Obama’s jobs plan isn’t top priority for Reid

What did I get wrong? How will those bills create jobs? How will cutting government spending and laying off government workers result in MORE people working?

I would love to hear your explanation.
The same way that pulling leeches off of your arm leaves more blood for you.

It also results in the leech dying, as it has no food.

So ... you want us to kill anyone getting tax payer money? That will create jobs?

Dude, you're weird.
 
What did I get wrong? How will those bills create jobs? How will cutting government spending and laying off government workers result in MORE people working?

I would love to hear your explanation.
The same way that pulling leeches off of your arm leaves more blood for you.

It also results in the leech dying, as it has no food.

So ... you want us to kill anyone getting tax payer money? That will create jobs?

Dude, you're weird.
In the case of the bureaucratic leech, they'd go on unemployment for awhile, after which they'd be more or less forced to take gainful employment in the real world.

Much as you'd like to believe differently, that's good news for everyone involved.
 
Donald Trump thinks that currency manipulation of Socialist China needs to be a top priority, so Senator Reid is not without his ability to forge actual votes that pass both houses.

In the Washington Times article, even this appears:

"On the House side, GOP leaders, who control that chamber, have said they are waiting for an evaluation of the bill from the Congressional Budget Office and will then send the (Obama Jobs Plan) through the committee process."

"Republicans have said there are some ideas in Mr. Obama’s plan that they can accept, though they and some Democrats have rejected the tax increases Mr. Obama has called for — particularly the $400 billion he would raise over 10 years by limiting deductions for high-income taxpayers."

The Democrats are accustomed to real events and outcomes. The House is widely perceived as being controlled by only 64 Districts--Fantasy controlled--and not by Boehner. Republicans, too, are dismayed with the continuing capitulations to the 64.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(From Land Great Spirit Gave to Anita Bryant--Now arises Colored Fascist, Passing in the GOP: "Nein!! Nein! Nein!")
 
I'm rather surprised by this. The Democrats should know that jobs are the #1 priority for the country. It's also good for them going in to re-election. Odd that Reid wouldn't be pushing for this.

Of course, this doesn't change the fact the GOP have offered zero jobs plans so far, but still, Reid's behavior is weird.

you've been shown to be a lying sack of shit every time you say that. How many times do we have to post this???

Eric Cantor || Majority Leader || Blog || Senator Reid Blocks Republican Jobs Bills

Below is a list of measures House Republicans have passed related to job creation:


Empower Small Business Owners and Reduce Regulatory Burdens:

H.R. 872, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act

Introduced by Rep. Bob Gibbs (OH) on March 2, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 292-130 on March 31, 2011
Senate has taken no action to date

H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act

Introduced by Rep. Fred Upton (MI) on March 3, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 255-172 on April 7, 2011
Senate has taken no action to date

H.J.Res. 37, a Resolution of disapproval regarding the FCC’s regulation of the Internet and broadband industry practices

Introduced by Rep. Greg Walden (OR) on February 16, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 240 to 179 on April 8, 2011
Senate has taken no action to date

H.Res. 72, a Resolution to direct committees to inventory and review existing, pending, and proposed regulations and order from agencies of the Federal Government, particularly with respect to their effect on jobs and economic growth



Introduced by Rep. Pete Sessions (TX) on February 8, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 391 to 28 on February 11, 2011
The Senate has not directed their committees to take such action


Fix The Tax Code To Help Job Creators:

H.R. 4, the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act

Introduced by Rep. Dan Lungren (CA) on January 12, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 314 to 112 on March 3, 2011
Passed the Senate by a vote of 87 to 12 on March 31, 2011
Signed into law by the President on April 14, 2011
well, they got 'one' through anyway...

