I Saved 150,000 Jobs

Today I saved 150,000 jobs. There are now 150,000 people who will continue to work because of me. It was not tough to do because all I did was say I saved them. No one can prove I did not because there is no way to measure a “saved” job.

That does not stop Obama from continuing to make the claim and it does not stop the media branch of the Democratic party from slobbering all over the phony claim.

Obama today stated that he was accelerating the stimulus money distribution. This is an admission that what he has done so far is not working. Remember, he told us that without the stimulus unemployment would be over 9% but with the stimulus it would be around 8%. Well, he passed the stimulus and unemployment is OVER 9%. So he made my argument that if we had done nothing things would eventually improve and it would cost less. It should not surprise anyone that the stimulus did not actually create jobs. Billions of dollars in the plan went to things that will never create a job. The stimulus was a way for government to spend huge sums of money under the cover of an economic “crisis.”

Obama also claimed that by Summer he would create or save 600,000 jobs. If they are created we can measure that but we cannot measure a saved job so this is an empty claim. Later he can say that he saved them and no one will be able to prove he did not.

Of course, he won’t be able to prove that he did either.

So, until the liberals call Obama on this fabrication I will continue to save jobs for America. I figure that I can save 24,900,000 jobs by the end of the year if I continue to save 150,000 each day.

And I will, trust me.

Its pretty easy so feel free to join me. If we all contribute we will have everyone working in no time.

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

58 Responses to “I Saved 150,000 Jobs”

  1. Adam says:

    “So, until the liberals call Obama on this fabrication …”

    So what if I call you on your fabrication instead?

    First I’ll address this bogus part of your posting:

    You said: “No one can prove I did not because there is no way to measure a ‘saved’ job.”

    You are telling a lie. While predicting jobs saved is not as clear cut as predicting jobs created, to say there is no way to measure is just a bit of anti-stimulus myth making.

    As this Reuters article points out:

    The U.S. economic stimulus plan has created or saved 150,000 jobs since it was enacted 100 days ago, top White House economic officials said on Wednesday, relying on projections instead of an actual tally of workers.

    The White House, Bernstein said, is projecting what the level of employment would have been if the stimulus had not passed in February. It is then comparing that baseline to actual employment numbers. Using that method, Bernstein also expects another 600,000 jobs to be created or saved in the next 100 days.

    Now, you can say their estimates are wrong, politically motivated, or whatever, but don’t pretend Obama is simply fabricating his numbers out of whole cloth. That’s a lie and you know it. Or maybe you think projections and models aren’t valid for economists to predict outcomes by anymore.

    On the part where you pretend you were right that there was no need for a stimulus since apparently things recovered too quickly for the stimulus to be causing it? Another joke.

    Not only is it too early for economists to clearly predict what affect the stimulus is having on the economy the opposite of that is the true as well: It is too early to say it isn’t working.

    But maybe that is a better point. It is too early for economists, but apparently not too early for such knowledgeable economics bloggers such as yourself to predict the stimulus has failed. The burden of proof is not really on you so there’s no need to make a fool of yourself so early.

    • Blake says:

      Adam, read this- you cannot calculate “jobs saved”, s link to this, it’ll provide you with some info-
      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451592762396883.html
      as far as “Jobs saved”, his stimulus, of which only 44 billion has been spent, didn’t save those policemen in Ohio that Hussein had around him for one of his narcissistic photo ops, did it?

    • Blake says:

      Wouldn’t the fact that Hussein said that WITH the stimulus, the jobless rate “might” hit 8%- and yet it is now 9.4%, that would mean he is a liar, and his remedies do not work, and are only driving our country into bankruptcy?

    • Big Dog says:

      I wrote a response to this already. Obama is predicting but it is impossible to figure who would have been fired and who would not. In fact, his prediction about unemployment was wrong which means all the numbers he based on the predictions were wrong as well.

    • Randy says:

      If a guy that paves roads for a living is laid off because the road paving company doesn’t have enough money to pay him to work, then they get stimulus money and recall that worker, the job can be considered a saved job. It can also be considered a created job because the particular paving project may not have existed before stimulus funds became available. That is why they are called “saved or created” jobs. Those numbers can be put together. If you read carefully Blake, the article to which you linked, the author is careful to say “saved” jobs and leave out the “or created” when claiming funny numbers. I would also point out that it is an opinion article and not a news article. It uses as references a bunch of other opinions, and little in the way of facts.

