1 In 4 Americans 25-54 Not Working" "economy Working?" Ask These People!

[rdean]

And yet the Republicans continue to fight against job creation in the US in favor of sending our jobs overseas.

They won't even come back from their vacation to support their own country in a war though so how can we expect them to suddenly decide to work for their own citizens.

If the Repubs ever show up for work again, they should be brought up on charges of treason.

Do you people actually believe that crap? Who passed over 2,300 new jobs killing EPA regulations...yes Obama and his band of socialist pukes that's who. Who's holding up the Keystone pipeline jobs...yes Obamatard. Who is driving corporations to relocate oversees with high uncompetitive corporate taxes...yes the dumb as Democrats that's who. There I beat your post to the ground and kicked dirt in its face.

Counting the jobs lost to China Economic Policy Institute
2.4 million American jobs were lost between 2001 and 2008

Growing U.S. trade deficit with China cost 2.8 million jobs between 2001 and 2010 Economic Policy Institute

10 States Losing the Most Jobs to China Fox Business

19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Make You Weep - Business Insider
The United States has lost approximately 42,400 factories since 2001

How can you be so fucking stupid? You have the nerve to blame this on the EPA? Because filth and lack of safety leads to good jobs??? Moron! And you call Obama a tard? You shouldn't be posting until you learn something. You make the Republicans look even more stupid, than, than, OK, they couldn't look more stupid.

 

[MaxGrit]

When the demand for whatever you made doesn't materialize and you've gone bankrupt, then maybe you will understand what demand does for a company that supply will never do.

Economic Freedom

Best to stop manipulating markets with unnecessary regulations and laws.

Economic Freedom and Liberty

Economic Freedom and Liberty
5 Threats to Your Economic Freedom

By Geoffrey Pike
Friday, September 26th, 2014

There is no doubt that some countries are far more economically free than others.

Having a free economy means having strong property rights, a generally stable form of money, and few government regulations.

Where there is more economic freedom, there is usually more prosperity. There is less poverty and a higher standard of living. When people are allowed to voluntarily trade and do business, it encourages savings and investment. It encourages entrepreneurism.

While there is always a risk in starting a business, the risk of government confiscation or interference is diminished in a society that generally respects property rights. An entrepreneur who is successful in a relatively free economy will get to reap the rewards of providing his goods and services.

In some countries, economic freedom outweighs civil liberties. For example, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates are two of the freest places on the planet, economically speaking. They are great places to find a job or do business — but they are not as good in terms of civil liberties and social freedoms.

On the other hand, some European countries are freer when it comes to civil liberties yet not as economically free — they're often considered welfare states.

With that said, there is no question that there is a relationship between economic freedom and liberty in general. It is no coincidence that North Korea is probably the most authoritarian country on Earth and also has almost nothing in the way of a free market. It is an extremely impoverished country.

The United States in the 19th century was perhaps the most economically free country in history (not counting the 1860s, which was a period of war).

This was one of the greatest periods of growth in history, too. It was also a time of great civil liberties in the respect that government, particularly the federal government, had little involvement in people’s lives.

The one major contradiction of this time period was, of course, slavery. This is the glaring exception where liberty did not reign supreme.

Government Intervention and the Economy

Those who identify themselves as Republicans and conservatives (civilians, not politicians) tend to favor economic freedom, including lower taxes and less government regulation.

Unfortunately, many conservatives don’t care to pay a lot of attention to issues of civil liberties and foreign intervention — or worse, they cheer on big government when it comes to these things. There is something of a contradiction in thinking that the government is too incompetent to run our health care system and plan our economy yet is an efficient machine when it comes to fighting wars, stopping drug abuse, and keeping us safe from terrorists.

It must be stressed that economic freedom goes hand in hand with the general cause of liberty. It is rare that you have a government that will spy on you, control you, and intervene overseas, while also maintaining strong property rights and economic freedom at home.

And while this probably won’t come as a surprise, it takes a lot of money for a government to be active. Spying on people is expensive. Fighting a drug war is expensive. Regulating people’s behavior is expensive. Most of all, fighting foreign wars and occupying other countries is incredibly expensive, both in lives and money.

