Obama's got "better stuff to do"

Back in late April, President Obama claimed "I've got better stuff to do" than respond to Donald Trump and the "birthers".

Pray tell, besides authorizing the assassination of Bin Laden, what "better stuff" was he talking about?

Given the latest bad news, it must not include staying on top of this country's crumbling economic situation:

"Daily economic briefings disappear from Obama's White House schedule"

Obama's forgotten that "It's the economy, stupid!" and unfortunately for us, he appears to be "stuck on stupid".

He hasn't forgotten about the economy at all. First of all the Repubs and its propaganda arm Fox News know that the ONLY way they will defeat Obama in 2012 is hammer him on the economy on the bad monthly reports and the debt on the months that the economy shows improvement.

The great thing about politics is that the choices you have aren't always clear cut. Many times as I said before the choice you have is between a bad choice and a worst choice.

People look to the president for guidance and leadership. If one has learn anything about him it is he tends to look at results over time and is not overly focused on the short term, 24 hour news cycle stuff like this past monthly economic report. He knows that next month or the month after it could show a bump.

One of the failings of corporate america in my opinion is the over reliance of quarterly reports. This encourages executives to make short term decisions which may increase the bottom line but is not healthy for the company in the long term.

The beauty in all of this is that the Repubs can offer nothing in terms of improvement other than the failed economic theories that got us into this mess in the first place. The instances of voters "buyers remorse" in at least 4 to 5 states with right wing Gov's should send a signal that they don't have a clue.

Neither the president or congress can wave a magic wand and make the economy better when you have housing and manufacturing two industries that normally lead economic comebacks basically decimated with jobs outsourced never to come back and nothing to replace them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Given the latest bad news, it must not include staying on top of this country's crumbling economic situation:

"Daily economic briefings disappear from Obama's White House schedule"

Obama's forgotten that "It's the economy, stupid!" and unfortunately for us, he appears to be "stuck on stupid".

---

Where's the House jobs bill?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Back in late April, President Obama claimed "I've got better stuff to do" than respond to Donald Trump and the "birthers".

Pray tell, besides authorizing the assassination of Bin Laden, what "better stuff" was he talking about?

Given the latest bad news, it must not include staying on top of this country's crumbling economic situation:

"Daily economic briefings disappear from Obama's White House schedule"

Obama's forgotten that "It's the economy, stupid!" and unfortunately for us, he appears to be "stuck on stupid".

---

I'm not for a minute forgetting or forgiving your neo-con, right-wing friend's parts in all of this, but I have to say NO!Bama hasn't done a damn thing about jobs. Oh, excuuuuuuuse me, he 'feel's our frustration'. What a loser! We've gone from criminal [[Bush2) to uncaring and inept [[NO!Bama).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

I'm not for a minute forgetting or forgiving your neo-con, right-wing friend's parts in all of this, but I have to say NO!Bama hasn't done a damn thing about jobs. Oh, excuuuuuuuse me, he 'feel's our frustration'. What a loser! We've gone from criminal [[Bush2) to uncaring and inept [[NO!Bama).

---

I don't think that's entirely fair, for several reasons:

1. The $800 billion economic stimulus bill in 2009 was loaded-down with $400 billion in tax cuts, at the insistence of the GOP. That's $400 billion--never to be seen again--that could have been spent on job-creating infrastructure projects.

2. The GOP has stricken future funding for high speed rail construction from the budget.

3. Extended unemployment benefits were only passed after an agreement to extend tax cuts for billionaires.

4. Failure to raise the debt ceiling limits what the government can do about anything, let alone creating jobs.

Welcome to 1937.

And I already know what the responses to my post will be: poor NO!Bama, look what he has to work with. Poor NO!Bama, he has no control over congress. Poor NO!Bama, everyone is against him. Poor NO!Bama, he's better than......look what the option was.......blah, blah, blah. My response: poor NO!Bama, go back to the southside of Chicago and neighborhood organizing. Go back to acadamia and all of its connections and benefits. Go somewhere other than the white house. Your feelings don't do me and mine a damn bit of good. The only way things will get better in this country is when they get so bad [[are we there yet?) that tens and hundreds of thousands get out in the streets. We keep talking trash and fighting [[if you believe our wars are about democracy, ha, ha) in the middle east and we're eating our own lunch, expending the lives of our people and ruining our society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

And I already know what the responses to my post will be: poor NO!Bama, look what he has to work with. Poor NO!Bama, he has no control over congress. Poor NO!Bama, everyone is against him. Poor NO!Bama, he's better than......look what the option was.......blah, blah, blah. My response: poor NO!Bama, go back to the southside of Chicago and neighborhood organizing. Go back to acadamia and all of its connections and benefits. Go somewhere other than the white house. Your feelings don't do me and mine a damn bit of good. The only way things will get better in this country is when they get so bad [[are we there yet?) that tens and hundreds of thousands get out in the streets. We keep talking trash and fighting [[if you believe our wars are about democracy, ha, ha) in the middle east and we're eating our own lunch, expending the lives of our people and ruining our society.

---

What should he or for that matter anybody in that position do ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

What should he or for that matter anybody in that position do ?

---

Get some principles. Stand up and speak them. Continually and constantly. What we have for politicians right now are mealy mouthed, bought and sold hacks. They are almost all in the hands of the corporate oligarchy, aristocracy. They're more interested in celebrity and power than anything else including democracy. Oh yeah, re-election. This is not a democratic system. And don't hand me that shit about how much better off we are than the rest of the world - it's BULL. Yes, we have the basis for a great system but it's been co-opted. Bought and sold. Other countries followed our example and modified their systems to accomplish good things for their own. Here we are tilting at windmills. Windmills erected by corporations and politicians.

