Who’d've thunk it. Reuters:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The number of jobs created or saved by infrastructure projects funded by the U.S. economic stimulus plan more than doubled in June from May, according to a report released Tuesday by a House of Representatives committee.At the end of June, 49,377 jobs had been “created or sustained” by water, highway and public transportation projects, compared to slightly more than 21,000 jobs at the end of May.
The Pacific Northwestern state of Washington accounted for the most jobs of any state or territory at 3,481, with the bulk of those concentrated in highway repairs.
According to the Transportation Department, Washington has also been obligated some $627.8 million out of the $22.7 billion the states have requested from the federal government under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Snark aside, not a bad return 5 months into a 2 year recovery plan. These are small numbers in relation to the mere size of our economy, and there is a lot of “hypothetical” buried in these reports (i.e. it’s hard to prove those currently holding a “saved” job would be unemployed without that job, or just employed elsewhere). On a comparative scale, this is just a drop in the bucket, but it implies that planned spending is in fact having an effect on economic recovery.
That’s why I wanted to see almost all of the money put into infrastructure. Not only does it need the money, it creates real jobs.
@Jesse Harris
Nothing quite like creating real jobs with fake money, am I rite!?!?
I’m okay with running up an enormous debt for ourselves and our progeny, devaluing our currency perpetually, and literally trying to spend our way out of a money problem – just as long as those blessed individuals who work on the factory floor of an auto manufacturer or for the construction crew who wins the government bid have jobs!
YAY STIMULUS!
@Michael Reis
the alternative being doing nothing, still having enormous debt, but also having more people unemployed, struggling to feed their families, keep their homes, etc.
yay everyman for himself!
Your scenario omits the viability of charity, entrepreneurship, human ingenuity, adaptability, and the acknowledgement of a relatively quick turnaround.
I was laid off. Now I have my own business AND a better job.
Of course, if you’re THAT afraid, go ahead and force us all to go along with your plan, regardless of the consequence, just because it’s your preference…
YAY NO JUSTICE!
Besides, this stimulus concept is going to lead to Economic Crisis II : Return of the Beast!
well, it was passed by the house and the senate, so it wasn’t just my preference (actually my preference would have been a bigger stimulus, more upfront spending, but i’m impatient).
your situation sounds like it’s worked out quite well for you, but there are others who haven’t been so fortunate. charity has its limits, though i did see an article yesterday noting that charitable giving is high despite the down economy. as far as motivation, i don’t think the majority of those unemployed aren’t looking at any aspect they can to find new work, but starting your own company often times necessitates start up capital, which a lot of unemployed people don’t have.
i also have to disagree about the quick turnaround, though i’m not sure whether you’re talking about the overall economy, or individual employment situations, so if you want to clarify that, i’ll explain my disagreement.
@craig41
I should have said “quicker turnaround” which can only be expected if the economy is left to recover on its own.
Quick question – how do you account for the inflation that will occur following an injection of new money into the economy now?
Poor show Mike Reis.
If you honestly are suggesting that doing absolutely NOTHING except relying on charities and relying on imaginary $capital$ you’re living in La-La Land.
By the way…when the Republicans lower funding for scientific research and public education, how do you expect that magical human ingenuity to create business to any extent worth noting on a map ? Technology is what built the industrial explosions in this country from the steam engine to the dot-com era. Dropping bombs forever on countries of strategic interest may quell your cowardice when it’s time for you to sleep, but it’s not really a sustainable fiscal policy.
@Grumpy
– “If you honestly are suggesting that doing absolutely NOTHING except relying on charities and relying on imaginary $capital$ you’re living in La-La Land.”
That is in no way a complete sentence!
Anyway, we could argue what people would or wouldn’t do all night and it would still be speculation, so…
– “By the way…when the Republicans lower funding for scientific research and public education, how do you expect that magical human ingenuity to create business to any extent worth noting on a map ? Technology is what built the industrial explosions in this country from the steam engine to the dot-com era.”
Oh, TOTALLY. When are people going to realize that it’s the GOVERNMENT that has brought about all of the major innovations of history!?
– “Dropping bombs forever on countries of strategic interest may quell your cowardice when it’s time for you to sleep, but it’s not really a sustainable fiscal policy.”
Republicans are ridiculous.
The sarcasm truly is great!
–
It’s soooo good to see how many jobs have been ‘saved’ or ‘sustained’ by the stimulus monies, that must be an indicator that unemployment is finally trending downward, right? I’m so relieved to discover that the Federal Government can save us all and it really does know what’s best for us collectively and individually. I really understand what Pres. Obama means when he talks about not going back to the way things were, there’s no need, this way is much better! The government can control it all…when somethings missing, it can fill the void. When somebody is lacking, it can be the provider. When a company is too big to fail, too small to succeed, or simply not performing in a way that is conducive to the benefit of all people, it can step in and preside at the helm…not because it has an interest in controlling the private affairs of corporations but because the corporations haven’t considered fairly how their private affairs effect society, in its’ opinion. Hold on – isn’t there something similar to this in some big book of text which describes past events? How did that work out? No matter, the USofA has the right to scribe it’s own page in history.
