Ya, you're usually not supportive of anything that WOULD result in horrible environmental disasters....aren't you? :-)
RE; THE JOBS NUMBERS TODAY: Obama, this morning, talked about how muc
stronger our economy is getting because he thinks that the 430,000 new jobs created are a very good indicator of that. Um........except 390,000 of those jobs are CENSUS WORKERS/GOVERNMENT WORKERS, temporary government workers at that. Yes, only 41,000 jobs were created in the private sector (real growth depends on approximately 120,000 new jobs in the private sector). The job situation doesn't seem too solid to me unless you're a president desirous of depending on government jobs to employ the unemployed? I hope not.
Sound healthy to you? And, do you think he's really satisfied that government jobs are a sustainable job stimulus or does he know this is temporary and unsustainable and just says what he hopes most Americans won't think too deeply about his words but hear his optimism?
geeeeZ
56 comments:
And, do you think he's really satisfied that government jobs are a sustainable job stimulus ...?
In a society that favors direct government oversight of all jobs (not to mention most facets of private life), this probably would translate to "good news" Do you
Heather
You've got to see this.
BHO's use of "furious" is three things:
1) a sign of his arrogance
2) full of logic flaws: appeal to the people, for one.
3) an attempt at damage control for the coming November elections
BHO's being furious is an emotional statement and a temperamental one at that. In a word, "unpresdential."
And one more thing that BHO had better get into his head....A lot of the electorate are furious with HIM!
Oops, didn't finish..
Do you think temporary, govt controlled employment might be a goal?
Brooke, I'm sorry, your link won't click open for me :-( (and I'm afraid to look!)
Heather, Yes, exactly my point...it's GREAT NEWS for these guys, isn't it....IN AMERICA?
Always: You're brilliant with this list:
1) a sign of his arrogance
2) full of logic flaws: appeal to the people, for one.
3) an attempt at damage control for the coming November elections
The Logic flaws and appeal to the people are most of it, I think...if you can't baffle them with impressive action, you can ACT MIFFED and SHOW THOSE PEOPLE !
"Furious" usually means "NOT IN MY HANDS..I"M FURIOUS AT THAT, or HIM," right?
boy
By the way, I'll be around every few hours but my sprained foot isn't better today as I'd hoped so my expert buddy has told me to "camp" downstairs and stop going up and down stairs for ice, etc.
So, I'm taking my phone numbers, a lipstick and brush, a pen, some books, and a few other things and settling downstairs nearer the fridge for continual ICING (and food!!) and the front door for faster opening when friends come by... :-)
Please pray my foot gets better faster! (It didn't help that I tried on a high heel last night...ya, I know..but it was FEELING BETTER!!)
ugh.
See y'all later..xx
Heather "Do you think temporary, govt controlled employment might be a goal?"
Does Dracula have an overbite? :-)
By the way, obviously, I don't have a laptop! I type too fast for those smaller keyboards.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/06/linking-arizona-law-to-white-supremacists-get-la-congresswoman-in-hot-water.html
just wanted to comment with that (tho I'd like to do a post on it, I have to get downstairs)...
Read THAT and tell me your feelings..this is INSANITY, and ALL ABOUT THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS, FOLKS. She knows better than that, she's misled but not a moron
Hi Z. Do we need immigration reform? Really, do we need to reform the current system?
Since our current system has never been fully implemented or enforced, how do we know? We do know when we secure the borders, it works. So why don't we secure the whole border, ALL OF IT?
Then we could see what needs to be reformed.
If we really enforced the current laws, vis a vis businesses and individuals that hire illegal workers, would we have this magnitude of the problem.
I submit, WE DO NOT NEED REFORM.
What we need is a government that implements and enforces our laws.
The US Government is failing to do its job and THAT is why we have a massive illegal immigration problem.
We're sure paying through the nose, top dollar, for an ineffectual, incompetent government.
What needs comprehensive reform? The Federal Government, that's what. IT FAILS AT PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO!!!!!
Huh. Sorry about that.
Copy and paste:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zJ04AWn-5w&feature=player_embedded
Brooke, that video is great. These bureaucrats are so out of touch, they don't even know who James O'Keefe is!
And he's encouraged a whole group of young adults to become journalists, just like him.
Exposing criminality is the first step to stopping it!
Thank you for sharing this video!
Obviously Obama needs to check the tire pressure of this situation.
Why are you whining, z? President Empty Suit is avoiding a Keynesian stimulus in order to keep inflation down. Why do you object to that, or don't you think the unemployed should bear the brunt? Since you don't support any stimulus spending (and he has done very little) then I assume you don't care about the unemployment situation.
