By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT —  Governor-elect John Bel Edwards has declared that Louisiana has given him a mandate to do what he wants, what he promised during the campaign, and he intends to govern just that way.  Among his first steps, as I outlined last week, will be working to enact the Medicaid expansion that Governor Jindal has resisted.  Another high priority for Edwards is to raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $8.50 per hour.

Edwards vows that he will govern just as he campaigned and has no hidden agenda.  So far he is making plans to do just that.  I can’t help but think of Obama’s campaign where to too made promises that he vowed to keep, like destroying the coal industry.  Making and keeping promises isn’t always a good thing; one hopes that sometimes policy decisions may be re-evaluated.

Raising the minimum wage will only serve to force employers to pass costs on to consumers and in some cases will encourage employers to hire fewer employees thereby increasing the unemployment rate which is Louisiana is at about 6%.  But it’s okay if you lose your job because Edwards transition team is looking at reinstating SNAP benefits to 64,000 out of work people.

As Edwards works to get his teams and people in place, the question of who will be speaker of the House is drawing some interest.  Edwards has endorsed Democrat Walt Leger, citing in part the idea of bipartisanship.

“This time we’ll have a Republican president in the Senate (John Alario, R-Westwego) and a Democrat as speaker. I’m not asking for anything I didn’t agree to eight years ago. It’s entirely the same approach to bipartisanship.”

I’m pretty sure he said that comment about Alario being a Republican with a straight face, but it’s hard to tell.  Alario is about as Republican as Barack Obama is.

It remains to be seen how Edwards will govern and I know he has some plans toward education in the state that are positive, so I’m going to try to keep an open mind.  I would hope that rather than raising minimum wage and upping food stamps that Edwards would work to enact tax incentive policies and reduce government waste in efforts to bring jobs back to Louisiana.  Our bread and butter is the oil and gas industry and we need to keep those industries healthy and thriving which will also help support those small businesses which feed off of them.

Raising the minimum wage, expanding Medicaid, and upping food stamp benefits is only a Band-Aid.  We need jobs.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

Autumn pipes
Next stop Atlantic Ocean?

By John Ruberry

President Obama may soon find out what how it feels to be un-upped by Canada in a hockey-style shootout.

Since his inauguration nearly six years ago, Obama has been dragging his feet in regards to approving the Keystone XL pipeline. The proposed pipeline will bring much-needed petroleum from our friends in Alberta in Canada to the United States, which will lessen our need to import oil from hostile regimes such as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. I can’t imagine America buying oil from the Islamic State, but more oil on the market means cheaper prices, which will of course harm ISIS and bolster our national security.

The northern segment of Keystone will pass through the Dakotas and Nebraska. There is a smattering of local opposition in the Cornhusker State and some legal obstacles, but let’s be clear: Obama, the man who bragged earlier this year that he doesn’t need Congress to make things happen because, “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” would have found a way to break ground for Keystone XL by now if that’s what he wanted.

But Obama is of course more concerned about the needs of his wealthy environmentalist donors, who either believe that the era of fossil fuels is over or that the use of this Canadian oil will contribute to global warming. Obama, who once promised to heal the planet, is on the verge of being outmaneuvered.

TransCanada Corp., the mover behind Keystone, is strongly considering an-all Canada pipeline for the Alberta petroleum, Energy East, the terminus of which will be at St. John, New Brunswick on the Atlantic Ocean. The oil can be shipped from there to America or to western Europe, which will be welcomed with open spigots by countries fed up with buying petroleum from Vladimir Putin’s Russia.Canada

Bloomberg News is reporting that the supporters of Energy East are very confident that it will be built. A proposed western Canadian pipeline could still be constructed, although that route faces opposition from some Canadian First Nations people.

But if Keystone is built, it will mean up to 40,000, good paying–and are you reading this Obama?–union jobs. If the new pipeline from Alberta never crosses American soil, those jobs will taken by Canadians. Meanwhile, we have to go back to the sad Jimmy Carter years to find a time where the American labor participation rate has been lower than it is now.

I can imagine Obama looking north soon, as Jay Gatsby did from West Egg at the green light at the end of Tom and Daisy Buchanan’s pier, at those thousands of new jobs north of the border.

The last words are for the environmentalists: Despite your numerous protests and your arm-twisting of Obama, that oil is going to be pumped from the sands of Alberta whether you like it or not. Your Canadian War is over.

