Obama’s jobs plan: $447 billion for one decent month of employment growth
The headline is “Obama Jobs Plan May Prevent 2012 Recession.” But the story Bloomberg published, based on its survey of economists about the president’s $447 billion proposal, is best summarized by the second paragraph:
The legislation, submitted to Congress this month, would increase gross domestic product by 0.6 percent next year and add or keep 275,000 workers on payrolls, the median estimates in the survey of 34 economists showed. The program would also lower the jobless rate by 0.2 percentage point in 2012, economists said.
For those keeping score at home, that’s a “jobs plan” that costs more than $1.6 million per job. If the president wants to spend taxpayer dollars to provoke demand-side job creation, he would be better off holding a lottery and giving $10,000 apiece to 45 million people.
Worse, the Economic Policy Institute earlier this year estimated it would take job growth of 285,000 per month, every month for the next five years, for the economy to return to the pre-recession unemployment rate. That was after February’s job-growth numbers came out; job growth has come in well below 285,000 every month since then. (It was zero in August, in case you forgot.)
So, President Obama wants to spend $447 billion to speed up the recovery process by one month. Or, rather, the better part of one month.
The White House, according to Bloomberg, prefers to cite economists who say the plan would boost hiring by 1 million. But for every economist in the survey that says the plan would perform that well, there’s another who says it won’t produce any net new jobs. [This sentence has been edited from the original; see explanation in my comment at 11:20 a.m. -- KW]
Oh, and that line about the plan keeping us out of a recession next year? If 0.6 percent of GDP is the difference between being in a recession and staying out of one, we’re in for a rough 2012.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
163 comments Add your comment
I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
September 28th, 2011
9:11 am
Romney, Perry, Paul pull in cash – Other GOP hopefuls struggling, running out of money.bHerman Cain, the former pizza company executive, has loaned himself hundreds of thousands of dollars so he can keep running.-Urinal
Date- 9/28/11
Pay to the Order of- Herman Cain
Amount- $2,400
Signed- The Duh Report
Thanks for the information, AJC!
JKL2
September 28th, 2011
9:14 am
Keep those printing presses rolling. Free pesos for everyone!
Don’t forget to raise the minimun wage up to $20/hr while we’re at it. Then everyone could have a “good” job.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:20 am
The Republican job plan:
Step 1. zzzzzzzzzzzz.
Step 2. We could use unemployment to attack Obama.
Step 3. We need jobs and jobs is our Number One priority.
Step 4. Why hasn’t Obama created jobs.
Step 5. Obama wants to tax the job creators.
Step 6. Vote Republican and we will divert Medicaid money to pay for unemployment benefits.
Step 7. Vote Republican and we will reduce unemployment benefits that harm corporations.
Step 8. Vote Republican so we can keep our jobs.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:28 am
If Peter Piper picked a peck of job creators,
How many pecks of job creators would Peter Piper have to pick,
To pack a peck of jobs in Peter Piper’s peck.
Kyle's disingenuousness knows no bounds
September 28th, 2011
9:45 am
Congrats, Kyle. Once again you present us with a short, poorly conceived article citing cherry picked stats that do nothing but obfuscate. Here’s a suggestion: instead of baseless attacks, why not use your brilliant economic awesomeness to posit how you would fix the economy if you were Prez? And I’d like something beyond the standard vacuous platitudes of no taxes, no regs and no govt. I’d like specifics and data to show why your plan would work. Go on – I dare ya!
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:49 am
Tax cuts account for more than half the dollar value of the Obama plan, which also includes $105 billion in spending for school modernization, transportation projects and rehabilitation of vacant properties, according to a White House fact sheet. The proposal includes $35 billion in direct aid to state and local governments to stem dismissals of educators and emergency personnel.
And the great thing is that the house Republicans have a rule that tax cuts do not require a corresponding spending cut because every good Republican knows that tax cuts do not need corresponding spending cuts. I think it is written in the bylaws of being a Republican or something like that, right Kyle. So, Obama made it real easy for the Republicans by creating jobs that are not only paid for in the legislation but half paid for with a tax cut. Rejoice with us, Kyle.
Independence and Employed
September 28th, 2011
9:54 am
The summary is 280k to 1million job would be created with Obama’s Job plan. With everything that’s being said, we need a Job Bill NOW. Obama’s job act is not perfect, but, we have to act NOW.
