Democrats & Liberals Archives

Where Are the Jobs?

Before the midterms, John Boehner and other prominent Republicans had a mantra for each and every occasion: “Where are the jobs?” Now that the Republicans have won a majority in the House, I no longer hear the same thing. What I hear from Boehner is “Let’s repeal Obamacare.”

My reaction is "Where are the jobs?" According to all the polls, the big reason why people voted for Republicans was that they were concerned and anxious about jobs and thought a change was necessary in order to produce more jobs. And here it is only a few days after election and all I hear from Republicans is how to repeal the healthcare bill. How many jobs would such a repeal produce?

McConnell, the Minority Leader in the Senate, goes further. He says his primary goal is to make sure Obama is a one-term president. Will this produce jobs?

When he is being more accomodating, McConnel says that when Obama agrees with the people he, McConnell, would vote with him; when Obama does not agree with the people, McConnell would vote against him. Well, the people's primary concern is jobs. What will McConnell favor doing to produce some jobs? Will relitigating the healthcare bill produce any jobs?

Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires? This is where the big battle is shaping up now. Why are Republicans discussing helping the super-rich when it is the poor and the middle class that are hurting. Business is doing pretty well. It has recovered and the Dow is way up there, but working people don't have jobs. How would cutting taxes for the rich produce jobs?

It's hard for me to believe that Congressional Republicans give a damn about jobs for working people. If they did, they would still be talking about jobs. But all the "where are the jobs" talk was merely a way to knock Obama and to boost Republicans.

Today, the only ones still talking about jobs for Americans are President Obama and the Democrats. Today, the only ones trying their mightiest to obstruct Obama and the Democrats in their pursuit of jobs are Congressional Republicans. Not today, but pretty soon, the public will catch onto the "where-are-the-jobs"-scam that has been inflicted upon it by the self-centered Republicans, who are concerned only with their own power.

The question remains: "Where are the jobs?" Ask this of your Republican legislators. When they talk of tax cuts, ask them "How many jobs will it produce?" If they want to repeal the healthcare reform bill, ask "Will this produce any jobs?" When they try to get rid of some of the new financial regulations, ask them "Will this help job growth in the U.S.?"

Please tell me, Republicans, "Where are the jobs?"

Posted by Paul Siegel at November 5, 2010 8:34 PM
Comments
Comment #312510

Yes Paul where are the jobs? As I recall your boy Obama said that unemployment wouldn’t get above 8% and this was the summer of recovery. We’re still waiting Paul.

Posted by: KAP at November 5, 2010 8:46 PM
Comment #312512

I don’t believe I have ever heard such liberal nonsense. Why don’t you liberal socialist remove your heads from you annul cavities, and stop repeating the same things. Conjecture and supposition.

If you don’t like what is being done now, you’re going to hate what happens next.

Posted by: akcoyote at November 5, 2010 9:06 PM
Comment #312515

“As I recall your boy Obama said that unemployment wouldn’t get above 8% and this was the summer of recovery.”

The economy has certainly stabilized since the dramatic drop in late 2008 and 2009. GDP is growing and jobs are being created, albeit at a slower than desirable pace.

As for not meeting the unemployment target, did you apply the same standard to the Republicans in 2001-2004? The Bush administration wildly failed to meet its projections of job growth as a result of the massive tax cuts during the 2002-2003 period. http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/issuebriefs_ib197/

Posted by: Rich at November 5, 2010 9:21 PM
Comment #312521

As I recall Rich unemployment never hit 10% under Bush as it has with Obama. The economy may have stabilized but 9.6% unemployment is still unacceptable as BHO has stated himself. I’m not going to play the childish game of Bush did this and that, I look at what’s going on NOW.

Posted by: KAP at November 5, 2010 9:53 PM
Comment #312529

That’s an easy cop-out.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 5, 2010 10:29 PM
Comment #312530

Paul,

Valid thread. If jobs is the reason why the tide turned, you’d think they’d at least mention it now. Perhaps they think talking about it might draw attention to what is really happening in out slowly recovering economy and job situation? You know how conservatives like to misdirect.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 5, 2010 10:33 PM
Comment #312538

Question:

If unemployment decreases to, say, 8.5% by June, 2011, and banks begin to make good loans to small businesses again, and health care costs begin to drop, and producers begin to produce again, are conservatives going to back off, or will they charge ahead full steam, continuing the effort to derail this administration?


Posted by: Marysdude at November 5, 2010 11:19 PM
Comment #312539

Dude, Democrats, if I’m not mistaken, are still in control for another 8 weeks until Republicans take over the house. They are on probation and have 2 years to get it right or they find themselves in the same perdicament as the Democrats did this time. Jobs, economy and HC best be their main objectives.

Posted by: KAP at November 5, 2010 11:28 PM
Comment #312541

Dude, Only if he dosent do what Clinton did after his first 2 years he learned and was a decent Pres. The question is will Obama learn?

Posted by: KAP at November 5, 2010 11:32 PM
Comment #312542

Dude, wishful thinking

Posted by: Bill at November 5, 2010 11:38 PM
Comment #312547

I’ve heard several conservative sources- Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, local individuals- repeat a version of the economic situation. According to these conservatives, the Federal Reserve is ‘printing money’ to artificially inflate the stock market and cause inflation.

