Stimulus: $789B, But Just 18.5 Percent* for Jobs

I just went through the list of items covered in the final version of the stimulus plan (so called) and added up all the sums that were targeted at projects that could actually lead to jobs. I came up with $146.2 billion, which figures out to be 18.5 percent of the whole pie. The rest goes to what could be called the welfare state.

The implication here is pretty obvious: The Democrats decided to expand their favorite federal programs (some implemented by the states with fed dollars) while masquerading the whole thing as a "job-creating" stimulus package.

The question remains whether the targeted projects will "create or save" three million jobs (I also heard that Obama had raised that promised figure to four million). I've got a feeling that the $146.2 will just go to support unionized workers who are already working. At any rate, how does one prove that something "saves" four million jobs.

Here are the areas where money will be spent on job-creating or -saving projects: 1) Create a new "smart" power grid (to replace our current "dumb" one, I guess), $30 billion; 2) Repair and make energy efficient public housing, $6.3 billion; 3) Extend broadband services, $7 billion (again, does this create or save jobs?); 4) Implement electronic health records (EHRs), $19 billion; 5) Modernize roads and bridges, $29 billion; 6) Improve public transit and rail, $16.4 billion; 7) Restore lean water and modernize flood control, $18 billion; and 8) Modernize federal and public buildings, $9.5 billion (again, already-existing union workers who will now get triple-time).

I guess that's why White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel warned early on that "this is no time to waste a good crisis."

*N.B.: I loosely included the health IT's portion, $19 billion, but as I further thought about it, this really doesn't create any jobs; it just goes to buy equipment and services that are already available. If I delete this sum, the total going to "jobs" is reduced to $127.2, or 16 percent.

Lilly Ledbetter Takes a Seat in Maine Legislature

I can see the headlines now: "Brawl breaks out in office over pay records." "Worker stabbed in parking lot for being paid too much." "Supervisor assaulted by angry employees over pay disparity."

This also falls under the category of "What were they thinking?"

After Congress passed and the president signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which makes fair pay discrimination cases the only other offense besides first-degree murder to have no statute of limitations, some states moved into action, one being Maine.

There, in the home of Democrat-in-Republican-clothing Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, a Lilly Ledbetter clone named Deborah Simpson, who happens to be a Democratic state senator, introduced a law to enable employees to share their paystub information.

"So, you make $1,250 a week? Who the h--- do you think you are?" he exclaimed while cold-cocking his coworker across the aisle.

"You b----! You mean I've been working here ten years and you six months, and you make that much more than me!" she shreiked while pulling apart her coworker's perfectly coiffed bouffant hair by painful hair.

I may be making those scenarios sound unrealistic because they're too openly spiteful. No doubt the real retaliation would be more subtle, as in the Klingon prescription that "revenge is a dish best served cold."

Unless I'm missing something here, this all seems surreal, but the "Act to Ensure Fair Pay," as it's called, has surprising support in the Maine capital of Augusta.

Representatives from several organizations testified in support of the bill, including those from the Maine Women’s Lobby, the Maine Civil Liberties Union, the WAGE Project, and the Maine State Employees Association. William Peabody, director of the state Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Standards, also voiced support.

If You Work Here, Better Watch Out

You've no doubt heard of, or even participated in, the so-called online "dead pools," where odds are placed on which celebrity will be the next to meet the Grim Reaper.

That's a bit too morbid for me, but when it comes to business, I don't mind participating in some death watches since it's instructive to see how others can screw up a good thing.

I've been of the opinion for some time now that not only will it go, but Chrysler should go to cut down the glut in Detroit. Mind you, that's 50,000 or more layoffs, but capitalism is either creative destruction or it becomes socialism, where government picks the winners and losers. And let's hope our current president doesn't become this nation's Hugo Chavez.

Back to Chrysler: I came across a Yahoo Finance article about "15 Companies That Might Not Survive 2009," and sure enough, there was Chrysler's name right near the top.

Others on this dead pool include Krispy Kreme donuts and Rite Aid pharmacies, both of which I watched expand much too rapidly for their markets beginning back in the 1990s. (I don't think Starbucks will bite the bullet, and it's not on the list, but that coffee purveyor also got way too ambitious in its expansion plans.)

The name Trump, as in Donald, also appears on the list, but it's just one of the The Donald's holdings, specifically his casinos. It's "deja vu all over again" here as his Atlantic City holdings were near bankruptcy and forcibly restructured during the last great recession in the early 1990s.

So, if you work for one of these 15 (or anywhere else where things are shaky), polish up your resumes and be prepared for an "interesting" 2009, as in the Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times."