Fighting in a foreign war means buying and maintaining equipment. It means buying oil and gas to run the machinery. It means paying salaries and benefits to a large number of people. It means paying pensions and disability for injuries, both mental and physical. And this money has to come from somewhere.

It can either come from taxes or from inflation and debt. But even the latter scenario affects our economic freedom today. It is capital being diverted away from production and investment.

There is a misconception that debt is only a burden on future generations. In reality, it is a burden right now.

In other words, if you want a big government that is constantly fighting wars, and if you tolerate a big government when it comes to invading certain civil liberties, then you are probably not going to get a small government when it comes to taxes and regulations.

The Best Free Investment You'll Ever Make

Stay on top of the hottest investment ideas before they hit Wall Street. Sign up for the Wealth Daily newsletter below. You'll also get our free report, "Gold & Silver Mining Stocks".
Enter your email:
We never spam! View our Privacy Policy
A Government as a Reflection of the People

Governments will typically expand and gain as much power as the populace will allow. In the long run, government is generally a reflection of the people. This isn’t to say that people deserve the government they get, but the government is generally limited by the consent of the people.

When Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980, he was seen as the pro-liberty candidate. In terms of government spending, he didn’t live up to his reputation, as spending increased quite a bit on his watch.

One area where Reagan was successful in implementing a pro-liberty agenda was in the realm of income tax rates. During his eight years in office, he managed to get the top tax rate reduced from a whopping 70% down to 28%. But how did he manage to get this through a Democrat-controlled Congress?

There were some hard-core leftists that supported (voted in favor of) the legislation to reduce tax rates. Their support was really a reflection of the people.

These Democrats in Congress were receiving thousands of phone calls a day telling them to support Reagan’s tax-cut plan. They had almost no choice but to oblige or risk losing their jobs.

In other words, because Reagan received the support of the American people on cutting marginal income tax rates, it happened. When the will of the people is strong enough, politicians will change with the wind.

Consent to Being Ruled

The point here is that if you concede your liberty on some issues, then don’t be surprised when it is all infringed upon. If you ask the government do something on your behalf, it is going to take that as a green light to do everything on your behalf.

Republican politicians say they want more economic freedom but insist on curtailing civil liberties. Democratic politicians say they want greater civil liberties but insist on taxing the rich and increasing welfare.

So what happens?

Both sides compromise. The Republicans support bigger government for welfare programs. Democrats support bigger government to curtail civil liberties.

If you ask for bigger government in one area, you are probably going to get it everywhere. If you consent to big government, you are going to get big government.

That is why I believe that even if your main goal is to increase economic freedom and capitalism, it is also important to be aware of government in every area of your life. This includes everything from the government fighting wars thousands of miles away to the seemingly little things that go on in your hometown that are endorsed by your city council.

This is why we recently launched a new service called Liberty Briefing. And as a member of Wealth Daily, you can get it free right here.

Plus, my colleague Jeff Siegel has also put together a new report called, “The 5 Greatest Threats to Your Liberty.” This report is also free, and you can get a copy by clicking this link.

Look, if you want to properly build and protect your wealth, you must properly defend your rights to do so. And that means being acutely aware of any threat to your individual liberty.

We'll help you do that at Liberty Briefing.

Until next time,

Geoffrey Pike for Wealth Daily

 

[frigidweirdo]

And yet the Republicans continue to fight against job creation in the US in favor of sending our jobs overseas.

They won't even come back from their vacation to support their own country in a war though so how can we expect them to suddenly decide to work for their own citizens.

If the Repubs ever show up for work again, they should be brought up on charges of treason.

Do you people actually believe that crap? Who passed over 2,300 new jobs killing EPA regulations...yes Obama and his band of socialist pukes that's who. Who's holding up the Keystone pipeline jobs...yes Obamatard. Who is driving corporations to relocate oversees with high uncompetitive corporate taxes...yes the dumb as Democrats that's who. There I beat your post to the ground and kicked dirt in its face.

