A Stimulus Project That’s Not Creating Any Jobs

A Stimulus Project That’s Not Creating Any Jobs

But does that really make it a failure?

Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 - 8:52am

LANSING, Mich.—It should be said up top: I have found a stimulus project that has not created a single job. Nor has it saved any. Twenty-thousand dollars have gone to the Lansing chapter of Volunteers of America to restock their food kitchen, and according to the Obama administration’s rubric, it should be a failure of a stimulus project. The $20,000 comes from FEMA via the United Way, and it has gone toward buying more goods for the food pantry here, where they've served 85,439 meals this year, a 9 percent increase from last year. Next year, they’re aiming to serve 100,000 meals. Because when you're a homeless shelter/food pantry in Michigan, the community’s need isn’t going to ebb any time soon.

food kitchen

So now the complicated question: If the stimulus is supposed to create and/or save jobs, does that mean we don’t want to fund anything that doesn’t do that? The $20,000, of course, pales in comparison to the huge pot of $499 billion of nontax stimulus monies being doled out. Patrick, the VP of operations who showed us around, isn’t shy about saying there weren’t any jobs created. And presumably he’ll have to write that into his report on what he’s doing with his stimulus dollar. But the money has already been obligated to Volunteers of America (it hasn’t actually been paid, despite being due a week ago, but that’s a separate story), so it’s not like the government is going to pull back the funds. But the fact remains: This is a stimulus project that is not creating or saving any jobs.

But I’m not sure that that’s a reason to stop these kinds of funds. The work that these people are doing is good work. It’s necessary work. It’s work that has everything to do with the recession. Without the 14.9 percent unemployment rate in Michigan, the pantry wouldn’t have such an increased load. And the stimulus is supposed to counteract the recession. So it’s doing its job there.

Unfortunately, the $20,000 is marked as stimulus money, so it has an extra responsibility to work harder. It has the expectations of a nation weighing it down, demanding that it does more than just help create something but also that it helps employ somebody new to create that something. But these are distinctions that mean little to the kitchen at Volunteers of America. They’ve got an extra $20,000 and an extra 20,000 people to feed. That responsibility is clear cut.

food pantry food punch

(Photos by David Backer.)

For more on Recessionary Road's trip to Lansing, see dispatches on Michigan's stimulus czar, youth workers renovating an old school into a community center, and a sewer project in the middle of the city. For posts from outside of Lansing, visit the RR blog.

Comments

  • 3 Total
  • • Pending Comments 0
  • Login or register to post comments

Stimulus

The food kitchen bought $20,000 of food, no? From a food manufacturer? It sounds like the $20,000 might help save a job or two at the cannery or whatever down the line. Sure, it's attenuated, but there's a strong case that this money made it to businesses in the economy which needed the boost -- while helping those who just needed a meal. It's a boost -- however small -- that they might not have gotten.

In the sense that no jobs were created at the food bank you are correct, but in that way it was only a way-station for the $20,000 (and one that you note does combat the effects of the recession), until the $20,000 made its way into the broader economy.

stimulus that does not create jobs

Um . . . seems to me a person suffering from hunger is not likely to be fit enough to even apply for a job. Likewise, a person suffering from both hunger and homelessness is even less likely to be fit for and seriously considered for a job. So, although this use of stimulus funds does not directly create jobs, it may make the securing of a job more likely to occur for those who are hungry and homeless.

Your Piece Makes No Sense

Matllin's premise is 100% flawed imho.

Every penny of increased food aid to the poor and homeless is spent as it is distributed.

That money is IMMEDIATELY injected into the economy!

If Obama is serious about stimulating the economy how about another 500,000 Section 8 grants? That would sure be a boon to the RE markets?

How about doubling the food stamp program? That would be a boon to farmers and the rest of the food industry.

How about increasing the grants to SSI folk by 50%! They would still be dirt poor but they would surely spend all the money!!!

How about setting up primary/preventive health care appointments with the working poor who have no insurance and then funding a year of real coverage to take care of things before they become ER matters down the road.

We don't have to wait months for projects to be "shovel ready"....many billions could have been injected into the economy virtually overnight......but heaven forbid we make life any easier/better for the poor folk who rarely vote and even more rarely "contribute" to campaigns.

Such moves may not technically "create jobs" but the surely staunch layoffs and could even result in some new jobs as demand increases.

Also, how about 5 billion in streamlined micro loans to TRULY small start ups! They would all spend the money and maybe half of them would wind up as ongoing operations growing and hiring.

As it is most of the "stimulus" will go to well connected contractors who will pocket far more money than they spend on hiring new employees. The boondogglers and scammers are in their heaven.

Read more comments