We will be experiencing “headwinds” until this jackass is evicted from the Whitehouse.
Why?
Cuz he BLOWS.
Greg
12 years ago
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery, that’s helped to create new American jobs, that’s helped to boost consumer and small business confidence, or that’s helped to lessen the pain of the casualties of the economic downturn since Barack Obama has been elected?
They’ve done absolutely nothing but resist the constructive efforts of others, talk down confidence in recovery, attack the President, and aggressively pursue an extremist right-wing social agenda that has absolutely nothing to do with job creation.
Anybody wanting to put the people who nearly drove the nation over a cliff back in the driver’s seat when all they’re promising is even more of what they did before needs to have their head examined.
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery
We kicked the unions ass in WI. There is a public perception now that following bad money with even more money isn’t going to spend our way to prosperity; and it’s very well seen the relation between pols and unions are quite incestious.
Nan G
12 years ago
Paul Ryan was on a business channel this AM, he pointed these facts out:
The House Majority of Republicans have focused on job creation and economic growth.
The House has passed 35 bills aimed at empowering small business owners and reducing regulatory burdens, fixing the tax code to help job creators, increasing competitiveness for American manufacturers, encouraging entrepreneurship and growth, maximizing domestic energy production, paying down America’s unsustainable debt burden and beginning to live within our means.
Unfortunately, 28 of these bills, despite garnering bipartisan support in the House, have either been blocked by or are stuck in the Senate.
Obama cannot say the same thing.
Of his budgets and jobs bills none has passed in either half of the US Congress.
In fact Obama has ”garnered bipartisan support,” however, both Republicans AND Democrats vote AGAINST Obama’s budgets!
It was actually the public, not the private, sector that shed thousands of jobs in May. While private businesses hired 82,000 people last month, federal, state and local governments wiped 13,000 employees from the payroll, according to Labor Department data.
“The government is actually contributing to the slow recovery,” said Scott Brown, the chief economist at the Florida-based financial firm Raymond James & Associates.
Brown said that if it were not for the “drag” of this public sector job loss, the economy would likely be growing a full percentage point faster, with GDP growing at 3 percent rather than at 2 percent.
“That would help mop up the jobs lost during the downturn,” he said. “Factor in the drag from government and we are growing at a pace that’s roughly enough to absorb the growth in population but not fast enough to make up much of the ground lost.”
But conservatives argue that cutting the government workforce, and thus the government spending needed to sustain it, gives the private sector more room to flourish.
“Any of the resources the government spends, it’s taking from the private sector,” said James Sherk, a senior policy analyst in labor economics at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “If the government takes fewer resources, then there’s more in the private sector for the private sector to invest.”
What Sherk ignores, of course, is that government employees spend their wages entirely in the public sector. Similarly, the government itself spends in the private sector. If you reduce those infusions of cash into the private sector, what do you suppose happens to all of the private sector jobs that spending supports? You’re not adding only former public employees to the unemployment rolls. You’re not reducing the standard of living of only teachers, firemen, police officers, and other public servants that conservatives seem to dislike.
All of that serves the cause of GOP election success, however. They only succeed to the extent that they can cause national confidence to fail and 27 months of continuous job growth to falter.
Maybe I should repeat the question:
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery?
What Walker has done in Wisconsin doesn’t qualify as an example.
mossomo
12 years ago
@Greg: Here’s the thing, I don’t know if you see it, but what you espouse is taking money from the productive part of our economy, the part that creates the stuff you and me want to buy, and you want to funnel that capital into the non-productive/less productive part of the economy.
Here’s the contrast it sets up: the productive sector gave us the 69¢ Edison light bulbs we’ve used for a century vs the govt layer that produces the $50 hazardous waste EPA light bulb.
And your money is on the govt layer to spur economic growth? The same gov’t layer that incubated the EPA who went on to sign off on a $50 light bulb that I can’t throw away in the my regular trash because the Evironmental Protection Agency classifies their light bulb as being hazardous waste?
