Here is a quick and dirty calculation,
The deficit changed from $160 billion to $1.412 trillion from FY2007 to FY2009. That is an increase in the deficit of $1.252 trillion. In the same time period, about 8.5 million people lost their jobs. That means every job lost meant an increase of the deficit of $147,000.
If we spend $200 billion and create 4 million jobs, the deficit reduction could be 4 million multiplied by $147k = $589 billion
$589 billion - $200 billion = $389 billion. But as should be done, I go conservative and cut the $589 billion in half, then it is $295 - $200 = $95 billion. That is $95 billion more than the spending.
I acknowledge that TARP spending was a part of it. The need for TARP shows secondary effects when a recession goes really bad. I also want to point out if a recovery is strong enough, many Americans besides the 4 million new job holders see wage increases.
The deficit changed from $160 billion to $1.412 trillion from FY2007 to FY2009. That is an increase in the deficit of $1.252 trillion. In the same time period, about 8.5 million people lost their jobs. That means every job lost meant an increase of the deficit of $147,000.
If we spend $200 billion and create 4 million jobs, the deficit reduction could be 4 million multiplied by $147k = $589 billion
$589 billion - $200 billion = $389 billion. But as should be done, I go conservative and cut the $589 billion in half, then it is $295 - $200 = $95 billion. That is $95 billion more than the spending.
I acknowledge that TARP spending was a part of it. The need for TARP shows secondary effects when a recession goes really bad. I also want to point out if a recovery is strong enough, many Americans besides the 4 million new job holders see wage increases.