If the economy doesn't improve and the unemployment rate doesn't drop, the Republicans will win the next election. Obviously they realize that and it scares the hell out of me. A large portion of them can afford to wait it out. If both parties were to actually attempt to work together to fix this problem we're in, it could be accomplished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old guy

If the economy doesn't improve and the unemployment rate doesn't drop, the Republicans will win the next election. Obviously they realize that and it scares the hell out of me. A large portion of them can afford to wait it out. If both parties were to actually attempt to work together to fix this problem we're in, it could be accomplished.

---

But they can't you see. It's physically and logically impossible for these two public serving bodies to coordinate on just about anything meaningful. They reserve those meaningful public agendas for bait and switch purposes. And propaganda campaigns. Platforms to be reelected, or to defeat an incumbant. That is where the bulk of their power, money and efforts are holstered. There are still a few very good politicians out there imho. But in the end, these two parties are way too dominant. They rally record high campaign donations [[sickeningly from corporate interets at this point in history) and use this capital to bash their opponent into the ground any way possible. All in the name of party loyalty, inevitably forsaking their constituents in most cases. And there's always next election to think about. The games start years before voting day. It's all one big jockeying-for-position kinda chess match.

Another bleak glimpse into what our political society has become. Mostly derived from greed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

Get some principles. Stand up and speak them. Continually and constantly. What we have for politicians right now are mealy mouthed, bought and sold hacks. They are almost all in the hands of the corporate oligarchy, aristocracy. They're more interested in celebrity and power than anything else including democracy. Oh yeah, re-election. This is not a democratic system. And don't hand me that shit about how much better off we are than the rest of the world - it's BULL. Yes, we have the basis for a great system but it's been co-opted. Bought and sold. Other countries followed our example and modified their systems to accomplish good things for their own. Here we are tilting at windmills. Windmills erected by corporations and politicians.

---

Great rant ! I agree, but how is the bully pulpit going to improve our economy ?

Because basically what you said in the rest of your post, rendered the bolded part moot.

It's Obama's Economy stupid!

Back in late April, President Obama claimed "I've got better stuff to do".........

....... like bail out Greece so they don't default on their debt!

As the old-time saying goes, "this isn't going to play well in Peoria".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Back in late April, President Obama claimed "I've got better stuff to do".........

....... like bail out Greece so they don't default on their debt!

---

Uh, what? Bail out Greece? Since when did the US join the EU?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Uh, what? Bail out Greece? Since when did the US join the EU?

---

My guess is it's a bribe to Merkel so that Germany will do something for Obama to make him look good for a day.or two to cover the next bump in the road or blip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Back in late April, President Obama claimed "I've got better stuff to do".........

....... like bail out Greece so they don't default on their debt!

As the old-time saying goes, "this isn't going to play well in Peoria".

---

According to the bail out Greece article, "Obama said Greece had to make structural reforms and instill greater transparency in its economy." Now that's audacity; lecturing Greece on it's debt and transparency. Now we know where some of $100B Obama sends to the IMF annually will be going in addition to bilateral support. The 90B Euros that will be used to help Greece equals $130B as one Euro equals $1.46. For comparison, the State of California has a $370B debt. I doubt that Ms. Merkel will be offering to prop up California any time soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

For comparison, the State of California has a $370B debt. I doubt that Ms. Merkel will be offering to prop up California any time soon.

---

DEFICIT, not "debt". There's a difference, that being, since California is required to have a balanced budget, they're not allowed to have ANY debt. The factors involved in that deficit, however, are not even remotely related to Greece's free-wheeling ways, nor the common currency they share with some two dozen other nations. Nor is Greece's situation even remotely close to the situation in the United States, where falling tax revenues and spending necessary to stem a massive recession created a temporary ballooning of the deficit.

The fact that you consistently conflate "deficit" and "debt" indicates to me that maybe you don't know as much about finance as you pretend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

DEFICIT, not "debt". There's a difference, that being, since California is required to have a balanced budget, they're not allowed to have ANY debt. The factors involved in that deficit, however, are not even remotely related to Greece's free-wheeling ways, nor the common currency they share with some two dozen other nations. Nor is Greece's situation even remotely close to the situation in the United States, where falling tax revenues and spending necessary to stem a massive recession created a temporary ballooning of the deficit.

The fact that you consistently conflate "deficit" and "debt" indicates to me that maybe you don't know as much about finance as you pretend.

---

Hmmm. The last time I looked at this, it read 'debt'.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/state-deb...ebt-clock.html

This the result of free wheeling spending by California Democrats in my opinion.
A couple of days ago you were vigorously defending the President handing out $100,000,000,000 to the IMF two years in a row. Now, presumably, you are defending his, according to the article about Greece, additional gesture of offering bilateral support to Greece because of, as you put it, it's freewheeling ways. My point was that freewheeling behavior is not peculiar to Greece and the EU will probably not jump in to help California extricate itself from bigger numbers. Gov. Brown[[D) is now considering cutting the state school budget by $1.1B and cutting 20 days out of the school year while President Obama is writing huge checks to the IMF and another to Greece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TKshreve

Mostly derived from greed.

---

ALL derived from greed. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

It's Obama's Economy stupid!

---

It's NO!Bama's economy - derived from Bush2, stupid! My quote! When you hand off the dope, it becomes the property, the possession, of the holder whether or not the holder originally acquired it. It then becomes the responsibility of the holder of the dope to dispose of it. You didn't learn that in 10th grade? You're busted.

