Over the past year President Obama and liberal Democrats in general have been taking a pounding on the issue of unemployment and their prescription to solve this problem via Keynesian pump priming. They went so far as to issue the now infamous graphic showing their projection of what would happen if they didn’t do anything versus spending money we didn’t have via Stimulus Spending. In two years time, the hype about creating or saving three million jobs has pretty much been dropped by the Obama Administration. Having VP Joe Biden continually and somewhat comically demonstrate the lack of credibility of such a measureless assertion created more cynicism among the voters than confidence. The elections of November 2010 put an end to this silly meritless assertion since the voters seeing 9+% unemployment demonstrated they weren’t buying what was being foisted.
The wild annual trillion dollar deficit spending by a prolificate Congress with little to show for it frightened the voters enough that change was deemed necessary. Now that Barack Obama is looking to get re-elected in 2012, it seems the metrics need to be changed in his favor. Perversely, part of this change was the faulty definition of unemployment. By the definition a person is only considered unemployed if their period of joblessness is less than a year. To be fair, this definition was in place long before Obama became president. Under normal recessions this definition never truly impacted the math determining the unemployment rate. However, this is no normal recession and it is not unusual for a person to be unemployed for greater than a year in high unemployment areas, which brings us to some needed context.
In 2006, prior to the congressional elections the price of gasoline and diesel fuel increased rapidly placing a squeeze on personal disposable income. The Democrat Party promised among many things to lower the price of fuel. Democrats sensed they had a winning campaign strategy in the anti-war movement along with numerous campaigns promises. It was during this campaign season that Barack Obama was elected to the US Senate in Illinois and Democrats swept the House and Senate, placing Nancy Pelosi in charge of the House and Harry Reid in charge of the Senate. When they officially took office in January of 2007, the unemployment rate began its slow steady march upward. Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and Harry Reid reneged on their promise to lower the price of fuel but instead blamed the oil companies, engaged in theater by holding hearings and then refused to lift the drilling bans on coastal off shore drilling. Not only did they refuse off shore drilling, they refused to allow new drilling in Alaska and they intensified the ban to many land areas. On top of suppressing energy resource extraction, they enacted Ethanol legislation wasting billions of taxpayer dollars, and they literally doubled the Federal deficit for FY2008 with a veto proof majority in the House. The high-energy prices had the effect of mass layoffs, which then triggered the mortgage debacle. No job meant no ability to pay the mortgage. If you review past recessions back to the 1970s, the trigger for virtually every one of them was an increase in the cost of fuel. Thus the POR economy was born. Tom Blumer at Bizzyblog.com quite deftly put his finger on the source of our economic woes created by the meddling of Congress in things they had very little understanding.
To show the progress of the liberal Democrats failed policies I have provided some figures below which are strictly based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics raw data, NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED. First we see that from the recession in 2003 the number of people actually working (Average Annual Employment) increased by over seven million people until the peak of 2007. From 2008 to presently, the number of people actually working dropped by over seven million people. In two years all the gains from 2003 were wiped out. The assertions that three million jobs were created or saved by Keynesian pump priming policies are conclusively shown here to be a total wrong. Furthermore, since employment in the US is seasonal with January being typically the lowest month of employment, and June and November being the highest months of employment, for illustration purposes I have included the figures showing the period of 2001 to current. These three figures clearly show that total employment is down consistently for all cyclical months. The facts are clear, the trillions of dollars of deficit spending not only had zero effect in creating or saving jobs, they actually cost jobs.
If we have lost jobs, then how can the Administration claim we created jobs? Below is a chart showing the total number of employed people during the 12 months of 2010. Please note this is a typical profile of employment from January to December, where in January thousands of people are laid off after the Christmas holiday shopping season. During June typically thousands of people are hired for the summer vacation season then laid off and in November the hiring season picks up again for the holidays. Obviously, if you start low with mass layoffs and end high in mass hiring you will always show an increase in the number of jobs even though you might have less people working the next year on an average basis.
Compounding this misperception of actual employment and unemployment is the faulty definition of unemployment where people over one year of unemployment fall into the Not In Labor Force classification. You will hear the MSM usually refer to these people as having given up looking for jobs as though this was their fault by choice. No, they haven’t given up, and in many cases it is not their fault. It is a faulty definition that is being conveniently used by those attempting to cover up a failed policy by a group of people who are so ideologically rigid in their point of view they refuse to accept reality. We normally call such rigid thinking people ideologues.