Counting the jobs lost to China Economic Policy Institute
2.4 million American jobs were lost between 2001 and 2008

Growing U.S. trade deficit with China cost 2.8 million jobs between 2001 and 2010 Economic Policy Institute

10 States Losing the Most Jobs to China Fox Business

19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Make You Weep - Business Insider
The United States has lost approximately 42,400 factories since 2001

How can you be so fucking stupid? You have the nerve to blame this on the EPA? Because filth and lack of safety leads to good jobs??? Moron! And you call Obama a tard? You shouldn't be posting until you learn something. You make the Republicans look even more stupid, than, than, OK, they couldn't look more stupid.

The US needs to find itself a place in the world. Decide what it wants to be.

Does it want to be service industry? Does it want to be high level products? Does it want to be low level products?

The difference is often education. You improve education to meet the requirements of a more difficult market, like, for example, the Germans have done, then you can base your education around your needs, you can then be successful.

What does the US do? Not much, doesn't know whether it's coming or going, education is just hit and miss and probably not always geared to anything much.

China is getting smarter and smarter. Their kids are working over time so they can get a job. They get up at 6am, go to school, be there for 10 hours, then go to after school classes with English, Math, Science, then at weekends more of the same. University isn't so great, but hey, a lot of them are flying off to the US, UK or Australia and getting themselves a good university education, at some point these people will be the ones running universities too and China will have better universities.
Sure, Chinese kids are robots who lack creativity, but they're finding their place in the world and soon the US will get left behind.

Does anyone know this? Do they care? Even if they did care could they do anything with the paralyzing political system that doesn't allow anything to happen?



Jaime Oliver came to the US, and you see what the radio presenter said, he was right, you can't change anything. Pizza for breakfast. Come off it, this meets nutritional requirements. The food you eat helps or hinders you study, many schools are bad from the core, and the govts won't do much about it.

 

[BluesLegend]

And yet the Republicans continue to fight against job creation in the US in favor of sending our jobs overseas.

They won't even come back from their vacation to support their own country in a war though so how can we expect them to suddenly decide to work for their own citizens.

If the Repubs ever show up for work again, they should be brought up on charges of treason.

Do you people actually believe that crap? Who passed over 2,300 new jobs killing EPA regulations...yes Obama and his band of socialist pukes that's who. Who's holding up the Keystone pipeline jobs...yes Obamatard. Who is driving corporations to relocate oversees with high uncompetitive corporate taxes...yes the dumb as Democrats that's who. There I beat your post to the ground and kicked dirt in its face.

Counting the jobs lost to China Economic Policy Institute
2.4 million American jobs were lost between 2001 and 2008

Growing U.S. trade deficit with China cost 2.8 million jobs between 2001 and 2010 Economic Policy Institute

10 States Losing the Most Jobs to China Fox Business

19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Make You Weep - Business Insider
The United States has lost approximately 42,400 factories since 2001

How can you be so fucking stupid? You have the nerve to blame this on the EPA? Because filth and lack of safety leads to good jobs??? Moron! And you call Obama a tard? You shouldn't be posting until you learn something. You make the Republicans look even more stupid, than, than, OK, they couldn't look more stupid.

More proof liberals are dumb as a brick. ^^^ Hello earth to liberals where do jobs go when businesses are slammed with high taxes and ridiculously costly regulations? Why does your base buy made in China? Hello is anyone home in there"

 

[paulitician]

Yeah, you have to laugh at the '6%' Unemployment number. Absolute Bullshite.

 

[healthmyths]

Oh Blah Blah Blah Stupid Prog Pablum ^^^^

What causes job creation: Economic Growth

What causes economic growth: A Healthy Private Sector (businesses large and small)

What causes a Healthy Private Sector: Free Markets that aren't oppressed by Big Government

We are still suffering the after effects of the 2nd Great Depression caused by the Republican Deregulation of the Wall Street Casino.

At best we will recover around the end of this decade but the damage to the economy was severe. The current imbalance between hardworking Americans and the wealthy has never been greater and there needs to be a reset on that wealth gap.

When a CEO is being paid 350 time more than the average worker than means that 300+ workers are out of jobs that could otherwise be helping the economy.