I ask again, with high unemployment suppressing demand how do you generate hiring?
Once more we see the far right as nothing but a sound bite machine that either can't or won't express they true opinions. They just like to whine.
I do love this guy though. I've started calling him The Black Bush.
One month he is on his knees with gusto in front of the oil lobby and then when he sees he's got a PR problem he starts with the rhetoric.
Nothing will change. Big oil gets its way.
I continue to ask just what it is about The Black Bush that the far right finds so upsetting other than his being labeled "D" which ets you folks so primed to pop a vessel that you can't think.
Whining? Now there's the pot!
It cracks me up how Ducky just cannot help but pound out racist nonsense. He's like a cartoon of himself.
It must just gall him that he cannot defend the suicide path the man he voted for is putting this country on, so he defaults to his insane racism.
If only Obama were a woman, then Ducky could throw in some misogyny, too. He loves that shit.
And please remember that the census is mandated by the Constitution and hiring temporary census workers is absolutely nothing knew.
Have to take the census or are you against the U.S. Constitution?
X number of people live here.
Why does the gov't need race, marital status birth dates, names, ect?
Hell, just asking the race question should be enough for you post-race leftists to get your dander up... Unless certain areas are fed more federal dollars through lobby groups?
Sheesh.
President Empty Suit is avoiding a Keynesian stimulus in order to keep inflation down. Why do you object to that, or don't you think the unemployed should bear the brunt? Since you don't support any stimulus spending (and he has done very little) then I assume you don't care about the unemployment situation.
I ask again, with high unemployment suppressing demand how do you generate hiring?
Unemployment increases consumer demand for income, dipstick.
When are you blunt tools on the left going to figure out that the "means of production" you want government to own are people not slave drones?
Excellent point about the real number of jobs created, Z. Since it's the private sector jobs only that count as productive employment gains, and those on the government only get paid after expropriating the efforts of private production, government jobs are a drag on productivity.
Now that "we're all Keynesians now" according to President Nixon, it'll be left to President Obama to declare "we're all Bolsheviks now". Who will be dancing in the streets then, Ducky?
Speaking of Keynes, it should be obvious to the most casual observer that he has now become that "defunct economist" of whom he so eloquently spoke.
Obama can change from day to day. The night before he seemed to have a "tingle" running up his leg ogling Sir Paul McCartney while McCartney was serenading the missus with "her song Michelle". The nest night he was "furious" with that other creation of British royalty, BP.
Waylon
Unemployment increases consumer demand for income, dipstick.
--------------
Outstanding, Beamish, absolutely outstanding.
Really, clue us in, who do you follow home. No way you can remember the route to get home yourself.
Just outstanding.
Well Waylon, I agree that Keynes has diminished but you have to agree that your buddies the monetarists led by Milton Friedman have been in the dumper also.
Economics has always had poor predictive value and we are in the zone right now.
I would rather him be more proactive in the oil spill recovery instead of inciting his feelings about the whole debacle.
The MSM are going to portray him as someone who really cares because he is "furious." At least there are some of us who not so gullible.
As for the jobs? Who is he kidding? We are in the worst state ever.
Ducky, no matter what any "monetarist" did they could only fiddle with some of the smaller details. The road to he present was laid when the Federal Reserve was crated and Keynes followed to make sure that the destination of expanding government control of the economy was continued. So here we are today, a world teetering on the edge of the abyss envisioned by the Bolsheviks and Lenin. Keynes was a useful tool in arriving here, no?
Waylon
Duck to Beamish:
Really, clue us in, who do you follow home. No way you can remember the route to get home yourself.
Duck, you're cruisin' for a bruisin'
"I ask again, with high unemployment suppressing demand how do you generate hiring?"
You generate hiring by cutting taxes across the board, and cutting government spending.
Cutting taxes leaves money in the economic engine of business, leading to hiring and productivity.
Productivity leads to gains in the private sector, leading to more private investment, leading to more hiring, more money working in the economy, and rising demand for goods, and surprise! Higher revenues for govt to take in.
Cutting govt. spending makes cutting taxes more possible, and makes govt. smaller, less regulatory, which in turn frees up the people to engage in the free market while lowering the govt. debt, if the damn politicians weren't so quick to spend it in the first place.
Of course since the left is about power and control, this can't happen. The economy becomes stagnant, the people more reliant on government, which requires more taxes.
The engine of the private economy sputters along at a slow pace, which lowers revenues, reduces hiring, and requires more taxes to stay afloat, until we become Greece.