You lost.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

By Steve Eggleston

Yesterday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the August jobs report, and the news was not good. The seasonally-adjusted 144,000 non-farm jobs added, with 134,000 in the private sector, broke the 8-month streak of at least 200,000 jobs added per month, and was unexpectedly worse than the expert consensus of 220,000-230,000 jobs added. The prior two months’ worth of jobs gains were revised down by a net 28,000.

Meanwhile, even though the unemployment rate fell by 0.1 percentage points to 6.1%, that was due almost exclusively to more people departing the workforce. Only 16,000 more people were employed on a seasonally-adjusted basis in August, while the labor force declined by 64,000. That drove the seasonally-adjusted labor force participation rate back down to its multi-generational low of 62.8%, a level that, prior to October 2013 (and again in December 2013, April 2014, May 2014 and June 2014), was last seen in March 1978. The seasonally-adjusted employment-population ratio remained stuck at 59.0% for the third consecutive month, a level not seen between February 1984 and August 2009.

As usual, the deeper one digs into the numbers, the worse the news gets. Once again, there is a disconnect between the estabilshment survey, from which the jobs numbers come and the household survey, from which the unemployment numbers come. On a seasonally-adjusted basis, while there were 354,000 non-farm jobs added since June per the establishment survey, there were 168,000 fewer people working in non-farm jobs in August than in June per the household survey. That continues a multi-year trend – while there were 2,512,000 non-farm jobs added on a not-seasonally-adjusted basis since August 2013, there were only 2,064,000 more people employed in non-farm jobs on a not-seasonally-adjusted.

Staying with the non-seasonally-adjusted numbers, the 63.0% labor-force participation rate is the weakest August since August 1977’s 62.7%. The 59.1% employment-population ratio is, other than August 1982’s 58.7%, the weakest August between August 1977’s 59.0% and August 2010’s 58.8%. In fact, a larger percentage of the population was employed in August 1969 (59.2%) than was employed last month.

One more item – had each 5-year age group participated in the labor force at the same percentage as that group did in August 2008 (with the youth participating even more to cover the fact that the employed portion of the 60-64, 65-69 and 75+ year old population is larger than the entire population of those age groups back in 2008), the unemployment rate would have been 8.8%, not 6.1%.

Revisions/extensions – Related to this, the Los Angeles Times has a story on the booming street vendor phenomenon that has grown well beyond its traditional recent immigrant base to include, among others, laid-off professionals. While the Times has a short memory and didn’t make the connection, those with a sense of history might note the similarities to the last “Great” economic downturn, the Great Depression.

By Steve Eggleston

Yesterday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the July jobs report, which says that on a seasonally-adjusted basis, the economy added 209,000 jobs with the unemployment rate ticking up 0.1 percentage point to 6.2%. That marks the 6th month in a row that there were at least 200,000 jobs added, the first time that has happened since 1997.

Regarding the unemployment tick-up, it is as much a factor of people looking for work again as it was people losing jobs. While 131,000 more people were working on a seasonally-adjusted basis in July than in June, and 209,000 people were added to the 16-and-older civilian noninstitutional population (not seasonally-adjusted), 191,000 more people were officially listed as unemployed.

The bad news – that 6-month surge appears to be as good as it gets. From American Enterprise Institute’s James Pethokoukis:

Overall, it was a bad report for the job metrics “dashboard” of Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen. As economist Robert Brusca points out, ” … we see that the unemployment rate has risen, the U-6 rate is up. The long-term unemployed share of total unemployment is up. Part-time workers are up, part-time workers looking for full-time work is a higher ratio. Marginally attached workers are greater in number. There are more discouraged workers.”

Then again, what can you really expect from an economy that has expanded by just 2.4% over the past four quarters, and a mere 2.2% over the five years of the expansion? Now there are signs wage growth could be ready to accelerate. And maybe the 4% GDP growth in the second-quarter means above-trend growth for the rest of the year. But as Barclays puts it, “Overall, we view this report as consistent with a return to more moderate job growth in Q3 14 after the Q2 14 surge.”

Indeed, this is the 63rd consecutive month, going back to May 2009, that the seasonally-unadjusted employment-population ratio (59.4% in July) has been below the same month in 1979. It also is, other than July 1982 and July 1983, the worst July between 1977 and 2010. Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate, at a seasonally-unadjusted 63.5%, is lower than every July since 1977.

On a related tangent, the first read of 2nd-quarter GDP, released on Wednesday, was that real (inflation-adjusted) GDP growth grew at an annualized 4.0% rate, with a comprehensive revision of GDP data going back to 1999 knocking up 1st-quarter GDP change from -2.9% to -2.1%. That growth is not supported by the monthly releases of data of various components of GDP, though those montly releases are not comprehensive.

