A slick take on the predictions on the economy by the Obama administration offers proof that the country would have been better off without the costly $850 billion stimulus package.
With the news out this morning that the unemployment rate has risen to 9.1%, it’s as good a time as any to revisit the impact of the White House’s stimulus package. According to the predictions the administration’s own economic advisers made at the time, we may have been better off doing nothing.
In January 2009, the office of the president-elect released a study to promote the then-proposed stimulus bill. Titled “The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan,” it was written by economists Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein.
In it, the White House argued that with the stimulus plan, unemployment would peak around 8% by the end of 2009 and would be well below 7% today. If, on the other hand, Congress did not pass the stimulus package, it warned that unemployment would rise to about 9% in 2010 and be around 8% today. The then-Democratic-majority Congress passed the stimulus by the end of the month.
And the conclusion?
Nevertheless, the bottom line is this: Not only did the stimulus not provide the boost that was promised, but the $819 billion hole it blew in the budget only exacerbated economic uncertainty in a nation already worried about its deficit. Under the White House’s own predictions, had Congress done nothing, the economy would be better off.
The policies of this administration are consistent. If it will fail, let’s do it.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
At this rate (averaging the last two years) it will take us more than 4 & 1/2 years just to regain the jobs lost since Obama took office.
Longer if we are to regain all the jobs lost since the start of the recession.
Obama has no interest in creating the environment business people really need to invest and create jobs.
Until Obama does that, we’re going to have sub-par growth and that is not good news for anyone who is out of work.
@Nan G: As community organizer Obama was always able to shake someone down. Tough to do when you’re President.
@nan_g Um, you mean since democrats started writing the budgets back in 2007, don’t you? And the loss of three million jobs in two month after passing the minimum wage hike in 2008. Bush never even SAW a budget for 2009 because democrats apparently don’t like to pass budgets. Obama signed the very late 2009 budget. Here we are at four and a half years of democrat budget control (At least we took the house back this year.) The deficit was 168 billion in 2006. In 2011 the deficit is 1.7 TRILLION. Unemployment under the republicans in 2007 was 4.6. Today the real number is more like 17% (the U6.)
The recession was caused by the democrats Community Reinvestment Act which congress used to force banks to take bad loans until they overloaded the system with debt causing the recession.
The new great depression is being caused by over regulation and over taxation. Look how Obama ended all those jobs in the Gulf with his illegal drilling moratorium followed by the permit moratorium, and his continued refusal to issue any drilling permits in the last couple of years.
The high energy prices are what Obama promised when he ran: Gas prices more like Europe. He also promised to bankrupt energy companies. Everything is more expensive because of democrat ‘green’ policies.
Quantative Easing? Really?
Where are all of our liberal commenters in this post?
@Randy: Probably gathering “facts” to dispute the real facts.
Facts like when Obama requested to raise the debt ceiling by over two trillion dollars without deep spending cuts in government spending, House Democrats joined Boehner-led Republicans to rebuke Obama.
Had that been a Republican president slapped down by so many within his own party, the mainstream media would be signaling that impeachment was soon to follow.
Obama left Dems in the lurch last election, refusing to even visit many districts for the incumbants who stood by him to pass ObamaCare.
I’m going to go out on a limb and just say it: we are going to see elected Democrats speaking out against Obama more and more.
Voting against him was just the start.
He seems to be quite jocular in the photo above. Does he think this is funny? I’ll bet George Soros does. I guess when some people are on drugs everything, even the deficit, seems funny and gay. Maybe he’s drinking his own KOOL Aide.
The Chart is being updated at a new site.
http://www.economics21.org/files/updated%20unemployment%20stimulus%20graph.png
The E21 blog is all about Economic Policies for the 21st Century.
The E21 appears to have been around less than one yer, but a perusal of their essays looks like it is a must-read monthly, if not weekly.
A great tie-in to this topic today is their Sept. 28, 2010 article:
Finally Some Real Evidence on the Stimulus: Less Effective than You Think