In which case America as she was meant to be, no longer exists.
The End
Pris
PS. And Obama's furious? He doesn't know what furious is!
Ducky,
The problem with your leftist alternatives to rational thought is that in setting unemployment as your metric to measuring a decrease in demand you also want to argue to somehow the "overstock" of supply not demanded (by people unemployed without income) needs price controls and redistribution so those that can't pay for the products they demand to consume when they can afford them get them anyway, and without income on either end no more products are produced and comsumption is reduced by a metric you can measure in a body count of people starved to death because supply isn't replenished.
While this result might be desirable to zero-sum game legacy dimwits such as yourself and the vanguard party in leftist utopias like North Korea, state ownership of all the factories and farms doesn't seem to producing much supply for demand now is it.
It sinks your idea that unemployment decreases demand (when it decreases supply, idiot) and reveals the nature of the leftist mind, much as the left-wing labor activist Adolf Hitler's desperate Ardennes offensive does.
You can't write down on paper that you have fuel and expect it to magically power your engines.
Same with your economic scheme. You can't unemploy people and expect the economy to improve. You can't write down numbers and pretend people are suddenly earning income again.
Please, Ducky, before you die, grow up.
God Ducky you're again puking your highschool knowledge you acquired on Wikipedia.
High unemployment doesn't generate demand. But debt and too much government doesn't generate confidence and therefore trust in the future. It increases risk and the perception of risk to generate capital and human investment. It's even more true when the administration is incompetent.
So stop puking names like Keynes, Shumpeter and co. Use your own brain if you have one.
Things are more complex in life and the economics than what you're mentioning.
Stick to the arts. At least you can make sense there b/c well making sense of art is pointless.
Have a good weekend, mr highschool.
Well Waylon, I agree that Keynes has diminished but you have to agree that your buddies the monetarists led by Milton Friedman have been in the dumper also.
Another throw up. You sound like someone who makes sentence out of reading books and dictionaries, with a touch of sarcasm and wit.
What do you add to this? Nothing! You sound knowledgeable but if one scratches the surface you're like the President. An empty suit. Nothing else.
I'm nauseous from reading your pseudo knowledge. Why don't you admit your ignorance once in a while.
I do love this guy though. I've started calling him The Black Bush.
It's because you're a coward. You would jump off any ship so that YOU are not associated with the failure of your supposedly friends' ideas.
Even if we had a democratic socialist president elected and if was failing (as he would because of the past failureS of such policies), you would jump ship.
You're simply a COWARD, Ducky. You don't have serious principles, a solid intellectual foundations. All it is bits and pieces of knowledge you've gathered without making much sense of it or connecting the dots through LOGIC.
And your ultimate goal is too feel good. Therefore you jump ship when things go wrong.
Fairly pathetic.
It's ALL ABOUT HIM.
Z, you could have ended it all right there. This is the beginning and the end of Hussein's outlook on everything. Every speech he makes is full of "I this..." and "I that...". It's all about Him.
Frog, if government spending produces growth or greater efficiency then it is sound. There have certainly been projects initiated or subsidized by the government like the transcontinental railroad (ironic that the terminally ignorant Rand was so fond of railroads) that were critical to the nation's growth.
Government is the perfect source for developing shared resources which improve productivity but don't deliver to a specific corporate bottom line.
Pitch till you win.
Frog, I have never been fond of Obama. He was elected because it was too risky to elect a guy who had his brains fried. Don't want someone like that on the button.
Right now, Obama is delivering everything you clowns want.
He's working to privatize the education system
He is working to cut back Social Security.
He's flying as many drone missions as he can and has stated he will summarily assassinate American citizens. Even Chucklenuts wouldn't go that far.
He absolutely adores business and right now he can't believed he's been so ill used by BP.
He refused to nominate progressives to the bench and DO NOT tell me that right wingers who have a mind don't kbnow they are getting exactly what they hoped for in Kagan.
He refused to initiate a Keynesian stimulus.
With Chucklenuts at least we knew we were dealing with a deranged religious fanatic so it wasn't too hard to mount some opposition. With The Black Bush it's more difficult and people don't realize he's a stealth right winger which s why they are critical, I guess. But it's long past time even the Baggers cracked wise to this fool.
Snooze Duck.
You say things that come from nowhere.
Maybe you're part of the insider gang. Kewl for you.
He refused to initiate a Keynesian stimulus.
Please enlighten us the clowns that we are. What us a Keynesian stimulus? How does it differ from a stimulus?