@Michael Reis
first you shouldn’t really worry about the stimulus for increasing the money supply, that’s chump change compared to what the federal reserve is doing. but alas, inflation is just an alarmist distraction at this point.
inflation will only occur if the banks start lending the money, there’s more deflationary pressure right now, which is typical of a liquidity gap (we’re japan of the 90′s now, wahoo!)
an increase of money supply doesn’t necessarily result in inflation. for instance if the increased money supply went directly into peoples’ mattresses and stayed there inflation wouldn’t be a risk at all. which is what we’re seeing now, except that it isn’t mattresses, it’s going to banks and sitting there. once the banks start lending the fed will pull the reins in on the money supply, eliminating the inflationary pressures that would result.
now to the quicker turn around. i’m not even sure where to begin on this one, how would the turn around be quicker if the federal government stayed out? technically the recession would be worse by at least the amount of government spending in gdp terms (probably more, but assuming a 0 multiplier you’d still get that government spending once). so i’m having a little trouble understanding where you’re coming from in saying that it would turn around quicker on it’s own. could you elaborate?
@Nigel
– “Hold on – isn’t there something similar to this in some big book of text which describes past events? How did that work out? No matter, the USofA has the right to scribe it’s own page in history.”
We can finally add our name to the long list of crossed-out titles at the top of that particular page.
- “first you shouldn’t really worry about the stimulus for increasing the money supply, that’s chump change compared to what the federal reserve is doing. but alas, inflation is just an alarmist distraction at this point.”
Can’t I worry about both? I really want to be worried about both.
– “(we’re japan of the 90’s now, wahoo!)”
One of Japan’s mistakes was in attempting to prop up its economy with their version of a stimulus bill. Why make the same mistakes?
– “once the banks start lending the fed will pull the reins in on the money supply, eliminating the inflationary pressures that would result.”
Once the fed starts pulling the money back in, the banks will be hard pressed to increase lending, which will send us into another recession.
– “now to the quicker turn around. i’m not even sure where to begin on this one, how would the turn around be quicker if the federal government stayed out? ”
Because an unimpeded market is self-correcting. The mistake people make when discussing or considering the ebb and flow of the economic market is that it’s two-dimensional, like all of the graphs they see on television news. In reality, there are sections of our economy that haven’t seen such high booms in decades. It’s a dynamic ebb and flow, and the effects are felt dynamically. Furthermore, consumer confidence has an enormous effect on market activity across the board. So, when these booms and busts happen typically, nobody really panics and they self-correct, usually within months. But when the banks and the government gets involved, consumer confidence clenches up and adds severity to the issue. I guess the disconnect is in the way that we each define “recession”. People would be losing their jobs no matter what, so really it’s an issue of fluidity, which brings us back to the viability of the Keyensean theory, which is garbage.
yes, you can worry about both (though you shouldn’t). i was pointing out that you seem to be worrying only about the smaller.
as to japan, i’ll have to brush up on their actions in the recession, i was using it as an easy reference to a liquidity trap.
the fed will have a balancing act once the economy rebounds, there’s no doubt about that. but they’ve pulled off similar balancing acts in the past, so i would assume they could do it again.
also, self correcting doesn’t mean quicker, it just means it will take care of itself at some point. i agree that it is self correcting. i also agree that consumer confidence is one of (if not the only) leading force into and out of a recession. but consumer confidence has taken an uptick since the government has gotten involved. people like seeing someone do something to fix something that’s broken. hence without government intervention it could be argued that consumer confidence would have continued to slide, further adding to the severity of the recession.
as to the keynesian theory being garbage, well, i disagree, but that may be because i don’t know what of it you’re calling garbage, and what you’re suggesting as an alternative.
- “yes, you can worry about both (though you shouldn’t). i was pointing out that you seem to be worrying only about the smaller.”
Firstly, I agree that I shouldn’t worry – worrying never helped anything. It’s an important point to make for many people out there about many different subjects. Anyway, I was just attempting to stick to the subject of the post.
– “as to japan, i’ll have to brush up on their actions in the recession, i was using it as an easy reference to a liquidity trap.”
Watch this. It’s informative and entertaining:
http://reason.tv/video/show/turning-japanese
– “also, self correcting doesn’t mean quicker, it just means it will take care of itself at some point. i agree that it is self correcting.”
What I meant to relay was that no external force can “correct” the market because there are too many actors. Any such action is only predictable to a minor degree and always results in unintended and unforeseeable consequences (the housing bubble, for example). What we end up seeing are ham-fisted solutions that end up causing further problems, which bring on more ham-fisted solutions, etc. A section of the market, when left alone, will correct without unnaturally altering some other part.
A good parallel would be the history of Yellowstone National Park. Crichton gives a great description here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuUcBiToWg4
– “i also agree that consumer confidence is one of (if not the only) leading force into and out of a recession. but consumer confidence has taken an uptick since the government has gotten involved. people like seeing someone do something to fix something that’s broken. hence without government intervention it could be argued that consumer confidence would have continued to slide, further adding to the severity of the recession.”
Consumer confidence would probably have come back months ago if it hadn’t been for the fear-mongering and constant “we need to do something” speeches of this administration and it’s predecessors.
– “as to the keynesian theory being garbage, well, i disagree, but that may be because i don’t know what of it you’re calling garbage, and what you’re suggesting as an alternative.”
http://reason.tv/roughcut/show/628.html
Seriously watch these – give them a chance.
As for an alternative, I propose that the federal government immediately allow us all to keep more of the money we earn – talk about creating fluidity! I suggest that, if Barack Obama and his ilk really care about the people effected by plant closures and layoffs, they should start donating like mad to charities that can help them and urge the rest of the American people to do as they have done – that’s what REAL leadership is. I think that, rather than supporting only the construction industries by focusing on infrastructure projects, the government should encourage entrepreneurism by offering huge tax breaks to new and newly expanded businesses – you could create all kinds of jobs all over the country to support the skills and talents of EVERYONE.
There are just a few ideas. What do you think?
…Well, other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
@Michael Reis
Come on… nothing? Really? Boo.