Economic Stimulus.. Where are the jobs?

[Sstashmoo]

Just as someone else put it a while back about "priming the pump" in reference to a mass infusion of cash into the public sector [[Stimulus) to get things rolling again, And I said it was a wasted effort until trade was addressed, I was right.


Our "pumping" system has a huge leak on the suction side, and that leak Ladies and Gentlemen [[you too Cheddar), is trade.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_221852.html



""WASHINGTON — Republicans concerned about the Obama administration's big spending on economic stimulus, energy and health care are asking, "Where are the jobs?"
"The president and Democrats in Congress claim this spending binge is necessary to put Americans back to work," House Republican Leader John Boehner said Saturday in the Republican radio and Internet address. "They promised unemployment would not rise above 8 percent if their trillion-dollar stimulus was passed.
The administration was wrong, Boehner said. "Unemployment has soared above 9 percent. And now the president admits that unemployment will soon reach double digits.
"After all of this spending, after all of this borrowing from China, the Middle East, our children and our grandchildren, where are the jobs?" he said.""

""Since President Barack Obama's stimulus plan to trigger job creation was passed, the economy has shed 1.6 million jobs. The administration has focused instead on its estimate that the stimulus has created or saved 150,000 jobs.""

We've lost 10 times more jobs than they have created. I wonder if those jobs were created like Bush's in his first term by the upstart collection agencies.

[gazhekwe]

I agree that we must start making things or finding some other way to put money in middle class tradespeople's pockets. It doesn't do much good to tell people they need to train for the jobs of tomorrow when no one has any idea what they may be or when they might be plentiful enough to make a difference. Also, we still need people who know how to design and build things and support for same.

[lilpup]

The guy's been in office less than six months and you expect him to turn around a ship that's been gaining momentum in the wrong direction for almost 30 years.

[Sstashmoo]

How many economic stimulus plans have we had in the last few years? They don't work when the conditions still exist that caused the slow down in the first place. 6 months is 180 days. I still see Chinese goods flowing in unabated, Nafta has continued on virtually untouched. The two key issues ailing our economy. He only has about a year left to really do anything because he'll spend the last two years of his Presidency running for office again. So when do they plan on doing something about our most important issues? I mean I could have borrowed a Trillion dollars and gave it away, no skill or talent there. The unemployment rate is just skyrocketing, and they seem more worried about building the country's infrastructure. Am I the only the one that thinks they have their priorities badly aligned?

[ccbatson]

It is so sadly simple that it astounds me how intelligent liberals can be so easily duped. Real jobs, come from real business and prosperity which means free trade and enterprise ONLY. Everything else is a waste of time AT BEST, and an accelerator of the problem more realistically.

[mjs]

The guy's been in office less than six months and you expect him to turn around a ship that's been gaining momentum in the wrong direction for almost 30 years.

Wow. The Republicans really won seven and a half Presidential elections in a row!

[ccbatson]

Lilpup...you understand that the executive branch is one branch of government, and not the one that writes laws, don't you?

Obama doesn't get that concept at all [[like you Lilpup), he directs legislators as to what they should do, and pressures the judicial system to legislate [[with liberal bias) from the bench.

[Lorax]

How many economic stimulus plans have we had in the last few years? They don't work when the conditions still exist that caused the slow down in the first place. 6 months is 180 days. I still see Chinese goods flowing in unabated, Nafta has continued on virtually untouched. The two key issues ailing our economy. He only has about a year left to really do anything because he'll spend the last two years of his Presidency running for office again. So when do they plan on doing something about our most important issues? I mean I could have borrowed a Trillion dollars and gave it away, no skill or talent there. The unemployment rate is just skyrocketing, and they seem more worried about building the country's infrastructure. Am I the only the one that thinks they have their priorities badly aligned?

Problem is, economic stimulus packages don't work when Rethugnican propose and pass them. Did Tush's 600 bucks really do that much to help you? It was ruse into buying loyalty to the fascist brand.

Building the country's infrastructure creates jobs. The problem with this, is there was not enough stimulus for infrastructure allotted.

Obama's stimulus is really too little, too late. There will be some benefit, but until the banks are natioalized and forced to start lending again, rather than holding parties and dumping millions on their totalatarian CEO's, then little will change.

Now that most of the banks have had their bacon saved, what money they have left will be used to shore up their bottom lines. Corporations will benefit most from lending going forward, individuals are screwed again.

[mjs]

So, comrade, now that we are on the verge of socializing American's health, you also wish we nationalize their finances? Shall we also set their gasoline prices or is it time to nationalize their oil companies?

