Gay Patriot Header Image

Dems prefer academic theories of job creation to economic reality

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 7:40 pm - January 24, 2011.
Filed under: Big Government Follies,Economy

Over at Michelle Malkin, Doug Powers provides an important datum which helps explain why so many Democrats, apparently the president included, believe increased government spending is a necessary means to create new jobs.  It’s what they learned in college.  And if their professors taught them governments create jobs, well, experience be damned, it must be so!

While evidence continues to pour on showing that the hundreds of billions the federal government showered on the states failed to hold the unemployment down as the president’s economic advisors predicted, “evidence” the editors of the Washington Examiner report, “is mounting that economic superstition is alive and well in the nation’s political circles, though it has nothing to do with a fondness for tax cuts. It’s instead the crazy belief that the government can spend its way to prosperity for the rest of us.

Over at Powerline, John Hinderaker provides a handy-dandy chart showing that “the ballooning public expenditures of recent years have not caused a boom in the job market“:

Jobs:Spending Comparison.001.jpg

He is still “not shaken,” Jennifer Rubin writes, “in his belief that government spending “creates jobs’.

Hans Bader finds it to be “a bad sign for the American worker” that “‘The new spending’ Obama will call for will likely ‘include initiatives aimed at building the renewable-energy sector—which received billions of dollars in stimulus funding'”:

This is because such green jobs programs have wiped out thousands of American jobs in the past.  The $800 billion stimulus package used “green-jobs” subsidies to send American jobs overseas.  79 percent of those subsidies went to foreign firms, such as an Australian firm that imported Japanese wind turbines, effectively outsourcing American jobs.  It also wiped out jobs in America’s export sector.

Still beholden to the nostrums of the left on green jobs and government spending, the president is setting the stage for a showdown with congressional Republicans.  Perhaps, that’s part of his political strategy.  But, if Republicans hold firm on their principles, this showdown could redound to the benefit of the GOP.   Americans have no appetite for more government spending and indeed want elected officials to hold the line on such expenditures.



  1. Human capital is destroyed by u/e.

    Ah, I see we’re to the usual moocher’s tactic of whining about how we have to pay his bills because of “the poor”.

    NDT, agreed. “Human capital” and “the poor” are both shibboleths that left-wingers trot out cynically, to try and shut down a pro-capitalist viewpoint. If lefties actually cared about the poor, they would become pro-capitalist, as capitalism is what has raised the living standards of the poor so much, these last two centuries. But lefties don’t actually care about the poor; only about punishing success (fulfilling their inner envy of the successful).

    Likewise, in this case, I talked about how Harding’s government-reducing response to the 1920 recession let the economy recover quickly from that recession and got the pain over with quickly, which was a great boon to the unemployed and to human beings everywhere… while Hoover and Roosevelt’s government-expanding response dragged out the 1930 recession for over a decade of agony. And likewise with Obama’s government-expanding response to recession today, or Zimbabwe’s. If a person cares about the unemployed and “human capital”, in truth and not just as a pose, it should be clear which path is better.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 29, 2011 @ 11:20 am - January 29, 2011

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.