I'm sure it was frustrating for Dr. Summers -- who wasn't exactly forthright about stimulus numbers himself (more on that later) -- but it would have been easier for him to make his point if he came to MTP with graphs. Like this one:
The best explanation I've found for why the stimulus didn't work is
this graph from the GAO analysis of the stimulus act. It shows pretty
clearly that the 76 percent of stimulus spending through the first four
months went to fill in the gaping holes in Medicaid and state budgets.
In other words, the stimulus isn't acting like a pole vault lifting job
creation above the baseline. It's been acting like a crutch to keep
state budgets and payrolls from imploding tumbling. (Update: Those in need to crutches are not, in fact, at risk of exploding, imploding, or any sort of ploding if we take those crutches away. Mixed metaphor, away with you!)
Nice. A proposed refinement:
Dividing up the FY 2009 outlays is half the picture, but I think you also need another graph showing what percentage of the total spend actually occured in FY 2009. Until I know how many billion of the total got spent in FY 2009, knowing how they were distributed doesn't do me much good.
"It shows pretty clearly that the 76 percent of stimulus spending through the first four months went to fill in the gaping holes in Medicaid and state budgets. In other words, the stimulus isn't acting like a pole vault lifting job creation above the baseline. It's been acting like a crutch to keep state budgets and payrolls from imploding tumbling."
.........Er..........this was part of the plan.......Roughly $170 billion of the stimulus program was intended to prop up state spending and thereby prevent massive layoffs at the state level(what would unemployment have been without it)......since you're supposed to be an economic commentator Mr Thompson I'd have thought you knew this.......the rest of the $800 billion was divied up as follows: $260 billion for tax cuts and rebates to prop up consumer spending much of which is already out there (where's that in your chart?)......and the remaining roughly $370 billion for infrastructure projects most of which will be spent in the second half of this year and next......You're spinning not providing objective analysis
Yes- keeping nurses, doctors, and teachers employed is all part of creating or saving jobs. There is a kind of sexism involved in this kind of attack which sees creating construction jobs to build highways as "real jobs" and health care workers as not real employment.
It's strange and disturbing but seems to be an emerging anti-stimulus arguemnts.