And if you think it's as easy as saying it's NO!Bama's economy, 2012 is coming faster than you think or are prepared for. 2012, 2016, 2020 are all going to be affected by this taxes deficit, no matter whether a demican or republicrat is the office holder. So, have fun while you can.

While you're laughing, we're all paying,...and paying, and............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

It's NO!Bama's economy - derived from Bush2, stupid! My quote! When you hand off the dope, it becomes the property, the possession, of the holder whether or not the holder originally acquired it. It then becomes the responsibility of the holder of the dope to dispose of it. You didn't learn that in 10th grade? You're busted.

---

Well you write like you have first hand experience of this type of transaction so I bow to your superior knowledge. But it's still Obama's Economy stupid - which has a far truer ring to it than the gobbledigook you had to devise in an attempt to excuse him. Hope he runs on it.

You appear to be one sandwich, short of a picnic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Dog

You appear to be one sandwich, short of a picnic.

---

I do agree with you he is one sandwich, short of a picnic - but I didn't like being so direct. I mean "NObama's economy - derived from Bush2, stupid; what a joke!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

Great rant ! I agree, but how is the bully pulpit going to improve our economy ?

Because basically what you said in the rest of your post, rendered the bolded part moot.

---

And you'd suggest what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

Well you write like you have first hand experience of this type of transaction so I bow to your superior knowledge. But it's still Obama's Economy stupid - which has a far truer ring to it than the gobbledigook you had to devise in an attempt to excuse him. Hope he runs on it.

---

Shows to go ya', you're missing basic comprehension. I never attempt to excuse NO!Bama. You were trying to excuse the previous 8 years which caused this whole mess. NO!Bama isn't making it any better but he sure as hell didn't create it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

And you'd suggest what?

---

I would suggest that it would take a lot more than the bully pulpit you want Obama to jump on to improve this economy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

I would suggest that it would take a lot more than the bully pulpit you want Obama to jump on to improve this economy.

---

And you may be correct. Considering what he's done so far, reaching across the aisle and all, it sure as hell wouldn't hurt to try it. He's viewed as a gutless wonder. Not quite true, but he's certainly not the most assertive, aggressive president. if you're suggesting he has no other tools at his disposal, I'd be likely to agree with you on that. That's why I'm suggesting if he's going to accomplish anything, he better get off his ass and speak out - take a stand.

He is using tools in the toolbox to fix the economy. Economics however is an inexact science. Besides politics complicates things even more. I believe the problem independents and people within his own party has with him is that he is a "stay the course" kind of guy and doesn't react to the 24 hour news cycle get it done now mentality that we see more and more.

It makes him seem weak and uncaring, but he's anything but that.

We are over a year before the election, lets see where we are this time next year. Lets judge him on the economy at that point not based on one bad report after several good ones, because the political pundits need something to fill the airwaves on a daily basis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

He is using tools in the toolbox to fix the economy. Economics however is an inexact science. Besides politics complicates things even more. I believe the problem independents and people within his own party has with him is that he is a "stay the course" kind of guy and doesn't react to the 24 hour news cycle get it done now mentality that we see more and more.

It makes him seem weak and uncaring, but he's anything but that.

We are over a year before the election, lets see where we are this time next year. Lets judge him on the economy at that point not based on one bad report after several good ones, because the political pundits need something to fill the airwaves on a daily basis.

---

President Obama was once very interested in using the tools in his economic toolbox but he has since lost interest and dropped the daily economic briefing he had asked for at the beginning of his term. According to his press secretary at the time, Obama felt is was “important that each day he receive the most up to date information as it relates to the economy." Obama promised that in return for passing his $0.8 trillion stimulus spending plan, unemployment would not exceed 8.5% . But politics complicates things and he decided to let the Democrat leaders in Congress fill the plan with a boatload of pork. They passed the stimulus plan and then forgot about the economy while Obama changed the agenda to fixing the healthcare crisis, check that, the health insurance crisis.

Economics however is an inexact science and while they focused on writing health insurance legislation, the unemployment numbers sailed way past 8.5% and more than two years later remains stuck at around 9%. Nonetheless, the President is a "stay the course kind of guy" and remains committed to try and spend our way into economic recovery, despite the evidence that it hasn't worked yet to improve employment outside of the government and road construction sectors.

We are 17 months before the election and at the recent monthly rates of new job growth, there is no way that the economy will be creating jobs above the replacement rate by then and the actual numbers of unemployed will still be far greater than what is was when Obama came into office and sold the country his stimulus plan. The unemployed, underemployed and those who personally know them will be the ones to judge this president come election day - regardless of political punditry or the pathetic rationalizations of his die-hard supporters.

"It's the economy, stupid" and Obama remains stuck on stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Obama promised that in return for passing his $0.8 trillion stimulus spending plan, unemployment would not exceed 8.5% .

---

I believe a statement was made by one of Obama's economic advisors that without the stimulus, unemployment was likely to rise above 8%. Clearly, the economy was in worse shape than anyone thought. Please provide citation where President Obama promised that unemployment would not exceed 8.5%.

Quote:

---

But politics complicates things and he decided to let the Democrat leaders in Congress fill the plan with a boatload of pork.

---

Please cite examples of said "pork". Nearly 40% of the stimulus bill was tax cuts. The bulk of the balance was funding for infrastructure projects, aid to states, and extensions of unemployment benefits.

If Obama's economic strategy, i.e. the stimulus, was so stupid, please show me the Republican proposal for boosting employment. As far as I'm concerned, we're repeating 1937, where concerns about long-term debt are suddenly and irrationally more important than short-term growth in GDP and employment.