Maximize Domestic Energy Production To Ensure An Energy Policy For The Twenty-First Century:

H.R. 1230, Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act

Introduced by Rep. Doc Hastings (WA) on March 29, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 266-149 on May 5, 2011
Senate has taken no action to date

H.R. 1229, Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act

Introduced by Rep. Doc Hastings (WA) on March 29, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 263-163 on May 11, 2011
Senate has taken no action to date

H.R. 1231, Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act

Introduced by Rep. Doc Hastings (WA) on March 29, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 243-179 on May 12, 2011
Senate has taken no action to date

Pay Down America’s Unsustainable Debt Burden and Start Living Within Our Means:

H.Con.Res. 34, a Resolution establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2012 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2013 through 2021

Introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan (WI) on April 11, 2011
Passed the House by a vote of 235-193 on April 15, 2011
Senate has not yet considered a budget of their own

Yup. Like I said. No jobs bills. Thanks for confirming that!

Or, wait, do you think those were jobs bills? Oh, please tell me you don't think those were jobs bills! H.Con.Res 34 would actually result in people being laid off!!


I'm still waiting to see someone explain how a $787 Billion Stimulus that results in an increase in unemployment from 7.2% to at best 9.1% today, results in a success of Obama's handling of jobs and the economy during his watch?

Just look at what the left had to say about the economy under the Bush administration:

Jobless Rate Hits 7.2%, a 16-Year High
By LOUIS UCHITELLE
Published: January 9, 2009


The nation lost 524,000 jobs in December, reflecting a pervasive fear among employers that if they fail to shed workers quickly their companies may go under in a recession poised to become the worst since the 1930s.
Enlarge This Image

The unemployment rate, meanwhile, jumped to a 16-year-high of 7.2 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday. The growing army of the unemployed, at 11.1 million, is nearly 50 percent bigger than at the start of the recession a year ago.

Responding to the report, President-elect Barack Obama said Congress must enact an economic stimulus plan quickly.

Unemployment Soars to Highest Level in 16 Years - NYTimes.com

Where is the outrage over the unemployment numbers we are seeing today under President Obama?
 
Last edited:
For decades jobs were supported by an uneasy compact between capital and labor whereby workers earned higher wages so that they could drive the domestic economy through consumer spending. A whole bunch of government programs were implemented to increase the economic security of the middle class, which economic security translated into major consumption. Indeed, this was a virtuous cycle because the capitalist was forced to add more and more jobs to deal with the increased demand. This economic model lead to the greatest economic growth in America's history. (Don't take my word for it; research the growth in the 50s and 60s - and then research the economic policies in play)

Additionally, the Fed employed an expansionary or stimulative monetary policy to maintain high employment during downturns. They did this because they thought a recession would turn into a vicious deflationary cycle where less consumer spending would beget job loss which would beget even less consumer spending which would beget even more layoffs which would beget lower tax revenues which would beget austerity (fewer benefits & safety nets) which would beget even lower consumer spending and even more job loss. . . an on and on.

But let's be frank about the compact between capital and labor: it was very contentious (e.g., Labor frequently striked, while also pressuring capital to employ more women and African Americans). Capital felt suffocated by the growing liberal encroachment on its profits. Put simply: it didn't want to pay such high labor costs or be beholden to "Social Justice".

As a result....

In the late 60s... business began to aggressively target Washington, pouring money into the Republican Party. They finally got their man in Reagan, who pointed to the inflation caused by the oil shock and said America must reduce the load on capital so that it could compete globally and deliver innovation and competitive prices. Indeed, we were told, America must stop all the things being done to create a powerful middle-class-consumer so that it could provide the tax and regulatory environment conducive to investments, innovations, jobs, and cheaper prices.

So we listened to Reagan, and we began to roll-back the advantages awarded to labor during the long dark Liberal Hegemony of the postwar years (when the American economy grew at its highest rate, partly because high wages, benefits, entitlements, and government programs enabled such vigorous consumption). We slowly started to replace demand centered policies with supply side policies, i.e., we took care of suppliers in hopes that their newfound largess would redound to average consumers.