That revision contains a hidden admission – the first 4 years/16 quarters of recovery from the Great Recession, covering the 3rd quarter of 2009 through the 2nd quarter of 2013, was not only worse than any post-World War II recovery, but also worse than the recovery from the 4-year-long recession that started the Great Depression. Tom Blumer’s analysis shows that the both the peak-to-peak real GDP change of 4.1% (from the 4th quarter of 2007) and the trough-to-peak real GDP change of 8.7% (from the 2nd quarter of 2009) are the worst performances on record.

The last year didn’t help the comparisons much. While the 2.4% growth since the 2nd quarter of 2013 allowed the 5-year peak-to-peak real GDP to grow by 6.6% since the Great Recession, which does beat the post Great Depression’s 4-year peak-to-peak estimated 4.3% real GDP growth, it is still signifcantly worse than the worst post-WWII peak-to-peak recovery, 10.9% in the 14 quarters after the 1953-1954 recession. Notably, the 16-quarter mark following the 1953-1954 recession had a GDP level that was 6.9% better than the pre-recession high-water mark, and that was the low-water mark of the 1957-1958 recession.

The 5-year post-Great Recession trough-to-peak real GDP growth of 11.4% is still short of the previous 2nd-weakest 4-year trough-to-peak trough-to-16th-quarter recovery, 12.8% GDP growth following the 2001 recession, and well off the 15.3% 5-year growth following the 2001 recession.

Revisions/extensions – While the trough-to-peak recovery following the 1953-54 recession was +13.8% at the 14-quarter mark, the 1957-58 recession knocked the trough-to-16th-quarter growth to +9.7%, lower than the 5-year trough-to-peak recovery from the Great Recession and higher than the 4-year trough-to-peak recovery from the Great Recession. However, the trough-to-20th-quarter growth following the 1953-54 recession was 17.8%.

By Steve Eggleston

Because Independence Day fell on Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the June employment and jobs report on Thursday. On the surface, much of the report seems strong, especially considering the jobs numbers for April and May were revised upward. On a seasonally-adjusted basis, there were 288,000 more non-farm jobs and 262,000 more private-sector non-farm jobs in June than in May, and the number of employed actually began to catch up to the 5 months of 200,000+ job growth with 407,000 more people employed in June. That dropped the seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate to 6.1%, the lowest since August 2008.

On the good half of the non-seasonally-adjusted side of the numbers, the job gain was close enough to Tom Blumer’s targets for him to say that it might be the beginning of the long-awaited breakout, at least if certain other fundamentals changed. Compared to June 2013, the number of employed grew to a June record of 147,104,000, an increase of 2,263,000 and 1,000 more than the increase in the civilian non-institutional population. The number of non-farm jobs increased by 2,566,000 to 139,761,000, also a June record.

Scratch a bit deeper, though, and there’s still plenty to be concerned about. Even though the number of employed grew by more than the growth in population, on a seasonally-unadjusted basis, the labor force shrank by 92,000 over the past year to 156,997,000. The resulting 63.35% labor-force participation rate (LFRP) is the worst June since June 1976, after the first 4 months’ worth of LFRP came in as the worst since the respective months in 1978 and May’s LFRP came in as the worst since May 1979.

Similarly, the number not in the labor force but who want a job shrank by 458,000 over the past year to 6,694,000. Given the non-adjusted employment-population ratio of 59.4% is, other than the past 4 Junes, June 1982, and June 1983, the lowest June since June 1977, that is a sign people have simply given up on the economy.

In another flashing neon sign of that despair, if one were to adjust the 66.6% non-seasonally-adjusted LFRP from June 2008, the last month prior to the start of the traditionalists’ definition of the Great Recession, for the aging demographics and apply it to the population and number of employed in June 2014, the resulting seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate would have been 8.5%, not 6.1%. Of note, June 2008’s unemployment rate was 5.6%.

Expanding on one of Tom’s updates of his look to include jobs in the accomodations (i.e. hotels) sector, the number of jobs in temporary services and accomodation/food services (i.e. hotels, restaurants and bars) increased by 559,000 over the past year, which accounted for 21.8% of all job growth over the last year. At this point last year, what was derided during the Bush administration as McJobs accounted for only 11.1% of all jobs.

President Barack Obama took the time to gloat that the drop in the unemployment rate was the fastest since 1999. Not much of that can be attributed to any positive developments in the larger economy, whether he was refering to the drop from the 10.0% unemployment rate in October 2009 or the 9.9% unemployment rate in April 2010.