And, sure as shit, we're seeing very similar results. Ever since the GOP made the deficit and debt its only concerns, unemployment has begun to rise again, and a double-dip recession is rearing its head. What's your plan for averting a double dip? More tax cuts???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

......Clearly, the economy was in worse shape than anyone thought......

---

When the results go bad, the Democrats and their liberal base more often than not attempt to disavow the very policies they had previously supported and enacted. Above is the left's typical whining on the economy, basically a repeat of the excuses coming out of the undisciplined mouth of Joe Biden: "The truth is, we and everyone else misread the economy, the figures we worked off of in January were the consensus figures in most of the blue chip indexes out there. ..."

That sounds almost exactly like the same shit we heard from Democrats who voted to make regime change in Iraq our national policy and then later followed through and voted to give the President authorization to invade Iraq. Joe Biden again, this time on Iraq and the assumptions that Saddam had WMDs: "everyone in the world thought he had them. The weapons inspectors said he had them." Regarding his vote on the invasion, Biden wants to argue semantics, "It allowed the president to go to war. It did not authorize him to go to it."

The Democrats are not capable of accepting responsibility for their actions and are not fit to lead this country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

The Democrats are not capable of accepting responsibility for their actions and are not fit to lead this country.

---

You might be right. But you'd be hard pressed to make the argument that the Republicans are.

GP, You are right about that statement being made by President Obama's top economic advisors rather than directly by the President. However, the President signed on to it when he passed Porkulus. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...9102738AA32ijJ

In the same report was a graph purporting to show what the economy would look like with or without Porkulus. I found that graph and another graph showing what happened with Porkulus.
QE 2 Was A Disaster: Here Is Why US Fiscal "Stimulus" Was A Complete Failure As Well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Nearly 40% of the stimulus bill was tax cuts. The bulk of the balance was funding for infrastructure projects, aid to states, and extensions of unemployment benefits.

If Obama's economic strategy, i.e. the stimulus, was so stupid, please show me the Republican proposal for boosting employment. As far as I'm concerned, we're repeating 1937, where concerns about long-term debt are suddenly and irrationally more important than short-term growth in GDP and employment.

---

The 40% in tax cuts really stimulated the private sector in creating jobs didn't it !

And oh, we have Rep gov's refusing stimulus money for infrastructure projects. Florida for one, I'm sure there others.

And without the extensions of unemployment benefits, keeping our teachers and other public employees on the job the recession would have been much worst.

Folks on here harp that the stimulus didn't create jobs, how could it when it was too busy plugging up holes, besides that wasted 40% in tax cuts that didn't create private sector jobs

Thats why the stimulus wasn't large enough.

No one has answered how do you grow the economy and create jobs when two of the key industries housing and manufacturing that lead in economic recovery are not and will not be the same due to downsizing, outsourcing and globalization.

Technology one of the growth industries we can't take advantage of because our kids aren't educated enough to do so due to funding cuts that Repubs are pushing.

So GP's question remains the same whats your plan ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

GP, You are right about that statement being made by President Obama's top economic advisors rather than directly by the President. However, the President signed on to it when he passed Porkulus. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...9102738AA32ijJ

---

The link you providided quotes PolitFact, which has this neat little paragraph at the end of the piece:

"We think its a big stretch to call the economic projection a "promise." The administration never characterized it that way and included plenty of disclaimers saying the predictions had "significant margins of error" and a higher degree of uncertainty due to a recession that is "unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity." And so we rule the statement by Cantor — and other Republicans who have said the same thing — Barely True."

Care to comment? And Mikeg has still not identified any of the so-called "pork" in the stimulus bill. Nor does he propose what would have happened to the economy-in-freefall without it. Instead, he presents a biased opinion, unsubstantiated with facts, that does nothing to refute the facts contradictory to his own baseless opinions.

So let's hear it, geniuses. How do you decrease unemployment? More tax cuts? Read every page of every Congressional bill out loud? Eliminate the entire federal budget? Cry "Constitution!" every time the President opens his mouth? Pray to Jesus? What???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

The link you providided quotes PolitFact, which has this neat little paragraph at the end of the piece:

"We think its a big stretch to call the economic projection a "promise." The administration never characterized it that way and included plenty of disclaimers saying the predictions had "significant margins of error" and a higher degree of uncertainty due to a recession that is "unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity." And so we rule the statement by Cantor — and other Republicans who have said the same thing — Barely True."

Care to comment? And Mikeg has still not identified any of the so-called "pork" in the stimulus bill. Nor does he propose what would have happened to the economy-in-freefall without it. Instead, he presents a biased opinion, unsubstantiated with facts, that does nothing to refute the facts contradictory to his own baseless opinions.

So let's hear it, geniuses. How do you decrease unemployment? More tax cuts? Read every page of every Congressional bill out loud? Eliminate the entire federal budget? Cry "Constitution!" every time the President opens his mouth? Pray to Jesus? What???

---

I provided two links; not one as you are implying. The second contained the graphs of the Obama economic alchemists showing what they believed the unemployment rate would be like with and without Porkulus. An additional line is added showing how wrong they were about the benefits of Porkulus. Who called this a 'promise' by the way? You are setting up a straw dog argument again. It was just a projection by the adminstration which time proved wrong. Truman might have said, "The buck stops here". Obama would rather say something along the lines of "included plenty of disclaimers saying the predictions had "significant margins of error" and a higher degree of uncertainty due to a recession that is "unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity." [[translated: Yadda, Yadda, we don't know what we are doing.)

