the search for a solution to turning the economy around. is it time for yet another round of stimulus? or for some new ideas? i'm alsli velshi. welcome to "your $$$$$." and i'm christine romans. over 40 and out of work. we unwill be the secrets to landing the elusive job in a very tough job market. and we'll take a look at the role of facebook in this economy. plus ali, my friend ali, on a motorcycle. but, first, we begin with a stimulus reality check, what is the government doing with your money and is it working? just over 10% of the massive $787 billion stimulus has been contributed. >> why hasn't more of the money been spent and why are some democrats calling for yet another round of stimulus? kate bolduan joins us now with more. >> reporter: even as the obama administration touts the jobs being created by recovery act spending -- >> we're starting to see some real progress. >> reporter: -- unemployment has soar to 9.5% and 3.4 million jobs have been lost in the past six months. republicans say the stimulus isn't working, and wednesday they pounce. >> i think that we need to justify how much money we're spending, and where are the jobs saved, and where -- how have they been preserved and i think that we've got a major credibility crisis here. >> the president is quoted as saying that, quote, the stimulus has done its job. is that true or not true? >> we believe the stimulus has had the impact which we had predicted which is job kreeps. >> reporter: in the hot seat, the president's deputy budget director rob nabors who said the stimulus plan is slowing the economic free-fall. nabors said 150,000 jobs have been created or saved. >> it's a work in progress, but it's steady progress. >> reporter: the government accountability office says of the $29 billion delivered to hard-hit states so far, most has gone to pay medicaid costs, balance budgets, and avoid layoffs. at the same time, tom eslin, vermont's chief recovery officer, says funds for big, job-producing investments like broadband and the electric smart grid are still caught in the stimulus pipeline. >> the frustration has been that the money hasn't come out, and we kept hearing later and later dates for the money coming out. >> reporter: massachusetts governor, deval patrick, says states are ready and waiting. >> no funds, no projects. and no projects, no jobs. >> reporter: now, also in that hearing, rob nabors, the white house's deputy budget director, he seemed to criticize states for making what he called unwise choices to simply use stimulus money to balance their budgets. now, the administration has said actually stimulus spending will peak in 2010. ali, christine? >> kate, you know, it's only a fraction, then, of the $787 billion stimulus distributed so far. why are some democrats already calling for what would be round three? last year we had some of the president bush, some dems want a second round. >> many people's eyes pop open and say what are you talking about just five months into this one? but some democrats are saying that, really, it's prudent to start planning now, planning ahead, if this round of stimulus, this jolt, doesn't help the economy recover. but at the same time, christine, it's really politically risky. already republicans are jumping on that as simply they say an admission that the current stimulus isn't working. and economists say it could be october, november, december before we really have a clear picture of the success or failure of this current effort. but i think the big question, and i'm sure you're hearing it as well, is will the american public, can they stomach, even a conversation about round three already? >> all right, kate bolduan, thanks so much. ali, kate, it's so interesting, too, because you look at japan in the '90s, i think they had nine different stimulus plans -- >> and no interest rate, same problem. >> a very similar problem, and it's a lot of challenges and a lot of very smart minds have been working on it. when president obama took office in january, he led a chorus of top democrats urgently demanding the passage of that stimulus. you know, their argument then, jobs, jobs, jobs. >> if we do not act, 3 million to 4 million more could lose their jobs. >> we're not going to grow the economy, we're not going to see a lessening of those deficits, if unemployment hits 10%. >> by necessity, we are moving quickly. we're not moving quickly because we're trying to jam something down people's throats. we're moving quickly because we're told that if we don't move quickly, that the economy is going to keep on getting worse. we'll have another 2 million or 3 million or 4 million jobs lost this year. >> today 2.3 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus passed since the president has been making the arguments. is this progress or broken promises? >> let's pose it to democratic congressman chris van holland of maryland, now joining us from capitol hill. representative van holland, thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> what is the situation? the stimulus bill was passed in large measure because it was going to create jobs, amongst other things. but really key to most americans was the creation of jobs. and while things are a little better than they were in february, they're still pretty bad. >> well, look, the recovery act has succeeded in slowing job loss, in many cases creating jobs. i know in my own district people have been put to work on transportation and roads projects that were shovel ready. i know there were a lot of people that would have been laid off, teachers especially, but for the fact that this passed. the president made clear very early that this was going to be a long and painful recovery, but it would be more painful and it would be longer if we had not passed this economic recovery plan. so, it's beginning to kick in. but this is like trying to walk up an escalator that's going down. if you do nothing, you're going to go down a lot faster. but even if you're doing things, because the economy was in free-fall, an economy that the president inherited, progress is -- is slow. and you have to measure it in terms of reduced pain. it will take a while before we actually turn the corner. >> you know, unemployment back when they were trying to sell the stimulus was 7.2%. now it is 9.5%. i want you to listen quickly to what the vice president said about a week ago about the economy and how we must thread this. >> the truth is, there was a misreading of just how bad an economy we inherited. now, that doesn't -- i'm not laying the -- it's now our responsibility. >> so, here's my question -- is