Losing 200,000 jobs is OK?

[driveby]

A couple of months ago when Obama was pushing his tax on the top 1% which the CBO said would reduce the deficit by 350 billion dollars, Boehner and fellow Republicans fought this tax claiming it would cost American jobs. But now, it's ok to lose 200,000 jobs for only a 100 billion dollar savings.

You dopes crack me up, Obama and Pelosi's policies cost the US private sector MILLIONS of jobs while spending a trillion dollars. Also, i thought Pelosi said being on unemployment was a good thing, that it stimulates the economy, now she's bitching about losing jobs?.....

 

[boedicca]

I wouldn't call this losing 200,000 jobs.

It's the elimination of 200,000 undeserved payroll recipients.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A couple of months ago when Obama was pushing his tax on the top 1% which the CBO said would reduce the deficit by 350 billion dollars, Boehner and fellow Republicans fought this tax claiming it would cost American jobs. But now, it's ok to lose 200,000 jobs for only a 100 billion dollar savings.

You dopes crack me up, Obama and Pelosi's policies cost the US private sector MILLIONS of jobs while spending a trillion dollars. Also, i thought Pelosi said being on unemployment was a good thing, that it stimulates the economy, now she's bitching about losing jobs?.....

That's false. You should be ashamed of yourself for being such a tool.

 

[NYcarbineer]

lol, how I miss Keith Olbermann's

Mr. Boehner! Where are the Jobs!

sign off.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

In a Feb. 15, 2011, press conference, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said that "over the last two years since President Barack Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs. 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."

PolitiFact | John Boehner says 200,000 new federal jobs have sprouted since start of Obama's term

I thought the idea was to increase the number of jobs as you come out of a recession not cut them.

Actually the number is 58,000 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but 200,000 sounds more dramatic.

Yes. The army of public sector do-nothings should slashed by 50%... as a starter.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

lol, how I miss Keith Olbermann's

Mr. Boehner! Where are the Jobs!

sign off.

Well, be happy ... there's five or six other people that miss Olbermann as well.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I wouldn't call this losing 200,000 jobs.

It's the elimination of 200,000 undeserved payroll recipients.

Amen.

 

[driveby]

A couple of months ago when Obama was pushing his tax on the top 1% which the CBO said would reduce the deficit by 350 billion dollars, Boehner and fellow Republicans fought this tax claiming it would cost American jobs. But now, it's ok to lose 200,000 jobs for only a 100 billion dollar savings.

You dopes crack me up, Obama and Pelosi's policies cost the US private sector MILLIONS of jobs while spending a trillion dollars. Also, i thought Pelosi said being on unemployment was a good thing, that it stimulates the economy, now she's bitching about losing jobs?.....

That's false. You should be ashamed of yourself for being such a tool.

False you say?



Pelosi: Unemployment Benefits Biggest Stimulus for Economy | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.


and



Employers cut 4.2 million jobs in 2009. And the unemployment rate averaged 9.3 percent. That compares with an average of 5.8 percent in 2008 and 4.6 percent in 2007. Nearly 15.3 million people are unemployed, an increase of 3.9 million during 2009.


Unemployment Hovers at 10%; 85K Jobs Lost - CBS News


Now get Obama's tool out of your mouth and deal with the facts, have a nice day......

 

[driveby]

lol, how I miss Keith Olbermann's

Mr. Boehner! Where are the Jobs!

sign off.

Now only a COMPLETE fucking tool would miss Keith Olbermann........

 

[rdean]

In a Feb. 15, 2011, press conference, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said that "over the last two years since President Barack Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs. 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."

PolitiFact | John Boehner says 200,000 new federal jobs have sprouted since start of Obama's term

I thought the idea was to increase the number of jobs as you come out of a recession not cut them.

Actually the number is 58,000 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but 200,000 sounds more dramatic.

According to federal budget expert Scott Lilly at the Center for American Progress, Boehner's proposed spending cuts could kill almost 1 million jobs.

Lilly ran the numbers for Dana Milbank of the Washington Post:

using the usual multipliers, [Lilly] calculated that the cuts - a net of $59 billion in the last half of fiscal 2011 - would lead to the loss of 650,000 government jobs, and the indirect loss of 325,000 more jobs as fewer government workers travel and buy things. That's nearly 1 million jobs - possibly enough to tip the economy back into recession.

But the best part was this:

which is done in a GE plant in Boehner's district that employs 7,000 people.

Boehner's Spending Cuts Would Kill 1 Million Jobs | TPMDC

=============

A 450 million dollar earmark for Boehner? So Be It! Hilarious.

 

[Flopper]

The government has to be run like a business. If it doesn't have the money, then it has to let some people go. (Preferably starting with the bosses)

The reason why your food, gas , and clothing prices are up is because the dickheads running the government are NOT running it like a business.

The dickheads running government caused a drought in Mexico (food), turmoil in the middle east (gas) and a spike in cotton prices (clothes)?

No they caused lower confidence in the dollar. The dollar is worth less so buys less cotton, gasoline and food.

In a limited way, the dickheads running government did cause turmoil in the middle east by ignoring the signs of impending trouble in Egypt. hillary clinton, Leon Panetta and obama all should be horsewhipped for being surprised by the events there.