Regarding pork: First I'll cherry pick a paragraph like you did from the first article. "Their report projected that the stimulus plan proposed by Obama would create between three and four million jobs by the end of 2010. The report also includes a graphic predicting unemployment rates with and without the stimulus. Without the stimulus [[the baseline), unemployment was projected to hit about 8.5 percent in 2009 and then continue rising to a peak of about 9 percent in 2010. With the stimulus, they predicted the unemployment rate would peak at just under 8 percent in 2009. But in June, the unemployment rate was 9.5 percent."

Note that it was supposed to create millions of jobs. That didn't happen. Instead, even you admitted to that failure in your post to firstandten, "keeping our teachers and other public employees on the job the recession would have been much worst. Folks on here harp that the stimulus didn't create jobs, how could it when it was too busy plugging up holes" So instead of infrastructure, much of it was used to keep teachers and other public employees on payrolls. That is by definition pork.

One way would be to emulate President Harding who did next to nothing to resolve the depression of 1921. Debts were liquidated quickly and the economy was booming again two years later. Obama instead transferred a lot of the bad debt from bankers to taxpayers and they are yet to be liquidated so the recession wears on. I keep suggesting that Congress move a higher percentage of taxation from income taxes to import taxes. It would suddenly make sense to manufacture things in the US = jobs, jobs, jobs. Import corporations, owned primarily by the rich, would have to pay a higher percentage of taxes while individuals would pay less. That is a constitutionally delegated power which the President and Congress have at their disposal. I realize you hate the restrictions of constitutional government so on that point we differ. I contend that if Congress and the President observed the limitations of the Constitution, we wouldn't be in this mire of paying for all these wars, otherwise subsidizing corporations, and sending our jobs off to China.

This is the reason I said you need to stay the course and not get too frantic over any one monthly report. The media will have you believe the sky is falling

Report from Austan Goolsbee Council of Economic Advisors concerning May 2011 numbers

Today’s employment report shows that private sector payrolls increased by 83,000 in May and the unemployment rate ticked up to 9.1 percent. There are always bumps on the road to recovery, but the overall trajectory of the economy has improved dramatically over the past two years.
While the private sector has added more than 2.1 million jobs over the past 15 months, the unemployment rate is unacceptably high and faster growth is needed to replace the jobs lost in the downturn. The initiatives put in place by this Administration – such as the payroll tax cut and business incentives for investment – have contributed to solid employment growth overall this year, but this report is a reminder of the challenges that remain. We are focused on promoting exports, reducing regulatory burdens and making the investments in education, research and development, and infrastructure that will grow our economy and create jobs. We will continue to work with Congress to responsibly reduce the deficit and live within our means.
Overall payroll employment rose by 54,000 in May. Solid employment increases occurred in professional and business services [[+44,000) and education and health services [[+34,000). Sectors with employment declines included local government [[-28,000), retail trade [[-8,500), and manufacturing [[-5,000). Despite the decline this month, manufacturing has added 238,000 jobs since the beginning of 2010, the best period of manufacturing job growth in over a decade.
The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.

BTW a link to an intelligent and comprehensive article on the recovery act from Time magazine

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...013683,00.html

Obama's got "better stuff to do".......

....like creating another coordinating committee:

Obama Administration Establishes White House Rural Council to Strengthen Rural Communities


Apparently, Obama needs this new "council" because under his Agriculture Secretary, the USDA and 24 other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices aren't doing enough to "enhance Federal engagement with rural communities".

So let's add a 26th group to the mix - that ought to really "enhance the Federal engagement"!

It just might. We'll have a wait and see.

People yell and scream and cry about Jobs.

The purpose of the U.S. government is to not create jobs. Businesses create jobs. And Businesses are taking manufacturing jobs overseas.

What the American worker needs to understand is the days of good manufacturing jobs is O-V-E-R. The jobs loss overseas will not return.

What workers and American people need to do is to create their own income. Quit being lazy and create your own opportunity.

Quit being a welfare society begging the government for jobs. Become entreprenaurs, create businesses.

Do something. Quit crying and JUST DO IT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Dog

It just might. We'll have a wait and see.

---

What makes you think that adding a council in Washington DC "just might" make a difference out there in flyover country?

Apparently the 25 executive branch departments, agencies, and offices under the President's direction aren't able to produce the results the Obama wants. So the instinctive reaction of the former community organizer is to create a committee and add another layer to "coordinate", without bothering to hold his Cabinet members accountable for the poor results.

Anyone with executive experience knows that to solve underperformance you need to find the organizational obstacles and remove them - not "coordinate" around them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

What makes you think that adding a council in Washington DC "just might" make a difference out there in flyover country?

Apparently the 25 executive branch departments, agencies, and offices under the President's direction aren't able to produce the results the Obama wants. So the instinctive reaction of the former community organizer is to create a committee and add another layer to "coordinate", without bothering to hold his Cabinet members accountable for the poor results.

Anyone with executive experience knows that to solve underperformance you need to find the organizational obstacles and remove them - not "coordinate" around them.

---

And how do you know this? Executive experience? Did you just add "coordinate" around them? Have you ever been a community organizer, thereby giving you insight into a community organizer's instinctive reactions? Even if what you say is true, is your point that NO!Bama is the only presidente in history to add a layer of bureaucracy or "coordinate'? I'm no NO!Bama fan but you seem to only point a finger at him and nobody who's preceded him. Let's face it, there's plenty of blame to go around at all times. And there is nobody making real and serious attempts at 'Change You Can Believe In'. Not now, and not the previous 16 years. Do you expect it from any of the republicrat candidates? Once in power, they'll do what all politicians do - pay back their contributors. And that ain't you and I.

