pubs are betting we're too stupid to see through this

[M.D. Rawlings]

They can't force President Obama to make a decision other than "no" because the law requires the "environmental review". Its not as though the president has a choice.

Nonsense. If passed, it goes. The review is preliminary. The Obama Administration is flat-out determined to stop the project. Plain and simple.

The pubs have been anti-job for President Obama's entire administration so its really not surprising that when they finally do get behind a so-called "jobs producer", it will be fewer than 2000 long term jobs.

More spin.

Now for the truth behind lefty's doggerel. . . .


ABikerSailor writes:

The GOP claims that it will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Actual estimate? 5,000.

Damage done to the environment? Priceless.​

Tree hugging over jobs.

Dimwits, Republicans are not merely talking about the jobs immediately associated with the project's construction. They're talking about the additional jobs that will eventually be created by new businesses due to this infrastructural expansion. Duh! More proof of leftists' incompetence in capitalist economics.

 

[Oddball]

Take a few minutes and review the history of republican policy starting at the beginning of the last century and the only obvious fact is a long list of ideological failures. The exceptions are the progressive republicans - few and far between. http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186726-republican-ideology-through-history-7.html#post4251322

If anyone takes a few minutes to review your history, the obvious fact that reveals itself is what a lying, self-absorbed, overbearing, elitist dickweed you are, no matter the topic at hand.

While the definition of insanity is often stated as doing the same thing and expecting a different result, the definition of a republican is someone who has done the same thing and the consequence is the same thing and yet they continue to praise the same thing: economic collapse and bailouts for the wealthy institutional systems. The more interesting part for me is that so many are tied to their home team, reason sense and good policy don't matter. Republicans are like a team with a bad roster but ardent fans who cheer failure. You got me!

See: Freudian projection.

Splinter, meet plank...

 

[Katzndogz]

It's like no one knows we have over 600,000 miles of oil pipeline already. The environment is doing just fine.

Unless this administration has a goal of increasing the oil supply of China, it has nothing to say.

 

[ABikerSailor]

They can't force President Obama to make a decision other than "no" because the law requires the "environmental review". Its not as though the president has a choice.

Nonsense. If passed, it goes. The review is preliminary. The Obama Administration is flat-out determined to stop the project. Plain and simple.

The pubs have been anti-job for President Obama's entire administration so its really not surprising that when they finally do get behind a so-called "jobs producer", it will be fewer than 2000 long term jobs.

More spin.

Now for the truth behind lefty's doggerel. . . .


ABikerSailor writes:

The GOP claims that it will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Actual estimate? 5,000.

Damage done to the environment? Priceless.​

Tree hugging over jobs.

Dimwits, Republicans are not merely talking about the jobs immediately associated with the project's construction. They're talking about the additional jobs that will eventually be created by new businesses due to this infrastructural expansion. Duh! More proof of leftists' incompetence in capitalist economics.

Actually, the final number of permanent jobs that it will create is between 50 and 100.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They can't force President Obama to make a decision other than "no" because the law requires the "environmental review". Its not as though the president has a choice.

Nonsense. If passed, it goes. The review is preliminary. The Obama Administration is flat-out determined to stop the project. Plain and simple.

The pubs have been anti-job for President Obama's entire administration so its really not surprising that when they finally do get behind a so-called "jobs producer", it will be fewer than 2000 long term jobs.

More spin.

Now for the truth behind lefty's doggerel. . . .


ABikerSailor writes:

The GOP claims that it will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Actual estimate? 5,000.

Damage done to the environment? Priceless.​

Tree hugging over jobs.

Dimwits, Republicans are not merely talking about the jobs immediately associated with the project's construction. They're talking about the additional jobs that will eventually be created by new businesses due to this infrastructural expansion. Duh! More proof of leftists' incompetence in capitalist economics.

Actually, the final number of permanent jobs that it will create is between 50 and 100.

You mean 50 to 100 more than the Obama stimulus?

 

[bripat9643]

The GOP claims that it will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Actual estimate? 5,000.

Damage done to the environment? Priceless.