It is an insanely stupid take on the economy. Really, it’s just nonsense. The problem for the conservatives is that some leading indicators, such as the stock market, look positive. The indicators which need to turn north in order to generate jobs have generally done so; the problem is that wages remain flat and asset deflation is still a major threat in the real estate market, and also, the financial sector is still suffering from a credit freeze hangover. Indeed, asset deflation- NOT inflation- must be a huge concern for the Federal Reserve, more than some of us realize, in order for it to pursue quantitative easing. The most threatening scenario is a replay of the Japanese experience with their asset deflation, which resulted in a ‘lost decade.’

The situation for the economy is still difficult. No doubt. However, Obama has done a very good job of navigating his way through one of the most difficult situations any president has faced. Despite the baying from hyper-partisans, Obama has pursued a careful, moderate course. He has sought consensus even when it has slowed the agenda, and even when the opposition has no intention of negotiating in good faith.

As a result, Obama has been compared unfavorably with Bush because his attempt to seek concensus- to be president of all Americans, and not just his party- has been viewed as indecisiveness. Bush got it done. However, this misses the point. Bush got it wrong. He acted rashly, without bringing in all points of view. And that is exactly the point. By taking a cautious, careful, and conciliatory approach, Obama has avoided making mistakes. He saved the economy from another Great Depression.

Posted by: phx8 at November 6, 2010 2:11 AM
Comment #312553

Bill,

Not wishful thinking. I presented hypotheticals for the purpose of showing that no matter what they say, conservatives do not want what is best for America. I don’t think they ever have. Their glory days were during the Industrial Revolution, and they’ve been trying to return to that period ever since. It is now merely a matter of time.

The current recovery, although slow, is a recovery similar to many in the past. Conservative news outlets and leaders sold a bill-of-goods to their constituency, and used lies and deceit to regain a power they are guilty of sbusing…kinda like a woman who keeps going back to an abusive relationship until her abuser eventually kills her, our people fell for that, “I’m so sorry darling, it’ll never happen again, I promise”, lie once again.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 6, 2010 9:00 AM
Comment #312566

Don’t we just love the term “quantitative easing.” In simpler times we called it cranking up the money printing presses. Is it really a good idea to intentionally deflate the value of our currency?

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 12:18 PM
Comment #312568

Where are the jobs?

“According to the Treasury Department, 8 percent of small businesses earn enough to pay at the top two income-tax rates, but those businesses earn 72 percent of all small-business income. They also pay 82 percent of all income taxes paid by small businesses.

A survey by the National Association of Independent Business found the businesses most likely to face Obama’s higher rates are those employing between 20 and 250 workers. Targeting them for higher taxes would cause the largest possible harm to job creation.

If lawmakers are serious about helping the economy recover and creating jobs for the unemployed, they will take a pass on Obama’s tax-increase plan.

Instead, Congress should keep tax rates on small businesses where they’ve been for a decade. To raise rates now would make jobs harder to find.”

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2010/10/17/tax-increase-would-kill-economic-growth-jobs.html?sid=101

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 12:39 PM
Comment #312570

From RF’s link:

Mr. Dubay is a senior analyst in tax policy in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

A good source for how a liberal president shoud handle the economy…go to the Heritage Foundation for advice…shhuuurrr!

Posted by: Marysdude at November 6, 2010 12:58 PM
Comment #312571

If Obama would surround himself with pro-business types instead of communists he would understand what needs to be done. “You are known by the company you keep”, still rings loud and clear.

Posted by: Bill at November 6, 2010 12:59 PM
Comment #312574

Here is just one of many conversations among opposing positions regarding jobs, trade and more. Very interesting stuff. Follow the links to see more discussion.

“The issue is not just about the trade balance. As you point out, a somewhat stronger renminbi might not change the trade deficit, but it might allow producers of competitive products like Buicks to export more. The structure of the trade is as or more important than the size of the imbalance.

For instance, one of our biggest exports to China is waste paper and scrap metal. Our biggest import item is computers. Now suppose the reverse was the case. Suppose we were shipping computers to China and importing waste paper and scrap metal and suppose we imported so much waste paper that we still had a trade deficit. Nevertheless, I bet there would be a lot less concern about the deficit under those conditions.

Because, in fact while we articulate our concern in terms of the size of the deficit, what is really important is the jobs, the job quality, and the technology developmental implications. We have a trade deficit with the oil producers and no trade friction. The frictions arise when industries that could be competitive under free market conditions start to lose out because of undervalued currencies and subsidies of various kinds.

As important as currency values are the investment incentives offered by China and many others to induce offshoring. Intel recently announced a chip fab for China. This is a $5 billion to $7 billion investment. But Pentium chip production is very competitive from a U.S. base.

Most economists would argue that the U.S. has a comparative advantage in chip production, which, after all, is not at all labor-intensive. In fact, labor costs are insignificant. Rather, a big reason for the China plant is the fact that China is offering a rich plate of tax abatements, free land, reduced costs for utilities, etc.

It is these subsidies to capital that are much more important than exchange rates in these kinds of industries.”

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/it-isnt-just-chinas-currency/

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 1:05 PM
Comment #312575

A good source for how a liberal president shoud handle the economy…go to the Heritage Foundation for advice…shhuuurrr!

Posted by: Marysdude at November 6, 2010

dude, why not discuss what was written rather than who wrote it?