Quote:

---

the ONLY way they will defeat Obama in 2012 is hammer him on the economy

---

There's a mountain of policies, decisions, acts and events they can hammer Obama on. If the ONLY thing they use against Obama is the economy, they have already lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papasito

There's a mountain of policies, decisions, acts and events they can hammer Obama on. If the ONLY thing they use against Obama is the economy, they have already lost.

---

It doesn't matter. No matter who wins the Republican nomination next year, this WILL be the platform:

1. Cut taxes
2. Cut regulations
3. Repeal health care reform.

None of the seven boobs on television last night has a single original, plausible idea. The GOP prescription for whatever ails us has been the exact same for 30 years--no matter what the scenario.

And as much as people are dismayed about the economy, the GOP has yet to present a single economic growth idea or jobs bill since taking over the House. All we hear about it balancing the long-term budget, when what we really need is some job creation and economic growth in the short-term. If any of the candidates had any solutions, we certainly would have heard about them by now.

How many jobs have you created gp?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

And how do you know this? Executive experience? Did you just add "coordinate" around them? Have you ever been a community organizer, thereby giving you insight into a community organizer's instinctive reactions? Even if what you say is true, is your point that NO!Bama is the only presidente in history to add a layer of bureaucracy or "coordinate'? I'm no NO!Bama fan but you seem to only point a finger at him and nobody who's preceded him. Let's face it, there's plenty of blame to go around at all times. And there is nobody making real and serious attempts at 'Change You Can Believe In'. Not now, and not the previous 16 years. Do you expect it from any of the republicrat candidates? Once in power, they'll do what all politicians do - pay back their contributors. And that ain't you and I.

---

How do I know this? I've had 20 years of managerial work experience at a large corporation in the private sector, 16 years of which was at the executive level. I was also an appointed public official for 6 years in a city of 80,000 people where I learned how to chair public hearings, accept and respond to public criticism and also deal with self-styled "community organizers". I currently volunteer my services on the board of directors of three different organizations. Two of those boards are community associations where I live and the other is a non-profit whose board includes retired businessmen, educators and elected offficials. Over the years, I've learned a thing or two about how to get results not only from direct reports, but also from committee members and from volunteers. In the process, I also learned what kinds of organizational structures and approaches tend to get the best results and what not to repeat. But enough about me.

This thread is about President Obama, yet all I read is comments excusing his poor performance because of the previous administration, the Republicans in Congress, "they all do it", etc. There's no need to thread-jack. Bush and the Republicans have been - and remain - the subject of plenty of other threads in this forum. If you want to bring up "the republicrat candidates", start your own damn thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

I would suggest that it would take a lot more than the bully pulpit you want Obama to jump on to improve this economy.

---

Yes. And the U.S. economy has undergone a structural change that is not likely to return.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/business/13every.html

"... An accurate count would reduce manufacturing’s share of the gross domestic product, or total national output, to less than the 11.2 percent that the Bureau of Economic Analysis has reported through 2009, the latest figure available. That 11.2 percent would be closer to 10.5 percent, if all of the imported components were counted as imported instead of domestically made. Even the 11.2 percent figure is down sharply from the 14.2 percent share of just a decade earlier, and the nearly 30 percent of the heyday 1950s, when almost every product bought by Americans was also made here..."

Looks like we are heading to be third world and fast. No, I have no solution, like the experts in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

How many jobs have you created gp?

---

As a result of the tax cuts I received, or otherwise?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

As a result of the tax cuts I received, or otherwise?

---

If you pay taxes - both.

Quote:

---

Mikeg: "It's the economy, stupid" and Obama remains stuck on stupid.

---

The Republicans who still swallow the rightwing swill that tax cuts for the rich create jobs are stuck on stupid. You know the definition of craziness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxx

The Republicans who still swallow the rightwing swill that tax cuts for the rich create jobs are stuck on stupid. You know the definition of craziness.

---

You cannot get more stupid than somebody that flushed $1Trillion of our money down the toilet on "shovel ready jobs" that didn't exist. Now that's STUPID beyond belief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

You cannot get more stupid than somebody that flushed $1Trillion of our money down the toilet on "shovel ready jobs" that didn't exist. Now that's STUPID beyond belief.

---

It was $800 billion, not $1 trillion. But what's a 25% difference? Pshaw!

About 40% of the $800 billion was tax cuts, which could be why the stimulus did not have as big an effect as hoped. The bulk of the rest was aid to states for education, public safety, and unemployment insurance.

Any of the money spent on real, actual infrastructure projects, in my opinion, is a terrific investment. We SHOULD be making MORE capital improvements while interest rates are at record lows. Alas, the "business-friendly" GOP/Tea Party cabal in the House has no fucking clue how to do math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

How many jobs have you created gp?

---

Unless you know that GP is in the top 1% of income in the U.S., that is a stupid question.

Obama's got "better stuff to do"..........

.....like personally "Tweeting" so that he can better "engage with the American people", according to one of his staffers.

This begs the question, "Can this Presidency be Saved?"

Very doubtful. He thinks he is still 'community organizing' not that the alternatives are that great either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Obama's got "better stuff to do"..........

.....like personally "Tweeting" so that he can better "engage with the American people", according to one of his staffers.

This begs the question, "Can this Presidency be Saved?"

---

Obama's got "better stuff to do".......

...... and Rep. James Clyburn [[D-SC) agrees. When questioned why President Obama shouldn't be more involved in the the stalled debt ceiling talks with Congressional leaders, he responded that

Quote:

---

“We can’t have the President sitting in these meetings, three and four hours every day, when all of these other things are happening around the world. The president has much more to do with his time, and that’s why you have a Vice President.”