And so the Fed shifted its focus from stimulating demand and maintaining full employment to fighting inflation, e.g.,please recall the infamous Volker shock, which defeated inflation, but gave Reagan a recession and the highest unemployment since the Great Depression. . . (which was a god-send to business because high unemployment makes it harder for workers to strike or demand higher wages)

So what did Reagan and his economic team do when faced with a massive recession and weakened consumer spending? They shifted America to a debt ("credit card") economy, that is, Master Cards and Visas would make-up for disappearing wages, jobs, and benefits. Morning in America was fueled by massive borrowing. And it worked like a dream! The middle class started spending like never before. The American consumer went on a 30 year, debt-fueled spending orgy. And . . . every time the economy needed a little boost, a more ingenious vehicle was created from which to borrow, or a bubble was created to suck money off the side-lines. When we ran out of room on our credit cards, we made it easier for Americans to turn their homes into ATMs. Consumers borrowed from every source possible to make-up for the failed Reagan trickle down [And of course it failed: you can't maintain vigorous consumption by lowering wages, benefits, and cutting entitlements. This is why Henry Ford paid his workers enough to buy the cars they made].

Regardless, you can only borrow for so long until you break the bank. The credit card economy had to fail eventually. . . (and it did)

So where does that leave us?

Capital has more liquid than at any times in the past 50 years. In fact their surplus is too large for Wall Street to allocate, which has lead to the construction of phantom derivative ponzi schemes. The Koch brothers are sitting on 50 billion, but they won't add one American job until the middle class consumer has money in to buy stuff. And the middle class will not have the money until we return to the demand centered policies which the Right calls socialism (in order to protect the suppliers, who now control the opinions of average Americans. What gave them such control over American opinion? What has allowed them to convince poor people to vote for the concentration of wealth & political power at the top? Easy. The wealthy used the staggering profits made possible by Reaganomics to invest in think tanks and media. This means they can now prevent the country from re-investing in the middle class consumer.)

In other words, we're fucked.

Enter Religion, the other phase of the Reagan Revolution.

With an increase in desperation God always does a brisk business.

(brilliant)
 
Last edited:
What did I get wrong? How will those bills create jobs? How will cutting government spending and laying off government workers result in MORE people working?

I would love to hear your explanation.
The same way that pulling leeches off of your arm leaves more blood for you.

It also results in the leech dying, as it has no food.

So ... you want us to kill anyone getting tax payer money? That will create jobs?

Dude, you're weird.

So, you let the leech suck the very life from you because you're worried about the leech?

A parasite is a parasite...

Dude, YOU'RE weird.

:lol:
 
I'm still waiting to see someone explain how a $787 Billion Stimulus that results in an increase in unemployment from 7.2% to at best 9.1% today, results in a success of Obama's handling of jobs and the economy during his watch?
In early 2009, projections were that unemployment could go as high as 11% without stimulus. We topped out just above 10% and are now down to 9.1%, and while that's not great, it's a lot better than 11%.

But beside that, the Recovery Act's #1 priority was not jobs. It was about getting the economy growing again and keeping us from falling in to a Depression. In that regard, it has worked perfectly. We are growing and have been for 2 years now.
 
Personally, I have a problem with being asked to pay more taxes so that some government paper shuffler who tells me I need to get a $50 permit, a variance and 3 inspections in order to swap out my bathroom vanity, has a job, guaranteed for life with full benefits after 25 years, yet I have to operate in what we call reality.
 
Personally, I have a problem with being asked to pay more taxes so that some government paper shuffler who tells me I need to get a $50 permit, a variance and 3 inspections in order to swap out my bathroom vanity, has a job, guaranteed for life with full benefits after 25 years, yet I have to operate in what we call reality.

That just sounds like jealousy.

Get a better job.
 
Personally, I have a problem with being asked to pay more taxes so that some government paper shuffler who tells me I need to get a $50 permit, a variance and 3 inspections in order to swap out my bathroom vanity, has a job, guaranteed for life with full benefits after 25 years, yet I have to operate in what we call reality.

That just sounds like jealousy.

Get a better job.

No, not at all, and I'm self employed and I love it. The point is my goofy friend, there are no guarantees.. I have to keep my clients happy... In tough times I can't raise my rates... I can't just go and say hey guys... I need to raise revenues so "you need to pay your fair share". No, I may have to cut back, I may have to lay off.

I find this much more rewarding than sitting on my ass waiting for retirement.
 
