Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

White House should have acknowledged errors in the figures, official says

WASHINGTON - The government watchdog overseeing economic stimulus spending said Thursday that, in its rush to take credit for saving hundreds of thousands of jobs, the Obama administration was overly confident in its job-counting and did not acknowledge significant errors in the figures.

Numbers released last month identified more than 640,000 jobs linked to stimulus projects around the country. Despite warning signs that the numbers were flawed, the White House said the public could have confidence in them and they proved the administration was on track save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of next year.

Since then, tens of thousands of problems have been documented, from the substantive to the clerical. Republicans have been able to use those flaws to attack what so far is the signature domestic policy of Obama's presidency.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34040859/ns ... n_turmoil/

Honestly, can someone please explain how you identify a job as "saved"?

AZGrizFan wrote:Honestly, can someone please explain how you identify a job as "saved"?

Exactly....there may be a reasonable definition for this, but I'd be interested in hearing it.....

Appaholic wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Honestly, can someone please explain how you identify a job as "saved"?

Exactly....there may be a reasonable definition for this, but I'd be interested in hearing it.....

Crickets.

Yeah, I didn't THINK there was a logical explanation.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Exactly....there may be a reasonable definition for this, but I'd be interested in hearing it.....

Crickets.

Yeah, I didn't THINK there was a logical explanation.

They got the money they wanted...they don't need to provide YOU with any justification...

AZGrizFan wrote:Honestly, can someone please explain how you identify a job as "saved"?

I don't know if they are claiming them or not but a lot of govt jobs were "saved" by the stimulus. Stimulus dollars flowed to state budgets last year to keep them afloat. In Iowa our governor just ordered a 10% across the board cut which will result in layoffs because they don't have any stimulus money for this fiscal year. Our state is so flat ass broke that there will be even more layoff next fiscal year. Our state funds a lot of k-12 education so teachers didn't get the ax this year but will next year.

Notice these are all government jobs and no private sector jobs.

They never had a method to measure the jobs created or saved in the first place. How do you determine whether a job would have been created in spite of stimulus funds unless it's a government agency or program? It was destined to be fuzzy math for any quantification - the right and left will fight about the numbers, and they'll both be wrong.

One area that ain't cuttin' back:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/governmen ... gbinge.htm

Old news. We heard weeks ago about one case where there was a stimulus project that provided 6 jobs covering 480 man-hours. The Obama Administration/Donkeys in the Congress claimed 480 "jobs saved and/or created" and refused to recant when the GOP called them on it.

Just take any Donk job-creation claim and knock off a minimum of four zeroes.

This is akin to Attila The Hun announcing he "saved a thousand lives last month".

HI54UNI wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Honestly, can someone please explain how you identify a job as "saved"?

I don't know if they are claiming them or not but a lot of govt jobs were "saved" by the stimulus. Stimulus dollars flowed to state budgets last year to keep them afloat. In Iowa our governor just ordered a 10% across the board cut which will result in layoffs because they don't have any stimulus money for this fiscal year. Our state is so flat ass broke that there will be even more layoff next fiscal year. Our state funds a lot of k-12 education so teachers didn't get the ax this year but will next year.

Notice these are all government jobs and no private sector jobs.

In the long run, it would have been far better for both the local and national economies and the citizens that live in those states for the jobs NOT to have been saved. The unions, particularly the teacher unions, are largely at fault for protecting incompetent members, opposing innovation, and pushing social agenda that are none of their business.

HI54UNI wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Honestly, can someone please explain how you identify a job as "saved"?

I don't know if they are claiming them or not but a lot of govt jobs were "saved" by the stimulus. Stimulus dollars flowed to state budgets last year to keep them afloat. In Iowa our governor just ordered a 10% across the board cut which will result in layoffs because they don't have any stimulus money for this fiscal year. Our state is so flat ass broke that there will be even more layoff next fiscal year. Our state funds a lot of k-12 education so teachers didn't get the ax this year but will next year.

Notice these are all government jobs and no private sector jobs.

The feds, if they were so concerned with "saving" goevernment jobs on the state & local level, should have exempted (temporarily at least) the multitude of unfunded mandates issued to state & local governments so they could free up the cash flow to pay for curent positions.....instead, they dangle money requisitoned from taxpayers to the states with additional strings attached....

travelinman67 wrote:This is akin to Attila The Hun announcing he "saved a thousand lives last month".