---

Clyburn failed to mention what he thinks the President's higher priorities are, but maybe they involve Whoopie Goldberg?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Obama's got "better stuff to do".......

...... and Rep. James Clyburn [[D-SC) agrees. When questioned why President Obama shouldn't be more involved in the the stalled debt ceiling talks with Congressional leaders, he responded that

Clyburn failed to mention what he thinks the President's higher priorities are, but maybe they involve Whoopie Goldberg?

---

So you think the best use of the President's time is to sit at a table and watch Eric McPissyPants Cantor storm out of the room because he can't do basic math?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

So you think the best use of the President's time is to sit at a table and watch Eric McPissyPants Cantor storm out of the room because he can't do basic math?

---

You are right. He could be out counting the number of States in the Union, or visiting his Corpsemen, or looking for his shovel ready jobs, or checking what year he's in, or whatever. Maybe it's time for his next vacation or a few rounds of golf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coracle

You are right. He could be out counting the number of States in the Union, or visiting his Corpsemen, or looking for his shovel ready jobs, or checking what year he's in, or whatever. Maybe it's time for his next vacation or a few rounds of golf.

---

Naw ! the best thing for him to do is to figure out what his agenda will be after he gets re-elected in 2012

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

Naw ! the best thing for him to do is to figure out what his agenda will be after he gets re-elected in 2012

---

Congratulations. To be able to type your thoughts with your head in that embarrassing position is quite an accomplishment

It's finally here! :)

Attachment 10312

^^^^ Well it looks fuel efficient and green enough! ROTFL! Just the prototype! Joy!

So if I take it to a tea bagger convention it should run for weeks without a re-fill. Easy on the pocket book too !

Just don't get into an accident with those of us still driving those 'gas guzzlin' bit-o-steel, subcompact four-cylinder jobs [[US or foreign made). LOL --:rolleyes:-- !!

There's a lot of folks I know and work with that voted for Obama the first time that aren't doing it again. Most of them are actually wishing Hillary would run against him, but I'm fairly certain Obama will be unchallenged.

Thier biggest gripes with him are:
* out of control Government spending
* broken promises
* wars weren't drawn down/ended fast enough
[[he was supposed to be the "peace" guy, McCain was supposed to be the "war" guy)
* GITMO is still open
* A BIG ONE IM HEARING IS: The old folks were told the evil Republicans were going to cut Social Security and Medicaid if McCain won, so they voted for Obama. Now the Social Security folks are having thier benefits cut and no annual increases. They [[all the retired people I know that are living primarily off SS) are really steamed about that.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...romise-broken/

as a sidenote, these folks I'm talking about are all Democrats. Including my own father.

Timothy leary used to be the king of LSD. Has been replaced by Timothy G. & B rocko.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papasito

There's a lot of folks I know and work with that voted for Obama the first time that aren't doing it again. Most of them are actually wishing Hillary would run against him, but I'm fairly certain Obama will be unchallenged.

Thier biggest gripes with him are:
* out of control Government spending
* broken promises
* wars weren't drawn down/ended fast enough
[[he was supposed to be the "peace" guy, McCain was supposed to be the "war" guy)
* GITMO is still open
* A BIG ONE IM HEARING IS: The old folks were told the evil Republicans were going to cut Social Security and Medicaid if McCain won, so they voted for Obama. Now the Social Security folks are having thier benefits cut and no annual increases. They [[all the retired people I know that are living primarily off SS) are really steamed about that.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...romise-broken/

as a sidenote, these folks I'm talking about are all Democrats. Including my own father.

---

Again you failed to add context and perspective to your post.

Politifact stated in terms of the presidents promises broken

" When he could act on his own with executive authority, he was often successful. It was harder for him to fulfill promises that required approval from Congress, especially after Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives in the last election"

You then listed the promises broken which was around 40 but you don't state that there are somewhere around 4 to 5 times that amount of promises that aren't broken.

If you look on the same web site and review the top 25 Obama promises approx 5 were broken

I know you want to make it seem like he's breaking promises left and right but the facts don't bear that out.

In reality most of the promises he has not kept have been due to a lack of a super majority the first two years[[60 votes in Senate) and a Repub controlled House these last two.

The Dem's will huff and puff but don't expect to see a primary challenge to Obama.

The Repubs will tell you that they want Obama out, but what I think they are really trying to do is win both the House and Senate in 2012. They know that they don't have a mainstream candidate who can beat Obama. But if they can control Congress, they can short circuit anything Obama wants to do and since they don't have to actually govern, they can set themselves up perfectly for 2016 to win the WH.

Whatever respect I had for you, has now gone out the window. Sorry mikeg, gone. And the history with me.

Quote:

---

Clyburn failed to mention what he thinks the President's higher priorities are, but maybe they involve Whoopie Goldberg?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigb23

Whatever respect I had for you, has now gone out the window. Sorry mikeg, gone. And the history with me.

---

What did I write that offended you? I pointed out that Rep. Clyburn failed to mention what Obama's higher priorities might be and I just offered as a suggestion the fact that Obama was attending a campaign fundraiser that evening in NYC featuring a play that Whoppi Goldberg was producing. Did you not click on the link I provided?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

It
About 40% of the $800 billion was tax cuts, which could be why the stimulus did not have as big an effect as hoped.

---

There has never been so much as a correlation between tax cuts and job creation, much less a causal connection

Quote:

---

Any of the money spent on real, actual infrastructure projects, in my opinion, is a terrific investment. We SHOULD be making MORE capital improvements while interest rates are at record lows. Alas, the "business-friendly" GOP/Tea Party cabal in the House has no fucking clue how to do math.