The last two figures below show the Labor Force and Not In Labor Force trends for the past ten years. As you can see since 2008 the Labor Force has leveled off. The Not In Labor Force trends has increased sharply to triple it’s normal rate. By my estimate some three million people fell out of the Unemployment classification into the Not In Labor Force category by means of a faulty definition. Instead of there being 14 million people unemployed, there are actually 17 million people unemployed. This is not even counting the millions of people who are under employed in part time jobs. Where did all these people come from beyond the seven million people who lost their jobs since 2007? Every year between the four million young adults who enter the labor force and some 1.5 million people who retire or die, approximately 2.5 million net additional people are available for work. Since 2007, when unemployment began to increase, some 7.5 million people entered the labor force. Because of the normal turn over in employment many of these people got a job, lost a job, and began being counted in the unemployment figures.
The Obama Administration has decided to double down on their rigid ideological thinking by unleashing the EPA upon businesses. Instead of learning from their mistakes and economic history, the Obama Administration has embarked on a disastrous policy of regulating Carbon Dioxide emissions that will drive up the cost of energy. Now that the price of gasoline is above $3 per gallon, any weak economic recovery we might have experienced will be choked off. The EPA actions on top of the recent spike in energy prices will cause the feared double dip recession. Barack Obama himself admitted that his policies of necessity would cause the price of electricity to skyrocket, those were his words. Now if high-energy costs slow, and cause a recession, why would anyone engage in a policy to raise the cost of energy, especially at a time of economic weakness? Clearly, Obama himself realizes the effect of the EPA’s action will increase the cost of energy. This is on top of a recent court ruling holding the Department of Interior in Contempt of Court for illegally proceeding with a drilling ban in the Gulf of Mexico by stonewalling permits. An ideologue ignores the consequences of reality.
At this point Congress has to step up to the plate to introduce legislation to ban the EPA from regulating Carbon Dioxide as a pollutant. It is possible for Democrats to vote with Republicans on this issue. During the four years Democrats ran Congress they tried unsuccessfully to pass Global Warming legislation even though they, via a party line vote, could have rammed through such a bill. The fact they didn’t means there were plenty of Democrats who weren’t prepared to commit political suicide as many did over ObamaCare. In the House, just via a party line vote, the GOP can pass this legislation and with an additional 51 Democrats can override a veto. In the Senate, a GOP party line vote plus 19 Democrat Senators would be needed to help override any veto attempt by Obama. These numbers are within the realm of possibility given enough fear by Democrats of being blamed for a double dip recession.
While you’re holding your breath for Congress to get things done quickly, don’t leave your fate in their hands. As of December, the latest figures available, there are 14 metro areas in the US with unemployment rates under 5%. Most of these areas are in the Midwest with a few in the Northeast. Look up your closest metro area in the reference section to determine the local unemployment rate. If you have been unemployed for some time consider relocating to one of these areas. Be an American, vote with your feet like your forefathers and don’t let some politician entice you to stay in their sphere of influence just because they offer you a stipend called unemployment insurance. Note that California has some of the worst unemployment in the country due to their anti-business behavior, their best ranked metro area Santa Barbara (9.5%) is number 242 out of 372. Why should you accept the consequences of other people’s poor choices?
References:
- Welcome to the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Economy: A Washington-Driven Recession or Downturn May Have Begun
- Has the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Economy Bottomed Out?
- Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detail
- A-1. Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over, 1976 to date
- Obama: I’ll make energy prices “skyrocket”
- Cost of the Drilling Ban
- Cause and Effect
- Obama’s Non Sequitur
- Primer on the Economy
- Economics Shotgun Style
- Unemployment Rates for Metropolitan Areas
I think it is wonderful that you conclude with doing exactly what Obama seems intent on stopping: voting with one’s feet.
If anything typifies Obama’s rule it is an attempt to make all 50 states the same.
And Obama’s ideal image is sort of like Detroit or Chicago, in other words, a ruin.
I also wanted to add a graph to your discussion.
This graph shows how job growth (bad as it was) worsened, slowing to a crawl, as soon as ObamaCare passed.
At the end of October, 2009, companies immediately stopped hiring as many people and unemployment filings decreased at a much reduced rate.
This means the ”breaking even” place cannot be reached for YEARS, near a decade, instead of mere months.
When we realize that Obama’s most loyal constituency has been those ”on the dole,” as well as those government workers who dole out the dole, we can understand Obama’s pretense of talking jobs while never clearing the way for job creation: He Needs More Poor People!
Over 1 in 7 Americans are now on Food Stamps.
