The jobs bill is $15 Billion? Really?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Really?

Aw jeez...

And some percentage of eligible hires would have been made anyway so it's not even a full $15 billion bang-for-the-buck. (Of course that inefficiency would also apply to a larger version of the plan which is an argument for scale. A 60% bang from 100 is way bigger than a 60% bang from 15)

As the saying goes, I try to be cynical but I can't keep up.

Seems like only last week Krugman was mocking a $70 Billion bill as an non-serious effort. Wait, that WAS last week...

But at least some republicans voted for it which teaches us the real meaning of Christmas... or something.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. Translation: Or 5 weeks of war.

[frazzled]

2. Harry Reid broke up the bill into pieces

So the $15 billion doesn't reflect everything they are going to try (heavy on the try) to pass. It's going to add up to much more if the series of bills passes.

[Uzybone]

3. Thanks for some actual information

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. Do you refer to everything you wish were true as "actual information"?

[Oregone]

5. "And some percentage of eligible hires would have been made anyway"

Perhaps all of them. Is a tax benefit really going to alter the bottom line enough on a long-term hire or change conditions that would dictate the need for the hire (such as business demand). This money merely is rewarding profittable companies with expected growth for doing what they will do anyway: hire workers.

Bang-for-buck? Forget about it. Gone is the days of Keynesian stimulus. This is the Third Way, for better or for worse.