Skip to comments.$200K Per Job? Timothy Geithner Says White House Jobs Plan Is Still a Bargain
Posted on 09/27/2011 6:34:42 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner didn't dispute a Harvard economist's estimate that each job in the White House's jobs plan would cost $200,000, but said the pricetag is the wrong way to measure the bill's worth.
And he also pointed out, in an interview today with ABC News' David Muir, that there is no other option on the table for getting the economy moving and putting more people back to work.
"You've got to think about the costs of the alternatives," Geithner said when asked about Harvard economist Martin Feldstein's calculation that each job created by President Obama's American Jobs Act would cost taxpayers about $200,000.
"If government does nothing, it does nothing now because they're scared by politics or they want to debate what's perfect, then there will be fewer Americans back to work, the economy will be weaker," he said.
"We can borrow money for 10 years as the government of the United States because people have confidence in this country at less than 2 percent," he said. "The responsible path now is to take advantage of the unique position we're in as a country. People have a lot of confidence in us. Let's take advantage of that now to do things that help growth in the short-term."
Geithner told Muir he believes there is a "very good chance" the Jobs Act will pass because the proposals have seen bipartisan support in the past and the cost of inaction is far too high.
"If the alternative plan is for Washington to do nothing, that's unacceptable," Geithner said. "If the alternative plan is to sit there and say we're going to cut our way out of this by just cutting spending, that would make the economy weaker. Or we're going to sit here and just complain about regulation. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Geithner really is an idiot. Of course, so are the American people who voted for Obama.
Are you sure this isn’t a parody? John Semmens has punked ABC News?
Can you imagine if the FedGov tried to run a McDonalds? There would be minimum wage employees that cost taxpayers $200,000 a year. There would be dozens of bureaucrats for every location and the top officials would make up to $500,000. They would never make a profit and they would accept food stamps of course.
Geitner and Co. aren’t idiots. They’re amongst the most brazen thieves in history. We’re supposed to think they’re just inept. It’s part of the act.
How out of touch can these ass clowns I’n D C get?
I see stories like this and I wonder, too. But, this is the same WH that told us food stamps are good for the economy along with unemployment checks, a new government program, Obamacare, will cover more people and bring down healthcare costs, ect ect and i believe this story is real based on past history
Well, they’re very convincing!
Economically - 100% wrong
This is political vote-buying and nothing more
Give me $50,000, and I’ll start a Cat D car repair business, hire two people and double the money in a year.
RE: Give me $50,000, and Ill start a Cat D car repair business, hire two people and double the money in a year.
Won’t banks give you a loan for that? With very low interest rates today, you should be able to (emphasis on “should”).
I’ll do it for $190K. There, I just saved $10,000!!!
“...Obama’s American Jobs Act would cost taxpayers about $200,000.”
The $200,000+ per job created is the best spin put on it. The real cost will be much more. A rational leader would do nothing other than taking off the nonsense regulations and get out of the way of the private business sector. The magic of capitalism would create wealth, spur investments in products and production and put many more Americans back to work than any big government program.
What kind of insanity is it when you pay $200,000 dollars to create one job that pays $50,000 dollars, and the job will probably run out in a year.
Somebody in Government is sh1tsimple.
Maybe we'll get a Nobel prize for our bold and innovative solution.
Oh, it's worse than that. Most of these jobs are less than a year, often far less. A highway bridge may take a year to build, but that does NOT mean that the construction people get a year of work. The riggers and crane operators may work for 4 months, the guys who paint the bridge may work 4 weeks, the landscapers may work less than that.
Even the numbers they give are inflated.
I think you are 100% correct.
I am also sure that is how DC makes cuts.
Our plan would count as a $20K savings. . . . . . . . . .
We get $180K for a job & we will split the $1M Nobel prize money.
And to think I woke up worried about money. . . . . .
Timmy needs to crack a history book-and preferably one NOT vetted by Harvard.....
Warren Harding figured it out in 1920...
Congress and the Executive Branch have lots to do.
So far theyre not doin it right..
Harding cut the governments budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Hardings approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third. The Federal Reserves activity, moreover, was hardly noticeable. As one economic historian puts it, Despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction. 2 By the late summer of 1921, signs of recovery were already visible. The following year, unemployment was back down to 6.7 percent and was only 2.4 percent by 1923.
BTW..ole Warren ALSO fixed immigration...
Mr. Harding signed into law the Emergency Quota Act which sought to control immigration following World War I and preserve the distinctive American culture by ensuring the majority of immigrants came from the historically compatible cultures of Northern Europe. This law aimed to bring wages of hard working Americans under control by limiting immigration to 3% of the 1910 census. It was followed on by a similar act in 1924, after Mr. Hardings death.
A Warren Harding prescription...if filled ...would ignite the afterburners on the US job machine and the economy. However DC would have to yield on a tremendous amount of power. Our job as We the People...is to persuade them of the utility ..shall we say..of doing so. In all probability the same minds that made the mess...arent capable of the solution however.
BTW any takers that Bammy couldnt even tell you that Warren Harding was one of his predecessors in office?
Even more telling about what our betters in the RinoCracy think of a Constitutional President..
With creative people like us this country is bound to prosper. /smile