Better die from trying than not trying at all. I felt that some of these politicians has no idea in regarding to what’s out there.
dw
September 28th, 2011
9:55 am
I actually agree with Kyle on this one. WHEN will the country wake up and realize that the economy is NOT a usa problem… it is a WORLD problem. Its not going to get better until the next internet or housing boom comes along! Quit expecting stupid politicians to fix it overnight retards……..
Ayn Rant
September 28th, 2011
9:57 am
Right-wing voodoo economics is just bad arithmetic.
When you pour money into the pockets of working people who will spend it, you spur consumer demand that will provide opportunities for profitable investment in job-creating enterprises. It’s inevitable; there’s nowhere else the money can go. Put $100,000 in and you get one job for one year, or support 1% of a hundred jobs for one year.
Kyle’s voodoo economics is outright deception: he divides the entire cost of the job creation program into a right-wing “estimate” of the number of jobs that will be created in 2012. The job-creating proposal by the President creates jobs over several years to come; it would initiate, not complete, the investment projects in 2012.
President Obama’s job creation plan is the only one on the table. Ignore it if you are content with the present economic stagnation, or fool enough to believe that repeating the same mistakes that caused the economic blow-out will jolt the economy to life.
Bart Abel
September 28th, 2011
10:00 am
RE: “So, President Obama wants to spend $447 billion to speed up the recovery process by one month.”
———————————-
Readers wouldn’t know it from reading this post, so I thought that it’s worth pointing out that more than half of the American Jobs Act proposal is made up of tax cuts.
Kyle also made the mistake of writing that one out of three economists predict that the American Jobs Act won’t produce any “net new jobs”. That’s not correct either. Bloomberg reported that this data measures the number of workers that employers would “add or keep” as a result of this jobs proposal. “Net new jobs” is not the same as “add or keep”.
Now, here’s the problem. The median statistics that Kyle relies on above are misleading because they’re reporting medians from a survey in which some economists mysteriously reported that the legislation would “add or keep” zero jobs. One doesn’t have to be an economist to know that that is arithmetically impossible. I repeat…impossible! You can’t hire tens of thousands of construction workers to repair schools, roads, and bridges, and then somehow claim no jobs were saved or created.
In short, this survey is flawed.
BULLSEYE
September 28th, 2011
10:01 am
That’s crazy. When we can always do this:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/08/314467/gop-voted-for-50-billion-to-rebuild-iraq-without-cuts-now-insist-on-cuts-to-offset-funding-to-rebuild-america/
The definition of insanity
September 28th, 2011
10:06 am
Stimulus 1 didn’t work and yet the liberals on here think a stimulus 2 would work. Sometimes you wonder if the liberals have just gone insane. Repeating the same mistake over and over and expecting different results- insanity.
Lost and found department
September 28th, 2011
10:08 am
Somewhere in Chicago a community has lost its organizer. Will someone please return the organizer to his community.
BULLSEYE
September 28th, 2011
10:09 am
Here’s a stimulus for ya:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
10:11 am
Independence: No, the summary is that zero to 1 million jobs would be created — and there are a lot more of Bloomberg’s economists predicting zero than there are predicting 1 million.
Bart: Fine, so they would “add or keep” zero. Does that really make you feel better? As for the part about the bill including tax cuts: I’ve long said not all tax cuts are created equal from an economic perspective.
Obama: Ethics class influences my presidency – USA Today | Obama News
September 28th, 2011
10:12 am
[...] PostEconomists: Obama plan would hold off recessionPoliticoObama Encourages Learning to StudentsTIMEAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -ABC Newsall 929 news [...]
Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 28th, 2011
10:13 am
Looks like Kyle rattled the cage of the leftist loons. If you want to grow the US economy, just undo everything that has happened since the democrats took control of Congress in January 2007. In fact, if you really want the economy to roar, just undo everything Congress has done since 1969.
Class of '98
September 28th, 2011
10:16 am
The mentality of a liberal: “Better die from trying than not trying at all.”
These are the same people, who if they were lost in the woods, would think there best option to find safety would be to simply run faster. They think the direction in which they run doesn’t matter.
It matters. It matters.
Bart Abel
September 28th, 2011
10:17 am
Thanks for the correction, Kyle. But to be clear, arguing that all tax cuts are the same is not equivalent to reporting as if they don’t exist.
And no, the surveys indicated that the American Jobs Act would not add or keep zero jobs doesn’t make me feel better…or worse. It tells me that the survey is flawed, because as I said, that would be mathematically impossible.
