Econwatch
May 18, 2009 3:56 PM

Unemployment Rate Calls Stimulus Claims Into Question

(iStockphoto)


Early this year, as the U.S. Congress prepared to debate a $787 billion spending bill that's better known as the stimulus plan, President Barack Obama claimed that immediate action was necessary to prevent unemployment from skyrocketing.

"Experts agree that if nothing is done, the unemployment rate could reach double digits," Mr. Obama said in a January 24 radio address. "If we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad situation could become dramatically worse." The same month, his economic advisors released a report saying that, without the stimulus, unemployment would hit around 8.5 percent by April 2009, and 7.8 percent with it.

We know what happened next: a Democratic Congress quickly approved the legislation. But what may not be as obvious is that even with the stimulus, current unemployment is far worse than the Obama administration had predicted: it's already 8.9 percent.

In the last few days, a marked-up version of that chart has rocketed around economics and public policy blogs, with some administration critics arguing it showed the stimulus was unnecessary. (For perspective, the stimulus' generous $787 billion is roughly 60 percent of the total revenue that the IRS collects each year from Americans' personal income taxes, or almost seven times the entire GDP of New Zealand.)

Harvard University economics professor Greg Mankiw wrote on Sunday: "In light of the shifting baseline, it is impossible to hold the administration accountable for whether its policies are achieving their intended effects." The conservative Heritage Foundation dubbed it "Obama's growing credibility gap."

Ed Morrissey, a conservative blogger and radio host, argued: "Not only did the stimulus plan not work, the unemployment actually rose faster with the 'recovery plan' in place than the Obama administration predicted unemployment would rise without it."

In fairness to the administration, it's possible that the economy simply was in worse shape in January 2009 than report authors Christina Romer (now chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors) and Jared Bernstein (the vice president's chief economist) believed it to be. While economists are used to dealing with uncertainties, nuances tend to be lost in Washington's political process.

This points to another problem, which is the virtual impossibility of judging whether the stimulus is working or not. Mr. Obama said in February that the legislation "will save or create 3 million to 4 million jobs over the next two years."

The problem: If unemployment rises, the administration can claim that it would have been worse without the stimulus package. If unemployment falls, it can claim that the stimulus worked. That's called having your $787 billion and spending it too.
(CBS)


Tags:
unemployment ,
stimulus ,
obama ,
economics
Topics:
Employment
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 44 Comments
by May 23, 2009 5:51 PM EDT
The economy is crashing because of years of over borowing by the average Joe, and now Obama is going to fix the problem boworing for us because we can not or will not borrow any more. Isn't there something wrong with this picture. Aren't we curing the patient with the poison that is making him sick. When these commie bastards try to force alot taxes on us to pay for all this reckless spending the people are going to revolt and vote these pinko's out for sure. The USSA is going to go the way of California who's people rejected any new tax increases and forced the state to make cuts to its budgett. BUSH SPENT TOO MUCH AND OBAMA IS SPENDING TOO MUCH AND THEY AREN'T GOING TO FORCE THE HOME OF THE FREE TO PAY FOR IT!
Reply to this comment
by Trust_me_ May 23, 2009 10:48 AM EDT
Banks are starting to make loans again, construction will be on the rise. It amazes me that people ignore what is going on for 8 years, let everything crash and then are impatient to it all to be well again in a few months. Get real people, it is your own ignorance and going along with corruption that caused all of this. Shut the heck up and help make it better.
Posted by sjc_1

I will not lift a finger to help turn this country into the USSA!
Reply to this comment
by Trust_me_ May 23, 2009 10:46 AM EDT
Yes we can .... Yes we can ..... - WELL APPARENTLY NO YOU CAN"T IS MORE LIKE IT !!!!!!!!! The empty suit Pied Piper conned many of you losers and you fell for it....Maybe you are now in the unemploymemnt line...you reap what you sow...trillions to bankrupt us and people and businesses are suffering all over...You fell for it - all of it and Obama is laughing his head off. Suckers !!!
Posted by junglejimy12

LOL The little train that couldnt !
Reply to this comment
by Trust_me_ May 23, 2009 10:43 AM EDT
Or we are truly doomed.
Posted by jswilliams451

Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Elected to four terms of office

"New Deal" strategy of Government funded initiatives, public works programs, and overhaul of the financial system.

Elected
1932-1936.

His other terms being 1936-1940, 1940-1944 and 1944-

till his death in office from a Cerebral Hemorrhage on April 12, 1945, in Warm Springs Georgia. He was 62

If he didn?t die at 62 how long would he have been in office.

