June 5, 2009

Obamanomics Graph of the Day

Filed under: Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 2:27 pm

Yikes (from Michael’s Comments; HT BizzyBlog commenter dscott):

stimulus-vs-unemployment-may

For hard-of-comprehension lefties, the three lines, all of which start in Q12007, are:

  • “With Recovery Plan” — What the Obama administration claimed would happen to the unemployment rate if the so-called, misnamed economic “stimulus package,” the one that nobody had the time to read, passed.
  • “Without Recovery Plan” — What the Obama administration claimed would happen to the unemployment rate if the so-called, misnamed economic “stimulus package,” the one that nobody had the time to read, didn’t pass.
  • Third line ending in dots for March ’09, April ’09, and May ’09 — What has really happened to the unemployment rate since the so-called, misnamed economic “stimulus package,” the one that nobody had the time to read, passed.

The three dots mean that things are not only worse than Obama predicted if the plan passed, but they are worse than Obama predicted if the plan didn’t pass. Three months in, it has become pretty close to conclusively clear that we would have been better off if we had done nothing.

I blame Bush …. and Rush Limbaugh …. and Sean Hannity …. and Dick Cheney (/sarc).

Don’t blame Boehner:

Share

18 Comments

  1. As someone said (I believe it was Greta on Fox) if they had really wanted to do something immediately to help reduce unemployment, why not reduce or eliminate the payroll tax and make it cheaper for businesses to hire folks?

    Nope, much more fun for Obama to increase spending and stupid unworkable government programs.

    Comment by zf — June 5, 2009 @ 3:06 pm

  2. The utopian denial of reality will bear it’s fruit in August when we see the July stats. How will the MSM spin 11% unemployment come August? 3 million high school grads will be looking for work this summer. 1 million will go on to college, current college grads account for the May spike in unemployment and partial for June.

    I can see the headlines now – 10% unemployment, layoffs peter out in June, the end is near!

    Comment by dscott — June 5, 2009 @ 3:45 pm

  3. Wow. You have a real problem with logic, bud,

    How you conclude that “it has become pretty close to conclusively clear that we would have been better off if we had done nothing.”?????

    The data show nothing of the kind. What they show is that the administration was pretty far off in their estimates of future unemployment. Thats all it shows. IT does not in any way preclude the possibility that if the stimulus were not passed, the numbers might have been even higher yet.

    OF course it doesnt show that they would have been either. We cannot do the experiment and actually see what would have happened in both scenarios.

    Therefore, the rate which we would be seeing now if the stimulus were not passed has to be estimated from something model. Obama administration would clearly estimate that the numbers would have been higher.

    You ASSERT that they would have been lower. Why? Whether you like the government stimulating the economy or not, whether you think it may be a disastrous debt buden going forward – it does seem hard to beleive that spending all that money isnt going to help employment a bit, no?
    But you go way beyond denying any postive benefit – you are claiming that the stimulus has made the employment numbers WORSE.

    How on earth can you justify such a claim?

    Comment by Joe Citizen — June 5, 2009 @ 4:18 pm

  4. My guess is that if we did nothing, we’d be at the end of the recession, and on to recovery. If we had cut taxes too, we’d already be in a boom.

    Comment by Joe C. — June 5, 2009 @ 4:19 pm

  5. #3 –

    How on earth can you justify such a claim?

    Uh, I look at the chart.

    I’m just going with the all-knowing, all-seeing predictions Obama et al used to justify the “stimulus.”

    THEY predicted things would get better in the wake of the stimulus, and BECAUSE of the stimulus. THEY predicted that unemployment would have almost peaked this month at about 7.9%, gone to maybe 8.0% in June, and then would start heading downward. THEY predicted that uemployment would go to 9.0% if we did nothing (a phrase Obama straw-manned to death during the time period).

    Unemployment has gotten far worse than predicted since the stimulus instead of better — even worse than the 9.0% THEY predicted things would get if we “did nothing” — seven months ahead of schedule.

    I’m not the one who asserted that the Recovery Act was going to improve things. THEY are. So far, they are as wrong as wrong can be.

    This is all about Obamanomics and its failure thus far to revive the economy, or to even keep it from further declining.