Quick tangent. Our gov’t passed a law to outlaw the Edison light bulb. Much in the same way Blue States pass laws to force bids on govt contracts to conform with union wages. And ever still like how dinasuar industries tried to continue providing pensions the unions strong armed them into promising even though the rest of the private sector moved on. Common denominator: no substitutes. Which constricts, not grows.
I have to question your belief in the American profit motive. You seem to prefer the removal of money from the people with the skillset and history of actually creating wealth; you trust the gov’t layer and keynasian modifiers to prove it’s “stimulating” more than the wealth producers could themselves.
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery?
We’ll have to agree to disagree because my positives I think are your negatives. GOP and WI vs Public Sector Unions – we got the mssg out nationally that the model is unsubstanable – THIS IS HUGE and sets a trend. Nan G brought up some good points. I liked this one: H.R. 872, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act. Passed the House, hit the Senate and there it sits to the serenade of crickets.
Great Lakes State
12 years ago
Greg asked: What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery?
Here is a list of 29 bills/budget items that have passed the house that would help small business owners, cut taxes for small business and boost energy production that are being held up by Harry Reid in the senate.
Each bill stuck in the Senate is stuck for a reason. Generally, because it furthers some special interest agenda at the expense of the environment or contrary to the interests of the general public, or provides a tax cut without any consideration for how the lost revenue will be made up.
Those on the list that don’t have such problems have mostly been passed and signed into law by the President.
Each bill stuck in the Senate is stuck for a reason. Generally, because it furthers some special interest agenda at the expense of the environment or contrary to the interests of the general public, or provides a tax cut without any consideration for how the lost revenue will be made up.
And here again you show ignorance. Again, I’m not calling you stupid, but do you not understand how our system of government works?
The House writes a bill. The Senate has the opportunity to vote on that bill, write their own version, or ignore it. If they vote on it and it passes, it goes to the President to be signed or vetoed. If they write their own bill, the two bills go to conference where differences are ironed out, a new bill is produced and voted on by both chambers, and it either fails or passes and goes to the President to be signed or vetoed. Or they can ignore it and nothing happens, no debate, nothing. Harry Reid has decided he does not want a debate with the House because he will lose that debate!
It is not the republicans that are stopping the things from getting done Greg, it is Harry Reid. You can keep crying about how the GOP House is not doing anything all you want, the facts are the facts. The Senate can pass their own bills. By the way, where is their budget?
mossomo
12 years ago
how the lost revenue will be made up
This will be one of the issues come fall my friend. I’ll hazard that the electorate is kind of pissed, seeing that the majority of us have had to make life changes over the last five years directly related to the performance of the economy – while the gov’t carries on as usual.
Private sector payrolls have been devastated and participation in the work force is at an all time low, and all this while federal outlays have doubled over the last decade, and federal/state employees have spiked to all time highs. This won’t and cannot last.
Private sector payrolls have been devastated and participation in the work force is at an all time low, and all this while federal outlays have doubled over the last decade, and federal/state employees have spiked to all time highs.
Actually, part of that’s misleading, and the rest is flat-out false.
The private sector payroll devastation had set in during 2008, and the peak of monthly job losses–nearly 850,000 lost in a single month–occurred in the final month of the Bush administration. The loss rate dropped off after Obama entered the White House, and was reversed to monthly job gains during the course of 2009. We have now had 27 consecutive months of net private sector job gains.
Indeed, federal outlays have doubled over the last decade–during more than half of which we had a republican majority in both the House and Senate, and a republican president in the White House, and no disastrous downturn to contend with. Government expanded enormously during the Bush years. Not to mention debt, which almost doubled.
Under the Obama administration, there are 273,000 fewer Federal employees than there were during the administration of Ronald Reagan.
Overall government employment–both state and federal–has declined by 2.2 percent since Obama was elected. It’s been estimated that without those government job losses, unemployment would be markedly lower, and the GDP growth would be a full percentage point higher. (Refer to post #7.)
The republicans’ anti-Obama argument is largely woven out of such “facts” that don’t stand up to close inspection.
This will be one of the issues come fall my friend. I’ll hazard that the electorate is kind of pissed, seeing that the majority of us have had to make life changes over the last five years directly related to the performance of the economy – while the gov’t carries on as usual.