[Lorax]

So, comrade, now that we are on the verge of socializing American's health, you also wish we nationalize their finances? Shall we also set their gasoline prices or is it time to nationalize their oil companies?

Well, Comrade, now that you bring it up, yeah, it would be a great idea. It works well in Venezuela where CITGO is the nationalized oil company, and gas, I last heard is 85 cents a gallon.

It'a amazing how people fall in love with corporations who could care less whether you live or die. Then the CEO worship is another thing which I will never understand, no matter how long I live.

Socialized health care is the gold standard in all industrialized nations except ours. All of these other nations have some form of socialized medicine, and it works just fine, thank you very much.

We already have a socialized Social Security Administration, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Socialized medicine for all is the natural next step. And it's long overdue.

[Sstashmoo]

Nationalize the banks? You mean like our government running them? You know they are almost eleven trillion dollars in debt, right? They haven't had a balanced budget in at least 30 years, unless you want to cite the book-cooking of the Clinton era. Several programs like SS they screwed up are mathematically impossible to sustain. Businesses need to stay in the private sector with regulation.

""It'a amazing how people fall in love with corporations who could care less whether you live or die. ""

You claim you have a business, then you would have no complaints with the Government coming in and taking over?

[mjs]

There will be some benefit, but until the banks are natioalized and forced to start lending again, rather than holding parties and dumping millions on their totalatarian CEO's, then little will change.

When I look up the definition of totalitarian, I'm confused as to how the rest of your post doesn't show support for totalitarianism, but they didn't have a listing for "totalatarian" or "natioalized". Do they mean something different?

1. Of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures. [[as censorship and terrorism)

2. Completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency.

[mjs]

Please, move back to Venezuela so the rest of us evil Americans can enjoy the American way of life. Were you the one that recommended Chavez give Obama that book? It seems he read it.

[Lorax]

When I look up the definition of totalitarian, I'm confused as to how the rest of your post doesn't show support for totalitarianism, but they didn't have a listing for "totalatarian" or "natioalized". Do they mean something different?

1. Of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures. [[as censorship and terrorism)

2. Completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency.

Yeah, child, I got you on "Aynn Rand" which is even more of a mistake since you were taking a direct quote.

I type at 70 wpm, so at least I have a good excuse.

[Lorax]

Please, move back to Venezuela so the rest of us evil Americans can enjoy the American way of life. Were you the one that recommended Chavez give Obama that book? It seems he read it.

Since I've never lived in Venezuela, it seems somehow strange to move back.

Who said Americans were evil? Not me. That was you, Sparky.

Most Rethugnicans have read "Mein Kampf" as well, but does that make them Nazis?

If Chavez or Osama Bin Laden gave me a book to read, I would probably read it, rather than act like a Rethugnican knuckledragger and toss it back at him.

That's because I'm intellectually curious, not some psycophantic zealot.

[Sstashmoo]

Ok this is getting too bizarre.

[mjs]

Its childish to want a clear dialogue? If two people are using the same words, but attributing them different meanings, how can they have an effective exchange of ideas?

I thank you comrade for the correction of my misspelling of Ayn, but her name was outside the quotation marks so it wasn't what was being quoted.

If Osama Bin Laden was close enough to give me a book to read, I'd kill him. Not because I wasn't interested interested in the book or I have anything against the free exchange of ideas, but because I wouldn't be in much of a mood to exchange gifts, negotiate, or talk world affairs with a mass murder.

[firstandten]

One thing to consider is that duration of unemployment is a lagging rather than leading indicator of the economy. The economic stimulus will take months to have effect in the economy and it will take months to see the results in terms of more jobs.

[mjs]

If Chavez or Osama Bin Laden gave me a book to read, I would probably read it, rather than act like a Rethugnican knuckledragger and toss it back at him.

That's because I'm intellectually curious, not some sycophantic zealot.

Since I'm also intellectually curious, I look up words I don't know. When I look up "sycophantic" I find several definitions including flattering influential people for personal gain and falsely persecuting people so they'll bribe you to quit persecuting them. Which definition were you using and are you implying that others are labeling you sycophantic or that the knuckle dragging something or anothers are psychophantic? Once again, that childish thing I have about desiring clear communication.

[oladub]

One thing to consider is that duration of unemployment is a lagging rather than leading indicator of the economy. The economic stimulus will take months to have effect in the economy and it will take months to see the results in terms of more jobs.