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 1:09 PM
Comment #312577

“Our studies conclude that a 20 percent rise in the renminbi will reduce China’s external surplus by $350 billion to $500 billion and the external deficit of the United States by $50 billion to $120 billion. This would create 300,000 to 700,000 high-paying jobs in the United States. Elimination of China’s huge currency protectionism is thus an essential element, along with the many steps that the United States must take itself, to restore sustainable health to the American economy”

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/biggest-protectionism-since-world-war-ii/

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 1:21 PM
Comment #312578

Because every time liberals on this site brought up something written by or funded by or researched by folks leaning left, y’all raised so much cane we had an over supply of sugar. We know what side YOUR bread is buttered, but you’ve somehow missed out on how we like OURS buttered.

You have forgotten that we, on the left, are concerned about the lack of economic equity and economic stability, that you and your friend (true free marketers) so espouse. You get great efficiency for the few, while the many mostly get left out. You cannot see that your way has been tried several times and has failed ‘the people’ every time.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 6, 2010 1:22 PM
Comment #312579

I thought the Bush tax cuts that are about to expire was going to create jobs. Seeing how 10 years of said tax cuts didn’t do that, I can’t help wondering why the Right Wing Echo Chamber is not howling over that failure. Waiting for someone to reply that the 19 months Obama was in the WH is the reason.

Posted by: Ray at November 6, 2010 1:28 PM
Comment #312580

The Heritage Foundation is a great source of information. RF, don’t you agree that Americans seem to be learning about our history? My neighbor is a 60 year old nurse and her ans her husband are actively involved in the TP. Yesterday I was talking with her and she began rattleing off terms like “caucus” and quoting ammendments from the Bill of Rights. I told her I was impressed and she said, “two year ago, I didn’t know anything about the government”. Since then, they have made a couple of trips to DC, including atteneding the Glenn Beck rally.

Rush Limbaugh said yesterday that “republican politicians need to get back to educating the people”.

Hos 4:6 “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.”

Isn’t it ironic that liberals are the ones to push spending on education the most, but are responsible for teaching false doctrine? The more conservatives learn about our government, the more the left accuses them of be ignorant and ill-informed.

Posted by: Bill at November 6, 2010 1:28 PM
Comment #312585

The Heritage Foundation is a great place to go for skewed information. They rake in big bucks to find information that backs the play of corporate conglomerates. While they have a plethora of information, it would not be a good place for a liberal president to go for economic stability information. Conservative economics is far more efficient than liberal economics, but it does tend to be erratic, and it does tend to keep ‘we the people’ on a short string. The Heritage Foundation findings would be a good place to toss a ball against, if you have no friends to play catch with, but to actually try to use…well…that’s been tried before…those who cannot learn from history, are bound to repeat previous failures.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 6, 2010 2:08 PM
Comment #312586

I wrote; “dude, why not discuss what was written rather than who wrote it?”

dude wrote; “Because every time liberals on this site brought up something written by or funded by or researched by folks leaning left, y’all raised so much cane we had an over supply of sugar.”

A closed mind is a pitiful thing.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 2:18 PM
Comment #312597
A closed mind is a pitiful thing

Cited by a prime example of that he cited.

Posted by: jane doe at November 6, 2010 4:02 PM
Comment #312602

No original thoughts of your own Jane?

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 5:45 PM
Comment #312604

“Don’t we just love the term “quantitative easing.” In simpler times we called it cranking up the money printing presses. Is it really a good idea to intentionally deflate the value of our currency?”

The “quantitative easing” program of the Fed is very misunderstood. The Fed is simply swapping cash for an existing Treasury bond or other asset held in the private sector. There is no net financial gain or loss in the private sector. The intent of the transaction is to create incentives for the former holders of the bonds to seek alternative investment opportunities (lending, stocks, commodities, etc.) with the cash. The goal is to increase asset prices to assist with the private sector balance sheet problem (notice the stock market rally). The ultimate goal is to spur more borrowing and economic activity from the “wealth effect” of rising asset prices. In essence, it is an effort to get money parked in the Treasury bond safe haven into investments more productive for the economy.

Whether the program will have the desired results in a question mark with many economists. Japan did not have great success with its quantitative easing program. In any case, the Fed can unwind the program by selling its bonds back into the private sector and extracting the cash from the private sector.

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2010 5:59 PM
Comment #312606

From wikipedia…”
Quantitative easing (QE) is a monetary policy used by some central banks to increase the supply of money by increasing the excess reserves of the banking system, generally through buying of the central government’s own bonds to stabilize or raise their prices and thereby lower long-term interest rates. This policy is usually invoked when the normal methods to control the money supply have failed, i.e the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero. It has been termed the electronic equivalent of simply printing legal tender.[1]

A central bank implements quantitative easing by first crediting its own account with money it creates ex nihilo (“out of nothing”).[2] It then purchases financial assets, including government bonds, agency debt, mortgage-backed securities and corporate bonds, from banks and other financial institutions in a process referred to as open market operations. The purchases, by way of account deposits, give banks the excess reserves required for them to create new money, and thus hopefully induce a stimulation of the economy, by the process of deposit multiplication from increased lending in the fractional reserve banking system.