Over 16 million people are unemployed/underemployed.
While voting with one’s feet might be a solution for some, being able to see the need to accept government help without becoming an Obama supporter is vital.
With real unemployment floating at 16%-17% across America, we will be entertained by Washington through the MSM that a new “Normal” for a decade to come will be published & acknowledged unemployment levels of between 8% and 9%. We will be told by the W.H. that 8% unemployment is acceptable, and an improvement on the 9.6% currently being claimed.
We will also be lied to about the nature of that employment level. New and old businesses will hire Part-timers more readily than Full-timers for all the obvious reasons handed to them by an incomprehensible Administration, and weak-kneed Congress – such as dramatically higher costs of Employing, and a destabilizing uncertainty of future arbitrary government Decrees.
Washington is awash in indecision. Each end of the political spectrum is pulling at the center, and nothing of consequence will get done to turn the ship of Deficit and Debt around.
The best we can hope for, given the current landscape, is for a leader from the Republican side of Congress to take the reigns in hand, and get ahead of the story. Use the podium to move public consciousness, before Obama’s teleprompters-roadies get a chance to finish their egg-mcmuffins in the morning. Strike the bell every morning by controlling the agenda, demonstrating clear, and specific cuts in government over-reaching spending that will actually put a serious dent in the Deficit and Debt, not 15 years from now, but this year. Then, the lead might be followed at State level, and at Municipal levels.
The bureaucracy’s Over-burden is weighing much too heavily on all levels of society, not just businesses. The status quo does not need to be accepted.
We all know what is required: High-end tax rates must be increased, and defense spending and the cost of entitlement programs must be reduced. Leave any part of that out and we might as well do nothing at all.
So far nothing is exactly what’s being done. As a matter of fact, each party seems to be dedicated to making some part of the problem worse.
@Greg: You said:
Yeah, that is brilliant. The businesses are already guarded because they do not trust this administration and so they have stopped hiring; and your answer is to take MORE of their money.
You have a grasp of finances that is outstanding, Greg.
And by that I mean that you may as well be out standing in a field somewhere…
James Raider, you mentionned a leader from the REPUBLICAN LEADER must come out
I agree and considering the danger of having those votes done carelously by some which
listen only to their master, be it religous or any other be it a media which work to push the one they will profit from who hold the authority absolute to their followers,
meaning voting for the one chosen by somebody else,that vote is not a genuine vote, compare to those AMERICANS who think the consequences of voting is so important for the years ahead, and as we see now being told lies with a smiling face, and realise after they made a mistake is not good enough for this GREAT AMERICA,
@anticsrocks, #4:
An excessive tax rate at the highest income level is not the reason we went into an economic recession, nor is it the reason that businesses have not resumed hiring. Top end tax rates are presently much lower than historical averages, and have been lower for years.
There’s also a far greater percentage of wealth now concentrated at the top. The upward redistribution of wealth has continued through the recession.
@anticsrocks:
After reading a lot of dreadful stuff – thanks for the Laugh!
@Faith7 – Thanks! Glad to be of help.
@Greg: Don’t remember saying what caused or contributed to the current massive recession we are in. However, it is clear that you have never owned your own business, never had to meet a payroll, never had to deal with the plethora of governmental regulations that hinder business and commerce in this country.
When you take more money from the job producers, you get fewer jobs.
Your comments show that you believe like Howard Dean; and that is that a government’s job is to redistribute wealth.
So what IS the reason that businesses have not resumed hiring?
Please illuminate us.
@anticsrocks, #8: “So what IS the reason that businesses have not resumed hiring?”
The theory is a simple:
Businesses haven’t resumed hiring because there’s not enough demand for their goods and services to justify taking on the additional costs.
There’s insufficient demand for their goods and services because the average American consumer’s share of total wealth and income has been steadily declining. If consumers have less money, they buy less. This decline was offset for more than a decade by consumer willingness to use readily available credit, but that day is over and isn’t coming back.
The only way to remedy the situation is for consumer confidence and buying power to increase. You can’t get there without allowing them a more equitable share of wealth and income.
In a truly healthy system workers would receive a greater share of the income and wealth generated by the productive work they do. That way downward redistribution takes a form that directly incentivizes greater productive effort, and everybody benefits.
Unfortunately, the trend has been just the opposite. Real wages have been in decline, with more time and effort required just to keep up; employee benefits have also declined; employee pension plans appear to be headed for extinction; forget about job security.