the white house misread the depths of the problem or how far it would go, because the white house was saying 8% would be the peak in unemployment if the stimulus was passed. does that mean that the stimulus wasn't the right package in the first place and does that mean there needs to be another one? >> no, i think the stimulus was the right package and i think it is beginning to kick in. the fact of the matter is, in the third quarter, the next quarter, you're going to see more of the stimulus funds entering the economy. this was a package that was designed to put more funds into the economy over a two-year period. the initial tax cuts went up very quickly. but the transportation moneys and the other moneys are beginning to kick in now. so, you're not going to see a dramatic reversal, i mean, the president was very clear about that. but i do believe that it's pretty clear that things would be worse and that the decline would be steeper if we hadn't done this. >> there have been some criticisms that the states have used the money to plug very immediate holes that they had that addressed some short-term matters and that are not stimulative in the long term. there were budget gaps and the states have used that money and that's not actually going to create jobs or long-term work. what do you think about that? >> well, as you know, the states have to balance their budgets, so if they didn't use the money to balance the budgets through medicaid, they would have to make cuts elsewhere, which means laying off teachers and public safety people. because of the balanced-budget requirements in the states, if they don't use the funds to balance the budgets in the states, it means more cuts and layoffs and it continues the virks cycles downwards. it means the teachers don't have money to go to the stores and buy local goods. it's a good thing. and if we hadn't passed that bill and states hadn't been able to use some of the money for their budgets, you would have a continuing, rapid decline. we know even with this money, states like california and other states are having a tough time. imagine how much tougher a time they would be having if we hadn't passed this. >> we know of one school district that kept 2,000 teachers on staff that would have been fired without this money. congressman chris van hollen, democrat from maryland. thank you very much for joining us. i know you have to run out for a vote. thank you very much. we were talking about representative van hollen about unemployment. it stands at 9.5%, as christine said, but would we be in worse shape, would it have been higher if the stimulus bill had not passed? republican paul van ryn is the ranking member of the house budget committee, he joins us now. he did not support the stimulus bill. he does not support it now. congressman, give us your views? >> first of all, the claim wax that the stimulus would keep unemployment below 8%. it's now 9.5%. what we've already lost is 2 million jobs since the stimulus passed. more to the point, the stimulus will cost $1.1 billion in borrowing and that's pushing interest rates up and that's hurting people that are trying to buy homes and avoid foreclosure and are trying to invest. so, when we see the stimulus spent very slowly, the kind of spending in this stimulus, most of it doesn't even occur until after 2011, it's not working. we should do something better and only 3% of the stimulus package actually goes to encouraging businesses to keep or create jobs. the rest of it is rebates in spending, most of the spending is slow, wasteful, and ineffective. >> and you fundamentally just don't believe we should be borrowing money. >> that's right. >> money that we don't have and running all the deficits, we should be borrowing money to get out of the debt problem. that's your philosophical view on this. paul krugman, who won a nobel prize, a "new york times" economist. i want to read to you something he said how the issues are playing out politically -- so, he's saying that it's not necessarily -- he would like to see maybe even a bigger stimulus. >> that's right. i've heard his argument. i just don't agree with that. more borrowing -- look, we're already borrowing 50% of the federal government's this year alone. we're borrowing $2 trillion just this year. all this borrowing is going to push up interest rates. it's going to give us an inflation problem. and we believe that the stimulus -- and we proposed an alternative -- ought to go to businesses, small and large, to encourage them to keep people working. to encourage businesses to invest and expand and hire more people. more spending through washington. look, if more spending from washington was the answer to our economy, then we wouldn't have a problem in our economy, because we're spending more than we ever have in the history of this country. >> let's talk about that, representative. let's talk about that. you're talking about more money to businesses. ultimately businesses don't invest if consumers aren't going to buy. but what specifically are you saying we should do? what kind of incentives do you provide for businesses and who should pay for it? >> what we say is give businesses the ability to write off 100% of their businesses. if they hire people and buy more plant and machinery to put people to work, they can write that off immediately. we also tax our companies, our corporations, the second highest rate in the industrialized world, so what happens in the 21st global economy when you tax your employers a lot more than your competitors are taxing theirs, we lose jobs overseas. we've got to be more competitive. so those are the things we're saying we ought to do. also we think we ought to help people make the money back in their savings portfolio that they lost. we think there ought to be a sunset of the capital gains tax for two years. it's not a huge revenue razor for the government, but it's a huge punitive tax on our savings plans. let's help the economy get back into investing. let's encourage investors to take risks and let's help people make back the money in their i.r.a.s and the 401(k)s and their kids' college savings plans that they've lost so much money from. >> democrats are preaching patience. only 10% of the money is, let's give it some time. we have to leave it there, congressman paul ryan. thank you very much. a shocking forecast for the housing market. what's in store for the value of your biggest asset, your home? will it be worth more or less in two years? plus, over 40 and out of work, how to take steps to land the next job. ( honking, news radio update ) when you're really in