The Obamanation

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Redux

...followed by Palin's $100,000 speech at the closing banquet.

She needs the money.

Records show that Sarah Palin hasn't paid any property taxes on cabins that have been built on two backcountry plots partially owned by the former Alaska governor.

[Shawnee123]

How come all the tea-baggin' women are those fat pasty grub-worm looking things, with thin lips and prominent sagging jowls? Is it inbreeding?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

So where are Merc and Classic?

They are always the first to post economic and jobs reports as soon as they are released by the govt.

False. I don't thin that I've ever posted one, but lemme see what I can find real fast for you. . .

Real Unemployment Rate at 16.77%
We Need Jobs!

WASHINGTON - February 5 - Americans for Democratic Action’s National Director, Michael J. Wilson, made the following statement about today’s unemployment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

“The real unemployment rate released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics is 16.7% -- a full 7 points higher than the officially reported rate.

“We are beginning to see signs of an economic recovery. Even though we know that jobs are a lagging indicator, we know that is of little comfort to the millions who have remained jobless for week after week after week.

“In addition, as we enter African American History Month, the 24.3% African American unemployment rate means that nearly one in four African Americans is jobless. The Congress and the President need to work together to make sure that the Great Recession’s contribution to history is ending the disparate impact joblessness has on the African American community.

Former Joint Economic Committee Economist and ADA partner Paul Manchester, said the following:

“The unemployment rate fell from 10.0% in December to 9.7% in January. The number of unemployed also fell, from 15.27 million to 14.84 million, which is also good news.

However, the average length of unemployment increased, from 29.1 weeks to 30.2 weeks, a record.

The increase in the duration of unemployment more than offsets the drop in the number of unemployed, so the Manchester Index continued to rise, from 444.3 million weeks to 448.1 million weeks of joblessness. However, it should be noted that this is the smallest increase the last 12 months.”

Link

Happy now?

Originally Posted by classicman

False. I don't thin that I've ever posted one, but lemme see what I can find real fast for you. . .


Link

Happy now?

SO what was the real unemployment rate before Obama took office.

Or doesnt that matter if you start using that figure now.

And happy to see you and offer my perspective on your negativism.

"Always with the negative vibes MerClassic, always with the negative vibes."

I apologize if I am wrong about you posting the monthly econ/job news reports...maybe that is just Merc...but you and he both post so many "interesting" and negative links, its hard to keep track. And more often than not, you post those links w/o offering an opinion and rarely, if ever, offering a solution of your own.

And, to your credit, you dont make constant references to Socialism and Nazis.

Relax...Lighten up. (sound familiar)

[Happy Monkey]

Via Talking Points Memo:

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Compares Job Losses Under Presidents Obama and Bush

[TheMercenary]

So I bet this Nazi is eating her words now...

Pelosi: Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

August 1, 2003


Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bureau of Labor Statistics' announcement that 470,000 people abandoned their job searches in July and that 3.2 million private sector jobs have been lost since President Bush took office:

“The fact is that President Bush’s misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs. Since President Bush took office, the country has lost 3.2 million jobs, the worst record since President Hoover. And today we learned that in July nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.

“Job losses are taking a real toll on the financial security of American families. While Democrats are fighting for opportunity, jobs, and economic security for working families, Republicans continue to focus on helping those who need help the least.

“According to today’s survey, while the national unemployment rate dropped slightly, it still stands at a near record high. In addition, the unemployment rate for African Americans was still over 11 percent in July, and the unemployment rate for Hispanics was 8.2 percent in July.

“It is time for President Bush and the Republicans to get to work for all Americans, not just the elite few.”

Nancy Pelosi.

[jinx]

And today we learned that in July nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.

How is this determined? Just wondering...

[Undertoad]

I think they measure the people who go off unemployment without having a job. Which is hardly the same as giving up looking. And they don't measure people who were never on unemployment, or who took freelance work, etc.

So how should we go about stabilizing and then correcting the worst economic trends in 60+ years?

From 2000-2009: job growth was essentially zero, economic output (as measured by GDP) saw the lowest growth in any decade, and for the first time, household net worth decreased.

Or is it just a laughing matter?

[classicman]

WASHINGTON – It's a bipartisan jobs bill that would hand President Barack Obama a badly needed political victory and placate Republicans with tax cuts at the same time. But it has a problem: It won't create many jobs.

Even the Obama administration acknowledges the legislation's centerpiece — a tax cut for businesses that hire unemployed workers — would work only on the margins.

As for the bill's effectiveness, tax experts and business leaders said companies are unlikely to hire workers just to receive a tax break. Before businesses start hiring, they need increased demand for their products, more work for their employees and more revenue to pay those workers.

"We're skeptical that it's going to be a big job creator," said Bill Rys, tax counsel for the National Federation of Independent Business. "There's certainly nothing wrong with giving a tax break to a business that's hired a new worker, especially in these tough times. But in terms of being an incentive to hire a lot of workers, we're skeptical."

Rick Klahsen, a tax expert at the accounting firm RSM McGladrey, said his clients need to see business pick up before they can hire more workers.

"If demand were increased, they are saying it will take care of itself because I will then have the motivation to go out and hire new employees," Klahsen said.

The bipartisan Senate plan would exempt businesses from paying a 6.2 percent Social Security tax on the wages of new employees, as long as the workers have been unemployed at least 60 days. The tax break would run through the end of the year.

A company could save a maximum of $6,621 if it hired an unemployed worker after the bill is enacted and paid that worker at least $106,800 — the maximum amount of wages subject to Social Security taxes — by the end of the year. The company could get an additional $1,000 on its 2011 tax return if it kept the new worker for at least a full year.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office recently concluded that reducing Social Security taxes for companies that add workers would be among the most efficient ways for the government to create jobs. However, in showing how difficult it is to create jobs through tax policy, CBO estimates that such a tax break would generate only eight to 18 full-time jobs per $1 million in tax breaks.

The Senate proposal, which is more narrow than the one analyzed by CBO, is estimated to cost about $10 billion. That would add 80,000 to 180,000 jobs over the course of a year. The U.S. economy, meanwhile, has lost 8.4 million jobs since the start of the recession.

Nonetheless, supporters say it is cheaper, simpler and less vulnerable to abuse than Obama's plan, which would give a $5,000 tax credit for each new worker that employers hire and cost $33 billion.

Link
Another partisan AP article.

[TheMercenary]

Even the Obama administration acknowledges the legislation's centerpiece — a tax cut for businesses that hire unemployed workers — would work only on the margins.

As I stated earlier, smoke and mirrors to make everyone feel better, sort of like he is doing something for small business. When in fact he is not. Although I am tempted to hire my family members to get a tax break.

[xoxoxoBruce]

So will every cocksucker that's just looking for ways to scam the system, and siphon off help that would really help boost the economy.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

So will every congressperson that's just looking for ways to scam the system, and siphon off help that would really help boost the economy.

fixed that for ya.

[classicman]

Have they been out of work long enough?