Bart Abel
September 28th, 2011
10:18 am
Correction: …arguing that all tax cuts are NOT the same is not equivalent to reporting as if they don’t exist.
BULLSEYE
September 28th, 2011
10:20 am
This should jump start our ecomnomy
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2005/oct/24/00007/
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
10:22 am
Bart: What I reported is that Obama has a plan with a price tag of $447 billion, and the median-case projection is that it would create or “save” 275,000 jobs. That’s the story here.
carlosgvv
September 28th, 2011
10:23 am
One more time – Obama is The President of The United States, not the KING. He shares power with the Congress and The Supreme Court and job creation is not really a part of his job description. To make matters worse, he is saddled with a poison Tea Party Congress who would rather let America slide into third world status than help him succeed at anything.
dw
September 28th, 2011
10:26 am
WE LIVE IN A WORLD ECONOMY… it doesnt matter who is POTUS. The world economy is screwed right now. Hiking taxes or cutting taxes in the usa is not going to make a lick of difference
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
10:30 am
Kyle
and what infrastructure do we get for free along with those very expensive jobs?
Bart Abel
September 28th, 2011
10:38 am
Kyle,
I was referring to this line from your post (emphasis mine): “President Obama wants to SPEND $447 billion to speed up the recovery process by one month.” However, the word “spend” also included about $245 billion in tax cuts. My complaint is that, in my opinion, your silence on these tax cuts leaves readers confused.
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
10:40 am
Maintaining: I knew someone would bring that up. Of course part of the expense covers construction costs, etc. But the president isn’t selling an infrastructure plan. He’s selling a jobs plan. Unlike his first stimulus, this isn’t a recovery and *reinvestment* act. It’s supposed to be a jobs, jobs, jobs bill. So, the idea should be to create as many jobs as quickly as possible. And, as he’s admitted many times before, these jobs aren’t really shovel-ready…which means his plan would be neither quick nor, getting back to the economic forecasts, effective at job creation.
Like I said, if the point is to dump a bunch of money in the economy, this isn’t even the best way to do that.
JF McNamara
September 28th, 2011
10:43 am
Isn’t this a failure in Republican policies? The jobs plan is 55% tax cuts, and Republicans are saying its expensive and will fail. Its 31% infrastructure and local aid, 14% unemployment, and the rest (55%) is tax cuts. Tax cuts, by far, are what the plan is about.
I guess tax cuts don’t actually work. Thanks for finally acknowledging your own dumb propaganda is a lie.
You need to make the change, “Tax cut plan” that costs more than $1.6 million per job.
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
10:43 am
Kyle,
If you knew someone would bring it up why not address it? Do you find it shameful that his jobs plan manages to do both?
Please enlighten us as to what “the best way to do it is”.
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
10:44 am
Kyle,
One other thought. Would you have preferred we spent that much money and got no infrastructure for it?
Check these stats
September 28th, 2011
10:46 am
And the republicans job plan? Cut the corporate tax rate to $0, cut *entitlements* that people have actually paid into their entire working lives, no spending on anything but free market subsidies to big business (snark) and more money to defense contractors.
Michael Marr
September 28th, 2011
10:48 am
In the last stimulus, didn’t teachers, cops and other govt employees get an extra $25 per week in their paychecks and these counted as “jobs”?
JDW
September 28th, 2011
10:49 am
Well Kyle I agree that the plan is less efficient than I would like The main problem is that it was conceived to put something on the table that could be passed by Repugicans. Therefore it is loaded up with inefficient job creating costs such as tax cuts rather than things that could really help like funding for new businesses, more infrastructure spending or energy R&D.
Now to your “cherry picking” and down right misrepresentation of the facts. What Bloomberg actually said was:
“President Barack Obama’s $447 billion jobs plan would help avoid a return to recession by maintaining growth and pushing down the unemployment rate next year”
They went on to say:
“The legislation, submitted to Congress this month, would increase gross domestic product by 0.6 percent next year and add or keep 275,000 workers on payrolls, the median estimates in the survey of 34 economists showed. The program would also lower the jobless rate by 0.2 percentage point in 2012, economists said.”
Where you err (mislead
) is in doing your math using zero as the baseline. For example doing nothing:
“would cut GDP by 1.7 percent in 2012, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. chief U.S. economist Michael Feroli in New York”
So the net impact on GDP is actually in the 2.3% range rather than .6%. Sounds like a bit better investment now doesn’t it?
