On Thursday President Obama signed the HIRE Act, a jobs stimulus. The summary of the signing can be found here.
There is also a transcript of his remarks found here.
I could make many comments about this jobs stimulus. However, as an intervention measure, it has many of the same characteristics of other interventions. As such, my previous extensive comments about interventions are highly relevant. Those posts can be found listed under the "Intervention" tag.
However, I will make two comments specific to this legislation:
First, the ARRA was supposed to be a "jobs creation" legislation. On various levels it has not performed as intended with regard to job creation. As I've pointed out before, we should be very cognizant of how previous stimulus bills have fared before enacting new ones.
Second, in President Obama's comments he said, "I’m signing it mindful that, as I’ve said before, the solution to our economic problems will not come from government alone. Government can’t create all the jobs we need or can it repair all the damage that’s been done by this recession." This entire idea of "creating" jobs or "stimulating" job creation needs to be intensely scrutinized. Should government be attempting to "create" jobs - as seems to be the current widely accepted theory - or should job creation and job growth be an inherent feature of a strong economy?
SPX at 1159.90 as this post is written