Private sector payrolls have been devastated and participation in the work force is at an all time low….
Totally true, and succinctly put, mossomo.
Attrition took many companies down to and then PAST where they could carry on production without hiring someone new.
We did that.
Instead of a high of 75 employees ours is now well below 45 people.
But we DID have to finally hire someone….. a new estimator.
So, it took over three years of Obama before we hired ONE person!
And Obama looks at that one new hire and says, ”the private sector is doing fine!”
Astounding!
wow that is so interesting,
subsequent denials of what GREG PUT IN,
WHAT ELSE HE WILL PUT IN, HE IS THE MESSENGER OF WHAT HE HEAR FROM THE LIBERALS.
ONLY BULLS..
The republicans’ anti-Obama argument is largely woven out of such “facts” that don’t stand up to close inspection.
Really? So Obama’s big plan is to send money to the states to keep public sector employees working. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t we try that very thing at the beginning of his term to the tune of an $800 billion stimulus?
You want to know the big difference between you and most of the posters here at FA Greg? We have no delusions that republicans are blame-free for the current mess. We believe both parties have screwed things up. We believe government itself is the problem, and never the solution. Government always gets us into these messes and is never responsible for getting us out of them. Only the innovation and work ethic of the American people get us out of these messes.
Obama wants to use the government to fix the mess, the republicans want to free the American people to do it. My bet is on the American people.
Who knew that our own president was a magician? First, he earned the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing. I guess pot smoking, public nudity and anti-American sentiment is all you need these days to earn an award given to such honorable people as Mother Theresa. Job numbers are down, unemployment is up, there is no plan for the next 4 years, we have no federal budget, our foreign policy is schizophrenic and the dollars is in the crapper. And despite all of this Obama’s approval rating still is above 40%. Now that’s the real magic! How could he do nothing right and still have any approval rating at all?
Maybe I can figure it out. What I learned about doing a real good illusion is a concept called misdirection. By definition misdirection is a form of deception in which the attention of an audience is focused on one thing in order to distract its attention from another. Well, I think that might just be the key. During the beginning of his tenure as president he misdirected all his failures towards President Bush, blaming him for the tanking economy and continued recession. More recently it looks like he used that same misdirection trick to disguise his abysmal tenure as president by blaming Greece, Europe’s financial instability and the Republican’s inability to pass any his bills. However, when he had control of both houses the only thing he was able to pass was an unconstitutional bill that would bankrupt the country.
It also seems the media has picked up on this trick. Take for instance the Catholic Church. Instead of properly reporting Obama’s hatred towards the church and the justified laws suits he is facing from them, the media instead cover the airways with stories of priest’s sexual misconducts. I understand Obama hates the Catholic Church but does that mean the news media has to also?
However, he’s attempting to use his last bit of misdirection to get himself re-elected. Because he certainly can’t run his campaign based upon his horrific record, he instead turned people’s attention to Governor Romney. Using the media as if it were a government run propaganda machine, he has done everything to discredit and vilify his opponent and wife. The problem with this strategy is that Governor Romney actually has really strong credentials. He is an excellent businessman, governor, statesman and father. He was not a drug abuser, school skipper or deadbeat. Thus, Obama has turned to lies and other untruths in order to continue his misperception.
Well Mr. Obama, I’ve watched the FOX series Magic Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed and know what you’re doing. It’s just a matter of time the whole country comes to their senses and realize what a disaster the last few years have been with you in the White House.
