paulson fails english
by Alan Moore
Published: January 24, 2008
It’s said that 98% of statistics are made up on the spot. That’s quite a convenient tool when you need to prove a point at the water cooler, but backfires everywhere else it’s used. “What’s wrong with making an economic argument without including a single hard statistic,” you ask? Let’s take a look.
In a special guest editorial for Politico.com on January 21, US Secretary of the Treasury Henry M. Paulson stated that, “The US economy is resilient.” Really? If record foreclosures, gas prices that are up around Mars and a shrinking job market equals a “resilient economy,” then Secretary Paulson may want to consider taking a few more English classes as well.
The deal is really quite simple: the Bush administration can’t find a positive economic report anywhere, so they hide behind grand statements and hot air. As the old adage goes, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull.” Paulson’s editorial did not contain a single number, hard statistic or for that matter, anything that backs up his “resilient economy” statement.
Here’s the real kicker in the story: “The unemployment rate remains low and job creation continues, albeit at a modest pace. Our economic fundamentals are strong, and I am confident of our long-term economic strength. In the short term, however, the risks are clearly to the downside, and the potential benefits of quick action to support our economy have become clear.”
Jobs are being created often, yet Paulson can’t (or at least hasn’t) cited a single statistic to back that up. It’s what’s become typical of this administration, making blind statements and praying that no one will actually want proof behind the hot air. FYI: the economy added 18,000 jobs in December. That’s just a “modest” drop from Novembers’ 118,000 additions. If Paulson really wants to bolster the economy he should advise the administration to keep its collective mouth shut. It would do wonders for the economy and probably help that whole global warming situation.
For those readers who would like to check my statements, I’ll point out that the only number in Paulson’s entire editorial is a “1.” He proposes that we allocate 1% of the United States’ Gross Domestic Product for economic change - whatever that means. And even if he could define his “Proposal For Economic Change,” to become law it would have to survive a vote in two houses of Congress, both of which are bitterly opposed to the current administration.
In the end, Paulson never cites a single statistic to prove that the US economy is “resilient.” Meanwhile, a simple “job growth” search on Google or a phone call to my friends in the suburbs of Atlanta to find out that, yes, their condo is still for sale, is sufficient to prove that the economy is heading down the toilet.
Had No Child Left Behind been imposed on Secretary Paulson’s grade schools he probably would have learned what “resilient” really means. Wait… scratch that. He probably wouldn’t have learned it there either.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
