The greatest creation of the Messiah's administration has not been jobs, but rather the convoluted language justifying deficit spending that sends real dollars into rabbit holes with depths unknown. I've long held that government never "creates" a job. It is only a business which can create a job and that is only a result of demand for the product of that business. If there is driving demand the revenue generated will enable the businessman to hire more employees. Government produces no product and hence generates no revenue in the traditional non-confiscatory sense and therefore can never "create" a job.
The creation of the administration is the new terminology, "created or saved jobs." The obvious difficulty in measuring when a job was in jeopardy and a particular action saved it seems to elude the Bamster. Since it is immeasurable it is difficult to really disprove it. Unless of course, the claim is so patently false that even ABC News notices. Try this on for size:
Bread Cast Upon Imaginary Waters
Who would ever have thought that some curious journalist from a major network would actually look at the claims of recovery.gov regarding jobs saved or created in relation to specific amounts of stimulus spending?
Well, ABC did and the astonishing discovery was that jobs were saved and created in congressional districts that don't even exist!
But, the real mystery here relates to the question that isn't addressed in that news item. If the page lists specific dollar amounts that went to create or save these jobs as claimed in non-existant districts who in fact got the money?
One or two errors in a massive compilation of statistics can be excused, but when you've got a laundry list of job creation claims against specific congressional districts and a lot of them are imaginery you begin to suspect more than errors. We know that the money was appropriated and distributed, but if the administration documents that it was spent in non-existent locations then where did the real money go? Who got the check? What happened to it?
Is this entire business simply an embezzlement of the public funds?
1 comment:
I think in a way it always has been a con. Infrastructure and Defense jobs may be the only legitimate expenditures, but those are actually "cost of doing business" expenses and easily tracked because they actually produce something besides paperwork, something measurable.
It's administrators and their cadre who sop up the money like gravy on a biscuit, and create more jobs underneath their level to justify their existence.
*sigh* But you're spot on with your curiosity about where it all went. I suppose we shall just assume that it's lining the pockets of the kleptocrats.
Post a Comment