TIRED AMERICAN
YES, YOU PUT YOUR FINGER AT THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM
AND THE GREAT DECEIVER IS ALWAYS CAMPAIGNING NOT GOVERNING, HE SPEAK STRANGE WORDS THAT DON’T FIT IN AMERICA, THAT’S ALL HE DEPEND ON NOW, HE LOST ALL THE REST OF THE CREDIBILITY, AND THOSE WHO STILL FOLLOW HIM ARE MOST OF THEM GETTING PAID BY HIM USING THE MONEY OF THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES TO PAY FOR HIS CROWD WE SEE ON TELEVISION,
HE IS THE FALSE ONE AND HE WILL BE VOTE OUT SOON, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ARE LIKE YOU, SICK AND TIRED OF LOOKING AT A LEADER FROM A VERY STRANGE PLACE, NOBODY KNOWS WHERE,
NO PROOF OF IT EXIST,
IT REMIND ME OF WE KNOW THE SCRIPTURES WHICH MENTION THE GREAT DECEIVER,
BUT NOBODY KNOWS WHERE HE RESIDE, WE ONLY KNOW HE HAS MANY BELIEVERS ALSO, ADORING HIM,
Hard Right
12 years ago
greg like most dems, isn’t very good with numbers, or facing reality….or telling the truth.
Greg, do you not understand what a deficit is? Tell me, how many jobs were lost and how many have been regained? Spare us your lies and pathetic numbers games. We see thru your propganda.
Ouch. My brain just exploded. Christ. Really? Thought you bettter than that.
mossomo
12 years ago
Greg, greg, greg
Flat-out false. Like Obama and his green jobs lie: bus driver and handy man? How far am I misleading you, further than Obama’s green jobs line?
What about the g-d stimulus? Shovel ready? All economic expansion happens in the private sector, does the post office know how to turn a profit? Amtrak?
F! no. Yet all the stimulus went to Democrat clientele – those who know how to apply for federal grants, a skillset not common in the private sector cause we are chasing profits not tax payer provided “free” money; they were the ones who benefited by said stimulus: not a damn road saw any work despite those damn signs.
The benefited ONLY SPENT MONEY (or added it to their non-profit war chest). THEY DID NOTHING TO EXPAND. I buy groceries a few times a week, I am not growing my g-d damn economy nor am I growing yours. I’m spending. Spending /= growth.
Does this make sense? I buy groceries, therefore I am growing the economy? This is what we are talking about on the micro. Substaining but g-d damn we are not growing it. That’s why your whole argumnet about govt spending enlarging GDP is limp. The recovery is farce. Taking money from those who actually grow business and hire people and then just giving it to people who spend and waste is not growth.
Growth happens when chasing profit. While chasing profit i can employ more if I can capitalize on a return on my investment.
Again. Spending money is not growth. Spending does substain employment levels, but where does the money come for the spending? If I transfer money from expansion to substaining with a cut given to govt… If profits aren’t enlarging payrolls, then your whole growth is fiction.
Your argument if I’m allowed: taking money from the wealth/value producers and redistributing it to those who consume by definition how does that grow an economy? If you are consuming, are you growing? The argument: you net 5 tvs but is that substainable growth? Will those 5 tvs hire more people and will those five multiply into 15 tvs? That is growth. The other, substaining.
Keynesian economics. Your growth doesn’t exist, the value ADDED Keynesian modifier doesn’t hire a damn soul – this is what you call growth.
My point with you, all that you advocate, can’t exist in a free market. Remove your lawfare and the substance on which you stand crumbles. Minimum wage, the $50 EPA light bulb, public sector employee monopolies, living wage, project labor agreements… they DON’T exist without your lawfare. What you advocate is shaped by law, not markets.
27 consecutive months of net private sector job gains
I’ll quote Gordon Ramsey, “That is a bloody well limp dick.” 4.3 million jobs since February 2010. 11944 a month. How many people are entering the work force per month? How many simply no longer participate?
Despite the 27 months of private-sector job growth, there were still 5.0 million fewer jobs on nonfarm payrolls in May than when the recession began in December 2007 and 4.6 million fewer jobs on private payrolls. Payroll job growth has averaged just 96,000 over the last three months, a substantial step backwards from the pace of job creation in the three months before that. May’s 69,000 jobs added is the smallest such figure in a year. The number of jobs created in March and April was also revised down.
The recession and lack of job opportunities drove many people out of the labor force, and we have yet to see a sustained return to labor force participation (people aged 16 and over working or actively looking for work) that would mark a strong jobs recovery.
You said: Under the Obama administration, there are 273,000 fewer Federal employees than there were during the administration of Ronald Reagan.