      • Blake says:

        Yes, there’s all kinds of things one can do with numbers and words, but how real is it. “How many angels dance on the head of a pin?” the facts are 1)- only 44 billion out of 787 billion has been spent, 2)- what has been spent, and what they have not yet spent is not real money, and only harms our alleged budget, and 3) we could have done just as well, and be recovering faster without this stimulus- do not believe me? Ask the workers at all the dealerships that were laid off if they got a “saved” job.

  2. John says:

    If the president doubles the price of cigarettes, can he then claim he saved 150,000 lives?

    • Darrel says:

      Good question. It would take some calculating but the number of lives saved would probably be much greater than that. Lung cancer alone kills (never mind all of the other cancers caused by smoking) about 160k Americans per year and 80% of those are caused by cigarettes.

      So it depends on how many people would quit, or never start, because of the price double. There are pretty accurate formulas for this and most show a solid decrease with much less than a price double.

      (However, if the price is too high then a black market develops and this brings in crime problems too).

      Regardless, such an increase would dramatically reduce smoking rates and, just guessing, it would be safe to say that 150,000 lives would easily be saved within only a few years.

      Incidentally, I am for people being allowed to smoke whatever they want, but also think age minimums should be strictly enforced.

      D.

      • Big Dog says:

        We have data to show the number of cancer deaths (of all kinds) and we have data to show numbers of smokers. Death certificates have tobacco use as a contributing factor as one of the boxes to check off. So one could use the data that is reported and make fairly accurate predictions.

        Employers do not report when they decided to keep an employee on or if they were going to let one go but kept him. The payroll statistics are used to figure hired or let go but there is no number reported that deals with “saved.”

        Those items are predictions and we can see that they were way off. He predicted that unemployment would be 8% with stimulus and over 9% without. He got the stimulus and unemployment is over 9%. He cannot say how many jobs were saved. It is a guess and a posturing method to always be right. Just like I predicted I saved 150,000 jobs and I can attribute that to a number of things. Blake posted the link to the WSJ on this.

    • Blake says:

      Only if he claims he divinely made the spirit of the cancer leave their bodies, John- that is a claim that is just as hard to prove as “saved” jobs.

    • Big Dog says:

      Not unless people stopped smoking. However, he could not claim that he did not raise taxes on the poor.

  3. Darrel says:

    DAR
    It does not follow that “accelerating the stimulus money distribution” is “an admission that what he has done so far is not working.”

    It could just as easily be argued that it is working and he just wants to increase the rate of improvement.

    All projections about future employment are (obviously) *estimates* and are necessarily *tentative* and subject to revision.

    It’s going to take a while to get us out of this death spiral Bush left us in. Whether the efforts are to much or too little, only time will tell.

    D.

    • Blake says:

      No Darrel, the fact that what he has done so far HAS NOT WORKED is a clear enough indication that he doesn’t know what he is doing- incidentally, I also saved 150,000 jobs,um, yeah, that’s the ticket.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “No Darrel, the fact that what he has done so far HAS NOT WORKED…”>>

        DAR
        Do note that putting a claim in CAPS, does not make it more likely to be true, not even a little bit.

        Unfortunately, your claim can never, in any way, be shown to be true or false. One could just as easily claim that unemployment would be 12% right now had he not taken the steps he has. Or any other number.

        So your claim is quite unfalsifiable, which means basically, worthless.

        D.
        —————-
        Incidentally, I noticed today that banks will be paying back $68 billion in TARP money (with interest and charges). That’s nice.

        Hey, when things get better, make sure and give GW Bush the credit eh?

        • Blake says:

          When I put words in caps it is so you will at least notice those words- you seem to choose what you do wish to comprehend.
          The banks would be paying back the money quicker, but Hussein didn’t want them to. The banking “Czar” wants to retain control, and the “Pay Czar” still wants to regulate pay, even if you didn’t take the money.
          All of this is quite UnConstitutional, you know- but then you do not care, that much I have gathered from what you write.