Risks include the policy being more effective than intended, spurring hyperinflation, or the risk of not being effective enough, if banks opt simply to sit on the additional cash in order to increase their capital reserves in a climate of increasing defaults in their present loan portfolio.[2]

“Quantitative” refers to the fact that a specific quantity of money is being created; “easing” refers to reducing the pressure on banks.[3] However, another explanation is that the name comes from the Japanese-language expression for “stimulatory monetary policy”, which uses the term “easing”.[4] Quantitative easing is sometimes colloquially described as “printing money” although in reality the money is simply shifted from member bank dollar deposits to financial instruments.[5] Examples of economies where this policy has been used include Japan during the early 2000s, and the United States, the United Kingdom and the Eurozone during the global financial crisis of 2008–the present, since the programme is suitable for economies where the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 6:23 PM
Comment #312607

Royal Flush-
If two percent are earning the vast majority of the small business income, then you’re not defining small business right, because no small business could earn that much money and still be small.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 6, 2010 6:31 PM
Comment #312609

Royal Flush,

If you feel that appreciation of the Chinese currency is essential to re-balancing our account deficit with China (as your link implies), then you should actually love the Fed’s quantitative easing program which you appear to disparage in another comment.

“According to their argument, the Fed’s action [quantitative easing] essentially presents China with two choices: If China holds its exchange rate down but accepts higher inflation, then the prices of Chinese goods abroad will rise; if China tries to hold down inflation by allowing its exchange to rise, then the prices of Chinese goods abroad will rise. In both cases the U.S. would get what it wants – an effective appreciation in the Chinese yuan against the dollar.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2010/10/18/china-shows-unease-with-prospect-of-quantitative-easing/

Revulsion against the depreciation of the dollar is an understandable knee jerk reaction. However, the majority of economists understand that a strong dollar puts US industries at a major disadvantage with international competitors. Sure, we can buy a lot with a strong dollar. The other side of the coin is that we cannot sell a lot. The truth of matter is that we are buying a lot more than we are selling.

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2010 6:43 PM
Comment #312610

Royal Flush-
If two percent are earning the vast majority of the small business income, then you’re not defining small business right, because no small business could earn that much money and still be small.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 6, 2010

According to the Treasury Department, 8 percent of small businesses earn enough to pay at the top two income-tax rates

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 6:56 PM
Comment #312612

Royal Flush,

What’s your point? The fact of the matter is that no additional financial assets are being added to the private sector by the Fed’s current quantitative easing program. It is simply exchanging a bond initially purchased by the private sector for cash. It is increasing the money supply by replacing a debt instrument with cash. But there is no net balance sheet change for the private sector. It puts money formerly tied up in a Treasury back into circulation.

Quantitative easing was used by the Fed in 2008-09 to support the bank bailout. The Fed purchased a huge amount of mortgage backed securities and other toxic like assets to provide liquidity to the banking system.

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2010 7:19 PM
Comment #312613

Rich, I wrote this when I posted these quotes and links regarding China…

“Here is just one of many conversations among opposing positions regarding jobs, trade and more. Very interesting stuff. Follow the links to see more discussion.”

I will agree with Donald Trump when he said…”China is financing its economy with American jobs.”

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 7:24 PM
Comment #312614

Rich asks; “Royal Flush, What’s your point?”

Is it really a good idea to intentionally deflate the value of our currency?

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2010 7:31 PM
Comment #312617

Royal Flush-
You’ve missed the point. If fifty to seventy-two percent of profits from small businesses are coming from just a few percent, it means your standards are skewed. And in fact they are.

Among the firms Republicans want to protect from new taxes, according to research by House Democrats: The management team at Wall Street buyout firm Kohlberg, Kravis and Roberts (KKR), which recently reported more than $54 billion in assets managed by 14 offices around the world. Auditing firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, a household name with operations in more than 150 countries. And the Tribune Corp., which owns the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times and the Baltimore Sun.

See, the problem is, you’re generalizing that certain kinds of pass-through corporations and partnerships are by definition small businesses, because most of that category of corporations filing such taxes are. That’s how you get your number of half or more: by including huge corporations that are privately owned, and which pay taxes under such laws.

Very few small businesses will pay those raised taxes, and then, they would pay them the same way everybody pays them, only on the brackets higher than 250,000. The rest of the money they keep the tax cuts on.

People should not be scared by your talk of higher taxes, especially since we’re talking no higher taxes than we were charged in the best of times, and from a group of people who can typically absorb the cost without problem for their lifestyle.

These people, as a matter of fact, aren’t spending it anyways, with the tax cuts as they already are. They saved the money, and that meant it wasn’t going around the country, being used by different people, before it inevitably landed in some rich person’s pocket.

That, in fact, is why infrastructure and other programs where the people who need the jobs and need the money are directly assisted scores better than tax cuts in stimulus studies. The whole point of stimulus is to kickstart demand, not further reward supply siders who can’t sell people products they can’t buy.

I read this book which describe the way economys, whether they intend to or not, tend to naturally develop some people who concentrate resources rather than simply passing them on. It’s pretty much inevitable, whether the system’s communist or capitalist.

The important part, really, is how long that pathway that dollar takes is. Is it just automatically landing where the money’s already gathering naturally, or is it being dispersed out in the world, to flow through the pocketbooks of a number of other people and other places before it lands there? That’s the way I look at the economy. Now, if the Private sector, like it was doing before, was doing better job of getting the money to people, that would be one thing. However, if the private sector’s lagging on that, that becomes a long-term problem for the economy.