This won't happen out of the kindness of the hearts of greed obsessed CEO's either therefore this has to be done via We the People using the government OF the People FOR the People.

Yes, I know, your blood pressure is rising and you are calling me a commie and a socialist and all of the other idiotic kneejerk names.

But that doesn't alter the reality of (a) where we are now, and (b) how and why we got here, and (c) what we have to do in order to turn this around.

So use your outrage creatively and find a way to convince a CEO to create more jobs even if it means taking a pay cut. That would do more to help this nation than just venting your feelings at me.

You asked out to "create more jobs".
How about simply not attacking existing companies that employ people as a start?
Obama wants 1,300 companies to go out of business that pay $100 billion in taxes and employ 400,000 people.
Obama wants utility companies to go bankrupt... he's said so.
Obama wants utility rates to skyrocket. He's said so.
Obama wants higher gas prices and he contributes by signing 40% LESS federal oil leases then Bush and thus reducing federal production by 13%.

If Obama didn't want these events to occur then more people would be working! That simple.

Please ask me to prove the above statements that Obama has made are true.

Sure, why not, knock yourself out proving your allegations.

Obama wants 1,300 companies to go out of business that pay $100 billion in taxes and employ 400,000 people.
Obama said:"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program.”
If he wants a single payer what happens to the 1,300 health insurance companies?
See people don't about these "unintended consequences"... These companies pay Federal,state,local taxes along with 7.2% SS/Medicare... so what happens if Obama gets his way??? Remember he said he "is a proponent of ONE payer"!!!
Obama wants utility companies to go bankrupt... he's said so.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them…”
– Barack Obama speaking to San Francisco Chronicle, January 2008
Obama's plan is to make business regulations so onerous and costly they won't build them! Good thinking! Instead of figuring out
ways to accomplish the EPA requirements just slap more rules and regulations and let the companies deal with them by going under!
Obama wants utility rates to skyrocket. He's said so.
"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket"
Obama I 8217 ll make energy prices 8220 skyrocket 8221 Hot Air
Obama wants higher gas prices and he contributes by signing 40% LESS federal oil leases then Bush and thus reducing federal production by 13%.
Obama said I'd like higher gas prices, just not so quickly.."

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

and backs that belief hiring Energy secretary Chu, who said in 2008...
“Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

Why are these guys so anxious to raise our costs of living?
Rather then figure out how to work with businesses... being the anti-capitalists, ignorant of business functions he wants to destroy businesses. I mean how else can anyone look at his actions and what he says except he doesn't want businesses to succeed.

So instead of "encouraging" Obama discourages by
In fiscal year 2010, 36 percent of our nation’s oil production took place on federal lands.
36%!!! 2010 OIL production from Federal lands!

Due to Obama Administration policies, by 2013,
only 23 percent of our nation’s oil production took place on federal lands.

Production on non-Federal lands, in contrast, is skyrocketing as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have increased production dramatically.
Oil production on non-Federal lands increased by 21 percent in fiscal year 2013 from fiscal year 2012 levels—an increase of almost one million barrels per day.

Likewise, natural gas production on Federal lands has been steadily declining, while natural gas production on non-Federal lands has been steadily increasing. In fiscal year 2013, natural gas production on non-Federal lands increased by 3 percent—654 billion cubic feet—and natural gas production on Federal lands declined by 9 percent—392 billion cubic feet.
Oil and Gas Production on Federal Lands Still a Disappointment - IER

And all the while Federal land leases signed by Obama admin. leases the lowest amount of federal land in 25 years
“The slow walking of permits and leases for natural gas and oil production has been a part of this president’s energy policy from the get go,” Chris Warren, spokesman for the free-market Institute for Energy Research told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Under this administration’s watch we have seen production on federal lands and waters plummet due to these policies.”

In 2013, it took 194 days on average for the BLM to approve oil and gas drilling permits — 99 days on average for companies to fix any problems with their application and 95 days for the BLM to approve the permits after problems have been fixed.