You play a numbers game, like how pol statisticians manipulate GDP to fool people there is growth when there isn’t any. Or like how they increase employment non-participation to decrease unemployment.
This is how it works: The Post Office is excluded from federal employment statistics. The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, moved the Post Office to a corporate like entity, rather than a department of government. Postal employees are hired and paid by the Post Office, not the federal government, excluding them from statistical inclusion.
BS.
In fiscal 2000, the government spent $208 billion on contractors. In fiscal 2009, that figure was up more than 150 percent, to $540 billion. There are two definitions of “federal workforce”: 1) Public servants working directly for the government and earning benefits, or 2) everyone who gets their paycheck directly from Uncle Sam or through contracts, grants, and other purchasing vehicles.”
We will be experiencing “headwinds” until this jackass is evicted from the Whitehouse.
Why?
Cuz he BLOWS.
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery, that’s helped to create new American jobs, that’s helped to boost consumer and small business confidence, or that’s helped to lessen the pain of the casualties of the economic downturn since Barack Obama has been elected?
They’ve done absolutely nothing but resist the constructive efforts of others, talk down confidence in recovery, attack the President, and aggressively pursue an extremist right-wing social agenda that has absolutely nothing to do with job creation.
Anybody wanting to put the people who nearly drove the nation over a cliff back in the driver’s seat when all they’re promising is even more of what they did before needs to have their head examined.
@Rides A Pale Horse:
Cuz he BLOWS.
Gay bath house (remember Michelle doesn’t go down) or the famous Columbian export?
@Greg:
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery
We kicked the unions ass in WI. There is a public perception now that following bad money with even more money isn’t going to spend our way to prosperity; and it’s very well seen the relation between pols and unions are quite incestious.
Paul Ryan was on a business channel this AM, he pointed these facts out:
The House Majority of Republicans have focused on job creation and economic growth.
The House has passed 35 bills aimed at empowering small business owners and reducing regulatory burdens, fixing the tax code to help job creators, increasing competitiveness for American manufacturers, encouraging entrepreneurship and growth, maximizing domestic energy production, paying down America’s unsustainable debt burden and beginning to live within our means.
Unfortunately, 28 of these bills, despite garnering bipartisan support in the House, have either been blocked by or are stuck in the Senate.
Obama cannot say the same thing.
Of his budgets and jobs bills none has passed in either half of the US Congress.
In fact Obama has ”garnered bipartisan support,” however, both Republicans AND Democrats vote AGAINST Obama’s budgets!
Whichever way, Obama blows
@mossomo, #4:
From Government Job Loss: President Obama’s Catch 22, June 6, ABC News:
What Sherk ignores, of course, is that government employees spend their wages entirely in the public sector. Similarly, the government itself spends in the private sector. If you reduce those infusions of cash into the private sector, what do you suppose happens to all of the private sector jobs that spending supports? You’re not adding only former public employees to the unemployment rolls. You’re not reducing the standard of living of only teachers, firemen, police officers, and other public servants that conservatives seem to dislike.
All of that serves the cause of GOP election success, however. They only succeed to the extent that they can cause national confidence to fail and 27 months of continuous job growth to falter.
Maybe I should repeat the question:
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery?
What Walker has done in Wisconsin doesn’t qualify as an example.
@Greg: Here’s the thing, I don’t know if you see it, but what you espouse is taking money from the productive part of our economy, the part that creates the stuff you and me want to buy, and you want to funnel that capital into the non-productive/less productive part of the economy.
Here’s the contrast it sets up: the productive sector gave us the 69¢ Edison light bulbs we’ve used for a century vs the govt layer that produces the $50 hazardous waste EPA light bulb.
And your money is on the govt layer to spur economic growth? The same gov’t layer that incubated the EPA who went on to sign off on a $50 light bulb that I can’t throw away in the my regular trash because the Evironmental Protection Agency classifies their light bulb as being hazardous waste?
Quick tangent. Our gov’t passed a law to outlaw the Edison light bulb. Much in the same way Blue States pass laws to force bids on govt contracts to conform with union wages. And ever still like how dinasuar industries tried to continue providing pensions the unions strong armed them into promising even though the rest of the private sector moved on. Common denominator: no substitutes. Which constricts, not grows.