We need money flowing again among the people of this nation. The rich will always find a way to stay rich. The rest of us often have to struggle, and helping us helps the overall situation.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 6, 2010 7:49 PM
Comment #312619

RF,
The behavior of the stock markets and, more importantly, the bond markets, shows both approve approve of quantitative easing as proposed by the Fed. The point here is that we all need to recognize the peril’s for today’s economy. The problem is not too much money chasing too few goods. This is NOT an inflationary situation. The problem is too little money not chasing much of anything at all.

Some conservatives are attempting to explain away the positives of the economy’s performance under Obama with an outlandish scenario positing inflation. That is simply, flatly wrong. The stock and especially the bond markets are telling us deflation- NOT inflation- is the threat.

My concern is that some people will actually believe this foolishness coming from the likes of Limbaugh, the 700 Club, and others. These conservatives would literally destroy the economy if anyone actually listened to them, and all just so they can hurt Obama and gain more power for themselves.

Posted by: phx8 at November 6, 2010 8:17 PM
Comment #312620

“Is it really a good idea to intentionally deflate the value of our currency?”

Maybe, maybe not. Many economists argue that it would be the best possible thing for the economy. That it is only reflecting reality. That it would make our exports competitive on the international market. That it would add jobs. A strong dollar doesn’t necessarily equate to a strong US economy. The US stock market, in recent times, has trended upward on devaluation.

These are complicated questions. I don’t think that there are any clear answers to the problems facing our economy. The Fed sees a Japanese type deflation issue and is attempting to create asset inflation by expanding the amount of money in circulation. That is not some liberal concept. Bernanke is a disciple of the free market guru, Milton Friedman, who invented the term “helicopter drop” of money to quash deflation. Whether by monetary policy or fiscal policy, the intent is the same: decrease the output gap by increasing aggregate demand.

Posted by: Rich at November 6, 2010 8:25 PM
Comment #312624

Rich,
Good comments, both the most recent one and the earlier one as well. If the Obama administration successfully avoids reliving the Japanese experience with their Lost Decade, then Obama and the Federal Reserve will deserve the highest praise. So far, the Obama administration has done well. They pulled the country back from the brink of another Great Depression, and for that we all owe them thanks. The most important statistic, and a lagging one at that, is job creation. While the trends look good, job creation simply cannot happen fast enough.

Posted by: phx8 at November 6, 2010 9:36 PM
Comment #312628

>While the trends look good, job creation simply cannot happen fast enough.
Posted by: phx8 at November 6, 2010 09:36 PM

phx8,

Perhaps it can. Put on too many jobs at one time and it could turn inflationary. Demand would increase faster than production…maybe?

Posted by: Marysdude at November 7, 2010 6:37 AM
Comment #312663

phx8,

Watch closely, when jobs do begin to come back (assuming they do), the conservatives on WB will claim it is because they have recaptured the House, whether the House passes any legislation or not. They will ignore the lessons of the last 90 years, just as they seem a bit confused about monetary policy in the past two years. It is my biggest concern that the continued false rhetoric surrounding the Republican party will actually create a self fulfilling economic depression. So far, they have done an admirable job of repeating Republican rhetoric of the 20’s and 30’s. They are depending on the public being ignorant of actual history.

There is a reason the FED is a non political body. The question is can they drag the Republicans out of the hole they continue to dig for our economy?

Posted by: gergle at November 7, 2010 6:00 PM
Comment #312664

phx8,

The Obama administration has done a good job in stabilizing the economy. All the right wing rhetoric to the contrary and to the chagrin of progressives, his economic policies have been very centrist. They have been oriented to saving the system not radically transforming it. It must be galling to see the thanks expressed by Wall Street.

However, it is also seems clear that the US needs a new economic vision and direction. Obama will define his presidency over the next two years on that issue.

Posted by: Rich at November 7, 2010 6:30 PM
Comment #312667

However, it is also seems clear that the US needs a new economic vision and direction. Obama will define his presidency over the next two years on that issue.

Posted by: Rich at November 7, 2010

Rich, that comment is just a pile of psychobable. Can you even begin to explain what that means?

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 7, 2010 7:10 PM
Comment #312670

Royal Flush, address that comment to Rich, gergle, Marysdude, and Phx8 as well.

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 7, 2010 7:28 PM
Comment #312681

>They are depending on the public being ignorant of actual history.
Posted by: gergle at November 7, 2010 06:00 PM

gergle,

It’s too late. The public, at least the voting public, was stupid enough to fall for conservative mumbo-jumbo, lies, deceit and chicanery this past year, and proved just how stupid on election day. History means NOTHING to Americans, and if I wasn’t one too, I think I’d get off this ride. But, it looks like those of us who do read, study history, and think, will have to live with the results. It does not look good. Redistricting will just about kill any chance for real recovery no matter how well President Obama handles the current mess. Conservatives, under the guidance of Limbaugh, Beck and Rove, will see us into the sewer within ten years.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 7, 2010 9:29 PM
Comment #312715

Friday’s job report was very good news. The fact that the unemployment rate stopped getting bigger approx. a year ago, and enough jobs were created to accommodate labor force new entries which exceed retirees, was not viewed as good news by Republicans or the public. But, its hard to justify it as bad news. Going from 750,000 lost jobs per month to no net lost jobs per month, is a respectable record, given the modest GDP growth following the most threatening recession since the Great Depression.

