The Political Environment: Stimulus Produced More Than One Million Jobs, At a Mininmum

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Stimulus Produced More Than One Million Jobs, At a Mininmum

Says the Congressional Budget Office.

12 comments:

Ron R said...: Like many liberals and enviromental activists you quote ESTIMATES to support your beliefs. When I was in engineering school we referred to this as a SWAG. (Stupid Wild Assed Guess to those on the liberal arts side of campus); May 25, 2010 at 7:51 PM
James Rowen said...: A short post is meant to get a reader interested in the link. It's the same as a headline.

Try not to stumble over your slide rule when you walk away from the computer.; May 25, 2010 at 8:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Uh huh. A wild ass guess is as good as a fact.

Sounds like creating jobs and global warming share the same scientific measure.

And don’t forget to point out that it continues to be “saved or created.”

Keynes, East Anglia – tomato, to-mato.; May 25, 2010 at 11:32 PM
James Rowen said...: Can you folks read the linked story. The CBO uses the term "estimates."

It produces estimates.

The story title is:

From the Congressional Budget Office: Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output from January 2010 Through March 2010; May 26, 2010 at 12:01 AM
Anon Jim said...: Yeah, and according to the Feds the unemployment rate will never ever officially go over 10%, no matter how high the rate really is.

Seeing as that would be an inconvenient truth.

And anyone who seriously believes a million jobs were created by the "Stimulus" is either a fool, or is deluding themselves.; May 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM
James Rowen said...: Anon Jim - - Pretty arrogant comment.; May 26, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Ron R said...: No James, it's not arrogant. Probably it is a good ESTIMATE.; May 26, 2010 at 9:42 PM
jpk said...: Funny to see these bumpkins comment about econometric methods.

For the record, the estimates are based on regression models used in modern economic analysis.

FYI these estimates are provided at a 95% confidence level, the standard in economics.

Unless you give specfic criticisms about the statistical model, it's pretty clear you don't know what you're talking about.

Read the report. If there's something specific in the model that doesn't make sense, I'd be interested.; May 27, 2010 at 2:53 PM
James Rowen said...: JPK: "Read the report?' Those guys don't read. They react. Their gut tells them what's truthy.; May 27, 2010 at 3:10 PM
Ron R said...: Then why didn't your headline say 1 million ESTIMATED jobs, I read the article fine, your headline was misleading. (Imagine That); May 28, 2010 at 9:15 PM
James Rowen said...: To Run R; A headline gives a snapshot. The wording "At A Minimum," suggests that it is a ballpark figure. The headline is not misleading. You are picking nits where none are.; May 28, 2010 at 10:24 PM
James Rowen said...: For those of you interested in this back-and-forth: Here are the estimates {on the low side, lest anyone think I was over-emphazing the results) in the CBO report referenced in the blog item and headline:

"Increased the number of people employed by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million, and

Increased the number of full-time-equivalent jobs by 1.8 million to 4.1 million compared with what those amounts would have been otherwise.æ; May 28, 2010 at 10:38 PM