why did the stimulus create so few jobs?

The shovel ready jobs weren't shovel ready? It was never meant to create jobs. IT was meant to pay back supporters. Why else would we spend money on socially conscious puppet shows? Why else would districts that don't even exist get funds.

The stimulus was only part of the trillion. Most was capital replacement that's been/being repaid.

The problem with "stimulating" now is all efforts to do it will only stimulate the grossly overpopulating cultures, mostly in Asia, whose desperate excess labor has undercut wages all over the world and sucked away most of the industries to their burgeoning hordes. Even large amounts of stimulus funds will hardly be noticed there because it is a huge sea of excess people (half -- 3 billion people -- the population of the world in just two countries). When it "trickles down" among them they don't even get a penny each.

Because it was never about creating jobs. It was about Obama, Pelosi and Reed providing kick backs to his backers. Just follow the money and you will see who made out in the stimulus. Unions, political donors etc...

We are witnessing one of the most corrupt political regimes in American history ... yet many folks are still ignoring the obvious and would vote for these democrats again.

I agree there'll be a lot less jobs. It went from arising thousands of thousands of recent jobs, to saving jobs human beings do not supply them more beneficial funds. in case you're taking both trillion and divide that both each man or woman in us of a ought to receive over a million million 600 thousand. we ought to have paid mortgages, kept the banking, (by technique of paying the mort.) and spend the monetary gadget into structure. rather we've given the money to organizations that closed besides. With the money of their pocket. Leaving us in worse structure than before the money became paid. autonomous / lady / Grandmother of four / Lived via a recession. this isn't the thanks to recuperate.

Because it went into pockets: owners and stockholders. The argument for Bush's tax cuts/stimulus was that they would create jobs and turn the economy around. Corporations are making record profits . . . but it is not going into creating jobs, etc.

I think the tax cuts should be ended. And new tax cuts and future stimulus monies should be targeted to those corporations, companies, businesses that do add jobs, benefits, or higher wages. I have no problem with future tax cuts as incentives . . . but I want to see that those receiving them are addressing the problems that the cuts and/or stimulus were created to address.

Think about it.

You steal money from people and then give them a little of it back. How on earth is this helpful?

The "Cash for Clunkers" program was classic. It cost more than four times what each person got back to buy a car. Why did they take the money away in the first place?

1/3 went to the banks to stabilize the credit market - corporations are doing just fine as a result.

1/3 went to tax cuts.

1/3 started going to infrastructure projects, but those tend to be black holes for consuming money with little results. I don't think they spent all of it, and gave up before it was over.

The biggest winner has been corporations, but they are happily taking in more profits by making people do more for less money, so they aren't in a hurry to add more to their payroll.

That money just went into the pockets of Obama supporters.

because 98% of does trillions were used to bailout the bankers and other wall street releated business. thats why it created little to nothing.

Govts can't help people as much as people can help themselves directly