The bottom line is that the rich, as a group, can actually become too rich. Too large a concentration of the total wealth can become a drag on the entire system. If the wealthiest were putting more of their wealth back into circulation, there would be less of an argument for a more progressive tax schedule.
To paraphrase Greg:
WAHHHHHH! Those evil rich people!!!!!!!!
Greg’s wealth envy/hatred of the rich is pretty well known and Mata has schooled him on it repeatedly.
Is that how your brain read Greg’s post? I actually feel sorry for you. You can’t recognize an interesting argument or, more importantly, offer an intelligent rebuttal.
@Hard Right, #10.
It’s interesting how often it’s assumed that people who express views similar to my own must be poor. That makes about as much sense as the assumption that all republicans are rich.
We might want to consider a chart showing the growth of consumer debt along with those up at the top of the page. The rapid growth of both consumer debt and public debt have accompanied the rapid upward shift of the nation’s wealth. Essentially we fueled the economic activity leading to an enormous rapid expansion of wealth at the top by means of skyrocketing levels of debt in other sectors.
@Greg: You said:
So why exactly are the wealthiest not putting more of their wealth back into circulation?
GREG, yes you and who talk in sharing your view don’t know nothing about wealthy people
of course they are not all the same, and you just cannot put them all in the same way of thought’
they are pionneers also because they have spend in AMERICA and are responsible for others
whealth created along with them, and have been all along, and we all would be a poor country if not for their contributions in supporting CREATIVITY and ADVANCING SCIENCE of any subject,you
could find from sickness to space walk, and now they are investing in other country and doing the same effort that AMERICA had from them, and your way of thought to punish them because they are rich and powerfull is from an administration that are too envious and seek to become the only power in
this country, and that must not be tolerate for long, as we are seeing the slope going downward,
and dangerously poor
@ Greg
That’s simply not true. Did you look for and find an ipad over Christmas? Did you know that there are people already paying up to $600 to terminate their existing contracts with AT&T to buy the iphone from Verizon? As a telecommunications engineer, I am busier than I have ever been; yet my company does not want to hire more people. That is a decision I am in on and the reason is not a lack of consumption. We’re still afraid that the decisions made in Washington will have an adverse affect on business and the economy. I’ll tell you right now, the best thing for unemployment would be for Obamacare to be struck down by the SCOTUS. I know we’d bring more people on.
Coming from Illinois, I’ll let everyone know how well increasing individual and corporate taxes as opposed to reigning in spending works with regards to decreasing deficits. Corporate execs already told the state legislature that if these hikes were approved, which they were, it would be obvious to them that Illinois is not the place to do business in. Indiana and Wisconsin are looking forward to Illinois businesses moving to their states. Even Gov Christie has been lobbying Illinois businesses to relocate to his state because he made it more business friendly. Most likely this state will be losing lots of jobs and thus revenue. Abbott Labs, which is one of the largest private employers in the state, announced a couple of weeks ago that they will be sending pink slips to 1,000 of its 13,000 employees in the state compliments of new federal regulations and Obamacare. Of course the pols in this heavily blue state really don’t care about those white collar, middle class jobs because they are non union which means no kickbacks.
another vet, hi, I think that the non unionise employers should be getting lowder on the public stage to show AMERICA the important role they play and even more important than the unions,
on many levels of a company growing to excellence in all the stages of their products, and the impact they do in the economic benefits of this AMERICA, we hear of the employees being brief ,inside on the policys of their company, BUT THERE IS A LACK ON THE PUBLIC STAGE, EVEN IF THEY PAY LARGE SUMS OF MONEY TO MEDIAS IT STILL LACK TO REACH THE ONES WHO VOTES IN LARGE NUMBERS,
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR A COMPANY TO GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE WITTIN THEIR WALLS WHO CAN MORE EFFECTIVLY GET THE MESSAGE ON THE RIGHT PLATFORM, THAT IS THE MASSES
WHERE THOSE ARE SEEKING TO EARN AND WORK,AND ARE NOT ABLE BECAUSE OF THEIR GOVERNMENT
OPPOSITION TO FREEDOM OF COMPANY’S RULES RUN BY COMPANYS NOT BY GOVERNMENT RULES
allow me some more reflexion… THE mentality of the socialist groups have an importance consequence in the growth of a nation’s thoughts!!!I remember in convent where I was educated, having the call for demanding my aunt , money to help the CHINEESE CHILDREN, they where calling that BUYING the children from CHINA, and I would fight to get that money with my aunt who did not wish to contribute I was 6 years old, and today my sister was telling me that she follow a cable tv where the thinkers and
advance intelligent people where saying that , MANY LAND AND COMPANY AND FARM ARE BEING PURCHASE BY WHAT THEY CALL it CHINA’s CARTELL, that are not individuals but big government own cartell including BIG CHINEESE BANK, they are purchasing any thing with a good price and get the people to sell for that good deal, that all over CANADA, they where warning the CANADIAN to think twice before selling CANADA to forhein money wise cartells
I dont know if it’s done in USA but it is a danger in AMERICA not only by CHINA, think of other
oil rich COUNTRYS that are buying here medias wich are changing their journalistic integrity to please the new owner fullshares or lot important ones enough to have a voice to elect who they want
Greg says: 13
We might want to consider a chart showing the growth of consumer debt along with those up at the top of the page.