Quick Critic
September 28th, 2011
10:53 am
Let me see if I have this straight. Bloomberg publishes this story that Kyle doesn’t like or agree with, so we have this blog debate. Kyle says – “But for every economist in the survey that says the plan would perform that well, there are three who say it won’t produce any net new jobs.”
Here’s my two cents… (1) Kyle what your source that states a 3-to-1 ratio say it won’t produce any? new jobs” We cannot just make stuff up here, if this criticism by Kyle is credible, we’ve got to a source, not an opinion. (2) Bloomberg publised the story. (3) BLOOMBERG published the story. (4) Kyle isn’t employed by Bloomberg. This is equivilent to my coaching my 8 year old in baseball and writing about how Bobby Cox failed as a MLB manager in his later years.
Just my two cents – but this doesn’t hold any water or with the criticism without a source on the 3-to-1 ratio. (Fox News is not a credible source.)
I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
September 28th, 2011
10:54 am
With the Urinal offering opinion “from the right” through David Brooks and Kathleen Parker, it just goes to show you that the AJC wouldn’t know Conservatism if they fell over it.
freaking ate up liberals…
c
September 28th, 2011
10:55 am
WOW at the amount of stupid posts on this blog. You Obama lovers have no clue what you’re talking about. Keep up the good work Kyle. These idiots can’t handle the truth
Yahtzee
September 28th, 2011
10:57 am
Obama is a clown.
John
September 28th, 2011
11:00 am
I’m pretty close to being a yellow dog democrat; I’m pro-choice, don’t oppose gay marriage, strongly believe that pollution is contributing to global warming, and am generally not pro-big business. But, if the economy doesn’t improve markedly over the next 13 months I’ll in all likelihood be willing to give someone like Romney a good hard look. (NOT, however, Palin or Bachmann or Perry.)
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
11:02 am
JF: The only propaganda at play is the notion that I or any other informed conservative believes all tax cuts work equally well. Do some Republican politicians say that out of ignorance, or simply to pander? Sure. But it is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the economics.
JDW: Speaking of cherry-picking…you cite the opinion of one economist out of 34 and claim I’ve misrepresented the story. I could just as easily cite this quote a few paragraphs later:
“ ‘It’s not really going to have anything more than a marginal impact,’ said Stephen Stanley, chief economist at Pierpont Securities LLC in Stamford, Connecticut. ‘It’s just maintaining the status quo: extending the payroll-tax cuts and unemployment benefits. The bulk of the money is going to go to firms that would’ve hired anyway.’
“Stanley estimated the program would increase payrolls by 50,000 and add 0.25 percent to GDP next year.”
That’s why they survey a range of economists and report the medians. To avoid the exact kind of cherry-picking you did.
Gen. MacArthur
September 28th, 2011
11:04 am
Kyle, nobody cares what economists thinks. Where have ALL these expert economists been all this time? And to think that these economist have summarized the entire plan in one itty bitty paragraph shows that nobody know what they’re doing. The only people who know how to grow an economy are the Chinese. Keep sending money there at your own peril.
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
11:04 am
Quick Critic: Maybe you’re a little too quick on the draw. My source is the list of economists at the bottom of the Bloomberg article…which shows the individual predictions for each of the 34 economists.
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
11:07 am
“But for every economist in the survey that says the plan would perform that well, there are three who say it won’t produce any net new jobs.”
Please name them.
peachie
September 28th, 2011
11:08 am
Right-wing voodoo economics is just bad arithmetic.
>>When you pour money into the pockets of working people who will spend it, you spur consumer demand that will provide opportunities for profitable investment in job-creating enterprises. It’s inevitable; there’s nowhere else the money can go.<<
Actually there is, many pay down credit card balances which creates no new demand
Mike
September 28th, 2011
11:09 am
So give me an idea then buddy … oh I know.
1) Cut Spending (has no influence on me)
2) Lower taxes on the Job creators (which I’m technically included in. Thanks for the extra income, but I’m giving that to my family, not putting it in a pool to create a job)
3) Clear regulations (so me filling out less paperwork will give me an incentive to hire someone.)
Whatever dude. I’m good.
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
11:11 am
AIG? Goldman Sachs?
blkshepherd
September 28th, 2011
11:13 am
Kyle Wingfield
you along with others on here that Agree with you(I certainly don’t) remind me of the Adults in the Charlie Brown cartoon series..WAH WAH WAH WAH..you CRY like Babies constantly.
