As the economy continues to shrug off the Billions of dollars in economic spending, it raises the question -- just what exactly is the answer? Well, that depends on who you poise that question to. A least a few patriots of the Right believe that President Obama has a grand plan to absorb the multitude of unemployed under the Federal umbrella as Federal employees.

So is there any data to support the position of the Right or simply more political rhetoric? Well, apparently the average salary of a Federal employee is $71,206 compared to $40,331 in the private sector. Additionally, purportedly, those earning the coveted six figure salary -- $100,000-- has increased from 14.4% to 19% during the recession! Moreover, there are more than 10,000 Federal employees earning $150,000 or more. Stunning stats huh. Maybe - maybe not, it's necessary to look at the entire picture before making that determination. A simple math calculation of the stated figures illustrates Federal salary spending increases amount to under $2 Billion annually. Even if you want to round it up to a nice even $5 Billion in Federal salary increases that is lunch money in comparison to the national GDP -- as well as the Federal budget for salaries. So does that advocate increased Federal salary spending during a recession? Well you would have to compare that the private sector, too, in order to make that determination. So what exactly has the private sector done in terms of reviving the economy since the recession began? ...well the votes are in and it's not looking good for the private sector. The fact of the matter is that the private sector hasn't done much. Well that's not entirely true...wages have decreased to a 30 year low, we are experiencing unprecedented long term unemployment, layoffs and job eliminations continue to rise albeit workplace production output continues to increase as well.

Making a case against the Feds stepping up for American workers during the Great Recession while the private sector reaps production output gains at the expense of job eliminations is a hard sell. Moreover, for those on the Right that have amnesia, maybe, perhaps they should be reminded of the untold Billions expended under the leadership of former President Bush. What's the difference in the scenarios? Well under the Bush era the Billions in Federal spending were directed to the elite such as former Vice President Cheney and the no bid contract awards to Halliburton. How about the Oil Bigwigs who still have their feet on the table with the back door deals under the Bush era? Conversely, the Obama administration appears to favor the average Joe Federal employee and working class individual.

The bottom line is that there is no free lunch and someone has to do something about the ailing economy. The President appears to be sending the message that if the private sector wants to exploit the economic situation than payment is going to made on the back in versus  on the front. In other word, you pay now or you pay later...and judging by the way the credit industry works the private sector is better off paying up front versus paying later. In essence that means the private sector can pick up hiring and keep taxes at status quo and maybe even get a tax cut or continue with the exploitation charade and pay higher taxes on the back end. Decisions, decision, decisions. So maybe you can complain that Federal salaries increase while the economy drags it's feet, but hey somebody has to do something. Moreover, it's a fundamental principal that the Government should do what's best for the nation as a whole versus the single sided view of the private sector. So, to make a case against Federal spending on salaries -- to the private sector, the well over 15 million unemployed say -- show me the money or better stated show me the jobs.

As you probably already know, the economy is hardly doing well, despite the recent drop in the unemployment rate to 9.7%. So the question is, if Americans are still longing for hiring then why exactly is Congress sparring and jockeying for who will get credit for a jobs bill? Perhaps that's just how politics works, but its pretty clear that job seekers across the country are looking for Congress to promote hiring versus party line bickering and positioning to take credit for any potential jobs growth bill.

So lets say Congress can pull off an actual jobs growth stimulus plan, the bigger question is -- will such a stimulus target the usual suspect jobs such as construction for example? In other words, even if a jobs creation bill were to be signed into law would it target industries across the board or simply an industry here and an industry there? Take for example, the telecommunications industry which is largely responsible for providing the Internet backbone; for years it has been known that the US lags behind most other countries in the world (including what many would could consider third world countries) in terms of broadband connectivity as a standard. Hello! Even Google went on record recently stating that the Internet is just too freaking slow. Thus, instead of blindly pumping cash into more construction jobs, here's a thought, how about throwing a bone to the T-comm industry to help upgrade the Internet backbone. Doing so, would pick up where the last Internet bubble bust left off. Undoubtedly you would be talking about hiring at least 500,000 workers for such a large long running project.

The bottom line is that everyone knows the economy has a lot of rebounding to do. What's more important is when are we going to get some positive traction going versus continuous rhetoric and sensationalizing? Moreover, do you think any of the other 15 industries could use a lift? In the grand scheme of things the construction industry is a small contributor to the GDP, yet the subject of a lot of focus when it comes to talks about job growth and stimulus projects. In any event while Congress is sparring Americans need hiring...not next quarter, not next year...now. The rhetoric is running out of steam and Americans are frustrated and tired, which means in the end both political parties will pay dearly if both party members don't stop resting on their six figure salaries and help get unemployed Americans back to work.

The news we all have been waiting for...a decline in the jobless rate...surely that's good reason for a celebration. Whoa cowboy, maybe you should slow that horse down a minute. Why? Well the classic adage comes to mind, "...there are lies, lies and then there are statistics..." So lets take a look at the statistics that are fueling the embellished headlines cheering for this mysterious job growth.

Fundamentally speaking real job growth is directly related to hiring not the reduction of firing or job losses. Perhaps, that is why you hear so much focus on the jobless rate versus hiring, since the jobless rate figures can be altered to suit ones cause. For example, what you aren't hearing or which is otherwise buried deep in an article somewhere is that the primary factors that have lead to the so called decrease in the jobless rate are the following.

1.) A whooping increase of 266,000 job seekers who have given up on their job search

2.) The November upward revision to 64,000 jobs was largely due to seasonal/temporary/part-time hiring

3.) The national foreclosure rate is raging higher thus still out of control

What should really be jumping off the page right now is that more and more job seekers simply aren't being counted in the unemployment rate figures as unemployment benefits are exhausted and job seekers give up. With the way things are going, don't expect the Feds to extend unemployment benefits again. Why? Why should they, it only adds to their black eye about the struggling economy. In essence, if they extend unemployment benefits again that would acknowledge that the economy is still struggling which in turn would increase scrutiny of the current state of the economy. As for the home foreclosure rate, this is absolutely ridiculous. People don't get their homes foreclosed on because they have good paying jobs and CAN pay their mortgage. Quite the opposite is true. In fact, the only state East of the Mississippi to have higher foreclosure fillings than Georgia in December 2009 is Illinois. That isn't saying much about Georgia since Illinois has a population that is nearly three times that of Georgia but only 5,000 more foreclosure filings.

Sure everyone is more than anxious to hear the economy is showing real signs of improvement but the data as presented is just misleading at best. I'm from the school of thought that if you want to see real tried and true economic growth than two things will help -- government purchase orders and government regulations. Let's face it, history shows us that some of the most notable periods of economic growth were fueled by government purchasing (versus stimulus spending) and long overdue government regulations like say on the Big Banks that used credit default swaps to create the current Great Recession. So while the statistical decline in the jobless rate is good to hear, until you can show the hiring it hardly calls for celebration.