Boehner: Federal job losses? 'So be it'

[Sallow]

Boehner's numbers are a little off. 200K? It's more like 50K jobs were added to Federal Payrolls. And the amount of Federal/State workers are at historic lows. It represents like 5% of the budget as well.

Way to get that Deficit under control.

Even the OP's article says the actual number is around 107,000. So you and Boehner have something in common - you're both lying sacks of shit.

According to Office of Personnel Management statistics, 82,692 full-time federal workers left the federal government in fiscal 2009 and agencies added 142,687 new hires, for a net gain of 59,995 jobs.

I was off about 10K.

Boehner was off about 140K.

And your still an asshole.

Go fig.

 

[Yurt]

Boehner's numbers are a little off. 200K? It's more like 50K jobs were added to Federal Payrolls. And the amount of Federal/State workers are at historic lows. It represents like 5% of the budget as well.

Way to get that Deficit under control.

Even the OP's article says the actual number is around 107,000. So you and Boehner have something in common - you're both lying sacks of shit.

According to Office of Personnel Management statistics, 82,692 full-time federal workers left the federal government in fiscal 2009 and agencies added 142,687 new hires, for a net gain of 59,995 jobs.

I was off about 10K.

Boehner was off about 140K.

And your still an asshole.

Go fig.

no, you're off by about 90K....you said HIRED...that has nothing to do with "net gain"....your own link supports boehner's claim more than your claim

 

[Sallow]

Even the OP's article says the actual number is around 107,000. So you and Boehner have something in common - you're both lying sacks of shit.

According to Office of Personnel Management statistics, 82,692 full-time federal workers left the federal government in fiscal 2009 and agencies added 142,687 new hires, for a net gain of 59,995 jobs.

I was off about 10K.

Boehner was off about 140K.

And your still an asshole.

Go fig.

no, you're off by about 90K....you said HIRED...that has nothing to do with "net gain"....your own link supports boehner's claim more than your claim

I ain't getting into this "textualist" bullshit. I ain't a lawyer.

Bottom line there were 60K jobs added to the fed.

Does that work for you now?

You really want to go down the "exact words" route?

 

[NYcarbineer]

And to all the wingnuts here who ridiculed me last week when I said the GOP did not have a job creation plan...

...they had a job elimination plan

I just want to say, as Limbaugh likes to put it -

See? I told you so.

when am I ever wrong?? almost N E V E R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Claudette]

Why should Fed workers be exempt from layoffs??

They shouldn't.

 

[Jarhead]

Understood. I wonder how many of our GIs will get laid off? So, where is that Jobs Bill?

Probably none. Defense has usually been exempt.

Whenever the government puts together a 'jobs bill', I always get a little nervous since the government cannot directly create jobs (except for government jobs which defeats the purpose since the private sector has to pay a high price for a government job). I would prefer they not do that. Instead, they should spend within their means and pay off the debt.

I'm confused. During the run up to the 2010 elections, Boehner's mantra about Obama was "where's the jobs"? Are you saying that now that the GOP has control of the House, government can't create jobs?

Yo....stop the spin.

Obama Pelosi and Reid said if we let them borrow a trillion dollars and spend it, jobs will be created and unemployment would not exceed 8%.

When such did not happen, Boehner and the GOP had a right to ask "where are the hjobs" seeing as they were saying "if we let you spend a trillion dollars of borrowed money, it will not do what you say it will do"

And Obama, Pelosi and Reid said "yes it will"

And it didnt.

As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private secotr to create the jobs.

You just are so wrapped up in the virtues of government control, that you have become sickingly dependant upon them to do what they dont have the ability to do. Create jobs.

 

[mdn2000]

In reality we need a 90% loss of jobs in the Federal Government. We can start with the pencil pushers. The huge amount of waste and redunancy in Government can not be sustained. Its that simple. We have entire departments in the government that do nothing but destroy the private sector and people call for more government.

It is pure stupidity.

The government at all levels need to lose its power to steal money, for every dollar they steal from me they also destroy a job.