---

the economy with the best infrastructure wins

the last couple trillion chinese dollars was supposed to make our infrastructure all better... remember the "crumbling roads and bridges" comments by the Prez?

the economy still stinks and so does our infrastructure.
people are still in foreclosure, and people still don't have jobs or money.
1 in 7 Americans are on food stamps.

it's all b.s.
the only change we are getting is the amount of the national debt.
things are indicating another recession.
whatever they have been doing isn't working.
time to make a new strategey because the old one was total fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

It was $800 billion, not $1 trillion. But what's a 25% difference? Pshaw!

About 40% of the $800 billion was tax cuts, which could be why the stimulus did not have as big an effect as hoped. The bulk of the rest was aid to states for education, public safety, and unemployment insurance.

Any of the money spent on real, actual infrastructure projects, in my opinion, is a terrific investment. We SHOULD be making MORE capital improvements while interest rates are at record lows. Alas, the "business-friendly" GOP/Tea Party cabal in the House has no fucking clue how to do math.

---

...or 20%, but who's counting.

Agree with idea of putting actual money [[like that $800 billion) directly back into the economy via shovel-ready infrastructure projects that actually put people to work, on payrolls, spending money, paying taxes, etc., etc., as opposed to tax cuts and state bail outs, though the latter was apparently needed at the time. Somehow I doubt that the raised debt ceiling will lead to much of that sort of stimulus, though.

Obama 2012 R.U.N. [sane]

Say hello to DY's latest troll.

Obama's got "better stuff to do"......

....like taking charge at the hurricane "Irene" command center.

I'm sure the folks in the path of Irene are now a lot less worried about flooding from the storm surge! After all, Obama told us in June of 2008 when he won the Minnesota Primary that ..."this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow...."

After he saves the Atlantic Seaboard from massive flooding this weekend, it's back to work on figuring out his next "jobs plan"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Obama's got "better stuff to do"......

....like taking charge at the hurricane "Irene" command center.

I'm sure the folks in the path of Irene are now a lot less worried about flooding from the storm surge! After all, Obama told us in June of 2008 when he won the Minnesota Primary that ..."this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow...."

After he saves the Atlantic Seaboard from massive flooding this weekend, it's back to work on figuring out his next "jobs plan"!

---

You forgot that before he can save the Atlantic Seaboard from flooding he's got to find some schoolkids and read "My Pet Goat" to them. Then he can give us his jobs plan that the Repubs will say no to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Obama's got "better stuff to do"......

....like taking charge at the hurricane "Irene" command center.

I'm sure the folks in the path of Irene are now a lot less worried about flooding from the storm surge! After all, Obama told us in June of 2008 when he won the Minnesota Primary that ..."this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow...."

After he saves the Atlantic Seaboard from massive flooding this weekend, it's back to work on figuring out his next "jobs plan"!

---

And Governors along the Eastern Seaboard [[both Republican and Democrat) have indicated that FEMA was responsive and unlike Bush and "Brownie" - PROACTIVE.
So, considering that it's Obama's administration, I'm glad you agree that Obama did save the Atlantic Seaboard as the situation could have been MUCH worse.
You and I both know that given the opportunity, you would criticize anything Obama does, including disaster response.
But as you can see, when a President actually does his job and coordinates efforts [[rather than just flying over in Air Force One on his way to yet another vacation)), it makes a meaningful difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ferntruth

......But as you can see, when a President actually does his job and coordinates efforts [[rather than just flying over in Air Force One on his way to yet another vacation)), it makes a meaningful difference.

---

How was this an example of Obama doing his job? He was sitting in conference room getting briefed - not "taking charge" as the headline writer would have you believe. From the article:

Quote:

---

"The President was briefed on the current track of the storm, the weather impacts being felt so far and efforts to pre-position response and recovery assets," said a statement released by the White House.
"The President asked to be kept apprised of developments throughout the night and said that he wants the group to re-convene tomorrow morning."

---

Yep, he took charge all right - he wants another meeting!

What meaningful difference did Obama make in the lives of those affected by the hurricane? He might as well been in an airplane doing a flyover - at least then he could say that he saw the damage with his own eyeballs.

I think that President Obama did a better job with Irene than Bush did with Katrina although those two hurricanes didn't compare. FEMA though is tasked with the ridiculous job of selling insurance to farmers and rich homeowners who cannot buy insurance from conventional insurers who won't take high risks. This encourages and building and farming in areas where it otherwise wouldn't be done and thereby subsidizes bad investments.

"We pay people to build on beaches and then we have to go and rescue them" -from a Ron Paul interview a week ago The first 4:36 of this YouTube is about FEMA.

The mainstream press isn't bringing out the point that President Obama is financing his Irene performance by taking money from the funds set aside for Joplin tornado damage.
FEMA Suspends Joplin Relief to Pay for Irene Relief

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

How was this an example of Obama doing his job? He was sitting in conference room getting briefed - not "taking charge" as the headline writer would have you believe. From the article:

Yep, he took charge all right - he wants another meeting!

What meaningful difference did Obama make in the lives of those affected by the hurricane? He might as well been in an airplane doing a flyover - at least then he could say that he saw the damage with his own eyeballs.

---

Unlike Bush when he was told about the planes crashing into the tower, continued reading "My Pet Goat" to the schoolkids



C'mon he was involved and engaged, thats all a president can do in the beginning stages of a disaster. What did you want him to do. Wave his hands and have the hurricane go away. Obama's good but he's not that good.