But, I am sure some Republicans are trying to figure out how they can lay claim to this improvement. If Democrats follow the example of the Republicans, Democrats in Congress will use every parliamentarian trick in the book to insure that the employment picture does NOT improve for the next two years and blame it on that Do-Nothing Republican House of Representatives.

I hope that is not the case. But, what Democrat in Congress has not considered that option. They would have to be brain dead to not consider it, politically.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 1:52 PM
Comment #312717

Marysdude said: “voting public, was stupid enough to fall for conservative mumbo-jumbo, lies, deceit and chicanery this past year, and proved just how stupid on election day.”

Man, are you WRONG! Let’s say I put you in a room with no windows or doors leading to outside, and over days I begin telling you it is night when it is day and vice versa. This research actually occurred, and you would believe night was day and day, night, based on the information you were provided. Would that make you STUPID? Or just, misinformed?

Democrats failed to control and assert the information to the public that would have won the ongoing support of the public. Obama admitted this in this last week. It is obviously the case. Don’t call the public Stupid for having been fed misinformation, distortions, and lies in a constant barrage for more than 18 months.

The simple fact is, Democrats were not effective communicators and miscalculated the need to justify and sell their actions and legislation to the public in a way that overcame the misinformation of the Republican supporter camp. The Stupid ones were the Democratic Leadership in their assumption that their efforts as communicators were sufficient. They obviously, were NOT!

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 2:01 PM
Comment #312721

DRR,

Yes, you are right, the Democratic leadership was stupid enough to believe history proved their point for them. That much I grant you. But, a public that would fall for the crap that was handed them without consulting history, or being able to analyze the repercussions of taking such garbage as votable information, ain’t all that bright either.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 8, 2010 2:20 PM
Comment #312732

Mr. David Remer wrote; “Democrats failed to control and assert the information to the public that would have won the ongoing support of the public. Obama admitted this in this last week.”

That is one way to look at the thrashing the dems took at the polls. It is also possible that the electorate did hear and understand what the dems were saying and rejected it.

Sometimes, no matter the gifted oratory or how often repeated one simply can not turn that pigs ear into a silk purse.

Obama plead guilty to a misdemeanor falsehood rather than admit the obvious felonious truth.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 8, 2010 3:37 PM
Comment #312735

RF said: “It is also possible that the electorate did hear and understand what the dems were saying and rejected it.”

Not according to the polling data.

As for your comment: “Obama plead guilty to a misdemeanor falsehood rather than admit the obvious felonious truth.”, I haven’t a clue what you are referring to. Please elaborate.

Thanks.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 3:56 PM
Comment #312736

Marysdude said: “But, a public that would fall for the crap that was handed them without consulting history, or being able to analyze the repercussions of taking such garbage as votable information, ain’t all that bright either.”

Well, one can wish for an educated, vested, and perpetually researching voting public casting enlightened self-interested votes on election day, but, I personally have better things to do than to chase fantasies such as this. People’s lives are complicated, challenging, and highly distracted by brillions of dollars each year spent on expert psychological warfare upon their choices by the marketing and advertising industry.

But, the prescription of the founders for a literate, vested, and informed voting public is not in the best interest of either political party. That leads to questioning of authority, and the whole purpose of marketing and advertising is to dissuade people from questioning the authority of the advertiser payee.

One can deal with reality, or attempt to wish it away. The latter will always prove fruitless.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 4:04 PM
Comment #312742

DRR,

Again you read more into what is said than in what is actually said. Oneupmanship does not become you. I do not fantasize an educated or even an interested electorate. I lament the absence, but am realistic enough to understand the difference. “One can deal with reality, or wish it away”, indeed! Deal with the reality that our electorate is not only stupid, but gullible and apathetical as well…reality sucks!

Posted by: Marysdude at November 8, 2010 4:20 PM
Comment #312743

Here is why the economy (CNN Money) has been improving modestly and why the outlook for it over the next 2 years will be modest growth without dramatic job loss recovery. As I have said for some time, it is structural, not political:

Total consumer debt was $11.6 trillion as of Sept. 30; down 7.4%, or $922 billion, from the peak reached in the third quarter of 2008, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Consumer indebtedness fell another 0.3% in the third quarter, after a 3.3% decline in the prior quarter.

In addition, total household delinquency rates fell for the second consecutive quarter. The report said 11.1% of outstanding debt was in some stage of delinquency at the end of September — compared to 11.4% on June 30, and 11.6% a year earlier.

“If consumers can continue to repair their balance sheets, that bodes well for the sanity of the economy in the long term,” said economist John Canally of LPL Financial.

About 457,000 people went into foreclosure in the third quarter, a 5.5% decrease from the number of new foreclosures in the second quarter of this year. Bankruptcies also fell 16% from the previous quarter.

