Obama’s Own Stimulus Predictions Show We’d Have Been Better Off Without It
Upon arriving late (as usual) to his press conference, Obama launched into a tirade about the obstructive Republican party that has gotten in his way so often that the world is now on fire as a result.
This was, in part, a way of using the bully pulpit to remind Americans how awesome the Recovery Act (Stimulus) was and that it is the reason for all of our wonderful employment which sits at 6.2%. This number ignores that there are 3.6 million fewer full-time jobs than there were in 2007 as well as the millions of workforce dropouts that have simply given up. But hey, he’s got a new stimulus to fund because somehow after spending a trillion dollars, we still haven’t fixed any roads or bridges.
But how do you measure the success of the stimulus anyway? Obama claims it’s with our current job numbers, but even accepting the highly misleading 6.2% number, did the stimulus come through?
Well according to their own predictions, the short answer is no. The long answer is HELL no.
In fact, according to the experts that crafted the monstrosity, we would’ve done better had we not had a stimulus bill in 2009 at all.
If you can’t quite make that out it shows that as of this year, we should’ve been at 5% unemployment, with or without the stimulus. So one can only assume that means that their efforts actually impeded our ability to return to pre-recession employment.
I’m surprised the media ignored this milestone given that this landmark bill was the first major “accomplishment” of his administration and the predictions it laid out all extended to this year. Seems like a good time to review how things went. Strangely, unless I simply missed the reports, the media remains silent on it.