What the OP does not understand is that depending on the local environment, every dollar spent in the private sector will result in 4-7 dollars being spent in the total economy. So, the basis for the article is flawed from the beginning except to the uniformed.
Besides, how much of that stimulus spending improved the economy when 300m was given to Solyndra and they went bankrupt a year later ?
Another solar panel manufacturer that was a recipient of stimulus spending also went under a few weeks ago. No multiplier there.
What was the multiplier effect when Hillary channeled 4m dollars to a company in Chicago that does political surveys to hire 3 people ? Or was the stimulus just paying it forward for her 2016 campaign ?