Yup.
People ASSUMED that their homes were their personal piggy banks.
They lived well beyond their needs.
These are the same folks who walked away from their 2nd and 3rd mortgages.
Now, because Obama slowed the foreclosure process, they are rewarded by being allowed to still live in these homes rent-free!
They still enjoy all the toys, without having to pay for them, too.
A few short weeks ago, Obamaites were publishing articles about the morality of squatting in homes that people were NOT paying off!
Yes, walk away from the payments ….but stay in the house!
First fallacy was NOT Obama’s.
The idea that home prices would continue to rise forever was just stupidity.
But the rationalization by Obamaites of the continued bad behavior of those stupid folks is egregious.
I met a man whose HOA (homeowners’ association) is eating the losses as 1/4 of their condos have people in them who refuse to pay their dues.
At least in ours it is only 1 out of 27.
We have been very lucky.
I always learned early in my life that you pay the rent as an obligation before anything else,
otherwise you are not an honorable person worthy to be trusted in any kind of job you are seeking
in life, and more over is taking advantage of it by continuing to live in is as low as you can get
and it take a shamefull person to do it,
Nan G, hi, I think that OBAMA shoul be hold responsible by his actions,
and required to pay for those who don’t, on his salary as PRESIDENT OF the UNITED STATES,
that would give him a lesson to show his followers HOW TO BE an HONORABLE citizen,
that would be teaching using real life challenges, that those who rent their houses or apartment don’t have to take the burden of the one who is responsible for their lost of income.
@Greg:
If as you say consumer debt fueled the expansion of the economy, then how do you account that the massive draw down in consumer debt was accomplished mostly by defaulting upon it NOT by your implication of ceasing to buy stuff?
People didn’t simply decide not to buy any more goods, banks took inordinate risks by giving credit to those people who were not financially sound, when these people with marginal finances were laid off they in turn defaulted on credit cards and mortgages. You have it exactly backwards, the economy expands when companies take RISKS to invest in plant expansion and equipment. Profits and loans are the seed money for that investment. When the banks took the hit on all these defaults, they obviously couldn’t loan money for any expansion and furthermore tightened credit risk ratings to the point few would be eligible. The banks at this point with raised reserved requirements by the FDIC are making their money off of government bonds, a paper shuffle. As long as investors see their opportunities hindered by a government that increases their risk of return they will invest accordly, NOT in plant and equipment.
@dscott, #23:
My understanding is that corporate America is presently sitting on one of the largest accumulations of capital in history. I think their caution can be traced to concerns about the future demand for their products, which in turn stem from the diminished willingness and ability to spend on the part of the consumer.
You know, when Obama went in front of the US Chamber of Commerce he strongly suggested exactly what he would do: “throw caution to the winds and just spend all your money, folks!”
I recall reading about the huge loans Michelle and Barak Obama took out so they could establish themselves as big time partiers both in their “own” Chicago home and on the cocktail party circuit.
They are big believers in living well beyond their means.
And that is always his solution to America’s financial woes.
So, you do that, too.
It will make Obama look good.
Does that make any sense for the one who does it?
No!
Of course not!
Most people in business for themselves look long term and short term all the time.
Obama made long term look very iffy.
So, smarter people than him let their money sit.
Fools, however, follow him.
GREG, could it be that they are waiting to invest in an open production of getting the AMERICAN oil to AMERICANS denied by the government in place, but they know of time table will be with the next
GOVERNMENT will coming in power focussing in what the AMERICANS need and want,
that is their own oil
@another vet – I, too am from Illinois and agree with you completely on the business situation here. RE: Obamacare, I personally know three businesses who have laid off their workers, save for family members because they received a letter in the mail from HHS mandating that they purchase and offer health insurance even to part time employees. As a result, these folks through no fault of their own were suddenly without jobs. But hey!, they will eventually be covered by Medicaid! Screw the economy.