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “The banking “Czar” wants to retain control,…”>>

          DAR
          After this mess due to banking shenanigans, it is prudent to go slow and carefully regulate, lest they go back to their old ways.

          BLK: All of this is quite UnConstitutional, you know- but then you do not care,…>>

          DAR
          I don’t care what you think is “unconstitutional.” Not one little bit. I do care what the SCOTUS thinks is unconstitutional because what they think about the constitution, actually matters.

          D.

    • Big Dog says:

      Since the reports out indicate there is dissatisfaction with the progress and since they admitted that things were worse than they thought I would suggest that my take is closer to accurate.

      Obama will accelerate spending and then take credit for temporary Summer hires as the stimulus working but he will just blame it on temp jobs when the numbers reverse after the Summer.

      He told us that things would not start to work until next year. His words. He said it would take time, his words. He said that if we did not pass the stimuls unemployment over 9% but if we passed it around 8%. We passed it and unemployment is over 9% so he is accelerating spending in order to reverse the numbers he was abysmally wrong about.

      He has seen the polls and he knows that now Republicans have a 6 point lead on who can better handle the economy so he is worried that the delay will hurt him. The spending was political not stimulative. He wanted things to start getting better next year during an election year.

      The unrest is making him speed up his plans.

      • Darrel says:

        You make a lot of claims and say Obama “said” this and that but as usual, you don’t back any of it up. The truth is in the details. How come you don’t cite what he actually “said”?

        I do agree with you here:

        “He wanted things to start getting better next year during an election year.”

        I am glad that we have a president that works toward “things…getting better.” That is after all why we hire them. That they do this largely for the purpose of getting re-elected, matters not in the slighest. That’s called responsible government.

        D.

  4. Blake says:

    “Death spiral Bush left us in-” what a laugh- you consistently ignore facts that do not suit you. All the Dems did this, and they are continuing to screw us into the ground- primarily because they do not know the value of money, or of the value of one’s word.

    • Darrel says:

      BLK: “All the Dems did this”

      DAR
      You have the presidency for 8 years, and a solid six years of congress with two years tacked on the end with a Demo led congress which did very little facing constant (and record as I remember) threat of filibuster.

      And you can’t be honest enough to give your precious GW Bush his due. Amazing.

      D.

      • Blake says:

        It is the legislature that makes laws- Bush does not- and you talk of the threat of filibuster, this was the Democrat threat for the six years they were (barely) in the minority, with Cheney the tie breaker.
        And talk about the party of NO- Dems were the embodiment of that- no ideas, just a big no to anything. Their whole platform was “deny Bush credit on anything positive”- yea, you all were just real inspiring with the way you led, keeping the good of the country first in your hearts, yea right.
        Then when you had the majority, did you do anything? nooo- that would, again, mean giving Bush credit- instead, you worked to aggravate this financial situation, so for that, I call many of the Democrats traitors, plain and simple.

  5. Big Dog says:

    Randy, the opinions piece is no different than the opinions pieces that get linked to from all you guys. The person has some experience in the field.

    It is BUNK to say a guy laid off or fired gets called back is a saved job. That is a bogus claim. The job was not saved, it was going to eventually be refilled when things got better.

    No one in the administration has been able to explain how to measure this. Joe Biden said it was above his pay grade but then again so is Village Idiot.

    • Randy says:

      I haven’t seen where the administration has been asked how they measure that. If I’ve missed it, I would appreciate you pointing to where they were asked. I know I could very well be wrong, but I haven’t had the time to look.

      Anyhow, what I referenced was a job that was there. It could be counted as being there. Measured. Then it wasn’t there anymore. That can also be measured. With that data you can certainly calculate a job lost or a job gained. You can call it a “job saved or created”, and you can argue that the name is inaccurate or BS or whatever you want, but the number wasn’t ambiguous or made up. It came from measurable data.

      As far as the opinion piece, the only economic credentials I saw that the author has is being an editor at a financial magazine that has had a hard time with it’s own finances. The rest of his experience seems to be speech writing and writing editorials and opinion pieces.

  6. Big Dog says:

    Darrel, if I were to cite him I would use quotes. I am paraphrasing what he said. The words are not the exact ones he used but they convey the same message.