Hey, maybe if everyone could work for government and work together we could finally have Communism, that gives everyone a job.

 

[Jarhead]

And to all the wingnuts here who ridiculed me last week when I said the GOP did not have a job creation plan...

...they had a job elimination plan

I just want to say, as Limbaugh likes to put it -

See? I told you so.

when am I ever wrong?? almost N E V E R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For 2+ years, the GOP has been saying that the best plan to allow jobs to be created is to do nothing to create jobs. Instead they want to make it easier for the private sector to create the jobs.

For someone who claims to know so much, why are you so "in the dark"?

 

[kiwiman127]

Probably none. Defense has usually been exempt.

Whenever the government puts together a 'jobs bill', I always get a little nervous since the government cannot directly create jobs (except for government jobs which defeats the purpose since the private sector has to pay a high price for a government job). I would prefer they not do that. Instead, they should spend within their means and pay off the debt.

I'm confused. During the run up to the 2010 elections, Boehner's mantra about Obama was "where's the jobs"? Are you saying that now that the GOP has control of the House, government can't create jobs?

Yo....stop the spin.

Obama Pelosi and Reid said if we let them borrow a trillion dollars and spend it, jobs will be created and unemployment would not exceed 8%.

When such did not happen, Boehner and the GOP had a right to ask "where are the hjobs" seeing as they were saying "if we let you spend a trillion dollars of borrowed money, it will not do what you say it will do"

And Obama, Pelosi and Reid said "yes it will"

And it didnt.

As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private sector to create the jobs.

You just are so wrapped up in the virtues of government control, that you have become sickingly dependant upon them to do what they dont have the ability to do. Create jobs.

"As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private sector to create the jobs."

Well, I hope they do a better job than their reaction to the 2001 Recession.
Now yeah I know that the unemployment was brought down to near 4.4%, but then the unemployment numbers were never over 6.3. That's small peanuts compared to the Great Recession of 2007. The real numbers are the US Labor Participation Rate, that show there really never was much of a job recovery from the 2001
Recession. File:US Labor Participation Rate.gif - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How many W's of billions of dollars did the recovery tax cuts add to the National Debt with really not much to show for it regarding job growth in the private sector.
The GOP will again devise a plan that will be based on the trickle down theory which have never worked.

Otherwise, the Dems had their chance,,,,,,,,,,,!

 

[WillowTree]

As it should be. When a private company has a revenue shortfall, they have to layoff workers. The government should be no different.

You know you can't speak logic around a demonRat.. they will demon Rat Ize you... don'tchyaknowthat?

 

[WillowTree]

I read somewhere this morning that Obama wants the IRS to hire around 1000 employees to start implenting the first stages of Obamacare. More government jobs!

I have little sympathy for government workers who may be laid off. All those perks and hefty paychecks ... awwwwww. Maybe they'll be picked up by the IRS.

Anywho ... good to see you VaYank! It's been awhile. If you haven't noticed, Madeline has been giving you a run for your money when it comes to starting Palin threads. Are you going to let her out-do you? *wink*

I heard it on C span. The good (R) Senator from Wyoming said it. BarassoI think his name is.

 

[Jarhead]

I'm confused. During the run up to the 2010 elections, Boehner's mantra about Obama was "where's the jobs"? Are you saying that now that the GOP has control of the House, government can't create jobs?

Yo....stop the spin.

Obama Pelosi and Reid said if we let them borrow a trillion dollars and spend it, jobs will be created and unemployment would not exceed 8%.

When such did not happen, Boehner and the GOP had a right to ask "where are the hjobs" seeing as they were saying "if we let you spend a trillion dollars of borrowed money, it will not do what you say it will do"

And Obama, Pelosi and Reid said "yes it will"

And it didnt.

As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private sector to create the jobs.

You just are so wrapped up in the virtues of government control, that you have become sickingly dependant upon them to do what they dont have the ability to do. Create jobs.

"As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private sector to create the jobs."

