Expect the eco-shammers’ response to this to follow their usual excuse methodology: Justify the original expenditure by wildly exaggerating the number of jobs that will be created, and then when that number is proven to have been totally fabricated, respond “well, this is really about cleaner energy and saving the world from global warming, and these programs help accomplish that”:

The Obama administration distributed $9 billion in economic “stimulus” funds to solar and wind projects in 2009-11 that created, as the end result, 910 “direct” jobs — annual operation and maintenance positions — meaning that it cost about $9.8 million to establish each of those long-term jobs.

At the same time, those green energy projects also created, in the end, about 4,600 “indirect” jobs – positions indirectly supported by the annual operation and maintenance jobs — which means they cost about $1.9 million each ($9 billion divided by 4,600).

Combined (910 + 4,600 = 5,510), the direct and indirect jobs cost, on average, about $1.63 million each to produce.

For that amount of money the government could have sent 360,000 Americans each checks for $25,000. But they might not be Obama cronies so there’s a chance that expenditure would have been considered a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Comments

12 Responses to “Bargain: $9 Billion in Solar/Wind Project Stimulus Resulted in 910 Direct, Long-Term Jobs”

  1. backwoodsconsr on June 21st, 2012 12:50 pm

    Good point, Doug. It's amazing what is and is not considered wasteful spending in Washington these days. And the Democrats wonder why there's a Tea Party.

  2. clu seatoe on June 21st, 2012 12:58 pm

    “For that amount of money the government could have sent 360,000 Americans each checks for $25,000. But they might not be Obama cronies so there’s a chance that expenditure would have been considered a waste of taxpayer dollars.”

    There’s a better than average chance that the libs have already spent that much on that many illegal border crossers and the money has found its way to corrupt Mexican officials or drug cartels.

  3. Marshall_Will on June 21st, 2012 1:11 pm

    And without question, the patented lib response to exposing hairbrained cozy/crony spending IS…? The Cost of the Iraq War:

    "The Iraq war didn't just contribute to the severity of the financial crisis, though; it also kept us from responding to it effectively. Increased indebtedness meant that the government had far less room to maneuver than it otherwise would have had. More specifically, worries about the (war-inflated) debt and deficit constrained the size of the stimulus, and they continue to hamper our ability to respond to the recession. With the unemployment rate remaining stubbornly high, the country needs a second stimulus. But mounting government debt means support for this is low. The result is that the recession will be longer, output lower, unemployment higher and deficits larger than they would have been absent the war."
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti

  4. Marshall_Will on June 21st, 2012 1:15 pm

    "More specifically, worries about the (war-inflated) debt and deficit constrained the size of the stimulus,"

    Leaving one to wonder if we shouldn't be thankful for an *on-going conflict* or perhaps even a -broader- one lest more dollars get poured down the Wreckovery/GSA Redistribution toilet?

  5. Marshall_Will on June 21st, 2012 1:30 pm

    "The Iraq war didn't just contribute to the severity of the financial crisis, though; it also kept us from responding to it effectively."

    Right, because so many Americans ( predominately in bluer than BLUE major metro areas and Cali in particular ) were so worried about Little Abdul the Goat herder, they continued to buy multiple homes on LIAR Loans and flip houses for Fun & Profit.

    So they laid awake nights worrying not only about Lil' Abdul but also BusHitlerand the solvency of EvilMegaBank. Who's loans they walked away from…

  6. Truesoldier__ on June 21st, 2012 1:37 pm

    If the government had cut a check for every US citizen from all the different stimulous and green energy products we would all have been better off than we are now. Of course that would not have lined the Obama cronies pockets….

  7. Joe Redfield on June 21st, 2012 1:38 pm

    To a Progressive the phrase "wasteful spending" is an oxymoron, as least as it applies to government.

  8. jeffythequick on June 21st, 2012 2:25 pm

    Well, kinda/sorta… we'd still be a trillion dollars deeper in debt, but we're rapidly approaching the point where a trillion is a small fraction of the total debt.

    At $4 Trillion in debt, $1 Trillion is 25%. At $20 Trillion, it's only 5%.

    Woe be unto the person that wants to cut $1 from any program, though.

  9. clu seatoe on June 21st, 2012 4:35 pm

    One wonders why it takes 4,600 people to “support” 910 “direct” operation and maintenance personnel and how many of those 910 “direct” and 4,600 “support” personnel were new hires to work in the private sector that had otherwise lost their jobs due to Zero’s inadequacies, inefficiencies, stupidities and thieveries.

  10. Marshall_Will on June 21st, 2012 5:11 pm

    Clu,

    Bang up observation. Even the MILITARY doesn't have those Combat-to-Support ratios! Offering this feeble an explanation ( this late in the game ) is almost as if The Professional Left is clutching for straws.

    Political historians will one day refer to these inequities as: The Obama Curve. Instituting SO much change SO rapidly, it simply is beyond the scope of even an ARMY of sycophants in and OUT of the MSM to run interference and OUTrun the inevitable fallout.

    The Obama Curve.

  11. SignPainterGuy on June 21st, 2012 6:51 pm

    Did ya see where Bill Maher suggested the OWSers should be the dem`s "Tea Party" ?

    I thought, "Why not, they represent the essence of the dim party !"

  12. SignPainterGuy on June 21st, 2012 7:00 pm

    "The Obama Curve". Laughable isn`t it ? Right between the tears !

    It makes as much sense as the Nanny Bloomers poll showing Zero ahead of Romney 53-40. How is it possible that 2/3 of the populus opposed ObamaScare yet 2/3 "like" the job Obumble is doing ?

    There are lies, damn lies and Bloomberg Polls !

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.