10 million jobs?

MtnBiker

Senior Member
Sep 28, 2003
4,327
238
48
Rocky Mountains
Today at a rally in San Diego, John Kerry outlined his policies to get gas prices under control by moving the nation toward energy independence and growing the American economy. Two days ago, Kerry introduced his plan to create 10 million new jobs during his first term in office – 500,000 of them in renewable energy fields.
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0330.html



The Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site says that the current employment/population ratio is 62 percent. According to the U.S. Census Bureau Web site, the total U.S. population is 285 million. So 62 percent of that would be 176 million workers in the U.S.

Also according to the DOL Web site, the February unemployment rate in the U.S. is a surprisingly low 5.6 percent, a number the press apparently has underreported. So 5.6 percent of 176 million workers would be 9.8 million workers out of work. And that percentage appears to be heading lower.

So if we are to believe John Kerry will create 10 million jobs, not only will he have to lower unemployment to zero percent, but he'll have to find 200,000 extra workers that we currently do not have. And that's assuming that unemployment doesn't decrease in the coming months as most economists predict it will. That's one mighty big rabbit to pull out of a hat there, John.

link

0 percent unemployment :eek:
 
How many of those "jobs" are military or government for those fields given the upcoming draft in 2005?
 
unemployment is actually suppossed to be right around 5% as the figure counts everyone over the age of 16, meaning it counts seniors/retirees and teens w/o jobs. Statistically it isn't possible to lower unemployment much under 5%.

My question for Kerry would be how he plans to create jobs if he is going to raise taxes on the one group of people in this country that has the ability to create jobs.
 
Originally posted by NewGuy
Do I need to post the legislation?

Please do.

The only legislation I've read about was laughed at and dropped on the floor. Do you have anything recent?
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Please do.

The only legislation I've read about was laughed at and dropped on the floor. Do you have anything recent?

What I have immediately available is from Jan 2003, that may be what you are referring to. I have to look back and see what the superceding legislation was/is. Again, this is at first glance in my batch 'o stuff.
 
Originally posted by NewGuy
What I have immediately available is from Jan 2003, that may be what you are referring to. I have to look back and see what the superceding legislation was/is. Again, this is at first glance in my batch 'o stuff.

Yes, and that was introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel, a democrat out of my home state, and it was scoffed at by everyone including Rumsfeld. I'll see if I can find more...
 
That bill died a quick death in committee. It will never see a committe vote, much less a vote on the floor.

BTW - very ironic that Rangel, the anti-war liberal, would introduce a bill to bring back the draft.
 
H.R.163
Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors: 13
Related Bills: S.89
Latest Major Action: 2/3/2003 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
 
Shelved in this case means it was laughed off the floor. There isn't a hope in hell of this ever getting through and it's not even being entertained.
 
Originally posted by NewGuy
H.R.163
Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors: 13
Related Bills: S.89
Latest Major Action: 2/3/2003 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Executive Comment Requested from DOD.

No one in DoD wants a draft. No one in Congress wants to vote for it - and anyone who does, especially in a left-leaning district, faces a huge loss for re-election.

The draft is not coming back anytime soon.
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Shelved in this case means it was laughed off the floor. There isn't a hope in hell of this ever getting through and it's not even being entertained.

They pass stuff when people aren't looking. -They have emergency sessions. This is well known. Remember, bigger government gives them more money. -and control.
 
Originally posted by NewGuy
They pass stuff when people aren't looking. -They have emergency sessions. This is well known. Remember, bigger government gives them more money. -and control.

I would bet they pass it like the other most controversial legislation. -In secret.
 

Forum List

Back
Top