    If you said that Bush said there were WMD in Iraq I would not ask for the exact quote because it is common knowledge that the words he used were similar and conveyed the same message.

    Obama’s words are common knowledge. I don’t have to cite them verbatim.

  7. Big Dog says:

    Responsible government? If he cared about America he would want it to be done this year. My God, when Bush raised the alert level you guys cried that he was trying to scare up votes. Under your logic, it was smart politics.

    • Darrel says:

      You don’t see the difference between getting votes by:

      a) “making things better” and

      b) scaring people into voting for you out of fear?

      There is a difference.

  8. Big Dog says:

    Excuse me? The constant threat of filibuster came from Democrats for 6 years. Remember the gang of 14 and nuclear options? All that was under Republican control because of threats of filibuster from Democrats.

    Turn about is fair play. But don’t distort history. The Democrats going all the way back to Carter and the CRA are responsible for this mess.

    And now, this economy belongs to Obama. None of this crybaby he inherited it crap. It is his and he is messing it up.

  9. Big Dog says:

    What exactly am I not getting right with regard to what Obama said?

  10. Big Dog says:

    Well the claim about Bush was not proven. I see no difference in that and allowing the country to suffer for a year so that he can get votes. If he can make it better now he should. If he waited then he put politics above the country and its people.

    • Darrel says:

      BigD: “…allowing the country to suffer for a year so that he can get votes. If he can make it better now he should.”>>

      DAR
      Here is Obama, in November, pleading for fast action:

      “Obama Calls On Congress to Act Fast on Stimulus”

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110701246.html

      I fail to see any evidence he has delayed something to “allow the country to suffer for a year so he can get votes.”

      That’s ridiculous!

      You guys constantly complain that he is doing too much, and too little, *at the same time.*

      D.

      • Blake says:

        Only 44 billion has been spent of the stimulus, and you think Hussein is not going slow? that leaves what?- 743 billion that could be spent on jobs, but isn’t? What is he waiting for” Angels to sing Hosanna?
        He wants to prolong it, from my point of view, just to keep the “crisis” going, to keep people in fear, and that’s not a good policy.
        Already the tide is turning- look at Virginia, where erry Macauliffe just lost the primary to a “conservative” democrat, and the Republican opponent is looking like a winner here.
        One state at a time, we will claw back our country from the socialists.

  11. Big Dog says:

    I can’t provide the quote if I don’t know what you are referring to.

    • Darrel says:

      BIGD: “I can’t provide the quote if I don’t know what you are referring to.”>>

      DAR
      Of course. I am referring to this claim from you above:

      “…he [Obama] told us that without the stimulus unemployment would be over 9% but with the stimulus it would be around 8%.”

      I have looked for this and can’t find him saying this. If he did say something like this, or more likely someone in his cabinet, it would have included qualifiers. Any projection of future employment numbers are necessarily tentative. If he, or his administration didn’t provide the rosier side of projections they could (quite rightly) be accused of talking down the economy during this sensitive time. And that would be dumb.

      D.
      —————–
      I include your quote in this comment because sometimes it seems responses are not nested into the proper category and end up, alone, at the very bottom.

      • Darrel says:

        I tried it. Here are the qualifiers which I knew would be there. And note, this report contains no comments from Obama.

        ***
        “1 Forecasts of the unemployment rate without the recovery plan vary substantially. Some private forecasters anticipate unemployment rates as high as 11% in the absence of action.”

        And in the conclusion:

        “This study has sought to investigate the likely job creation effects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan currently under consideration. As emphasized at many points in the analysis, there is substantial uncertainty around all of our estimates. Nevertheless, we believe they can provide useful guidance as we go forward.”

        Also:

        “These estimates, like the aggregate ones, are subject to substantial margins of error. One additional source of uncertainty concerns the impact of the state fiscal relief.”

        –your link

  12. Big Dog says:

    You cannot measure saved jobs. Sorry.

    Here is what Biden said

    Vice President Joe Biden said on a Monday conference call with reporters that it was “above [his] pay grade” to explain in detail the methodology the White House uses to estimate the number of jobs created or saved by the economic stimulus legislation, but stressed that there had been no “reasonable” challenges to the estimates.

