Seems the numbers reported by the Obama Administration were a tad high.... http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-10-29-stimulus-jobs_N.htm?csp=34
Probably..but not due to the administration. I like the approach they are taking - that if there is a problem with numbers they are aggressive in trying to fix them and admitting the error.
Believe me, this is all the administration's doing. My wife is the controller for a non-profit that received $12MM in stimulus money. They had tried to return several million back to HHS but told they needed to spend it as well as the extra $12MM. In each form (which came in terms of a grant), she had to list "jobs created" and "jobs saved". It was made clear to her that listing more "jobs created" and "jobs saved" would help them when their contract came up for bid again--in no uncertain terms. When asked for clarification, she was told that hiring a contractor for a job to fix something--even if only for a few hours--counted as a "job created". She was told that any funds where they spent any amount of the $12MM to help one of their entities get their financial books straight counted as a "job saved". They told her the goal and told her the aims of the Obama Administration. Someone else will fall on the sword if busted, but this goal came straight from the White House. So, three cheers for my wife. She personally has "created" and "saved" scores of jobs!
BTW, I also heard that each job "created" or "saved" cost the American taxpayer over $72K. Wouldn't we have been better off just giving out of work people $36K tax free and doubling the impact of the stimulus?
That's a nice thing to say. Especially to people who have daughters. I'd like to ask you to delete that post. And if you do, delete mine here as well. Thank you. BP
It's how you framed it- and I think you know it. All I was asking was for a bit of decency. Is that too much?
Sorry, I don't see it as anything but a joke. It certainly wasn't directed in any way at you, or for that matter anyone. Angels don't actually exist, so they don't get raped or killed. barfo
I'd like you to remove your sexist post for the consideration of my brothers and future sons who are male but who also have the potential to be raped. It would so decent of you to realize that men are just as rapeable(sic) as are women.
And if he goes to prison for not being an angel? It's all fine then? Just so long as he's not an angel? I think I get it. But what of the angels in the hearts of men? They too get raped. I'm still offended by the overt sexism displayed in this thread and I demand censorship!
I don't think you get that I consider my future son to be an angel-in-waiting and that I don't appreciate the fact that his ability to be raped is washed over simply for the fact that he is male. I find that line of thinking to be grotesquely unfair and I pray to mighty Allah that there one day be a society that values the sacred body of the male as much as that of the female.
You get in a hissy fit over the content of another post and call for censorship. I find your "hissy fit" to be blatantly sexist in its gender bias and I call you out on it. What is it that I do not get?
