Don't be a simpleton and stop your analysis after the first sentence of the second paragraph of this excerpt:
Frederick R. Treyz, the chief economist of Regional Economic Models Inc., did an analysis of the possible impact of the storm.
Assuming that direct damages totaled $7 billion, Dr. Treyz projected that the recovery would generate roughly 42,000 jobs — including construction workers, debris removers and the jobs that would be generated by the money they earned and spent elsewhere. But he calculated that one day’s business disruption across the affected region — a rough estimate that allows for some businesses that were not disrupted at all, and others that were disrupted for several days — would lead to losses that could cost roughly 62,000 jobs.
via www.nytimes.com
Let alone that the money spent on rebuilding is a total waste. Wouldn't you rather have spent it on other things?
Note that this is entirely different from saying that disaster spending is good for construction workers and debris removers. Of course.
