As Dr. Phil would say ....so, how's that working for 'ya? Obama ought to go talk to a group of these folks at one of his 'town hall meetings'.
We need real jobs in this country, not pretend jobs funded by government
Look on the bright side. At least we will still have the debt and the interest obligations from this program; and will for years to come. So you can’t really claim with a straight face that it was a temporary program.
So...they lost their ~$250/week stimulus funded jobs. They are now elligible for ~$250/week unemployment for 52 weeks, right?
Deck chairs on the Titanic.
So much for the Stimulus Program; unfortunately for America, the Marxists in this administration - which means most or all government workers - refuse to realize a fundamental truth: the government can only stimulate the economy by de-regulating business and lowering taxes.
With the current mob utterly ignorant of the lessons of history, America is headed straight for communist-style economic failure as demonstrated by the late and unlamented Soviet Union.
Alas, Premier Obama will waffle and equivocate forever while America continues its economic slide. He could not be destroying his adopted country more quickly if he were doing it intentionally - which he may, in fact, be doing.
WHAT?
You mean my census job is not PERMANENT?
Boo-effing-hoo.....
I would like to know what kind of jobs these people were doing?
Look to see this HEAVILY covered on MSNBC. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
“Tens of thousands lose stimulus-subsidized jobs”
Yep, and here’s why: Governments Don’t Create Jobs!
Most of us who’ve objectively studied economics, history, business, and politics know that no government can create an abundance of sustainable and wealth-producing jobs. If governments could create jobs, then a private-sector economy wouldn’t be needed. This has been tried in economic systems such as communism, socialism and fascism, and we all know how well those kinds of economies have worked out.
Not surprisingly then, Obama’s economic “stimulus” has amounted to little more than “creating” jobs that are the modern-day equivalent of a hole-digging-hole-filling operation, with miniscule positive benefit to the currently stalled economy. That’s because, by definition, jobs “created” by government “stimulus” are jobs the private-sector economy didn’t/wouldn’t/couldn’t create because such jobs would not result in the creation of economically useful goods and services.
Worse, when the government stimulus stops as it invariably must, the government-created jobs will cease to exist because their only rationale for existence in the first place was government subsidy.
Even worse, the Obammunists have had to borrow the money for their various stimuli, obligating future generations to pay back this money with interest. Such wasteful borrowing is economically quite destructive in the long run for multiple reasons.
First, because government-stimulated jobs are not sustainable, the money has in fact been wasted, meaning the money could have been spent for something far more useful. For example, if the Obammunists had permanently reduced tax rates on private-sector job-creators, then real and sustainable private-sector job growth could have occurred. And while the deficit impact would initially have been the same as deficit “stimulus” spending, tax rate reductions would have produced new taxable wealth from the private-sector economy, creating new tax revenue that would offset the tax rate reductions.
Second, borrowed money has to eventually be paid back and with interest. Debt repayments reduce what the government has to spend in the future, and this weakens the government’s ability to fund essential projects such as the military, national security, law enforcement, medical research, consumer protection, national infrastructure, etc.
Finally, when too much borrowing has occurred, the government is forced to increase tax rates and/or promote inflationary policies to make it possible to both pay back its creditors and continue to operate. Both of these strategies are extremely detrimental to economic growth, plus inflation produces additional injury by wiping out the savings of those who were thrifty enough to delay gratification in exchange for a way to survive when they became too elderly to work full time.
Thus, while deficit “stimulus” spending may produce an initial ephemeral gain, it pretty quickly damages the future economy and everyone who participates in it.
The bottom line is that deficit stimulus spending is like a powerfully addictive drug. At first, the short term artificial improvement seems delightful, but then you’re forced to maintain, or even increase, the dose. If you stop cold-turkey, the resulting crash is awful, and yet the longer you go without stopping, the worse the crash. The problem of course is that eventually you must stop or otherwise you meet a fatal end.
So think about the above as the leftist media hammer their incessant drumbeat for continued, and even increased, deficit “stimulus” spending. How well has deficit “stimulus” worked out so far, and how well do you think more of the same would help? And finally, who are you going to support in the upcoming elections? Those who have promulgated wasteful and addictive deficit government “stimulus” or those who claim they will put our economy back on a self-sustaining course via private-sector growth?
*******a stimulus-subsidized employment program came to an end. About a quarter of a million people in 37 states were placed in short-term jobs thanks to a $5 billion
******
Deflection and distraction from this view. And where did/is the 700 billion gone/going? Let’s have a piece by piece breakdown of those numbers.