Excluding the effects of defaults, non-mortgage debt fell for the first time since 2000, according to the Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit. Also, mortgage debt paydowns, which began in 2008, reached nearly $140 billion by the end of 2009.
Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 4:23 PM
Comment #312744

I have to add, that I disagree with John Canally of LPL Financial, quoted in my previous comment. He seems to be ignoring entirely the looming entitlement crisis and the consequent growth in national debt to an unsustainable $20 trillion dollars by the end of the coming decade.
.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 4:26 PM
Comment #312749

As for your comment: “Obama plead guilty to a misdemeanor falsehood rather than admit the obvious felonious truth.”, I haven’t a clue what you are referring to. Please elaborate. Thanks.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8

Sorry, it was confusing. It was my failed attempt at humor. You wrote that Obama took credit for failing to get his message heard and understood (misdeameanor falsehood). I maintain that it was heard and understood and rejected.

The (felonious truth) was that his policies for the most part have not been popular.

I will refrain from attempts at humor in the future.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 8, 2010 5:01 PM
Comment #312750

Weary Willie,

Thanks for the trolling. Most of us think this site is for debate. Make a point or keep it to yourself.

Thanks.

Posted by: gergle at November 8, 2010 5:01 PM
Comment #312772

RF, Don’t refrain. I am not very good at it either, but, with practice, perhaps we can both get better at it, or, failing that, enter a mutual suicide pact to put ourselves out of each other’s misery.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 10:49 PM
Comment #312773

Marysdude said again: “Deal with the reality that our electorate is not only stupid,”

But, of course, they aren’t stupid. Preoccupied and ignorant perhaps or undereducated, but, not stupid. Give them factual and honest information and they will collectively make good decisions, most of the time, passion swells excepted, of course. Sometimes in our history, however, passion is exactly what brought about good decisions and progress. Women’s suffrage and enforced civil rights for example. Empathy can be a potent motivator in making progress.

We started as a Constitutionally approved slave owner nation. In 230 years, virtually no one in America will admit to wanting to return to those “bad old days”. Of course, it took 180 years and civil war, and enormous civil unrest and a non-violent movement evoking government sponsored terrorism upon citizens, to get here. But, America will never return to slavery - it is no longer in our cultural or historical mindset. Another 50 years or so, and racism should probably go the same way.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010 11:00 PM
Comment #312786

>But, of course, they aren’t stupid. Preoccupied and ignorant perhaps or undereducated, but, not stupid.

DRR,

1. Ignorance is not having information available.
2. Stupidity is having information available and using it incorrectly or ignoring it.
3. There is a plethora of information available.

I’d vouchsafe that a majority of those who voted 2010 lived through much of the last thirty years (Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Cheney/Bush and Obama). Every one of them either lived part of the great depression, heard stories about it, or studied it in school.

In my opinion, our fellow Americans are not ignorant, but if you insist they are, the ignorance is self imposed…which is stupid. Again, if they are uneducated, with all the good information available, and they are too preoccupied to seek it instead of listening to the garbage from Beck, Limbaugh or FAUX, it cannot mean they are intelligent. Election 2010 proved, beyond the shadow of a doubt…the American electorate is ‘stupid’.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 9, 2010 7:01 AM
Comment #312791

Mr. Remer wrote; “RF, Don’t refrain. I am not very good at it either, but, with practice, perhaps we can both get better at it, or, failing that, enter a mutual suicide pact to put ourselves out of each other’s misery.”

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2010

OK David, a mutual pact sounds good to me. We’ll let others decide when we should act on it.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 9, 2010 11:32 AM
Comment #312794

Marysdude, there was information out there from both sides, and a great deal of it was false, distorted, or out of context. Bad information in, bad decisions out. Anyone with any empirical science training will tell you that.

The people, as I said, work with the information they have available to them and when it conflicts, they choose the information that seems to comport with their own personal circumstances. 10 million people out of work is 10 million people choosing the information that says the Democrats weren’t doing anything to help them with jobs.

That is not stupid. That is normal human psychology. Democrats needed to make the opposite case to them persuasively and failed. It is that simple. The people are not stupid. Preoccupied, ignorant of the facts, or undereducated, but, not stupid.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2010 12:28 PM
Comment #312795

Marysdude, but, by all means, keep asserting the opinion that the people are stupid. I am sure you will persuade them to act differently with that tact. NOT! (Talk about stupid!)

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2010 12:30 PM
Comment #312797

Good chuckle, RF. Thanks.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2010 12:31 PM
Comment #312819

Good chuckle DRR. Thanks.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 9, 2010 4:07 PM
Comment #312822

PS:

As to your added comments on my comments…perhaps you are into oneupmanship after all. I don’t blame you…as a recruiter and campaigner for VOID, you must put up a campaigner’s front. You go man! If it makes you feel better, the people were not stupid when they voted away their best chance at recovery…they were merely dumber than a box of rocks.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 9, 2010 4:22 PM
Comment #312846

Thanks, Marysdude. We must all be breathing in the same DEA air pollution wafting over America. :-)

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2010 9:14 PM
Comment #312847

Marysdude, I will agree with up to the following point. If the Independent swing voters continue to register their dissatisfaction by changing Party majorities in government every few years, progress on the longer term challenges facing our nation will be impossible, since each Party will attempt to undo the solutions set forth by the previous Party.

However, and here is where we diverge, our long term challenges have been decades in the making, and neither Party, in full control of the Government, has even attempted to address the fundamental reforms required to address those long term challenges; now impending crises.

Democrats had the opportunity to address both long term deficits and debt growth and health care access for all with the Public Option while controlling the Congress and the White House - and they refused the opportunity. Both of the Parties CLEARLY put politics and elections far ahead on their priority and ToDo list of rescuing our nation’s future.