The term "actual estimate" means "liberal propaganda spin number pulled out of their ass."

 

[bripat9643]

Even radical democrats aren't arguing about the jobs created by the pipeline. What are whining about is that the president might not (sob, sob) have enough time to review the plan. You almost gotta laugh when you think about the health care plan that nobody read. Pelosi even said "you will see what's in it after it is passed". Clearly the pipeline is a good idea from every standpoint from security to the economy and it is popular. That's why Barry is hiding from it.

Good point!

We couldn't have even 24 hours to review a 3000 page healthcare bill that totally changed 15% of the economy, but 3 years isn't enough time to consider a pipeline when we already have 600,000 miles of pipeline in this country.

Who do these sleazy lying two-faced weasels think they're fooling?

 

[bripat9643]

Obama isn't a failure.

The economy went tits up in late 2008 under Bush and bottomed out around March 2009.

Since then, despite the GOP doing everything they can to prevent it, the economy has been in a slow recovery.

What has the GOP done that prevented the economy from recovering? The recovery is slow because of everything Obama has been doing, like trying to destroy the energy industry, taking over healthcare, massive deficit spending, constantly threatening tax increases, "green energy" boondoggles, massive new regulations on banking, yada, yada, yada.

It's gonna really suck for you guys when Obama actually starts campaigning and doing so on his record.

Obama has been campaigning since he got elected, and he's doing it on the taxpayer's dime.

 

[bripat9643]

While the definition of insanity is often stated as doing the same thing and expecting a different result, the definition of a republican is someone who has done the same thing and the consequence is the same thing and yet they continue to praise the same thing: economic collapse and bailouts for the wealthy institutional systems. The more interesting part for me is that so many are tied to their home team, reason sense and good policy don't matter. Republicans are like a team with a bad roster but ardent fans who cheer failure. You got me!

If you look up the definition of "gullible imbecile," you'll see your picture there.

 

[ABikerSailor]

The GOP claims that it will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Actual estimate? 5,000.

Damage done to the environment? Priceless.

The term "actual estimate" means "liberal propaganda spin number pulled out of their ass."

Really? The Washington Post begs to differ......

The Facts

TransCanada Corp., which is pushing to build the pipeline, claims that Keystone XL “was poised to put 20,000 Americans to work to construct the pipeline.” The company also cites another figure — 118,000 spin-off jobs Keystone XL would create through increased business for local restaurants, hotels and suppliers — that comes from a study commissioned by the company. The study even suggested that under “normal” oil price assumptions, the number of permanent jobs would top 250,000.

These statistics form the basis of most of the claims made about the jobs supposedly created by the pipeline. Caveat emptor: the company building the pipeline is obviously going to offer the rosiest scenario possible. One should especially view with a large grain of salt any study for which it paid good money.

Juliet Eilpern and Steven Mufson of The Washington Post explored some of the problems with these numbers in an article last month, but their analysis apparently did not get enough attention. Here’s what they wrote:



A key question for the administration is how many jobs the Keystone XL project would create. TransCanada's initial estimate of 20,000 — which it said includes 13,000 direct construction jobs and 7,000 jobs among supply manufacturers — has been widely quoted by lawmakers and presidential candidates.


[TransCanada chief executive Russ] Girling said Friday that the 13,000 figure was "one person, one year," meaning that if the construction jobs lasted two years, the number of people employed in each of the two years would be 6,500. That brings the company's number closer to the State Department's; State says the project would create 5,000 to 6,000 construction jobs, a figure that was calculated by its contractor Cardno Entrix.

People can reasonably disagree whether one should look at the overall size of the construction force — as the State Department did — or whether one should look at jobs per-person-per-year. Obviously, the second method can greatly increase the number of “jobs,” depending on the length of the project. TransCanada officials also argue that the State Department estimate was made before binding labor contracts were signed, which they suggest means the estimate could increase.

Opponents and proponents of the project have also disagreed over whether as many as 7,000 indirect supply chain jobs will be created. (That’s the rest of TransCanada’s 20,000 figure.) Much of that figure depends on where steel pipe will be fabricated, with opponents claiming that many of the jobs will actually be outside the United States.