I have to question your belief in the American profit motive. You seem to prefer the removal of money from the people with the skillset and history of actually creating wealth; you trust the gov’t layer and keynasian modifiers to prove it’s “stimulating” more than the wealth producers could themselves.
What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery?
We’ll have to agree to disagree because my positives I think are your negatives. GOP and WI vs Public Sector Unions – we got the mssg out nationally that the model is unsubstanable – THIS IS HUGE and sets a trend. Nan G brought up some good points. I liked this one: H.R. 872, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act. Passed the House, hit the Senate and there it sits to the serenade of crickets.
Greg asked: What single constructive thing has the GOP done that’s helped to strengthen the recovery?
Here is a list of 29 bills/budget items that have passed the house that would help small business owners, cut taxes for small business and boost energy production that are being held up by Harry Reid in the senate.
http://majorityleader.gov/JobsTracker/
Surely some, if not all of them, would provide help in creating jobs which would then strengthen the recovery.
@Great Lakes State, #9:
Each bill stuck in the Senate is stuck for a reason. Generally, because it furthers some special interest agenda at the expense of the environment or contrary to the interests of the general public, or provides a tax cut without any consideration for how the lost revenue will be made up.
Those on the list that don’t have such problems have mostly been passed and signed into law by the President.
@Greg:
And here again you show ignorance. Again, I’m not calling you stupid, but do you not understand how our system of government works?
The House writes a bill. The Senate has the opportunity to vote on that bill, write their own version, or ignore it. If they vote on it and it passes, it goes to the President to be signed or vetoed. If they write their own bill, the two bills go to conference where differences are ironed out, a new bill is produced and voted on by both chambers, and it either fails or passes and goes to the President to be signed or vetoed. Or they can ignore it and nothing happens, no debate, nothing. Harry Reid has decided he does not want a debate with the House because he will lose that debate!
It is not the republicans that are stopping the things from getting done Greg, it is Harry Reid. You can keep crying about how the GOP House is not doing anything all you want, the facts are the facts. The Senate can pass their own bills. By the way, where is their budget?
how the lost revenue will be made up
This will be one of the issues come fall my friend. I’ll hazard that the electorate is kind of pissed, seeing that the majority of us have had to make life changes over the last five years directly related to the performance of the economy – while the gov’t carries on as usual.
Private sector payrolls have been devastated and participation in the work force is at an all time low, and all this while federal outlays have doubled over the last decade, and federal/state employees have spiked to all time highs. This won’t and cannot last.
@mossomo, #12:
Actually, part of that’s misleading, and the rest is flat-out false.
The private sector payroll devastation had set in during 2008, and the peak of monthly job losses–nearly 850,000 lost in a single month–occurred in the final month of the Bush administration. The loss rate dropped off after Obama entered the White House, and was reversed to monthly job gains during the course of 2009. We have now had 27 consecutive months of net private sector job gains.
Indeed, federal outlays have doubled over the last decade–during more than half of which we had a republican majority in both the House and Senate, and a republican president in the White House, and no disastrous downturn to contend with. Government expanded enormously during the Bush years. Not to mention debt, which almost doubled.
Under the Obama administration, there are 273,000 fewer Federal employees than there were during the administration of Ronald Reagan.
Overall government employment–both state and federal–has declined by 2.2 percent since Obama was elected. It’s been estimated that without those government job losses, unemployment would be markedly lower, and the GDP growth would be a full percentage point higher. (Refer to post #7.)
The republicans’ anti-Obama argument is largely woven out of such “facts” that don’t stand up to close inspection.
Totally true, and succinctly put, mossomo.
Attrition took many companies down to and then PAST where they could carry on production without hiring someone new.
We did that.
Instead of a high of 75 employees ours is now well below 45 people.
But we DID have to finally hire someone….. a new estimator.
So, it took over three years of Obama before we hired ONE person!
And Obama looks at that one new hire and says, ”the private sector is doing fine!”