Last edited:
Bookmark this one for the next time you hear democratics mewling about "obstructionists" and/or not putting jobs at the top of the agenda...
President Obama still is pressing Congress to pass his jobs stimulus bill immediately, but his own party leaders in the Senate, where Democrats have a majority, have pushed that vote off yet again.

Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said Monday night that when the Senate returns from a weeklong vacation, the chamber will work instead on a bill that would push to label China a currency manipulator, which would make retaliatory steps in order.

<snip>

Mr. Reid is the Senate sponsor of the measure, but he said there are other priorities.

&#8220;We&#8217;ll get to that, but let&#8217;s get some of these things done that we have to get done first,&#8221; he said.

Obama's jobs plan isn't top priority for Reid - Washington Times

Time to face up to the fact, my liberoidal Obammy fluffer brothers and sisters; the fake "jobs bill" is a political prop, never intended to get passed, meant only at a flimsy pretext to claim that republicans don't care about job creation during the election.


Obama's job plan isn't a PRIORITY for Obama either--Otherwise he would have written a bill that could pass the house and the senate.

Still today--no DEMOCRAT in the house has introduced his bill--and Harry Reid has basically tabled it--basically STATING--No more spending money on Road and Bridge work--:lol:

Obama's NEW job plan is just stim bill Jr WHICH equates too--(same thing--different day) from what flopped 2-1/2 year ago-costing the American taxpayer 867 BILLION dollars. Obama just wants more of the same--he is STUCK in his own failed policies.

$donkey stimulus.jpg

One Big Ass Mistake America
 
Last edited:
In the case of the bureaucratic leech, they'd go on unemployment for awhile, after which they'd be more or less forced to take gainful employment in the real world.
And since it's so easy in today's market to get a job .... oh wait ...

And to that I say... "Welcome back to reality".

Tell that to Oddball. He's the one advocating public sector employees just go out and get private sector jobs. Simple!
 
I'm rather surprised by this. The Democrats should know that jobs are the #1 priority for the country. It's also good for them going in to re-election. Odd that Reid wouldn't be pushing for this.

Of course, this doesn't change the fact the GOP have offered zero jobs plans so far, but still, Reid's behavior is weird.

Hey Stupid, do you know what this is?



barlow%20tyrie%20monaco%20dining%20table.jpg



If not, have Reid explain it to you......
 
I'm still waiting to see someone explain how a $787 Billion Stimulus that results in an increase in unemployment from 7.2% to at best 9.1% today, results in a success of Obama's handling of jobs and the economy during his watch?
In early 2009, projections were that unemployment could go as high as 11% without stimulus. We topped out just above 10% and are now down to 9.1%, and while that's not great, it's a lot better than 11%.

But beside that, the Recovery Act's #1 priority was not jobs. It was about getting the economy growing again and keeping us from falling in to a Depression. In that regard, it has worked perfectly. We are growing and have been for 2 years now.


What PROOF can you provide to the claim that the Stimulus Plan saved the nation from falling into an 11% unemployment rate? For that matter, why not just say it saved the nation from reaching 14% . . . or even a 22% unemployment? Is this the only way liberals can somehow demonstrate the Recovery Act's success? I have come across this "Liberal Logic" of simply pulling figures out of the air, to try and provide some "much needed proof", once before (beginning at time segment 0:28)


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFMe2jFfhAI&feature=related]Get Smart S1 Ep. 25 - The Amazing Harry Hoo (part2) - YouTube[/ame]
 
Last edited:
I'm still waiting to see someone explain how a $787 Billion Stimulus that results in an increase in unemployment from 7.2% to at best 9.1% today, results in a success of Obama's handling of jobs and the economy during his watch?
In early 2009, projections were that unemployment could go as high as 11% without stimulus. We topped out just above 10% and are now down to 9.1%, and while that's not great, it's a lot better than 11%.

But beside that, the Recovery Act's #1 priority was not jobs. It was about getting the economy growing again and keeping us from falling in to a Depression. In that regard, it has worked perfectly. We are growing and have been for 2 years now.
So much party man hack spin it makes me physically queasy...Reminds me of...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fC89cgK5Sp0]CDES 216 Final - The Sandlot - YouTube[/ame]
 

Forum List

Back
Top