Oxhorn Subsidies

Money is fungible and income from one activity can be spent elsewhere while looking like it is unrelated. Stimulus money most certainly is being used for corporate subsidies regardless of how uninformed Ms. Oxhorn of the White House is about accounting, economics and unintended consequences. [Bloomberg]

Elizabeth Oxhorn, a White House spokeswoman, said she isn’t aware of any case in which states are directly using stimulus dollars to lure businesses. Any applications that would use funds in such a way would be rejected, she said. Competition among states “ensures that the taxpayers see the very best use of their money,” she added.
Technically she is correct, no stimulus money is being "directly" used but this is disingenuous Newspeak.

My complaint here is the stimulus packages (there were three so far) are sold as money going to mostly idealistic job-saving or economy-saving causes. What is needed is a deeper evaluation of the unintended consequences - by the public and policy makers. These are always present in any policy and the effects are usually minimized or outright ignored. The most recent stimulus was exaggerated as being imperative to avoid dire consequences. Well, we got the dire consequences and then some compared to stress test adverse scenario. Additionally, the economy is starting to turn the corner and yet the stimulus has not even spent $100B of $787B in the legislation. As many predicted, the stimulus would be delivered slowly, with poor feedback and ultimately arrive after recovery has started.