I don't think confidence in the dollar is a good argument. If the dollar goes down foreign goods cost more in the US but US made goods are cheaper in foreign countries. So it's a two edge sword. Inflation and the interest on the national debt is the problem.

 

[Flopper]

In a Feb. 15, 2011, press conference, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said that "over the last two years since President Barack Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs. 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."

PolitiFact | John Boehner says 200,000 new federal jobs have sprouted since start of Obama's term

I thought the idea was to increase the number of jobs as you come out of a recession not cut them.

Actually the number is 58,000 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but 200,000 sounds more dramatic.

Yes. The army of public sector do-nothings should slashed by 50%... as a starter.

That's a bit harsh as well being a ridiculous statement. The vast number of people working for the federal government are well qualified and are hard working employees. I worked for federal, state, and local government. I've been a consultant and have owned two businesses. There are just as many good employees in government as there are in the private sector.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The government has to be run like a business. If it doesn't have the money, then it has to let some people go. (Preferably starting with the bosses)

The reason why your food, gas , and clothing prices are up is because the dickheads running the government are NOT running it like a business.

Nice spin. Total bullshit, but a good effort. Boehner lied (period)! He inflated the number of jobs, a fact you ignore.

Boehner ran on creating jobs, now that he is speaker his comment on jobs being lost is, "so be it".

 

[Wry Catcher]

Simple solutions to complex problems, not a sign of critical thought.
Fire all meat inspectors! For we all know those who provide us with meat and polutry put profit last and good, safe, meat and polutry as job number 1 (please note the sarcasm).
Want other examples? Of course not, offering examples from the real world create cognitive dissonence in the willfully ignorant.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bang, boom; one more bullshit thead put to rest.

 

[uscitizen]

Boner ran knowing that the righties would vote for him in spite of his supporting massive overspending during the Bush years.

 

[Sallow]

The government has to be run like a business. If it doesn't have the money, then it has to let some people go. (Preferably starting with the bosses)

The reason why your food, gas , and clothing prices are up is because the dickheads running the government are NOT running it like a business.

If the government were run like a business, defense (Like security) would be outsourced and a relatively small part of the budget.

Like 5% or so. Labor expenses would be much higher..since benefits are included.

So..not a bad idea.

I'm cool with it.

 

[Flopper]

The government has to be run like a business. If it doesn't have the money, then it has to let some people go. (Preferably starting with the bosses)

The reason why your food, gas , and clothing prices are up is because the dickheads running the government are NOT running it like a business.

If the government were run like a business, defense (Like security) would be outsourced and a relatively small part of the budget.

Like 5% or so. Labor expenses would be much higher..since benefits are included.

So..not a bad idea.

I'm cool with it.

If government were run like a business it would be an autocracy.

 

[BrianH]

Why is it such a crazy notion for the government to not be allowed to spend more than what they're bringing in?

 

[JFK_USA]

I think we all want everyone to stand on their own two feet and take responsibility for themselves. How will you ever know what an ear of corn actually costs, if part of your taxes go to a corn farmer under the table, and part to the grocery store owner or wayside market along the highway? American consumers have no idea, and are completely out of touch with reality with our consumer prices. I pay to be a member of COSTCO, and shell out a hundred or so there for membership, then subsidies to farmers & other corporations, and at the cash register. How much does a TV set actually cost me?

So I say, cut the farmer off, and I own farm land. But all we are doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul, and jack off Jill going to the market on the hill. In the end, no one rides for free, you still pay for the product, but you haven't a clue what it cost. You bless the farmer holding a wad of your money behind his back, thanking him for low prices at the register. Which are not low.

I'm not so sure I agree with this. The farmer isn't exactly holding a fist of money behind his back. I live in a farming community and these farmers are struggling. The majority of farmers can't get "shit" for their crops without being involved in Co-ops. On top of that, the Co-ops low-ball the farmers for what they'll pay for their crops, and then sell high at market. It's a typical scheme we see with other B.S. I'm married to the farmers daughter and I tell you that they aren't banking. They farm a few thousand acres of cotton, maiz, and this year will be farming corn. For the last 4 or 5 years they've ended up in the hole every year. The last two years they've had to file crop insurance which doesn't pay but maybe half of what your took the farm loan out for. Maybe it's different elsewhere, but it simply isn't what I've experienced.

They are being squeezed by big corporate farmers, and the co-ops. The question is, if you are losing money to the point that you are mortgaging the farm, it is time to go do something different. Many farmers are generational, and I understand their pain to lose it all. But that is the way it goes. We all take chances on investments, and sometimes when we shouldn't. Sometimes we should see the futility of continuing down a hole in the ground. But I really think it is unfair for Americans to pay for bad dreams. I oppose subsidies. I wouldn't oppose welfare for the farmer, and if the system is screwed up, change it.

I see the farmer as the small business who lost to Walmart.

So someone that works hard their entire lives should have everything taken away from them because they are rich enough? Tell you kids that, tell them its hopeless to work hard because the rich people deserve everything and you deserve nothing because you are taking up the rich's peoples air and as a republican I think we are less of a human because we are not rich.

Unbelievable. Here is a novel idea, why don't we let Americans decide what Americans want to do.