@Greg: You STILL haven’t answered my question –
@Greg:
There is wealth creation, that is the actual formation of capital, of value, where previously there had been less value or capital.
And there is wealth redistribution, that is, taking from one group and giving to the other.
Wealthy people getting wealthier is not, and I emphasize NOT due to redistribution in the vast majority of cases. Its because wealth and capital was formed. Value was increased. This happens when risky investments pay off.
You take a risk in losing money, in order to get greater returns when capital is formed, value increases.
Wealth was NOT transfered to those “evil rich” people in your parlance Greg.
I find it profoundly sad that a large portion of the polity does not grasp this, or chooses to ignore it. Those with the agenda choose to ignore it. That would include Greg, Obami, and others of that ideological ilk, who do not comprehend, at the most basic level, how money is made, or wealth created. To them, wealth is distributed, so why not take the reigns of distribution and guide it where they want it to go?
Call it an indictment of our educational system, that otherwise normal and functional adults may have such a deep and profound miscomprehension of how the economy works. Given the groups who control our educational system, their ideological bents … I guess it shouldn’t surprise me.
@Aqua:
+1
As a business owner, I am terrified by the new tax regime. We literally do not know our costs going forward, which means we can’t hire until we have a better sense of this.
Our revenues hit new highs last year. Our hiring was on hold.
There may be a reason for this. And its one that the democrats, the liberals, the progressives simply cannot comprehend.
Tax me more, and I will reduce my cost basis, as I don’t have the pricing freedom to pass along the taxes to my customers. Whats the biggest thing in my cost basis?
People.
Taxes kill jobs. Period. End of story.
Make my life easier, make my taxes lower, not higher, and I will hire more. I had this conversation with a reporter a few weeks ago, and they declined to print that portion in the final text of the article. Go figure.
When the left side of the political spectrum decided that people making over $X (where X is some number) were rich and could afford more taxes, every single small business person I know with an S-Corp or an LLC, immediately, and for the forseeable future, stopped hiring. Wanna take a guess why? Big hint … these are flow through entities, so their earnings are reported upon your personal taxes. Which made me look like a millionare. Even though I can barely rub two nickels together. I took a huge pay cut to do what I am doing now. Gigantic risk. Existential for my families wealth. And we don’t have lots of free capital sitting around doing nothing. I am not a millionaire, on paper or in reality. But if you look at our revenue … a flow through entity would make me look like one.
And then some idiot somewhere, decided that I needed to pay more taxes. Because I was rich. I am not. But in their rainbow colored, unicorn riding worldview, I am.
As I said before, those on the left have a profoundly incorrect comprehension of how business works. They should never, ever, be in a position of power to make changes to something they do not understand.
Never Ever. Under any circumstances.
@John Galt:
Great comment, John Galt.
And with it you have explained exactly why those people Obama adressed at the Chamber of Commerce will NOT simply throw their money away by thoughtlessly spending it.
Obama would love it if they would.
Does he know that the VAST majority of new businesses FAIL?
I think he does.
But if smart business people act stupidly and lose all their money, that would give him a new constituency: the once rich, now impoverished.
Oh, gee.
Now, who will be left to support all of his constituents (welfare recipients)?
John Galt, hi, where where you, that is clear enough for me to understand mean that they
should now, UNLESS, they don’t want to. and that is more likely, considering their lack of willingness to understand the other problems they put on the people who are seeking desperatly a job,
something is very weird, because the business are not hiring and the GOVERNMENT
IS HIRING CONSTANTLY, some are being hired to teach the young chidren to love OBAMA,
they have their condo paid by the GOVERNMENT to do that job not counting the other government jobs paid by the taxpayers, while other are in a desperate situation of unemployement,
HEY that is COMMUNIST for sure and growing
Still waiting on Greg to answer me, but I’m not holding out much hope.
Have to be gone for the weekend, so I will have to wait until Monday to be disappointed by Greg’s not answering me. It is my anniversary weekend this weekend and so I am taking the wife on a micro-vacation. We got married on Valentine’s Day, which A. makes it easier for me to remember and B. I get to combine two presents in one!!
Shhh! Don’t tell the wife. lol
anticsrocks, happy anniversary, and hope you dont have the blowing snow I see out of my widow now,
I know how smart you are and to figure out to save a present, wow that is something,
did you ever count all the money you save? all those years, and figure the money you spent trying to make her forget it because of your guilty feeling you get every VALENTINE,
bye