TWO QUOTES – REDEFINING “CATASTROPHE”

Posted by Andrew Roman on March 13, 2009

“A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession, a less robust recovery, and a more uncertain future.”           -Barack Obama, February 4, 2009

“I’ve never bought into these Malthusian, woe, Chicken Little, the earth is falling. I tend to be pretty optimistic … I don’t think things are ever as good as they say, or ever as bad as they say. Things two years ago were not as good as we thought because there were a lot of underlying weaknesses in the economy. They’re not as bad as we think they are now.”        -Barack Obama, March 12, 2009

______________________

Three quick points …

First, didn’t the President also say that a failure to act on passing the stimulus bill could mean the economy might never recover?

Second, didn’t Chicken Little say the sky was falling?

Third, if the economy turns around on the Obama watch, will he then acknowledge things just aren’t as good as they seem?

______________________

 

From the Liberal/English Dictionary entry catastrophe: 

Main Entry:

ca·tas·tro·phe

Pronunciation:

\kə-ˈtas-trə-(ˌ)fē\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Greek katastrophē, from katastrephein to overturn, from kata- + strephein to turn – confiscated by American Democrat Party for political scare mongering

Date:

1540 original, February 2009 Democrat redefine

1: no biggie <failure to act will be a catastrophe>

2: false scare <this crisis will turn into a catastrophe if left alone>

3: as expected <my Presidency is a catastrophe>

 

cat·a·stroph·ic \ˌka-tə-ˈsträ-fik\ adjective

cat·a·stroph·i·cal·ly \-fi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

Posted in Bailout, Big Government, Economy, Obama's first 100 days, politics | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

CATASTROPHE LOOMS – PASS THIS THING SAYS BAM

Posted by Andrew Roman on February 4, 2009

obama-smiles

The President is warning of an impending “catastrophe” in the event his ever-swelling “stimulus” bill doesn’t pass in the Senate. Yet, only 37% of Americans like the spendulous plan, which has now gone north of the $900 billion line.

Gee, I don’t know why.

Doesn’t the addition of cash for medical research and tax breaks for car purchases make a bad spending bill a little better?

Even support among Democrats for this hideousness has slipped ten percentage points since last week.

And now, a posse of so-called Senate centrists have hop scotched over to the White House to voice their objections to the President’s trillion-dollar disaster by asking for $50 billion in cuts.

How delightful. That ought to make it even better, don’t you think?

My question is … which contingent of the population is more reprehensible – those that serve in Congress, or those of us who put them there?

Fifty billion? Out of over $900 billion? That still leaves this version of the bill more expensive than the one that passed the House last week.

This is compromise??

What is the game here? To bat around the $900 billion figure for a day or two so that when the bill does pass in the Senate – and it will, mark my words – the illusion of responsible budgeting can be peddled to the masses? Is that like jacking up the prices of all inventory at Circuit City (or any store at death’s door) just before the Going Out Of Business sale kicks in so prices can be slashed dramatically?

From Fox News:

Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, as well as Ben Nelson, D-Neb., have tentatively agreed to cutting more than $50 billion from the bill, a Nelson spokesman said, though details weren’t yet available.

Their effort is central to building at least some bipartisan support for the bill, which has come under increasing attack for too much spending unrelated to jolting the economy right away.

Meanwhile, 45% of Americans say they favor some sort of tax cut plan to boost the sagging economy. But I wonder if that means real tax cuts, or Obama-riffic style tax cuts. Remember, in Democrat-speak, Obama tax cuts are just a siphoning of revenues generated by taxing the “rich” and doling them out to the “not so rich.”

The president rejected some criticisms of the plan: that tax cuts alone would solve the problem, or that longer-term goals such as energy independence and health care reform should wait until afterward.

In remarks at the White House, Obama argued that recalcitrant lawmakers need to get behind his approach, saying the American people embraced his ideas when they elected him president in November.

Obama ran for President staying on point, hammering in a conservative concept that sounded nice – tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts.

52.7% of Americans bought it.

Unfortunately, not one aspect of anything Obama ran on amounted to a genuine tax cut.

Socialism 101.

Posted in Big Government, Economy, Liberalism, Obama's first 100 days | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

CATASTROPHE LOOMS – PASS THIS THING SAYS BAM

Posted by Andrew Roman on February 4, 2009

obama-smiles

The President is warning of an impending “catastrophe” in the event his ever-swelling “stimulus” bill doesn’t pass in the Senate. Yet, only 37% of Americans like the spendulous plan, which has now gone north of the $900 billion line.

Gee, I don’t know why.

Doesn’t the addition of cash for medical research and tax breaks for car purchases make a bad spending bill a little better?

Even support among Democrats for this hideousness has slipped ten percentage points since last week.

And now, a posse of so-called Senate centrists have hop scotched over to the White House to voice their objections to the President’s trillion-dollar disaster by asking for $50 billion in cuts.

How delightful. That ought to make it even better, don’t you think?

My question is … which contingent of the population is more reprehensible – those that serve in Congress, or those of us who put them there?

Fifty billion? Out of over $900 billion? That still leaves this version of the bill more expensive than the one that passed the House last week.

This is compromise??

What is the game here? To bat around the $900 billion figure for a day or two so that when the bill does pass in the Senate – and it will, mark my words – the illusion of responsible budgeting can be peddled to the masses? Is that like jacking up the prices of all inventory at Circuit City (or any store at death’s door) just before the Going Out Of Business sale kicks in so prices can be slashed dramatically?

From Fox News:

Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, as well as Ben Nelson, D-Neb., have tentatively agreed to cutting more than $50 billion from the bill, a Nelson spokesman said, though details weren’t yet available.

Their effort is central to building at least some bipartisan support for the bill, which has come under increasing attack for too much spending unrelated to jolting the economy right away.

Meanwhile, 45% of Americans say they favor some sort of tax cut plan to boost the sagging economy. But I wonder if that means real tax cuts, or Obama-riffic style tax cuts. Remember, in Democrat-speak, Obama tax cuts are just a siphoning of revenues generated by taxing the “rich” and doling them out to the “not so rich.”

The president rejected some criticisms of the plan: that tax cuts alone would solve the problem, or that longer-term goals such as energy independence and health care reform should wait until afterward.

In remarks at the White House, Obama argued that recalcitrant lawmakers need to get behind his approach, saying the American people embraced his ideas when they elected him president in November.

Obama ran for President staying on point, hammering in a conservative concept that sounded nice – tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts.

52.7% of Americans bought it.

Unfortunately, not one aspect of anything Obama ran on amounted to a genuine tax cut.

Socialism 101.

Posted in Big Government, Economy, Liberalism, Obama's first 100 days | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »