Just love it when folks try to make a number seem precise … 640,329 jobs. Should have said 640, 329.186 jobs, now that would be precise!
Back to reality.
From February 2009 through September 2009 the United States lost 3,386,000 jobs.
This is a fact that is easily confirmed at the US Bureau of Labor Statistics website.
Nearly 3.4 million jobs lost, Feb-Sep 2009. Net jobs lost. Not gained, not saved, not imagined.
Presumably any “created or saved” jobs are already factored into this bottom line number.
Assuming the administration is not lying.. err.. mistaken about their numbers, all the latest report means is we theoretically would have lost 4.4 million jobs if not for the stimulus.
Instead of lying… sorry again… reporting that jobs have been “created or saved”, why not tell the truth. Assuming the assessment is correct, the stimulus has slowed the acceleration of job losses.
Is that good enough? Cause for celebration? And how does that translate to the assertion that we are on track to “create or save” 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010?
If we have a net loss by the end of 2010 of 5 million jobs will we be told it would have been 8.5 million if not for the stimulus?
And what of this promised 3.5 million jobs. Should that figure not be 3.5 million more jobs than existed when the promise was made? Is the target not a net gain of jobs instead of some imaginary reduction in the loss of jobs?
So we should really expect to see 6.9 million jobs created between Oct 2009 and Dec 2010 so that the net gain will be 3.5 million jobs.
Here again is the chart showing the promise vs the reality:
Long way to go folks… what piece of the stimulus can we expect to move that line up?
|
|
|
|