You are an optimist. You said 'months' rather than 'years'. Since you seem to have it narrowed down, any guess on how many months it will take before President Obama turns this around with Porkulus, Cap and Trade, UN taxes, and anything else he might have up his sleep? If he hasn't made solid progress by July 2010, I think we should re-label the 'Bush recession' the 'Obama recession'. He has already passed bills to spend more than WWII or the Great Depression adjusted for inflation. Give us an approximate month when you expect to see strong evidence of a resulting economic turnaround without even considering debt.

[Gistok]

The problem I see with the stimulus package [[or GWB's $600 giveaway for that matter)... is that when individual people spend extra money that they might get for ANY stimulus package... if they go to a Walmart, or a dollar store or appliance store... much of their money ends up going for Asian made goods. So the effect on the US economy is minimal at best.

Now granted fixing the USA infrastructure may not be the most ideal way of promoting job growths... but it may be preferable to the alternative. At least we [[not China) would get some jobs and infrastructure benefits out of it.

But that's one of the major problems with having a "global" economy.... the benefits of any stimulus package often becomes difffused and goes well beyond the USA.

We made our proverbial beds... and now we have to suffer the consequences of it.

[firstandten]

You are an optimist. You said 'months' rather than 'years'. Since you seem to have it narrowed down, any guess on how many months it will take before President Obama turns this around with Porkulus, Cap and Trade, UN taxes, and anything else he might have up his sleep? If he hasn't made solid progress by July 2010, I think we should re-label the 'Bush recession' the 'Obama recession'. He has already passed bills to spend more than WWII or the Great Depression adjusted for inflation. Give us an approximate month when you expect to see strong evidence of a resulting economic turnaround without even considering debt.

Let's go with the date you have July 2010 , if we haven't seen progress by then you can call it Obama's recession and I won't say a word. And as far as debt I'm going to go with his word " deficit cut in half by end of first term."

[Lorax]

Its childish to want a clear dialogue? If two people are using the same words, but attributing them different meanings, how can they have an effective exchange of ideas?

I thank you comrade for the correction of my misspelling of Ayn, but her name was outside the quotation marks so it wasn't what was being quoted.

If Osama Bin Laden was close enough to give me a book to read, I'd kill him. Not because I wasn't interested interested in the book or I have anything against the free exchange of ideas, but because I wouldn't be in much of a mood to exchange gifts, negotiate, or talk world affairs with a mass murder.

Problem is, it's only Rthugnicans who love to shape-shift the meaning of words. Just listen to your friends Rush & Hannity who constantly label Obama a fascist, when he's just the opposite of a fascist.

He may be more of a socialist, but really, only Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich could be termed socialists. Which is not a dirty word in my book, so it's not an insult to call me one.

Even George Tush's domestic policy agenda was always labeled the opposite of what the particular legislation was designed to effect.

Clean Air Act = dirty air
Patriot Act = anti-American values
Healthy Forests Initiative = freebie to logging interests
Enhanced Interrogation = torture

And when you hear any Rethugnican talking about "jobs" keep an eye out for the nets and the slave ships, since their idea of an "ownership" society involves them owning all the labor, i.e. non-unionized slave labor.

Just look to China or any other far east sweat shop that makes your sneakers or clothes your family, and you'll have the ultimate economic model of the Rethugnican Reich and how they prefer to operate. Funny how the Reich has no problem with China or Viet Nam being communists, when they can benefit from the cheap labor. Hypocrites.

You need to live up to the obvious and continuous twisting of the meaning of words by the Reich.

Read Thomm Hartmann's book "Cracking the Code" and it will shed all the sunlight you need to disinfect he Rethugnican lie machine.

[mjs]

You are just kidding, right? You, the biggest lexicographer and most colorful writter on the forum is accusing others of shifting the definitions of words for dramatic effect? "Rethugican knuckle draggers" was a proper literal description and not a visciously figurative one? You still haven't answered any of the questions regarding what definitions apply to your words. I don't want to twist the clear honest dialogue you meant to convey.

[mjs]

Just look to China or any other far east sweat shop that makes your sneakers or clothes your family, and you'll have the ultimate economic model of the Rethugnican Reich and how they prefer to operate. Funny how the Reich has no problem with China or Viet Nam being communists, when they can benefit from the cheap labor. Hypocrites.

I thought your issue was that the American capitalist pigs and the Rethugicans views were too different from that of China and Viet Nam. Socialism, your political idealogy, not mine, is the one thats next to communism. If the united workers of the world have it better under communism, why aren't they getting paid more over there? I favor tougher trade policies on China until they start treating their citizens and the environment better. With a free Russia, we no longer need detante to weaken China. We just need to cut our support and let their economic models do them in.