Since I want to be fair, I’ll assume Obama was talking about the drop from October 2009 because the comparisons to April 2010 are even more damning. If the seasonally-adjusted LFPR in June 2014 would have been the 65.0% it was in October 2009, the unemployment rate would have been almost unchanged from then at 9.2%. To put it another way, the economic positives are only responsible for 0.8 percentage points of the 3.9 percentage-point drop in the unemployment rate.

Of course, the aging population means there necessarily will be fewer people working due to retirements. Because I needed to “freeze” the various age groups’ LFPRs at October 2009 rather than either June 2009 or June 2010, I had to use broader data than what I usually use to estimate the effects of the aging population. Instead of having data from 5-year age groups between 25 and 74, I had to use data from 10-year age groups between 25 and 54, and the rather broad 55-and-over group (to go along with the seasoned and unseasoned 16-19 and 20-24 age groups). After gathering that data, to get what the unadjusted number of unemployed would be if the only thing that affected the LFPR was changing demographics, I calculated what the unseasoned LFPR would have needed to be in June 2014 to match that age group’s October 2009 seasonally-adjusted LFPR, calculated what the unadjusted labor force would be for each age group, summed them up to get a total calcuated labor force, and subtracted the unadjusted number of employed from the that total calculated labor force to get a calculated number of unemployed.

Taking both the very marginal improvement in the economy and changing demographics into account, but not the additional departures from the potential labor force, the June 2014 seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate would have been 7.1%. That implies that 2.1 percentage points of the unemployment rate drop would have happened no matter what. It also implies that a full 1.0 percentage point of the drop was due to people just giving up on work.

In sum, over 1/2 of the drop in unemployment since October 2010’s (post-)Great Recession high is because of the aging population, and over 1/2 of the economic-related drop was not because of any positive developments but because of the abandonment of the desire to work. What a shock, SHOCK that is in the wake of the elimination of work-search requirements for food stamps.

By Steve Eggleston

Before I begin disassembling the December jobs report, I need to provide an update on the lawfare against conservatives here in Wisconsin. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the current judge overseeing the John Doe investigation has quashed subpoenas against the Walker campaign and three conservative groups, including two of the largest and most-active groups. That will leave a mark.

Speaking of leaving marks, nobody outside of the White House focused solely on the drop in the official unemployment rate to 6.7%, a level not seen since before Barack Obama became President. That is because of two reasons – the Labor Force Participation Rate of 62.8% has not been this low, other than October 2013, since March 1978, and the 78,000 jobs created is the lowest number since January 2011.

There is no shortage of charts showing how deep the Obama economy has cratered the job market. Sean Davis at The Federalist froze the LFPR at the 65.7% it was in June 2009 when the Great Recession “ended”, and calculates that the unemployment rate would be nearly 11%. The person behind I Took The Red Pill charted the employment-population ratios over the last 19 years, and found that an average of 63.3% of the population was employed in the 12 years of Republican control of at least 2/3rds of the elected branches of government, compared to 58.6% now. Perhaps my favorite chart comes from Hot Air commenter agmartin, which shows an unemployment rate of roughly 9% had the LFPR followed the track predicted in 2002 and reflected the normal retirement pattern of the elders and continued work of the under-55 part of the populace.

Another commenter at Hot Air, Chris of Rights, asked what the unemployment rate would have been during the George W. Bush Presidency had the LFPR been as low as it is now. 45 of the months between 2001 and 2008, including all of 2001 and 2006, would have had no unemployment because the employment-population ratio was at least the 62.8% the LFPR is now, and the worst month of the Bush Presidency, December 2008, would have had a 2.5% unemployment rate.

Once again, the “prime working age” population, those between 25 and 54, took the sputtering economy on the back pocket. On a seasonally-adjusted basis, only 80.7% of the “prime working age” population participated in the workforce last month, with 76.1% of that population holding jobs. Outside of October’s tie, the LFPR was lower than any point since September 1984. Since that statement regarding last month’s “prime working age” LFPR was “…since November 1984”, that is a regression.

Meanwhile, while the percentage of the “prime working age” population working was the fifth-best of the Obama administration, behind the first four months of the administration, it was worse than every month between November 1984 and April 2009. I somehow doubt we are voluntarily returning to the era of 1-worker/2-adult households.