“Compare this to five days in Texas and 25 in North Dakota and it’s no wonder why production on federal lands has gone down,” Warren added.
Obama. leases the lowest amount of federal land in 25 years The Daily Caller

So given ALL the documentation and substantiation my conclusion as anyone else honest enough is Obama hasn't done ANYTHING
to encourage businesses. On the contrary Over the past decade, the federal government has issued almost 38,000 new final rules, according to the draft of the 2011 annual report to Congress on federal regulations by the Office of Management and Budget. That brought the total at the end of 2011 to 169,301 pages.

Seventy percent of the regulations were economic, accounting for $1.236 trillion of the annual cost. The other regulations were, in order of cost, environment regulations ($281 billion), tax compliance ($160 billion) and occupational safety and health and homeland security ($75 billion).

“I think these kinds of figures, if you put yourself in the place of a business person you’ll find them fairly mindboggling,”Johnson said.

Economists with the Chamber also analyzed the OBM’s report on the study, calculating that if every U.S. household paid an equal share of the federal regulatory burden, it would mean a $15,586 tab for each household in 2008.
Under Obama 11 327 Pages of Federal Regulations Added CNS News

Debunked by FactCheck.Org.

Obama Wanted Higher Gasoline Prices

What are the odds that 100% of your allegations are out of context canards just like that one?

Congratulations, you just blew away your own credibility. FauxNews must be so proud to have you as one of their most gullible viewers!

So a "gradual adjustment" is not the same as " preferring higher prices"????
Let's take the words apart..
"Gradual" meaning moving up or down but in context of the below.. they discussion moving "HIGHER"!!!
Adjustment means tinkering with the prices to MAKE THEM GO HIGHER in this case again from the CONTEXT!!!


YOU got to be f..king KIDDING!!!
Also you obviously have NO knowledge as I personally do about Politifact.org!
Owned by the West Pravda i.e. Poynter Institute which owns the St. Petersburg Times!
Considered one of the most left leaning, biased newspapers in the country .... and you use THEM for validation?
Check out this web site for PROOF this is a very biased left wing publication!
PFB was started in early 2011 by Jeff D. and Bryan White, independent bloggers who share a sense of outrage that PolitiFact often peddles outrageous slant as objective news.

PolitiFact Bias About PolitiFact Bias FAQ
Harwood, June 10, 2008: As difficult as this is for consumers right now, is, in fact, high gas prices what we need to let the market work, a line incentive so that we do shift to alternative means of energy?

Obama: Well, I think that we have been slow to move in a better direction when it comes to energy usage. And the president, frankly, hasn’t had an energy policy. And as a consequence, we’ve been consuming energy as if it’s infinite. We now know that our demand is badly outstripping supply with China and India growing as rapidly as they are. So…

Harwood: So could these high prices help us?

Obama: I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocketbooks is not a good thing. But if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment, first of all by putting more money into their pockets, but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more quickly, particularly US automakers, then I think ultimately, we can come out of this stronger and have a more efficient energy policy than we do right now.
I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment.

 

[Rozman]

And yet the Republicans continue to fight against job creation in the US in favor of sending our jobs overseas.

They won't even come back from their vacation to support their own country in a war though so how can we expect them to suddenly decide to work for their own citizens.

If the Repubs ever show up for work again, they should be brought up on charges of treason.

Are the Democrats back to work?

 

[hipeter924]

Yeah, well, that's what happens when there's no jobs. Elect another globalist, and they'll pass the TPP and double those numbers of unemployed.

We are living under the next industrial revolution, basically most of the working age population is being made redundant by computers and other advanced technology. In a few decades all these low-income jobs being 'created' will cease to exist, when stacking shelves with robot hands and holographic displays become a reality.

In the meantime global population will continue to increase, till it reaches a high point and begins to decline. This is the first decade in recent times where children are guaranteed to live in an economically worse off world (in terms of poverty and unemployment) than their parents.

Futurists think that technology will fix everything, yet we are more unhappy and live more complex and stressful lives than ever before. Poverty also only increases as wonder robots put people out of work.

 

[pinqy]

Yeah, you have to laugh at the '6%' Unemployment number. Absolute Bullshite.

Oh? What percent of the labor force are you saying wants a job, could start a job if offered, and is trying to find work? And what's your source?