| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Since we've been told to trust Obama's economic statistics
Could someone offer a cogent explanation for this stuff that does not include the words "fraud"or "scam" ?
If a private investor put this dreck in the mail they'd be facing a host of federal statutory violations.
Here’s a stimulus success story: In Arizona’s 9th Congressional District, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that’s what the website set up by the Obama Administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says.
There’s one problem, though: There is no 9th Congressional District in Arizona; the state has only eight Congressional Districts.
There’s no 86th Congressional District in Arizona either, but the government’s recovery.gov Web site says $34 million in stimulus money has been spent there
But there's more
In fact, Recovery.gov lists hundreds of millions spent and hundreds of jobs created in Congressional districts that don't exist.
In Oklahoma, for example, the site lists more than $19 million in spending — and 15 jobs created — on Congressional districts that don't exist. In Iowa, it shows $10.6 million spent – and 39 jobs created — in non-existent districts.
In Connecticut's 42nd District (which also does not exist), the website claims 25 jobs created with zero stimulus dollars.
We should have caught on quicker when we saw listings for jobs created in Bloom County, Gotham City, San Andreas, Sunnydale, and Sodor.
UPDATE: A reader reports, "I have heard the congressmen representing Lake Woebegone, MN and Margaritaville, FL are livid those communities did not get their fair share of stimulus funding."
I can speak from personal knowledge that Connecticut has never had more than six congressional districts. If it now has 42, I may want to announce my candidacy for the open seat.
Jeez, and I thought Vice President Biden was on top of all this and "no one messes with Joe"
So when we are told that we must give full faith and credit to any economic number generated by the Obama Administration that appears inconsistent with observed reality, please ask him where Arizona's 86th Congressional District is.


Comments
and on the topic of 3rd quarter GNP growth...
James Pethokoukis reports on his twitter feed that JPMorgan is telling everyone there's going to be a major downward revision in the previously stated number. We'll see. I wouldn't be running around spiking the ball and doing high fives; we might not be in the end zone yet.
Let's see what the number reported for the 4th quarter is. Remember when you hear retail sales figures they had better be ahead of a year ago; last Christmas was an unmitigated disaster for the retail sector. Improving on that dismal performance is no great feat.
If they revise downward and stll get a positive number
then that is still a positive number, and that is the point - the that the patient has stopped getting worse. But it is going to take a long time to get back to full health.
Sorry to break it to you, but the GDP figures are revised EVERY quarter. Hell, if they revised all the way down to zero it would STILL be an improvement over the 4 quarters before it. Of course, that isn't going to happen. 10% at most.
2008 was the worst recession since the Great Depression. If you've got a plan for fixing all that damage in less than a year, I'm sure we'd all like to hear it.