Obama claims he will create 4 million jobs but "subject to significant margins of error"

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama countered critics with an analysis Saturday by his economic team showing that a program of tax cuts and spending like he's proposed would create up to 4.1 million jobs.

...

The 14-page analysis, which was posted online, says estimates are "subject to significant margins of error".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090111/ap_on_...e/obama_economy

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

From the same source:

University of Maryland economist Peter Morici said the analysis attempted an economic justification for a political decision. He said evidence suggests that working class families would spend the modest tax credits — $500 per individual or $1,000 per family — on low-cost, imported products that do little for the U.S. economy. He also said state and local governments don't need as much aid as Obama is proposing.

"They should stick to the infrastructure spending" in the plan and jettison much of the rest, Morici said in an interview, because that is the most likely proposal to provide a short-term economic boost and long-term benefits.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

From the same source:

University of Maryland economist Peter Morici said the analysis attempted an economic justification for a political decision. He said evidence suggests that working class families would spend the modest tax credits — $500 per individual or $1,000 per family — on low-cost, imported products that do little for the U.S. economy. He also said state and local governments don't need as much aid as Obama is proposing.

"They should stick to the infrastructure spending" in the plan and jettison much of the rest, Morici said in an interview, because that is the most likely proposal to provide a short-term economic boost and long-term benefits.

That sounds logical.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

From the same source:

University of Maryland economist Peter Morici said the analysis attempted an economic justification for a political decision. He said evidence suggests that working class families would spend the modest tax credits — $500 per individual or $1,000 per family — on low-cost, imported products that do little for the U.S. economy. He also said state and local governments don't need as much aid as Obama is proposing.

"They should stick to the infrastructure spending" in the plan and jettison much of the rest, Morici said in an interview, because that is the most likely proposal to provide a short-term economic boost and long-term benefits.

That sounds logical.

You think it's logical to to produce an analysis that can be described as an attempt at an "economic justification for a political decision"?

Can you imagine if Bush produced an analysis like that?

I thought we were going to get an economic decision, not a political one. Instead, we get a political decision with an economic justification. Pathetic!

[aidan80 9]

Looks good, actually looks like he's started creating new jobs already!

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Looks good, actually looks like he's started creating new jobs already!

That's a funny one.

[~PalmTreeGurl~ 154]

Its not true. He wont create 4 million jobs.

[aidan80 9]

Its not true. He wont create 4 million jobs.

There's what 300 million people in the country.. get that Ice Cream into enough Wal-Mart's and I'm sure we'll be well on the way!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

There's what 300 million people in the country..

Since we're talking about jobs, that's not the relevant number.

The size of the civilian labor force in the US is just over 154 million (154349000) according to the BLS in December 2008.

[aidan80 9]

There's what 300 million people in the country..

Since we're talking about jobs, that's not the relevant number.

The size of the civilian labor force in the US is just over 154 million (154349000) according to the BLS in December 2008.

I was talking about total population that could in theory buy some Ice Cream not how many people could in theory work! I'm sure it won't take much work to eat the stuff

Edited January 11, 2009 by aidan80

[one...two...tree 2,762]

From the same source:

University of Maryland economist Peter Morici said the analysis attempted an economic justification for a political decision. He said evidence suggests that working class families would spend the modest tax credits — $500 per individual or $1,000 per family — on low-cost, imported products that do little for the U.S. economy. He also said state and local governments don't need as much aid as Obama is proposing.

"They should stick to the infrastructure spending" in the plan and jettison much of the rest, Morici said in an interview, because that is the most likely proposal to provide a short-term economic boost and long-term benefits.

That sounds logical.

You think it's logical to to produce an analysis that can be described as an attempt at an "economic justification for a political decision"?

Can you imagine if Bush produced an analysis like that?

I thought we were going to get an economic decision, not a political one. Instead, we get a political decision with an economic justification. Pathetic!

That's Morici's take. I'd like to know how he can qualify that statement.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

That's Morici's take. I'd like to know how he can qualify that statement.

Morici's an economist. I thought you were all about the experts

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Its not true. He wont create 4 million jobs.

Yes he will. Maybe even more.

[~PalmTreeGurl~ 154]

Its not true. He wont create 4 million jobs.

Yes he will. Maybe even more.

No he wont, get over it ...

[rebeccajo 14]

Its not true. He wont create 4 million jobs.

Yes he will. Maybe even more.

No he wont, get over it ...

You got a crystal ball or something?