Please be specific b/c I'm getting sick and tired of your name dropping like some highschool teens that says he knows a movie star or hung out backstage with a band. It's fairly pathetic and useless.
So again enligthen us, ignorant clowns. Create your blog. Do something about it.
Or stop blahblahing while treating us like morons with your web-based knowledge
It sinks your idea that unemployment decreases demand (when it decreases supply, idiot)
-------------------
Oh that's a big fail for Beamish.
Let's review:
What do you need to create growth?
1. Labor - right now there is a worldwide glut. The world has an oversupply.
2. Raw materials - We are having a little trouble there so moderating demand does keep prices from heating up and generating inflation, the big fear right now.
3. Capital - Well, we've got a bit of a problem here and as long as the financial system is making enough to fuel its own profits and bonuses then there is no reason to do anything else.
There is no reason to hire and unless you've got a magic bullet that can add labor costs without generating inflation there ain't going to be any reason. Remember, you right wing folks are all bent up about the possibility of inflation and don't seem to realize that unemployment keeps labor costs low and inflation in check.
Your analysis is a little convoluted but seems to state that we aren't maximizing production at the moment because hiring is down.
No, there isn't a lot of lending going on because the financial system is not concerned about employment. Full employment doesn't do anything for them.
And is a Keynesian approach in line with your democratic socialistic doctrine? How does all of that fits? How would it work? Wouldn't democractic socialism require some serious nationalization? How can THAT work? Has it been effective in the past? If not, why and how would you change it so it works?
Really you need your own blog because you're so freaking smart, know the arts and all the bells and whistles while us clowns are working, paying taxes and are sick of the book-smarts than can't be street smarts and are ruining our lives.
Please explain to us. Instead of being witty and throwing up your """""knowledge""""" each time there's an opportunity for you to gloat.
Please enlighten us the clowns that we are. What us a Keynesian stimulus? How does it differ from a stimulus?
------------
It would be a stimulus designed to increase demand and spending and therefore employment as opposed to TARP.
See what I call a Keynesian stimulus would be building high speed rail or projects like that which employ and increase national productivity. However, Larry Summers doesn't see how that would recover the Harvard endowment so he isn't interested.
Specific enough Froggy. All I hear from you guys is tax cuts. More trickle down. More debt and more of what got us here.
I get confused when folks like pris go mental about the deficit and then propose tax cuts. Your just shifting the debt and if we had a decent administration it would be easier to focus the expenditure rather than just sailing it into the private sector to bump inflation.
Ducky, you are so using your Marxist theories of the 1800s.
I have news for you: THE WORLD HAS CHANGED.
It goes beyond raw materials.
It includes intellectual capital, intellectual material, highly intellectual labor, etc...
Please for God's sake use your power of observation in the 21st century. Look around. Stop reading books about class warfare in the 19th century.
This is more complex than this.
Simplification leads to tyranny. And in your case some serious idiocy.
I'm glad I had some serious and smart economics teachers and not YOU.
as your metric to measuring a decrease in demand you also want to argue to somehow the "overstock" of supply not demanded (by people unemployed without income) needs price controls and redistribution so those that can't pay for the products they demand to consume when they can afford them get them anyway,
--- Beamish
Can anyone put a propositional calculus on that? Does it have meaning?
It would be a stimulus designed to increase demand and spending and therefore employment as opposed to TARP.
See what I call a Keynesian stimulus would be building high speed rail or projects like that which employ and increase national productivity. However, Larry Summers doesn't see how that would recover the Harvard endowment so he isn't interested.
F-. That's your grade.
I knew you'd say this. A stimulus is supposed to increase demand, moron. Not supply demand.
So basically, I caught you doing some name dropping.
Laughing my butt off here.
See what I call a Keynesian stimulus would be building high speed rail or projects like that which employ and increase national productivity.
Yawn. Europe has tried that. Great infrastructures indeed in Europe.
10-13% unemployment since the 80s in France. 40% for under 25.
Ducky, it's 2010 again. Not 1960. Music has changed. Deal with it. Things have tried and failed. Please realize.
Good night, grandpa.
Question on this again? What is productivity?
You think gov spending is going to increase productivity? Really? Injecting money = productivity? It's like saying adding gas to the tank is going to increase the vehicle's speed?
Productivity takes knowledge, streamlined processes (gov is really bad at that, supply chain integration, economy of scales, blah blah blah), some serious human component (work ethics, energy), etc...
So I'm not sure a stimulus generates national productivity.
Unless you're implying high unemployment will make people more vigorous when they find a job once they're fully rested.
