Saturday, June 23, 2012

Obama White House Spends 
$10 Billion Tax Dollars
To Create.....
355 Permanent Jobs

Alternate Headline: If A Republican President Had Wasted This Much Of Our Money, It'd Be A Huge Scandal Already

"I'm so much smarter than all those business owners in the private sector
that sometimes it hurts."

Want to see rank stupidity in action?  The biggest lie Progressives ever foisted on the public is that ivory tower academics & politicians who have never run a business or met a payroll know far more & are far better at 'creating jobs' than private sector business owners.  

That is not just untrue, it's stupidly untrue.  

And for all time, the Obama White House has now demonstrated it beyond all dispute.  

Whereas private sector businesses are risking their OWN money when they choose whether or not to expand, hire new people, open up new facilities, etc., Government bureaucrats & academics in Washington are risking OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY, tax money.  

Consumers that generate profits for businesses that lead to hiring and expansion are CHOOSING to use that businesses services.  Taxpayers don't have the luxury of refusing to pay taxes to the Federal & State & Local government.  

You would SUPPOSE this would mean that the government servants that get this tax money would be MORE responsible and careful with how they spend it.  But that isn't the case. 

While Progressives want to obsess over what greedy rotten capitalists choose to do with their own profits, they totally ignore the huge amount of waste, corruption and fraud that goes on when government flunkies get billions of other people's money to spend.  

It's not THEIR money so why should they give a crap how carefully it's spent? 

When Obama & Co. came into office, they had a detailed strategy - which Obama has expounded upon at length at every opportunity - about scaling back on oil, coal and natural gas fossil fuels while pumping up and encouraging the development of alternative sources of energy like wind & solar power.  They even have a cool phrases they threw around to sell the strategy, like 'green tech', and 'green jobs'.  

Now if they'd just left it at encouragement, that's fine. But they didn't. They not only decided to deliberately ramp down American domestic production of fossil fuels, they also decided to pour billions and billions of tax dollars into green tech firms in the hopes this would create a big wave of new 'green jobs' that would force the market to shift from the fossil fuels to be more favorable to green sources of energy.  

Now it's 3 1/2 years later after they started pursuing this strategy.  What are the results?  

First, from last week, here's a Congressman getting a Department of Energy spokesman to admit what the Obama White House now calls a 'green job': 

Keep that in mind when you hear this administration boast about how many 'green jobs' have been produced in the last 3 1/2 years due to the billions of tax dollars they've poured into these green tech companies.  Almost ANYTHING counts as a green job to these people because they realize how truly awful the numbers are and so they try to artificially inflate their abysmal results.  
"I don't understand your question. Just because we've wasted billions of the
taxpayer's money on failed green loans, you want to know if we'll stop 
pouring tax dollars into failing green tech companies?  Why would we stop?
It's not like this is our own money or anything.  We don't see the problem here."

How abysmal are the results?  Try this on for size:
The Obama administration spent $10 billion to create 355 renewable energy jobs per year, according to testimony offered Tuesday before Congress by a Congressional Research Services expert. 
Asked by Rep. Cory Gardner (R., Colo.) “how many jobs were created” in 2009 and 2010 under the 1603 renewable energy grant program authorized by the Obama administration, a CRS specialist in public finance admitted that $10 billion was spent to create 3,666 construction jobs over a two-year period–and only 355 jobs per year going forward. 
Dr. Molly Sherlock, the CRS specialist, first said the jobs total would depend on the type of job–and differentiated between “induced,” “direct,” and ”indirect” jobs–before Gardner asked for a straight number. 
“I just want to know how many jobs were created,” Gardner said during the hearing. 
“If you’re looking at the direct jobs, this one estimate has direct jobs created at 3,666 in the construction phase, and direct jobs created at 355,” Sherlock said. “Direct jobs would just be the construction jobs and the ongoing operations and maintenance jobs. But if you wanted to look at the supporting jobs in other industries then you’d want to look at the other figures.” 
“So for direct jobs—just if we look at the first year, this is average jobs per year, it’s 355 jobs per year—in two years, 355 jobs created a year, $10 billion?” Gardner asked. 
“That would be jobs per year going forward,” Sherlock responded, “so these would be jobs that would be retained, average jobs per year going forward, yes.” 
“For $10 billion?” Gardner clarified. 
“Yes,” Sherlock said.

Realizing how bad this testimony made the loan program look, the DOE sent a statement to the Washington Free Beacon: 

“The highly successful 1603 tax program has played a critical role in the dramatic expansion of America’s renewable energy industry over the past three years – supporting more than 30,000 renewable energy projects, leveraging more than $25 billion in private sector investments and creating tens of thousands of jobs in installation, construction and operation, as well as up and down the manufacturing supply chain,” said DOE spokesperson Jen Stutsman. “This program has helped to build infrastructure that will spur economic development and job creation in the country over the long-term and ensure the United States can compete in the global clean energy economy.”

Uh, Jen Stutsman?  Didn't your OTHER official spokesperson just testify before Congress that the program produced 355 direct jobs per year?  It's nice you want to fudge the figures by adding in temp construction jobs and all, but 'tens of thousands'?  

Molly Sherlock wouldn't even venture above 5,000 jobs total including all the temporary construction jobs. Permanent, direct jobs were only 355 a year.  

I also question the claim that this gov't loan program shelling out billions of taxpayer cash to these green tech companies has resulted in the 'leveraging [of] more than $25 billion in private sector investments  because if private investors were rushing $25 billion dollars of their own hard-earned cash into these green tech companies, why the hell does this gov't loan program exist in the first place?  

They've reached a point where they are simply going to tell us all huge whoppers and hope we swallow them.  

The only good thing to come out of this when the final accounting is done after these present clowns are all thrown out of office by the voters this November?

The final tally of just how much of our money they burned up on these stupid projects will be an eternal warning to the American public once and for all what happens when you listen to stupid Progressives who never worked in the private sector talk about how awesome they are at creating jobs and want billions of tax dollars to prove it.  

1 comment:

  1. Commensurate with that, we see good interest in the renewable groundwater sector, more
    than the UAE's target.

    My webpage pv cell temperature