On a year-over-year, seasonally-unadjusted basis, while there were 2,395,000 more people eligible to be in the workforce and 1,363,000 more people employed in December 2013 than there were in December 2012, the workforce shrank by 496,000 and the number of people not in the workforce grew by 2,893,000 as 1,860,000 fewer people were counted as unemployed. The growth in the 55-64 and 65-and-older age groups, 732,000 and 1,460,000 respectively, does not satisfactorily explain away this phenomenon.

While there were 2,191,000 more jobs in December 2013 than in December 2012, that number lags behind the job growth in 2012. The difference between the number of jobs and the number of employed is the largest in recent history, made all the more puzzling by the fact there were 147,000 fewer people holding multiple jobs in December 2013 than in December 2012.


Olimometer 2.52

(DTG) Speaking of Ugly it’s Saturday there are only 17 hours left to this pay week and we remain $217 shy of making this week’s paycheck & payroll.

That’s ugly, but if you want to get real ugly if we combine last week’s tip jar with this one we STILL would not make this week paycheck & payroll.

That’s ugly squared.

But there is a way out of ugly.  and if 9 of you can spare $25 to DaTipJar we will be back on track to make the mortgage and the payroll and start 2014 off on the right note.

Remember if we can get those 58 1/4 subscribers @ at $20 a month the bills will be paid every week. Help make sure this blog can fight without fear all year long.


Last week the news was good, Unemployment down to 7% 200,000 new jobs, the first real sign of the business cycle re-asserting itself.

On simply anecdotal evidence I do finally see some signs of recovery.  I see a lot of help wanted signs as I drive through Fitchburg, Leominster (mostly at places like McDonalds & Walgreens etc but that’s a big change from just a couple of years ago when you couldn’t find a job to save your life providing that even a democrat administration can’t outlaw the business cycle.

Such news would normally be a strong selling point for the administration, but unfortunately nobody believes them.

We’ve seen this administration lie time after time, from Benghazi (it’s about a video) to Obamacare (you can keep your doctor and healthplan) to his uncle (I never had crashing privileges with that uncle).

And if that’s not enough we have the precedent of a job report already faked before the election.

Ronald Reagan famously used to say “Trust but verify”.  I’m sorry to say that we’ve reached a point were we can’t trust this White House or the people who supposedly “verify”.

Not even Nixon managed to so damage this countries institutions.

If you told me in January 2009 that we would be in this situation I would have called you an alarmist.

Village Boy: We’re ashamed to live here. Our fathers are cowards.

O’Reilly: Don’t you ever say that again about your fathers, because they are not cowards. You think I am brave because I carry a gun; well, your fathers are much braver because they carry responsibility, for you, your brothers, your sisters, and your mothers. And this responsibility is like a big rock that weighs a ton. It bends and it twists them until finally it buries them under the ground. And there’s nobody says they have to do this. They do it because they love you, and because they want to. I have never had this kind of courage. Running a farm, working like a mule every day with no guarantee anything will ever come of it. This is bravery. That’s why I never even started anything like that… that’s why I never will.

The Magnificent Seven 1960

I have been known to regularly complain about our current culture, yesterday a poll came out that confirmed my worst suspicions

34.3%: Share of Americans over age 16 who say they don’t want a job

Mind you this is polling people who are unemployed and asking if they want a job, apparently this has been a trend for a while.

Regis Barnichon and Andrew Figura divide up those out of the labor force using a simpler standard: whether or not the person says they want a job. And they uncover an interesting previously unnoticed trend: As a share of all those “not in the labor force,” the number of people who want a job has been generally declining since the early 1980s. Three decades ago, more than 10% wanted a job; on the eve of the latest recession, the share dipped below 6%.

And who are these people who don’t want to work a big chunk are the young:

The decline among young people mirrors a long-term decline in employment rates among young adults, especially teenagers. The reasons for that aren’t entirely clear, but may include a rising focus on college attendance, the disappearance of many low-skilled jobs and cultural factors that put less of a premium on working while in school.

Where could the young get the idea that they should not have to work, Well Michael Graham notes a few people making that case: 

Remember Nancy Pelosi telling college students that ObamaCare would set them free from their need to get a job?

And she’s not alone, particularly here in Massachusetts

Gov. Patrick constantly beats the “there’s no shame in being on the dole” drum. The GOP’s modest reductions in the massive surge of food stamp spending has sent Democrats into “you’re gonna kill the children” spasms.

Of course there was a time when we lived with traditional American Values whose source was the Judeo Christian Culture where the idea of being idle was a source of disgrace, when the idea that work ANY work was more honorable than not.