Or maybe you're taking about Obama. He's productive on the golf course.
if we had a decent administration it would be easier to focus the expenditure rather than just sailing it into the private sector to bump inflation.
Maybe it's time for you to realize that big government doesn't work for the people. It works for special interests on both sides of the aisle.
Only limited gov garantees we're free from this nonsense.
France with big gov has had the same problem for now 35+ years.
And don't tell me it's because it wasn't done right.
People in power are power hungry. Borderline psychopath or narcissistic for some. They are not interested in the people.
Even your favorite model Eastern Germany killed people, shot them at the wall when they tried to escape, spied on them, encouraged delation.
It's time for you to realize all of this. We're in 2010. Not in 450. We have over 2000 years of knowledge about human nature, human condition.
Get a FREAKING CLUE DUCKY! Just WAKE UP!
As we say in French, come down from your coconut tree.
(by people unemployed without income)
Unemployed people generally have no income.
Unless, of course, someone develops a welfare system that pays people to be unproductive.
H
as your metric to measuring a decrease in demand you also want to argue to somehow the "overstock" of supply not demanded (by people unemployed without income) needs price controls and redistribution so those that can't pay for the products they demand to consume when they can afford them get them anyway
Can anyone put a propositional calculus on that? Does it have meaning?
I'm killing two birds with one stone. You argue that unemployment cuts demand and creates economic growth by holding inflation down yet argue elsewhere usually that consumption of more than we produce decreases supply thus causing us to live beyond our means. I suppose you're trying to eke out a position that unemployment creates wealth by increasing debt, or as I said two dead birds under a brick looking rather flattened. Tax the rich harder, they hold the most IOUs?
Economics isn't your forte, Ducky. Perhaps a round of Gilligan's Island trivia?
Heather "Unless, of course, someone develops a welfare system that pays people to be unproductive."
Voila, the Census Bureau these days!
//hiring temporary census workers is absolutely nothing knew.//
No... it's not. But hiring them, laying them off, then rehiring them to pad the new jobs created stats is new.
Well...now that I think about it, it may not be. The ACORN principle is at work again. The Chicago way.
//but you have to agree that your buddies the monetarists led by Milton Friedman have been in the dumper also.//
BS.
We can never really test the Friedman theories. Before we can implement them and give them adequate time to flourish, some communist puke starts screaming that it's a racist system designed to keep poor people of color down, and they start glorifying the need for more government.
Punish the rich, to reward the lazy idiots who won't lift a finger. That's social justice, right?
Economics isn't your forte, Ducky. Perhaps a round of Gilligan's Island trivia?
ironic isn't it that progressives see socialism as the next step in historical dialectical process when it's a step backwards....
where the government becomes the feudal lord and the taxpayers the serfs..
where the government becomes the feudal lord and the taxpayers the serfs.
That's exactly what is is. That's why they don't mind too much in Europe. They have centuries of being serfs. And despite the French revolution it still is the same. Except this time the mill provided by the lord is the unemployment or health insurance provided by the State.
The "new class," Elbro.
Milovan Djilas was imprisoned in communist Yugoslavia for writing a book about how the communist party elites were no different and much worse than the "capitalists" they overthrew.
And to really sink in the kinds of minds the left produces, despite the criticism of the system he helped bring about and being imprisoned for it, Djilas REMAINED a communist, with the eternal struggle hope that somehow the perennially failed ideology of communism could work "if it were ever tried."
We're talking about droolers intimately aware of the taste of window panes.
Djilas REMAINED a communist, with the eternal struggle hope that somehow the perennially failed ideology of communism could work "if it were ever tried."
That's sad.
Not so different than the outcome of Marx's own life, though.
H
"I get confused when folks like pris go mental about the deficit and then propose tax cuts."
Ducky, I guess you didn't read this paragraph:
Pris: "Productivity leads to gains in the private sector, leading to more private investment, leading to more hiring, more money working in the economy, and rising demand for goods, and surprise! Higher revenues for govt to take in."
Or this one:
Pris: "Cutting govt. spending makes cutting taxes more possible, and makes govt. smaller, less regulatory, which in turn frees up the people to engage in the free market while lowering the govt. debt, if the damn politicians weren't so quick to spend it in the first place."
Haven't you noticed that government revenues are down at the same time the government is growing? Even though taxes are higher? Don't you realize that's because of a stagnant economy, unemployment is high, and new entitlements added to the ones we already had?
Really Ducky, please quit trying to pretend you know what you're talking about, and btw, if you can't read, we'll give you a pass!
Pris
Post a Comment