Opponents obviously have their own reasons for minimizing the number of jobs created. But the biggest stretch in all of these figures is the biggest number: the 118,000 “spin-off” jobs that supposedly would be created from building the pipeline. (This is again “person-year” jobs.)

This figure, calculated by Ray Perryman, a Texas-based consultant, depends mostly on two key figures, both of which are estimates: the basic capital costs, and the multiplier effect. As opponents have documented, if the capital costs are lower than predicted, and if the multiplier is smaller, then the number of “spin-off jobs” can shrink dramatically. The same goes for the estimates of “permanent jobs,” which depend also on the price of oil.

And what are some of these jobs? The TransCanada report does not say but Perryman used a similar technique for a report touting the benefits of a wind farm project.

Among the list of jobs that would be created: 51 dancers and choreographers, 138 dentists, 176 dental hygienists, 100 librarians, 510 bread bakers, 448 clergy, 154 stenographers, 865 hairdressers, 136 manicurists, 110 shampooers, 65 farmers, and (our favorite) 1,714 bartenders.

He even suggested the project would create jobs for 898 reporters and 98 public relations people, but that ratio seems off these days. Surely, it must be reversed. Anyway, you get the picture.

The House Speaker is the most prominent person in recent days to claim “tens of thousands of Americans jobs” would be created. Brendan Buck, his spokesman, defended the use of the figures. “Americans need jobs, and however you slice the numbers, approving this project will create a whole lot more of them than punting on it — like the president has done,” he said.

Keystone pipeline jobs claims: a bipartisan fumble - The Washington Post

 

[bripat9643]

Actually, the final number of permanent jobs that it will create is between 50 and 100.

Sorry, but your ass is not a credible source of data.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The GOP claims that it will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Actual estimate? 5,000.

Damage done to the environment? Priceless.

The term "actual estimate" means "liberal propaganda spin number pulled out of their ass."

Really? The Washington Post begs to differ......

The Facts

TransCanada Corp., which is pushing to build the pipeline, claims that Keystone XL “was poised to put 20,000 Americans to work to construct the pipeline.” The company also cites another figure — 118,000 spin-off jobs Keystone XL would create through increased business for local restaurants, hotels and suppliers — that comes from a study commissioned by the company. The study even suggested that under “normal” oil price assumptions, the number of permanent jobs would top 250,000.

These statistics form the basis of most of the claims made about the jobs supposedly created by the pipeline. Caveat emptor: the company building the pipeline is obviously going to offer the rosiest scenario possible. One should especially view with a large grain of salt any study for which it paid good money.

Juliet Eilpern and Steven Mufson of The Washington Post explored some of the problems with these numbers in an article last month, but their analysis apparently did not get enough attention. Here’s what they wrote:



A key question for the administration is how many jobs the Keystone XL project would create. TransCanada's initial estimate of 20,000 — which it said includes 13,000 direct construction jobs and 7,000 jobs among supply manufacturers — has been widely quoted by lawmakers and presidential candidates.


[TransCanada chief executive Russ] Girling said Friday that the 13,000 figure was "one person, one year," meaning that if the construction jobs lasted two years, the number of people employed in each of the two years would be 6,500. That brings the company's number closer to the State Department's; State says the project would create 5,000 to 6,000 construction jobs, a figure that was calculated by its contractor Cardno Entrix.

People can reasonably disagree whether one should look at the overall size of the construction force — as the State Department did — or whether one should look at jobs per-person-per-year. Obviously, the second method can greatly increase the number of “jobs,” depending on the length of the project. TransCanada officials also argue that the State Department estimate was made before binding labor contracts were signed, which they suggest means the estimate could increase.

Opponents and proponents of the project have also disagreed over whether as many as 7,000 indirect supply chain jobs will be created. (That’s the rest of TransCanada’s 20,000 figure.) Much of that figure depends on where steel pipe will be fabricated, with opponents claiming that many of the jobs will actually be outside the United States.