This is all Obama is trying to do and why he is installing the exact system Roosevelt had.
Reply to this comment
by jswilliams451 May 22, 2009 7:51 AM EDT
No one is telling us the truth. The fact of the matter is, this is NOT a recession. It is the start of Great Depression II. It started in late 2007 and early 2008, and its just getting worse. Government may be able to mitigate the decline somewhat. As FDR tried to do, starting in 1933. But its still going to be very, very bad.

The reason is, the economic growth models we have used since the end of WWII to fuel our economy have all run their course. And the previous two administrations, Clinton and Bush, did little to nothing to help engineer a soft landing for us.

We need new models now to move us forward and fuel economic growth. The green energy revolution can help. But its only going to be a small part of the equation. The rest is going to have to come from the American People and our penchant for innovation.

Or we are truly doomed.
Reply to this comment
by jonesjep May 21, 2009 4:23 PM EDT
"Just about everything about this recession has been worse than anyone predicted and it's not due to Obama"
...........................

It is worse because of Obama's actions. Even Liberal CBS is telling the truth now!!
Reply to this comment
by sjc_1 May 21, 2009 3:58 PM EDT
I call it the "Calvary Effect", once you know help is over the rise, you can hang on until it does. This was a huge factor months ago, just after the change of power. People knew that someone cared and would not just say "I got mine, screw you".
Reply to this comment
by lerlanger1 May 21, 2009 1:24 PM EDT
Just about everything about this recession has been worse than anyone predicted and it's not due to Obama. It's due to unregulated banks, hedge funds, etc. etc. who got greedy and gambled the economy into oblivion. This article proves nothing. The fact is the freefall has abated and consumer confidence is starting to turn around. Why? Because everyone sees that the current administration is taking action. I remember the term "kneejerk liberal" from the 70s and 80s. Today it's the conservatives who have become kneejerk and refuse to face reality.
Reply to this comment
by costaricantodd May 21, 2009 8:19 AM EDT
LOCATED IN CARTAGO, COSTA RICA. NEW HOPE COSTA RICA SPECIALIZES ON HELPING THOSE WITH ALCOHOL AND DRUG ADDICTIONS. ANXIETY OR EATING DISORDERS AND CANCER RECOVERY.

WE TAKE PRIDE IN OUR 69 ROOM RESORT THAT BOAST 3 POOLS, 1 FED BY VOLCANIC WATER( GREAT FOR ACHES AND PAINS) FULL MED-SPA, FITNESS CENTER, YOGA AND MASSAGE THERAPY. ( IT'S OK TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF)

OUR STAFF INCLUDES DOCTOR'S,NURSE'S, COUNSELOR'S, AND NUTRTIONALIST.

IF NOW IS THE TIME FOR YOU TO MAKE THAT NECESSARY CHANGE IN YOUR LIFE.

(506) 2533-3341 EXT 105 CONFIDENTIAL
TODD COX TODDCOX@NEWHOPECOSTARICA.COM

HTTP://COSTARICANEWHOPE.COM
Reply to this comment
by sjc_1 May 19, 2009 2:34 PM EDT
Banks are starting to make loans again, construction will be on the rise. It amazes me that people ignore what is going on for 8 years, let everything crash and then are impatient to it all to be well again in a few months. Get real people, it is your own ignorance and going along with corruption that caused all of this. Shut the heck up and help make it better.
Reply to this comment
by SSTGuy May 19, 2009 11:03 AM EDT
Unemployment will be double digit soon. Backlogs for commercial building projects and manufacturing are drying up. US manufacturing base is dying and the "service jobs" don't pay. Work at Ford Motor or Wall Mart? Contrary to current popular belief there is nothing surgical or positive about companies going bankrupt. During their reorganization they have to find cost reductions which = less people and the government picks up some of the pension costs. What Obama policy will encourage economic investment? Employee Free Choice Act?, Nationalizing Finance Sector of Economy?, Taxing S corporations, National health care? Cap and Trade--National Energy Tax? The stock market is not the economy only the score keeper. Nobody is going to invest in the US economy or hire people until they see a more favorable business environment. Only the government can work in the red and continue to hire. Expect 10+ % unemployment soon.
Reply to this comment
by vranger May 19, 2009 8:48 AM EDT
And on the subject of the economy, how convenient that CBS is evidently not even reporting that Obama is refusing, during a trip to Nevada, to meet with the state's GOVERNOR concerning remarks he naively made that have cost the state's economy an estimated 100 million PLUS.