But  nature arbors a vacuum.  When you throw out a culture of hard work and responsibility a different culture rises up in its place, and that culture might not be so enthusiastic about getting up in the morning and bagging groceries,  working in a Pizza joint.

And it goes without saying such people in that kind of culture aren’t even going to begin thinking about starting their own business and working to generate a customer base.

Why is this the case, well as Dennis Prager put it even conservative parents have underestimate how college and society changes their kids:

One is that most parents with traditional American and Judeo-Christian values have not thought it necessary to articulate these values to their children on a regular basis. They have assumed that there is no need to because society at large holds those values, or it did so throughout much of American history. Villages do indeed raise children. And when the village shares parents’ values, the parents don’t have to do the difficult work of inculcating these values.

But the village — American society — has radically changed.

You can’t count on anyone else to teach your children, you have to do it yourself. You’re the parent you have to carry the responsibility.

If you want to know why we need to fight the culture wars, this is it.

A postscript. Was   talking to a customer when the subject of my sons came up and how I’d like them to meet a nice girl, there was a young lady there who is 21 years old and has 4 Jobs  She and her friend asked about my boys. When they heard one had a job and the other had two her friend said: ” Go for the one with two jobs.”

Nice to know there are still some kids with common sense.

That is what you should NOT do. So let that be a lesson to you.

Jan Bearenstein The Bike Lesson 1964

Adam Smith has lost his job as CFO of a company in Arizona after his…episode at Chick-Fil-A Wednesday. While it is sad in this economy for anyone to lose a job for the sake of finding a silver lining in this, at least by his actions he has established four important rules for those tempted to follow in his footsteps to wit:

1. Don’t act like a bore in public

2. Don’t brag about yourself while you act like a bore in public

3. Don’t shoot a video of yourself while bragging about acting like a bore in public

4. Don’t upload the video you shot of yourself bragging about acting like a bore in public.

Future angry leftists should take these rule to heart.

Speaking of futures although it’s a problem of his own making I feel sorry for Mr. Smith. It is a tough time to be out of a job (and likely unable to collect). As a person who struggled through this I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. I hope Mr. Smith finds a job soon.

What he needs is to find a highly profitable employer who perhaps due to a much higher sales volume might have need of additional employees.

Suggestions anyone?


The DaTechGuy Fundraiser now known as the quest to no longer have to use dawife’s car continues. I’m looking at 10+ year old cars with 100k miles on them.

Any help is appreciated.

For details click here for the progress check the thermometer to the right and to kick in hit DaTipJar”.

The costs of Obama and his programs are becoming more apparent. via five feet of fury) those who oppose him:

Even if you add in all possible “indirect” jobs that could be attributed to this subsidy flurry, it still works out to $1.63 million in subsidies per job created, according to the report.

Just to be clear, this isn’t some taxpayers federation or Republican Party group writing this scathing review. This is the US government itself.

Consider that $1.63 million dollar figure. Imagine a WPA style program such as busy work/cleanup that a city might normally not do because of regular budget. Say 3 ten man crews at $30,000 each plus another $10K in side expenses and taxes. Add a chief to run each crew, say $50K each with taxes and one guy to supervise the supervisors, let’s make him expensive: $100,000 counting benefits and taxes on say an $80K pay.

$1.2 million (work Crew 39 men)
$ .15 million (Three crew chiefs)
$ .1 million The supervisor

That adds up to $1.45 Million dollars, employing 34 people vs $1.63 million for one.

But we can’t have that can we? After all none of those 34 people are in a position to kick back money to the campaign.

Those figures are no surprise to us who oppose him but to those who support him (via Glenn) there is a surprise awaiting them as well

William Jacobson (Cornell) blogs the tax consequences of the Obama campaign’s Dinner With Barack fundraising raffle. Three winners and their guests will receive:

Roundtrip airfare (valued at $1,200)
One night in a hotel ($200)
Dinner with President Obama ($200)

The rules state that “all federal, state and local taxes associated with the receipt or use of any prize are the sole responsibility of the winner.” The $1,600 is includible in each winner’s income under § 74 — at the 35% rate, that results in $560 of federal income tax.

Imagine you are a retired black person who was so proud to see the first black president elected and decides to give that $3 from her fixed income to get him re-elected, Just imagine her face after winning that dinner with Obama her getting that $560 tax bill.

That image is the Obama administration in a nutshell.

Update: The DaTechGuy Fundraiser is in progress, our goal is $3000 and any help is appreciated. For details click here for the progress check the thermometer to the right and to kick in hit DaTipJar”.