    To answer your question, the “stimulus” hasn’t been a “stimulus,” and everyone who looked at it with clearly eyes knew it wouldn’t be a stimulus. They predicted that the money wouldn’t get out with any kind of speed (unlike tax cuts of probably half the size, which would have had an immediate, very positive impact). They noted that it was larded up with entitlement expansion money that has nothing to do with stimulus, and it is. Finally, they predicted that a lot of the projects the stimulus dollars would be used for would be relatively low value adds for the economy. That has also been the case, as stimulus money, to cite just one such example of probably a gazillion, been thrown at suburban LA towns for transportation projects, even though they have no need for transportation projects.

    Comment by TBlumer — June 5, 2009 @ 7:03 pm

  6. [...] And the result? Let’s look at the Obamanomics Graph of the Day: [...]

    Pingback by Fausta’s Blog » Blog Archive » The Treasury bond market in cardiac arrest — June 5, 2009 @ 7:22 pm

  7. The so called do nothing plan by Repubs would have been:
    1. Unleash the oil and gas companies to drill domestically, thousands upon thousands of jobs would have been created without one red cent of tax payer funds.
    2. Squash all talk of future tax increases, making permanent the Bush Tax cuts, dispense with CO2 foolishness and healthcare so called reform – or rather screw up.
    3. Lower the tax on businesses if not eliminate them, capital gains and others.
    4. Repeal the CRA and every friggen agreement that had anything to do with social responsibility based lending. I.E. no more bad loans to people who can’t pay them back.

    The effects would have been immediate on the price of gasoline as shown by just talking about repealing the drilling ban with Bush removing all executive orders. the economy would have turned on a dime.

    The whole thing started by meddling in the economy by your buddies Obama, Pelosi and Reid, they broke their 2006 campaign promises, EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM but especially about lowering the price of gas.

    Unlike the idiots who currently run this government, business people understand what makes the economy go, it’s called investment in plant and equipment setting the stage for job expansion.

    Tom, I think it is necessary to give a primer on economics since too many people are challenged when it comes to what really drives the economy. Remember my post several days back about manufacturing vs. retail spending being the prime driver of the economy?

    Comment by dscott — June 5, 2009 @ 8:27 pm

  8. [...] Covering: Stop The ACLU, BizzyBlog, QandO, Fausta’s Blog, Politics and Critical Thinking, Gateway Pundit, Fox News, Hot Air, The [...]

    Pingback by Ouch: So much for that simulus! « Political Byline — June 6, 2009 @ 1:02 am

  9. The data points for March, April, and May are as far above the without line as that line is above the without line. This seems to indicate that the stimulus plan is accelerating the unemployment. This is quite likely since the government has no money unless it first takes it from the people, or borrows it, which takes money from other more useful investments, or just prints it which makes all money worse less than before. Either way money is taken out of the economy to be spent on political favors.

    Comment by mndasher — June 6, 2009 @ 9:29 am

  10. #9, indeed.

    The stimulus plan is worse than doing nothing.

    It fiddles while the economy burns.

    And never forget that it was Pelosi, Obama, and Reid talking down the economy, promising to starve it of energy, and promising to tax the more productive, during the entire time between June 2008 and the passage of the stimulus — raised to a fever pitch after Election Day — that threw business and then consumer psychology into a defensive uncertainty funk.

    Comment by TBlumer — June 6, 2009 @ 9:39 am

  11. Here is another thing we could do right now to jump start the economy that falls in line with investing in the infrastructure of the country with the point of efficiency and efficacy of capital to jobs and cost structure savings. The point of all investment in plant and equipment is to use capital to either improve the efficiency of the manufacturing process or reduce the energy used both of which adds to the bottom line or at least preserves it in the face of rising costs.

    Inhofe knows what he is talking about!
    http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=b803570b-cd92-42f1-a750-3dd25a014b71

    Comment by dscott — June 6, 2009 @ 11:42 am

  12. And here is an example of higher prices reducing tax receipts:

    Inhofe: Highway Trust Fund Shortfall Unacceptable

    http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a1cf65bb-802a-23ad-421d-0b8145ec2ff8&Region_id=&Issue_id=

    Due largely to extremely high gas prices, receipts deposited into the Highway Trust Fund dropped precipitously. That combined with a busy construction season caused the trust fund balance to fall from $4.2 billion at the end of July to less than $1.4 billion at the beginning of September. State DOTs responded to this announcement by delaying vital construction projects.

    Here is the real reason why shovel ready projects aren’t shoveling. Not to mention which even Inhofe didn’t mention is the fact that non road projects such as light rail consume a lot of trust fund outlays.