It has always been clear that Obama is naive and incompetent, but now we can add appalling cowardice to his resume.
Reply to this comment
by vranger May 19, 2009 8:44 AM EDT
"Must he also have an intuitive understanding of uncharted territory"

This is not uncharted territory. Carter left us in this same situation, and Reagan brought unemployment down from 9.8% to right at 4%. Obama just needs to study a bit of Reagan, for the good of the country, but don't expect him to, due to both this misplaced pride and naivity of both Obama and his DNC string pullers.
Reply to this comment
by budmag06 May 19, 2009 5:47 AM EDT
"a bad situation could become dramatically worse." Liberals, don't worry! Tax cheat Tim Geithner said the recession is over."
Reply to this comment
by declanm-2009 May 19, 2009 1:44 AM EDT
ubrew12: Yep, Mr. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate, thinks the stimulus package was necessary. Other Nobel laureates see things differently:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/28/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4759532.shtml

jxknowles: I've written before about how the stimulus money will take a while to be spent. But it seems fair to say "Obama said X would happen by April 2009 if the stimulus was approved" and looking to see whether X happened or not. By this admittedly narrow measure, X is nowhere in sight.
Reply to this comment
by valh1 May 18, 2009 10:26 PM EDT
Is CBS questioning the brilliance of the Annointed One? The stimulus will work, our Master has said that it would.
Reply to this comment
by democracy1 May 18, 2009 9:21 PM EDT
Over the past 30 years, we've seen the average worker's pay falling in comparison to the GDP (while their productivity rose dramatically) and CEO compensation soaring. Companies lay off the "little guy" while keeping CEOs who are often overpaid even while incompetently tanking their companies.

We have also seen the burden of the cost of health care and retirement plan fees increasingly transferred to the worker from the employer over the same time period of time. And since it's considered part of your "compensation package", essentially your "compensation" has gone down.

Isn't it strange that in my parents' generation only one parent generally needed to be the breadwinner? And we weren't buying the latest toys and gadgets (still don't).

But they had full health insurance for their families through their employer.

AND they were able to have a decent pension through their employer.

AND CEOs made a lot less then, relative to the average worker.

AND companies felt a certain loyalty to their workers (which no longer exists).

Care to tell me how all THAT all happened?

How much can you put on the "little guy's" shoulders before he collapses?
Reply to this comment
by democracy1 May 18, 2009 9:07 PM EDT
The garbage concept of trickle-down was fobbed off to us on the pretense that the wealthy would give us all better-paying jobs instead of upping their own pay or hiding it in the Caymans while laying off the average worker to outsource his/her job to India for a tenth of what they had to pay an American employee.

You can't take what has become the most destructive economic paradigm of the past 100 years and turn it around overnight.

Especially when people refuse to see that the vast majority of profits that keep those companies going has come from the middle class in America. When that same middle class no longer has money to spend to drive the economic engine, we all lose.

When people claim that poor people don't employ anyone, they are right. What they fail to see, by focusing on that part of the discussion is that if the wealthy can't make a profit from the middle class, then there is NO profit, no exorbitant CEO pay, no jobs. So the remedy is to stop laying off the middle class while paying super-salaries to the CEOs.

Pay less to the CEOs and more to the middle class (like it was in my father's generation in the 50s and 60s) and watch the economy take off.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 May 18, 2009 9:03 PM EDT
Ed Morrissey, a conservative blogger and radio host, argued: "Not only did the stimulus plan not work, the unemployment actually rose faster with the 'recovery plan' in place than the Obama administration predicted unemployment would rise without it."

Has the stimulus plan even been applied yet? I think its still making the rounds out to the state governments. As with private investment, the stock market is a leading indicator, and the employment statistics are a lagging indicator. Hence, employment would be the last thing you'd expect to change as a result of the stimulus package (which is why they railroaded it out as fast as they could). I don't even think the package has gotten to the point of application where its actually hiring people.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 May 18, 2009 8:57 PM EDT
Joseph Stiglitz thinks not only was the stimulus package necessary, but we need another one. He's a nobel prize winning economist, and who is Declan McCullagh?
Reply to this comment
See all 44 Comments

About Econwatch

News and analysis on the state of the economy from CBS News.

E-Mail EconWatch

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Kennedy: Bishop Barred Me From Communion

    (337 recent comments)