pain, relief can't come fast enough. introducing new bayer quick release crystals. active crystals dissolve quickly on your tongue. with an extra pain relieving booster, it's ready to go to work faster than caplets or tablets. it's a whole new way from bayer to dissolve pain... fast. new bayer quick release crystals. in a bold citrus taste. expect relief fast. "what do you mean homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods?" "a few inches of water caused all this?" "but i don't even live near the water." what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you. including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $119 a year. for an agent, call the number on your screen. to get worse before it gets better. that's the news from mortgage insurer, pmi group. half of the nation's largest cities will likely see home prices drop in the next two years. many are in hard-hit states, florida and california. i will say they do say that 98% of the homes -- home areas now are higher in affordability and so that's good if you're looking at low interest rates and you've managed to save up money for a down payment. there is some chance of getting that first-time home now for the first time in a long time. >> you know, we use california often as the example of that where back at the height, you know, a house was maybe $600,000, now it's under $200,000. >> that's right. >> which means you can get into it with a lower monthly payment and without taking a risky mortgage. but it depends you getting the mortgage. it's an interesting time, a glass half full or half empty depending on where you stand in the housing market. t. boone pickens is shelving his plans to build the largest wind farm ever. it would use thousands of turbines to generate electricity. put he said transmission problems and trouble getting capital have made the project unfeasible for now. pickens talked up the pickens plan, you might remember, with television commercials like these and lobbying efforts. his goal was to wean the u.s. off of foreign oil. move us over to wind and natural gas a little bit more so we use less oil for transportation. i spoke with t. boone pickens about his scaled-back plan for some of the turbines that are already ordered. >> we'll be right on schedule. we may not build the wind farm in pampa texas, you may find it in wisconsin or nebraska or someplace else, but we'll be actively building a wind farm someplace with the turbines. my garage is not big enough to take all those turbines. >> i bet he's got a big garage. i really do, but i don't think it's big enough for all those. >> yeah, this is a big bet that he made. he had a lot of money to make a bet and he made a big bet on wind. there were a lot of moving parts to this. it needed private investment and municipalities and states to participate in building the transmission lines and he said it wasn't happening enough fast enough in texas. but he will have to find a way out of it, and it's probably good news for those people depending on greater use of wind or solar or natural gas in this country, that they've got to find someplace to mutt these things. there are a lot of people looking for wind fares. >> we were bullish on oil when it was $140 a barrel. >> he said oil's going back up to the $140s in the next few years, but i guess it's in his interests at this point for oil to go higher to push his plan. when oil is lower, he's not worried about it. >> he told us he was long natural gas. bailed-out insurer aig is asking the government pay czar to review $235 million in bonuses that it owes employees of its famous now financial products division. they are reviewing $2.4 million in scheduled payments to 43 top executives. the bonuses are part of pay packages that were already contracted in 2008. that means aig is not required to receive approval before making the payments. a source close to the matter said aig wants to make sure the government a completely comfortable with the company's compensation plan. and ali -- >> which they can't possibly be. >> no one is comfortable with that. >> no one is. >> the people getting the bonuses -- >> it's the world's worst compensation plan. no question about that. however, we've already -- we've already had our chance to be outraged about this. this is the same one we were outraged about. it's another installment of the same outrageous compensation plan that we talked about a few months ago. >> it's the same money we were all angry about before. >> yeah. >> taxpayer money has to pay the bonuses, but now it looks like the government and aig are together trying to figure out what's the most appropriate way to do it or not do that. that's not the end of the story. >> i tell you how you do it. your hold your nose and you pretend you don't have to do it because it's terrible. >> all right, we'll leave it there. we'll give the technical advice. we'll draw it up and send to finalburg at treasury. facebook, promoting yourself and your business right online could mean a lot of money in the future. social networking sites are not just places to chat with your friends anymore. whether you're airing your grievances over your shrinking 401(k) or you're networking to find a new job, the way you use the sites has changed with the economy. randi zuckerberg is the marketing director at facebook. she joins me now from palo alto, california, via skype. thank you for being with us. >> great. thank you so much for having me. >> randi, i know that you really do follow the trends what's been going on on facebook and i know that within the last few weeks because of michael jackson and because of iran, there's been really an increase in not only usage but the way people use facebook. but, with respect to the economy, what sort of trends have you seen in terms of people struggling through the economy? how are they best using facebook to make things better for themselves? >> that's a great question. and because facebook is really a representation of what people are talking about offline in their daily lives, people have really been turning to facebook in a huge way to discuss the economy, ever since last year we have been tracking how people have been discussing terms like money, the economy, being laid off on facebook. and we've seen a tremendous increase in these terms being discussed with people and their friends. >> all right. so, the first thing that we typically, in business news, discuss when we think about social media and social networking with respect to you is jobs. networking, because you may know someone, there may be somebody in your group of friends who works