Obama predicting the stimulus would prevent double digit unemployment

Someone recently challenged me to prove that Obama predicted a dire outcome if we reached a 10% unemployment rate.... and that the way out of it was a stimulus.

From AP:

Throughout his remarks, Obama painted a stark picture, including double-digit unemployment and $1 trillion in lost economic activity—that recalled the days of the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Huh.

But wait. Maybe AP misunderstood what Barack said at George Mason on Jan 8th, 2009?

Now, I don't believe it's too late to change course, but it will be if we don't take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years.

The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four.

We could lose a generation of potential and promise as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and our standing in the world.

In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse.

Hmm. I guess not.

But that was just one speech... right?

These are America’s problems, and we must come together as Americans to meet them with the urgency this moment demands. Economists from across the political spectrum agree that if we don’t act swiftly and boldly, we could see a much deeper economic downturn that could lead to double digit unemployment and the American Dream slipping further and further out of reach.

Of course, you can't trust that source. Its Change.gov.

$278,000 per Stimulus Job

The Weekly Standard did the math, and that's what it works out to be. At least using the numbers of the White House economic advisers:

...the “stimulus” has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion

I think that $278,000 per job created or saved is a great bargain. Don't you? I mean, in US government terms...

Paul Krugman predicted 7.3 unemployment with the stimulus

The other day, I found myself in another stupid Facebook debate with someone didn't know their facts.

I should be used to this by now. But it never fails to get to me when someone who leans to the left insists that I'm uninformed while saying something that's provably not true.

This all started when a friend posted a link to a Paul Krugman article.
I called Paul an idiot (my bad) and then stated why he was an idiot: That all of the spending he championed failed to bring down the unemployment rate.

Now I'd reprint the debate verbatim if I could. But as it happens far too often, a friend of my friend kept using insults until the original friend blocked us both from her Facebook account.
So by trying to correct the record with facts, suddenly, I'm the asshole. Even though I wasn't the one calling her other friend names.

I know. I know... I'm losing the point of why I wrote this.
Paul Krugman was for spending shitloads of money through the government. We all agree on this. He believed that it would result in a lower unemployment rate.
It is also true that Krugman was upset that only $787 BILLION dollars was being spent on the stimulus program. Krugman believed this to be small. Which makes sense.
I mean, if you're going to be a Keynesian economist, why wouldn't you believe in spending more money? Ideally, by spending 50 Trillion Dollars, we'd go into a huge economic boom that would never be matched! Right?

My friend's friend insisted that Krugman was right. That the stimulus was too small... which is why it had no effect. He said that Krugman readers would know that Paul predicted that the stimulus bill would fail to reduce the unemployment rate.
But Paul didn't say that.
In fact, Krugman said:

Unemployment is currently about 7 percent, and heading much higher; Obama himself says that absent stimulus it could go into double digits. Suppose that we’re looking at an economy that, absent stimulus, would have an average unemployment rate of 9 percent over the next two years; this plan would cut that to 7.3 percent, which would be a help but could easily be spun by critics as a failure.

Wow. A 7.3% unemployment rate would be spun into a 'failure' of Obama's $787 economic plan. Presuming, of course, that the president didn't have a fawning media that would change his every failure into rainbows and unicorns.

In case you didn't know this (or were arguing with me on Facebook), the nonfarm unemployment rate for April of 2011 was 9.0%.
I created this handy chart to show you what's the stimulus plan results have looked like, vs. the predicted results. Note that the uptick in unemployment in April has not been added.

Christina Roemer is leaving

One of the WH advisers responsible for creating this chart:


















Is leaving.
About friggin time.

Hannity summing up Barack's unemployment incompetence

With guest Newt Gingritch, the two talk about how the stimulus bill was completely ineffective.

Obama Parkway

Oh man. They are already naming highways after him.

It’s official: An 800-foot stretch of Orlando road is now named “President Barack Obama Parkway.”

The City Council voted Monday to rename a short section of Mission Road between Cason Cove Drive and Conroy Road in Obama’s honor.

This, according to the Orlando Sentinal. The saddest part? Its being paid for with stimulus money, so that some day, some grandfather can tell his grandkid: "You paid for this with money that you haven't even made yet."