    • Randy says:

      Did you read the article to which you linked? Biden, to the best of his ability explained the methodology, which does exist, and can be explained in better detail by the Council of Economic Advisers, as explained by the Vice President.

      Biden was reporting the numbers, which were derived by two folks that hold graduate degrees from MIT in economics, and another that holds degrees in economics from Princeton and Harvard. They all have lots of experience outside of academia in economics as well. I’m sure if someone were to ask them to explain where they got those numbers, they would be more than happy to tell.

      I gleaned all of that information from your link and a couple of Google searches. All the info is there if you care to read it.

      • Blake says:

        “Biden, to the best of his ability…”- now THAT’S a qualifier- he has no ability. Certainly not the ability to keep his mouth shut. Talk about a “warm bucket of spit.”

  13. John says:

    I was being sarcastic earlier (the smoking thing). There is no scientific or any other method to prove such outlandish claims. It doesn’t matter if you’re left or right, claiming you “saved 150,000+ jobs (or lives for that matter)” is 100% politician bullshit. I’d like to see a list of those “saved” jobs to see if mine is on there-then I shall rest easy.

    On another note, those economists sure have a fine pedigree, Harvard, Princeton etc… but didn’t the most hated man in the world graduate from Yale and Harvard Business School?

    • Randy says:

      You should ask the folks that came up with the numbers. They all have Ph.D’s too, and something the person you reference did not, professional respect in their field. That really isn’t my point though. Why hasn’t anyone asked the folks that came up with the numbers? Are they afraid of the answer?

    • Darrel says:

      JOHN: “I was being sarcastic earlier (the smoking thing).>>

      DAR
      Yes I know that. But it was a good question and one I thought worth answering.

      John: There is no scientific or any other method to prove such outlandish claims.>>

      DAR
      With the “smoking thing” there actually is. Smoking and cancer causation has been studied in incredible detail.

      The job issue is more complicated but there are experts who study this in detail, as Randy has pointed out.

      D.

  14. Adam says:

    I guess you and Blake can continue to say you “saved 150,000 jobs” but that is a very childish and simplistic denial of what is right in front of your face as far as predicting job growth. But then again your side isn’t known lately for it’s adult arguments these days, is it?

    America gave your side a time out so you just go sit in the corner and think of what you’ve done while the adults try to clean up your mess. Maybe you can come out of time out in the next election.

    • Blake says:

      As it happens, it will be the conservatives who has to clean up after you children with all your “theories” and” Ideals” that have nothing to do with the real world. Our system of government worked very well until you liberal/ progressive/ socialist people decided to tinker with the system. Now it will be much harder to fix things and get back on track.
      We will end up being the ones who will have to give you your medication, and make sure the rubber room is to your satisfaction, be cause your delusions are really getting serious here.

      • Adam says:

        Right. Conservatives: stewards of our way of life. Obama inherited a glorious, shining city on the hill and look what he’s done with it! Laugh riot.

        • Blake says:

          Hussein and hiz libbies clusterf***ed America, beginning with Jiminy Carter, and the CRA- Elmer Fudd and the Banking committee, along with Schumer and Dodd, as well as Maxine Waters and others caused the sinkhole we now know as the mortgage meltdown. If not for them, we would be in good shape, but when they changed the rules, this is what we got.
          There are rules for a good reason- because they work. Not everyone deserves a house- you earn it, period.
          The fact that you libbies consistently attempt to paper over your parties blame for this fiasco is laughable. You are SO in denial.
          This is all on you and your ilk.

  15. Daniel says:

    I’m not going to argue about how many jobs were or weren’t created/saved/etc, as that is measurable. What I’m more skeptical of is Obama’s claim that he’s responsible for them. The economy dropped off. It’s to be expected that it would turn around. It’s happened before and it’ll happen again. The fact is it is impossible to predict the effect a single action will have on the economy. You can get an idea with economic formulae, but there are simply too many unknowns that cannot be discovered in a census/survey/projection/etc. to say the bailout was responsible. Maybe rising consumer confidence had something to do with that?

    I’d be interested to see what both sides thought of Newsy’s coverage of the claim, considering the polarized opinions here.

  16. Big Dog says:

    There is very little job creation in the stimulus.