Well, I hope they do a better job than their reaction to the 2001 Recession.
Now yeah I know that the unemployment was brought down to near 4.4%, but then the unemployment numbers were never over 6.3. That's small peanuts compared to the Great Recession of 2007. The real numbers are the US Labor Participation Rate, that show there really never was much of a job recovery from the 2001
Recession. File:US Labor Participation Rate.gif - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How many W's of billions of dollars did the recovery tax cuts add to the National Debt with really not much to show for it regarding job growth in the private sector.
The GOP will again devise a plan that will be based on the trickle down theory which have never worked.

Otherwise, the Dems had their chance,,,,,,,,,,,!

2001-2006 had the following NOT reflected in those statistics

1) An increase in population

2) a dramatic increase in technology as it pertains to the internet expansion, telecommunications, etc. This resulted in less need for human labor. For example....whereas a research department was needed in the past, now a data clerk can run boolean searches on the internet. Whereas a switchboard of many was required, now we have voicemail.

The numbers were actually quite good for many years despite this.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

"Over the last two years since President Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs," Boehner said. "And if some of those jobs are lost in this, so be it. We're broke. It's time for us to get serious about how we're spending the nation's money."

Federal Eye - John Boehner: If federal jobs are lost, 'So be it'

I sure hope the GOP comes through on their promise of a Jobs Bill soon. It looks like a lot of Federal Employees are going to hit the unemployment ranks if Boehner gets his way. Not that he cares....he got HIS government job...

I hope that many federal jobs and programs are eliminated and dismantled. Paying those workers unemployment will cost me far less tax dollars then their above avarage salary and benefits packages.

I also hope they can find jobs in the private sector after they collect unenjoyment for a while.

 

[boedicca]

The private sector has lost over 7M jobs while government employment has grown.

I'm tired of all this shared sacrifice CRAP spewed by the government when public employee unions have been protected at the expense of those who pay taxes.

Enough.

Fire a bunch of them.

 

[Claudette]

And to all the wingnuts here who ridiculed me last week when I said the GOP did not have a job creation plan...

...they had a job elimination plan

I just want to say, as Limbaugh likes to put it -

See? I told you so.

when am I ever wrong?? almost N E V E R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For 2+ years, the GOP has been saying that the best plan to allow jobs to be created is to do nothing to create jobs. Instead they want to make it easier for the private sector to create the jobs.

For someone who claims to know so much, why are you so "in the dark"?

You got that right.

If the environment were better the private sector would be producing jobs.

Get rid of capital gains and Obamacare and I think you would see the private sector take off like a rocket and provide those jobs.

They also need to shitcan a load of those useless Fed workers.

I'm sure none of us would notice.

 

[kiwiman127]

Yo....stop the spin.

Obama Pelosi and Reid said if we let them borrow a trillion dollars and spend it, jobs will be created and unemployment would not exceed 8%.

When such did not happen, Boehner and the GOP had a right to ask "where are the hjobs" seeing as they were saying "if we let you spend a trillion dollars of borrowed money, it will not do what you say it will do"

And Obama, Pelosi and Reid said "yes it will"

And it didnt.

As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private sector to create the jobs.

You just are so wrapped up in the virtues of government control, that you have become sickingly dependant upon them to do what they dont have the ability to do. Create jobs.

"As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private sector to create the jobs."

Well, I hope they do a better job than their reaction to the 2001 Recession.
Now yeah I know that the unemployment was brought down to near 4.4%, but then the unemployment numbers were never over 6.3. That's small peanuts compared to the Great Recession of 2007. The real numbers are the US Labor Participation Rate, that show there really never was much of a job recovery from the 2001
Recession. File:US Labor Participation Rate.gif - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How many W's of billions of dollars did the recovery tax cuts add to the National Debt with really not much to show for it regarding job growth in the private sector.
The GOP will again devise a plan that will be based on the trickle down theory which have never worked.

Otherwise, the Dems had their chance,,,,,,,,,,,!

