This morning, the White House reported that President Obama's stimulus package has created or saved 650,000 jobs -- of course, this time the Obama Administration promises that the new figures will be "more accurate" than in the past. As for the jobs saved or created, the administration based its finds on roughly $150 billion in spending from the $787 billion stimulus package. These "more accurate" numbers are taken from state reports and private companies. The White House did note that the actual number of jobs created thus far is "likely closer to 1 million" because this report looked at only $150 billion of the $339 billion invested in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds spent.

CNNMoney reports that after $150 billion in stimulus spending, tens of thousands of states, cities, and private companies have saved or created 650,000 jobs. At $230,769 per job, is that worth it?

The answer depends on whose side you're on. Those who want the president to fail are not thrilled, those who want to work and/or want him to succeed can feel some satisfaction.

When you spend $787 billion, there's a lot of pressure to show results. So, there's no surprise that success is being proclaimed across the country. States are saying that they've used the federal stimulus package money to create or save more than 388,000 jobs this year. Teachers, construction workers and other professions have realized the upside of stimulus cash according to reports from 33 states and Puerto Rico, with the remainder of the results being released on Friday.

Of course, the numbers "should be taken with a grain of salt," says Ethan Pollack of the Economic Policy Institute. The states were tasked to count the jobs created or protected, but the results have been of dubious accuracy. This doesn't mean the stats can't provide fodder to people on both sides of the aisle.

Columbia Business School's Frank Lichtenberg says the data shows a solid economic impact, and the Obama administration's Council of Economic Advisors believes the stimulus spending has taken care of between 600,000 and 1.1 million jobs.

And, there are those who disagree.

It's almost October and the pundits are at again, predicting that the market should sell off again. Let's look at their reasoning.

• We have an ongoing deterioration in consumer debt.
• Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Laureate, says that "the U.S. banking sector is now in worse shape than before the collapse of Lehman Brothers.
• Bank profitability is expected to come under pressure.
• The U.S. housing outlook is grim.

Oil traders have been selling off the precious crude Monday, as a steep sell-off of China's benchmark index raised concerns over the current state of both the Chinese and U.S. economies.

The Chinese Shanghai Composite Index took a beating to start off the week, trading down 6.74%, and raised fresh concerns over a global economic rebound. Today's sell off in the Chinese market was its biggest decline since June of 2008. The sell-off comes on the heels of a near 3% drop in the index last Friday.

Do we need a second stimulus? Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman thinks so.

If we take a page from history, Japan languished in never-never land for about ten years after the stock market crash of the early 1990s. Its economy remained stagnant. Some analysts say that reason for the stagnation was the lack of enough stimulus to pull it out of recession.

The key statistic in the U.S. Q2 GDP report, aside from the 1% decline in GDP, which was below the 1.5% Bloomberg News consensus estimate: the decline in consumer spending.

Consumer spending declined 1.3% in Q2, compared to a 0.7% increase in Q1. In Q2, durable goods decreased 7.1%, compared to an increase of 3.9% in Q1; nondurable goods decreased 2.5%, in contrast to an increase of 1.9%; and services increased 0.1%, compared to a decrease of 0.3%.

The economy is sending mixed signals right now.

Unemployment is up, and consumer sentiment is down. Plenty of companies are posting profits, but they're taking advantage of lower expectations and cost-cutting rather than revenue growth from an economic recovery. Rents are under pressure – both residential and commercial.

Bloomberg reports that "U.S. taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as $23.7 trillion to bail out financial companies, according to Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program."

$23.7 trillion? That's an amount so large that it's almost meaningless. To put it perspective, think of it this way: There are approximately 300 million people in the United States. My dollar store calculator couldn't handle an equation that big so I had to type it into Google but it works out to $79,000 per person.

Not per family or household. Per person. If you have a kindergartner, call him in and explain that he now owes $79,000.

One aspect of the economic cycle investors need to keep at the forefront is the nature of economic change and economic recovery, as promulgated by economist John Maynard Keynes.

First, toss out any notions that market forces, left to their own devices, will always bring about a quick economic recovery.

We get a second piece of positive news out of the housing industry in as many days today as the Commerce Department announced this morning that new home construction jumped 3.6% in June.

No one is going to put forth the argument that the housing market is all of a sudden in good shape again, but we are starting to see signs that things could be at least leveling off, which is the first step that needs to be made.

There has been a lot of chatter lately about the possibility of a second stimulus package for America, and now it has received the blessing of Warren Buffett.

On this morning's Good Morning America (on ABC), Buffett said, "I think that a second one [stimulus package] may well be called for ... you hope it doesn't get watered down in many ways." Buffett leveled criticism at the first stimulus bill, calling it "sort of like taking half a tablet of Viagra and having a bunch of candy mixed in."

God bless good ole' Joe Biden. The vice president has opened his mouth and stated that the Obama administration "misread how bad the economy was." At the same time, the veep said that the administration stands by its stimulus package and believes that the plan will create more jobs. Biden made this statement on ABC television's This Week, claiming that the nation's 9.5% unemployment rate is "much too high."

Biden noted that the figures the group used in January were "the consensus figures and most of the blue chip indexes out there." Biden added, "We misread how bad the economy was, but we are now only about 120 days into the recovery package," he also claimed that more jobs will be created in coming months.

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says there's good in this market -- remember that.

Does unemployment trump everything? Does it trump Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) (Cramer's Take) sales? Does it trump 3G and 4G? How about Chinese orders? How about General Mills' (NYSE: GIS) (Cramer's Take) numbers? Yum!'s (NYSE: YUM) (Cramer's Take) business? Does unemployment trump pending home sales? Or order pick-ups in autos and a subsequent bottom?

That's what you have to ask yourself when you sell. You have to ask yourself whether 40,000 or 60,000 jobs trumps everything good that has happened. You have to ask yourself if the government were to take 100,000 of those people and give them jobs taking care of federal lands and parks or working at the post office or having them go into a conservation corps, whether we would be up and not down.

Bad news! Another 467,000 jobs were lost according to the latest report. This is much worse that last month's loss of 322,000, and brings into question whether the stimulus programs are working to jump-start the economy. Obviously they are not doing the job. The unemployment rate rose to 9.5% from 9.4%.

Analysts had expected a much better report. Alan Ruskin of RBS Greenwich Capital said: "if you were betting on the U.S. driving a vigorous recovery, think again. ... The unemployment report can largely be taken at face value, and the face value story is a labor market that is not improving nearly as rapidly as the May data suggested."