Astounding!
wow that is so interesting,
subsequent denials of what GREG PUT IN,
WHAT ELSE HE WILL PUT IN, HE IS THE MESSENGER OF WHAT HE HEAR FROM THE LIBERALS.
ONLY BULLS..
@Greg:
Really? So Obama’s big plan is to send money to the states to keep public sector employees working. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t we try that very thing at the beginning of his term to the tune of an $800 billion stimulus?
You want to know the big difference between you and most of the posters here at FA Greg? We have no delusions that republicans are blame-free for the current mess. We believe both parties have screwed things up. We believe government itself is the problem, and never the solution. Government always gets us into these messes and is never responsible for getting us out of them. Only the innovation and work ethic of the American people get us out of these messes.
Obama wants to use the government to fix the mess, the republicans want to free the American people to do it. My bet is on the American people.
Who knew that our own president was a magician? First, he earned the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing. I guess pot smoking, public nudity and anti-American sentiment is all you need these days to earn an award given to such honorable people as Mother Theresa. Job numbers are down, unemployment is up, there is no plan for the next 4 years, we have no federal budget, our foreign policy is schizophrenic and the dollars is in the crapper. And despite all of this Obama’s approval rating still is above 40%. Now that’s the real magic! How could he do nothing right and still have any approval rating at all?
Maybe I can figure it out. What I learned about doing a real good illusion is a concept called misdirection. By definition misdirection is a form of deception in which the attention of an audience is focused on one thing in order to distract its attention from another. Well, I think that might just be the key. During the beginning of his tenure as president he misdirected all his failures towards President Bush, blaming him for the tanking economy and continued recession. More recently it looks like he used that same misdirection trick to disguise his abysmal tenure as president by blaming Greece, Europe’s financial instability and the Republican’s inability to pass any his bills. However, when he had control of both houses the only thing he was able to pass was an unconstitutional bill that would bankrupt the country.
It also seems the media has picked up on this trick. Take for instance the Catholic Church. Instead of properly reporting Obama’s hatred towards the church and the justified laws suits he is facing from them, the media instead cover the airways with stories of priest’s sexual misconducts. I understand Obama hates the Catholic Church but does that mean the news media has to also?
However, he’s attempting to use his last bit of misdirection to get himself re-elected. Because he certainly can’t run his campaign based upon his horrific record, he instead turned people’s attention to Governor Romney. Using the media as if it were a government run propaganda machine, he has done everything to discredit and vilify his opponent and wife. The problem with this strategy is that Governor Romney actually has really strong credentials. He is an excellent businessman, governor, statesman and father. He was not a drug abuser, school skipper or deadbeat. Thus, Obama has turned to lies and other untruths in order to continue his misperception.
Well Mr. Obama, I’ve watched the FOX series Magic Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed and know what you’re doing. It’s just a matter of time the whole country comes to their senses and realize what a disaster the last few years have been with you in the White House.
TIRED AMERICAN
YES, YOU PUT YOUR FINGER AT THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM
AND THE GREAT DECEIVER IS ALWAYS CAMPAIGNING NOT GOVERNING, HE SPEAK STRANGE WORDS THAT DON’T FIT IN AMERICA, THAT’S ALL HE DEPEND ON NOW, HE LOST ALL THE REST OF THE CREDIBILITY, AND THOSE WHO STILL FOLLOW HIM ARE MOST OF THEM GETTING PAID BY HIM USING THE MONEY OF THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES TO PAY FOR HIS CROWD WE SEE ON TELEVISION,
HE IS THE FALSE ONE AND HE WILL BE VOTE OUT SOON, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ARE LIKE YOU, SICK AND TIRED OF LOOKING AT A LEADER FROM A VERY STRANGE PLACE, NOBODY KNOWS WHERE,
NO PROOF OF IT EXIST,
IT REMIND ME OF WE KNOW THE SCRIPTURES WHICH MENTION THE GREAT DECEIVER,
BUT NOBODY KNOWS WHERE HE RESIDE, WE ONLY KNOW HE HAS MANY BELIEVERS ALSO, ADORING HIM,
greg like most dems, isn’t very good with numbers, or facing reality….or telling the truth.