2001-2006 had the following NOT reflected in those statistics

1) An increase in population

2) a dramatic increase in technology as it pertains to the internet expansion, telecommunications, etc. This resulted in less need for human labor. For example....whereas a research department was needed in the past, now a data clerk can run boolean searches on the internet. Whereas a switchboard of many was required, now we have voicemail.

The numbers were actually quite good for many years despite this.

The US Labor Participation Rate reflects the percent of the working- age population included in the labor force Therefore, I don't see how an increase in population can be used when one also has to figure in the percentage of the population that are retirement age. Baby Boomer's, which are a very large part of the population, lower the number of "working-age population".
Secondly, not only was there not much a budge in the Participation Rate but wages were pretty damn flat too (and still are). Flat wages certainly contributed to the credit crunch of 2007 and thusly to the recession. Two thirds of the US economy is driven by consumer spending and the working class is the "consumer class". It's kinda hard to participate in the economy when your expendable income shrinks. A downturn in consumer spending only shrinks the economy, which shrinks the job market.
Your technology comment is right on.

 

[Old Rocks]

Probably none. Defense has usually been exempt.

Whenever the government puts together a 'jobs bill', I always get a little nervous since the government cannot directly create jobs (except for government jobs which defeats the purpose since the private sector has to pay a high price for a government job). I would prefer they not do that. Instead, they should spend within their means and pay off the debt.

I'm confused. During the run up to the 2010 elections, Boehner's mantra about Obama was "where's the jobs"? Are you saying that now that the GOP has control of the House, government can't create jobs?

Yo....stop the spin.

Obama Pelosi and Reid said if we let them borrow a trillion dollars and spend it, jobs will be created and unemployment would not exceed 8%.

When such did not happen, Boehner and the GOP had a right to ask "where are the hjobs" seeing as they were saying "if we let you spend a trillion dollars of borrowed money, it will not do what you say it will do"

And Obama, Pelosi and Reid said "yes it will"

And it didnt.

As for a GOP jobs bill...the GOP does not want a jobs bill...they want a bill that will create an atmosphere that will allow the private secotr to create the jobs.

You just are so wrapped up in the virtues of government control, that you have become sickingly dependant upon them to do what they dont have the ability to do. Create jobs.

OK. Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican Executive from 2001 to 2007. How did they do on jobs then? Didn't even keep up citizens graduating from high school and college.

And managed to ignore all the signs of an economic disaster, damned near put us into the Second Great Republican Depression.

 

[boedicca]

The Senate was controlled by the Dems in the 107th Congress, bub.

 

[uscitizen]

And to all the wingnuts here who ridiculed me last week when I said the GOP did not have a job creation plan...

...they had a job elimination plan

I just want to say, as Limbaugh likes to put it -

See? I told you so.

when am I ever wrong?? almost N E V E R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For 2+ years, the GOP has been saying that the best plan to allow jobs to be created is to do nothing to create jobs. Instead they want to make it easier for the private sector to create the jobs.

For someone who claims to know so much, why are you so "in the dark"?

You got that right.

If the environment were better the private sector would be producing jobs.

Get rid of capital gains and Obamacare and I think you would see the private sector take off like a rocket and provide those jobs.

They also need to shitcan a load of those useless Fed workers.

I'm sure none of us would notice.

Make capital gains 50% on investments of less than 6 months, 40% on investments of one year , 30% on 2 years, etc. down to 5% on 10 year investments.
Lets work for some stability and make those who create instability pay more.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And to all the wingnuts here who ridiculed me last week when I said the GOP did not have a job creation plan...

...they had a job elimination plan

I just want to say, as Limbaugh likes to put it -

See? I told you so.

when am I ever wrong?? almost N E V E R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For 2+ years, the GOP has been saying that the best plan to allow jobs to be created is to do nothing to create jobs. Instead they want to make it easier for the private sector to create the jobs.

For someone who claims to know so much, why are you so "in the dark"?

Quote me ten Republicans who said they wanted to DO NOTHING to create jobs - and that explicitly was their jobs program.