Randy Haddock

Math & Politics

Squashed picked up a link I posted earlier this month and, in the spirit of the Obama administration’s “jobs created or saved” gimmick, tried to rebuke criticism of the astronomical cost of each job created by Obama’s green jobs program. The post is cute, condescending and makes some sort of jab at me and other conservatives’ math abilities, reminiscing about third grade math or something.

You offered me a hint, Squashed. Can I offer you one as well? When trying to insult an ideological opponent of not being good at math, it usually helps to make sure your calculations are tight and alright. Your original post, which I read from my iPhone, made the claim that it’s OK for a job to cost more than $130,000 to create, since a job that pays $50,000 a year will pay for itself and in 5 years make the employed individual $500,000. That left me scratching my head. It suddenly became clear to me. You learned math differently than I did. See, in my world, 50,000 times 5 equals 250,000.

Bellatoris noticed the same thing and you didn’t offer any explanation for your unique math calculations. You simply changed the post without making any mention of it. Nice.

Of course the job created will eventually pay for itself. The cost that goes into creating a job will eventually be recouped, sooner or later. I’m sure we all understand this. However, this is not what we were promised or told. We were promised unemployment wouldn’t go above 8%. We were promised job growth. We were promised a renewed economy under the enlightened age of Obama. We were promised the moon and more. As far as I can remember, we weren’t promised all this with a caveat that each job would cost more than $100,000 to create.

I know it’s been a tough week for those who generally stand behind Obama and his policies. Excuse me if I have somehow offended your fragile sensitivities on this matter. The numbers still stand as irrefutable.

Source: randyhaddock