Greg, do you not understand what a deficit is? Tell me, how many jobs were lost and how many have been regained? Spare us your lies and pathetic numbers games. We see thru your propganda.
@Greg:
and the rest is flat-out false.
Ouch. My brain just exploded. Christ. Really? Thought you bettter than that.
Greg, greg, greg
Flat-out false. Like Obama and his green jobs lie: bus driver and handy man? How far am I misleading you, further than Obama’s green jobs line?
What about the g-d stimulus? Shovel ready? All economic expansion happens in the private sector, does the post office know how to turn a profit? Amtrak?
F! no. Yet all the stimulus went to Democrat clientele – those who know how to apply for federal grants, a skillset not common in the private sector cause we are chasing profits not tax payer provided “free” money; they were the ones who benefited by said stimulus: not a damn road saw any work despite those damn signs.
The benefited ONLY SPENT MONEY (or added it to their non-profit war chest). THEY DID NOTHING TO EXPAND. I buy groceries a few times a week, I am not growing my g-d damn economy nor am I growing yours. I’m spending. Spending /= growth.
Does this make sense? I buy groceries, therefore I am growing the economy? This is what we are talking about on the micro. Substaining but g-d damn we are not growing it. That’s why your whole argumnet about govt spending enlarging GDP is limp. The recovery is farce. Taking money from those who actually grow business and hire people and then just giving it to people who spend and waste is not growth.
Growth happens when chasing profit. While chasing profit i can employ more if I can capitalize on a return on my investment.
Again. Spending money is not growth. Spending does substain employment levels, but where does the money come for the spending? If I transfer money from expansion to substaining with a cut given to govt… If profits aren’t enlarging payrolls, then your whole growth is fiction.
Your argument if I’m allowed: taking money from the wealth/value producers and redistributing it to those who consume by definition how does that grow an economy? If you are consuming, are you growing? The argument: you net 5 tvs but is that substainable growth? Will those 5 tvs hire more people and will those five multiply into 15 tvs? That is growth. The other, substaining.
Keynesian economics. Your growth doesn’t exist, the value ADDED Keynesian modifier doesn’t hire a damn soul – this is what you call growth.
My point with you, all that you advocate, can’t exist in a free market. Remove your lawfare and the substance on which you stand crumbles. Minimum wage, the $50 EPA light bulb, public sector employee monopolies, living wage, project labor agreements… they DON’T exist without your lawfare. What you advocate is shaped by law, not markets.
27 consecutive months of net private sector job gains
I’ll quote Gordon Ramsey, “That is a bloody well limp dick.” 4.3 million jobs since February 2010. 11944 a month. How many people are entering the work force per month? How many simply no longer participate?
Despite the 27 months of private-sector job growth, there were still 5.0 million fewer jobs on nonfarm payrolls in May than when the recession began in December 2007 and 4.6 million fewer jobs on private payrolls. Payroll job growth has averaged just 96,000 over the last three months, a substantial step backwards from the pace of job creation in the three months before that. May’s 69,000 jobs added is the smallest such figure in a year. The number of jobs created in March and April was also revised down.
The recession and lack of job opportunities drove many people out of the labor force, and we have yet to see a sustained return to labor force participation (people aged 16 and over working or actively looking for work) that would mark a strong jobs recovery.
You said: Under the Obama administration, there are 273,000 fewer Federal employees than there were during the administration of Ronald Reagan.
You play a numbers game, like how pol statisticians manipulate GDP to fool people there is growth when there isn’t any. Or like how they increase employment non-participation to decrease unemployment.
This is how it works: The Post Office is excluded from federal employment statistics. The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, moved the Post Office to a corporate like entity, rather than a department of government. Postal employees are hired and paid by the Post Office, not the federal government, excluding them from statistical inclusion.
BS.
In fiscal 2000, the government spent $208 billion on contractors. In fiscal 2009, that figure was up more than 150 percent, to $540 billion. There are two definitions of “federal workforce”: 1) Public servants working directly for the government and earning benefits, or 2) everyone who gets their paycheck directly from Uncle Sam or through contracts, grants, and other purchasing vehicles.”