    Comment by dscott — June 6, 2009 @ 11:55 am

  13. And now Tom, please, please update the thread again!

    More in depth analysis: Job Lossess Offer Clues to Recovery

    http://www.news-to-use.com/2009/06/job-losses-offer-clues-to-recovery.html

    Guess where the jobs were added????? Guess, guess…

    I so wish I could display the chart embed. dang!

    http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-AQ173A_Econo_NS_20090605201620.gif

    Comment by dscott — June 7, 2009 @ 11:12 am

  14. #13, I’m a little annoyed at the total overlook on the non-seasonally adjusted numbers. I’m finally convinced that everybody assumes that virtually everyone believes that -345,000 is what happened on the ground. They’re wrong; it isn’t.

    Comment by TBlumer — June 7, 2009 @ 1:18 pm

  15. #14, Yes that is typical of the MSM cherry picking the numbers to suit the agenda of the moment. Weren’t they just sticking with seasonally adjusted in the run up to the election to dramatize the largeness of the numbers and now they go with the unadjusted data to minimize the numbers and worse their entire diversionary focus has been on unemployment claims and discounting the national unemployment number itself.

    However, there is an even bigger implication in the numbers exposed here. Notice that only 3 sectors of the economy added jobs: Health Care, Government and Education. All the others were still losing. Now when Obama and the libs force health care reform and trim “costs” out of Medicare and Medicaid, by direct extension they MUST trim employment in health care to achieve that savings! Where do you think those billions of dollars go to that so called Big Pharma was going to cut from prescription costs???? You really think that would be from the profit margin? NOT! It will be as a result of so called automation technology reducing the need for PEOPLE to perform paper work functions. That’s right folks, Obama’s so called savings are an accounting gimmick of giving pink slips to the pencil pushers at Big Pharma, the insurance companies and potentially medical providers by digitizing data and thus transfer that cost to the unemployment line. Ordinarily I would say to bad so sad because those people would be absorbed in the general job creation of the economy. Thanks to Obama and the libs, the economy isn’t adding jobs, it’s shedding jobs because everyone is hunkering down for the next big cost to doing business: CO2 foolishness and small businesses having to count CO2 molecules in some yet to be determined manner.

    Comment by dscott — June 7, 2009 @ 4:43 pm

  16. #15, no they’re still going with seasonally adjusted as if it’s reality, as they always have.

    Re your second paragraph, automation has been happening, but it will probably be put in at a slower pace once Uncle Sam manages it, even though they think they’ll impose it quickly (almost everything is slower and costlier with govt.). You’re right, those let go need a dynamic econ environment to find their next line of work, and it mostly isn’t there.

    Comment by TBlumer — June 7, 2009 @ 9:19 pm

  17. I like the blatant dishonesty here. Why not plot the Jan and Feb unemployment figures?

    Oh yeah, because that should show that unemployment projections were wrong before the stimulus even passed.

    Keep doing what you do.

    Comment by Dero — June 12, 2009 @ 4:26 am

  18. #17, nice try, but the blatant dishonesty is in your comment.

    the Jan. figure of 7.6% is built into the existing graph, and is on both the light and dark blue lines, which are in the same place.

    The Feb figure of 8.1% isn’t on the dark blue line, but it’s on the light blue. Though the plan passed in mid-February, there was every expectation that something like it would pass even before Obama’s inauguration. So we should have been staying on the dark blue line based on that expectation. But no — the reaction in the economy to the impending stimulus was the opposite of what Team Obama promised.

    If you don’t like the (valid) expectations explanation, then consider that if Team Obama was dumb enough in mid-late January to draw up the graph based on the stimulus being passed RIGHT NOW, THIS MINUTE, but that it wouldn’t have any effect until passed, whose fault is that?

    Anyway, the stimulus plan passed on February 13. The last 15 days of February should have been under the glorious reign of the stimulus plan, moderating the evil unemployment rate.

    But …. the SOOOOO important and urgent plan that had to be done RIGHT NOW, with its shovel-ready projects (cough, cough) and all that blather …. wasn’t signed by Obama until February 16. So only the last 12 days of February were actually under the glorious reign of the stimulus plan. Whose fault is that?

    Keep trolling as you do.

    Comment by TBlumer — June 12, 2009 @ 8:26 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.