Opponents obviously have their own reasons for minimizing the number of jobs created. But the biggest stretch in all of these figures is the biggest number: the 118,000 “spin-off” jobs that supposedly would be created from building the pipeline. (This is again “person-year” jobs.)

This figure, calculated by Ray Perryman, a Texas-based consultant, depends mostly on two key figures, both of which are estimates: the basic capital costs, and the multiplier effect. As opponents have documented, if the capital costs are lower than predicted, and if the multiplier is smaller, then the number of “spin-off jobs” can shrink dramatically. The same goes for the estimates of “permanent jobs,” which depend also on the price of oil.

And what are some of these jobs? The TransCanada report does not say but Perryman used a similar technique for a report touting the benefits of a wind farm project.

Among the list of jobs that would be created: 51 dancers and choreographers, 138 dentists, 176 dental hygienists, 100 librarians, 510 bread bakers, 448 clergy, 154 stenographers, 865 hairdressers, 136 manicurists, 110 shampooers, 65 farmers, and (our favorite) 1,714 bartenders.

He even suggested the project would create jobs for 898 reporters and 98 public relations people, but that ratio seems off these days. Surely, it must be reversed. Anyway, you get the picture.

The House Speaker is the most prominent person in recent days to claim “tens of thousands of Americans jobs” would be created. Brendan Buck, his spokesman, defended the use of the figures. “Americans need jobs, and however you slice the numbers, approving this project will create a whole lot more of them than punting on it — like the president has done,” he said.

Keystone pipeline jobs claims: a bipartisan fumble - The Washington Post

Actually, the WaPo is full of shit. TransCanada said that the pipeline would create 13,000 jobs a year, not 13,000 jobs over the entire time it takes to build the pipeline. Do they want me to believe that, if the pipeline takes 10 years to build it will only provide 1300 jobs? If not, their math makes no sense at all. If so, it makes even less sense.

 

[Sarah G]

Actually, the final number of permanent jobs that it will create is between 50 and 100.

Sorry, but your ass is not a credible source of data.

You should know.

Actually all the lies they've been spewing in these debates are all going to come out and Republicans are going to get slammed again after the first of the year.

 

[Article 15]

Obama isn't a failure.

The economy went tits up in late 2008 under Bush and bottomed out around March 2009.

Since then, despite the GOP doing everything they can to prevent it, the economy has been in a slow recovery.

What has the GOP done that prevented the economy from recovering? The recovery is slow because of everything Obama has been doing, like trying to destroy the energy industry, taking over healthcare, massive deficit spending, constantly threatening tax increases, "green energy" boondoggles, massive new regulations on banking, yada, yada, yada.

It's gonna really suck for you guys when Obama actually starts campaigning and doing so on his record.

Obama has been campaigning since he got elected, and he's doing it on the taxpayer's dime.

Sure he has.

You, my little lying nutter friend, are gonna be one shocked mother fucker when the man actually does start campaigning.

But have a Merry Christmas anyway, you insufferable tool.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Obama isn't a failure.

The economy went tits up in late 2008 under Bush and bottomed out around March 2009.

Since then, despite the GOP doing everything they can to prevent it, the economy has been in a slow recovery.

What has the GOP done that prevented the economy from recovering? The recovery is slow because of everything Obama has been doing, like trying to destroy the energy industry, taking over healthcare, massive deficit spending, constantly threatening tax increases, "green energy" boondoggles, massive new regulations on banking, yada, yada, yada.

It's gonna really suck for you guys when Obama actually starts campaigning and doing so on his record.

Obama has been campaigning since he got elected, and he's doing it on the taxpayer's dime.

Sure he has.

You, my little lying nutter friend, are gonna be one shocked mother fucker when the man actually does start campaigning.

But have a Merry Christmas anyway, you insufferable tool.

My bet is you will not be able to show anyone the difference between when he starts campaigning and what he is doing now, but feel free to try. I do know one thing, no one that saw him start his campaign in 2008 by breaking a promise will be surprised by anything he does next year.