Given that reality, therefore, voting out incumbents of both Parties in ever increasing numbers is the ONLY non-violent way voters are going to force the Parties to change that priority and ToDo list. It is logical, it is Constitutional, and it is wise, given the political reality that is.

Neither Party is even willing to tackle the simplest of fundamental reforms, like an end to Weekday voting, an end to Ivotronic voting machines without accountability or verifiability, means testing S.S. and Medicare benefits saving trillions over the next 7 decades, redacting defense expenditures which the Military itself says it doesn’t want or need. These measures are common sense, straight forward, and conceptually easy solutions.

But, neither Party in power has the will to put elections and campaigning aside long enough to take on these simple but, all important reforms, let alone single payer universal health care insurance and promotion of non-profit health care delivery clinics, hospitals, and LLC practices, which would save our nation from the crippling health care inflation which is going to destroy our economy and domestic tranquility, not to mention the general welfare.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2010 9:32 PM
Comment #312860

I noticed that the political arm of JC Morgan Chase is predicting gridlock in Congress for the next two years. I’m not sure if that is what they bought, or if that is what they even wanted, but that is what they say we got with this last election. No surprise about the gridlock, we’ve all pretty much assumed the same thing, but Chase may very well be aware of things on high that we are not. That memo may be the death knell to our economic recovery. Conservatives may have gotten what they’ve been after since WWII…another great depression. This is, perhaps, the most delicate time in our history as far as our economy is concerned. That would mean that gridlock will likely tip us over.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 10, 2010 7:00 AM
Comment #312892

Marysdude,

I was reading today that gold will likely continue to soar and we will likely see another oil shock, and al qaeda is making every attempt to cause another economic dip.

It will be interesting to see if the Republicans when faced with these threats will simply rely on the Fed to bail them out or actually do something that makes economic sense.

Gold seems to be indicating that there is little faith in paper currency.

Posted by: gergle at November 10, 2010 5:20 PM
Comment #312903

gergle, nah! Gold is noting and anticipating inflation (rightly so, though it is in Bubble Price territory) and anticipating the results of the G-20 summit, which may, or, may not undermine the efficacy of global currencies.

Currency exchange rates can have an impact on every trading nation in the world. I liken it to putting Pelosi and Boehner in a row boat in the middle of the ocean with one paddle. They may fight and feud and duck and punch, but, they are still in the same boat together with one paddle, and will have to decide whether to use the paddle or throw it away out of contempt and spite toward each other.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 10, 2010 6:31 PM
Comment #312927

As much as the right ridicules Pelosi, I’ll bet Boehner gets more cooperation from her than she did from him.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 10, 2010 9:51 PM
Comment #312980

aw c’mon dude….you know that the right doesn’t know anything about cooperation. It’s all stall, lie, denounce and any number of other things that are negative.
Our instincts and desires to work together, cooperate, make better are all interpreted and denounced as being wussy!!
I just hope that I live long enough to see them finally and ultimately get their come-uppences, along with a swift kick in their collective ass!!!

Posted by: jane doe at November 11, 2010 4:20 PM
Comment #313021

Marysdude, and who will be yelling for government to do something when the next Great Depression arrives? About 3/4 of those conservatives who now say government should butt out. Fact is, Obama and Dem’s didn’t rescue their jobs and their 401Ks they say, and that was a major factor in why they voted conservative. The hypocrisy is truly monumental, if not intended.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 12, 2010 12:31 AM
Comment #313032

I have come to the conclusion that benLadin has won the War on Terror. He could not have orchestrated a more sound campaign than the one he did (is). He started with a few minor scrimmishes…a bomb here, an airplane there, etc., and created an overreaction that has broken the back, the spirit and the purse of all opposition. It has been his steamroller, a steamroller he created and used that has brought us to this point. One third of the world populace believes that we (the USA and allies) are more evil than terrorism, or that what we practice is actually more terroristic than what real terrorists practice.

If we had not been breaking the bank fighting in these incessant wars, we might have been able to absorb much of the effect of our financial meltdown. If we hadn’t felt so guilty about fighting these incessant wars and tried to hide their costs from the budget, conservatives would not have had half the ammunition they had in order to win the mid-terms. President Obama had to bring the war finances out of hiding, in order to present a halfway honest budget, and that budget was used against him very effectively. All of that because the baton of benLadin brought out a huge over reaction.

Great Britain is broke, France is broke, Australia is broke, and we are close to anarchy…all because of a finely tuned baton, in the hands of a madman.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 12, 2010 2:20 PM
Comment #313068

scrimmages…mea culpa. Darned spell check!

Posted by: Marysdude at November 12, 2010 10:17 PM
Comment #318479

I wasn’t happy with the wars Bush took us into but I never degraded his position as President and just prayed daily for him and this country. We have a good and decent black family voted into the White House, Republicans get over it and get off your behinds and do your job. You have been in control for over 5 weeks and have done nothing but whine and make empty promises. You can’t create jobs if the only ideas you have are to continue to take from the unemployed and give to the wealthy. That Social Security and Medicare you want to take from me was put there by me and is not yours to play with. Take it from your wealthy subsidies.

Posted by: easynan at February 11, 2011 4:30 PM
Post a comment