Suggestion, your not happy with the current President? Leave Our Country and go Live Outside the USA until he is out of office and theres some one else in the white House. And of Course you will continue to Whine and Complain… We Wont MISS you.
WAH WAH WAH. You all Cry worst than New born infants.
Uncle Jed
September 28th, 2011
11:15 am
Based on his record and recent past performance, why would anyone suggest that Obama is a good choice for a second term. The tactic of demanding that Kyle explain a Republican plan or that the Republican house has no plan or that congress has no plan or that Kyle left out some point one felt should be included or that Obama has the only plan on the table or asking Kyle to enlighten us about the best way to do things misses the overarching point facing the nation.
Obama was not qualified to be president and his lack of experience and said qualification deficiency led him to appoint too many knuckleheads and hacks to positions requiring learned experience, not just academic accomplishments and high-fives. America will reject Obama in 2012 and will break the Harry Reid gridlock in the United States Senate and then, and only then will this country see a turnaround in employment and economic growth.
Remember Carville: It’s The Economy, Stupid.
Bart Abel
September 28th, 2011
11:17 am
With respect, both Bloomberg and Kyle should know that it is mathematically impossible and downright contradictory to pump half a trillion dollars into the economy, partially by hiring tens or hundreds of thousands of construction workers, and then assert that doing so would save or creates ZERO jobs. Again, IMPOSSIBLE!
I can’t emphasize enough that this survey cannot and should not be relied upon.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
11:19 am
Those Bush tax cuts sure created a lot of jobs. Oops. Oh. They “created” jobs but different ones then got destroyed thus leaving us with fewer jobs than before the Bush tax cuts. Is that how it works. Too bad those Bush tax cuts did not pay for themselves. Does Kyle really know what he’s saying. What if we undo the Bush tax cuts and then redo the Bush tax cuts in order to recreate those jobs. We could do that over and over and over until it works.
Darwin
September 28th, 2011
11:19 am
Your right wing solution – let’s just end ALL taxation and ALL regulations. We will just spend money on the defense industry (we can live with those deficits) and live without any safeguards on health, safety or retirement health insurance. That should put us at 0% unemployment and solve all our problems. Right?
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
11:20 am
I made a mistake while revising this blog post. The 3:1 ratio refers to the number of economists surveyed by Bloomberg who predict job creation of less than 250,000 next year (13) compared to those who predict 1 million or more (4).
The number who predict zero job creation is 5 — more than the number who predict 1 million or more, but certainly not a 3:1 ratio.
I originally wrote about the comparison of <250,000 to >1 million, and that’s when I wrote the 3:1 ratio. Before posting, I decided to change the comparison from <250,000 to zero. But I apparently failed to update the ratio.
I don’t think this changes the broader point — that Obama’s jobs plan is seriously underwhelming — but I sincerely apologize for this mistake and am correcting the text above.
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
11:21 am
As I already noted, the list of economists is available at the bottom of the above-linked Bloomberg story, to which I am linking again here.
JF McNamara
September 28th, 2011
11:21 am
“JF: The only propaganda at play is the notion that I or any other informed conservative believes all tax cuts work equally well. Do some Republican politicians say that out of ignorance, or simply to pander? Sure. But it is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the economics.”
Well what is the Republican plan then? He cut the payroll tax which is what Republicans wanted. He cut tax on Small Business which Republicans have talked about ad nauseum. The only other catch phrases he didn’t address are more free trade (outsourcing for big business) and less burdensome regulation (more pollution).
Tax cuts is the main propaganda point being touted by Republicans, and Obama relinquished them. Now, Republicans are not only distancing themselves from it, Republicans are saying its too costly?
Tell me that its not enough, but don’t tell me it doesn’t work. Its a direct reflection on Republicans if it doesn’t work, because the party line is that tax cuts spur the economy ALL the time and raising taxes harms the economy ALL the time.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
11:23 am
You critics best bite your fingers or else Kyle will whip out proof that the Bush tax cuts created all those jobs that we don’t have.
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
11:25 am
Maintaining: The rules of this blog prohibit cutting and pasting entire articles from other sources; it’s a copyright issue. Please re-post an excerpt from the article and a link so that everyone can read it in its entirety. Thanks.
Paddy O
September 28th, 2011
11:32 am
for those obsessed with the government doing something – they can’t force an employer to hire. however, the focus on job eliminating technology is rather cutting the nose of inspite of face. The government can only create an environment of business friendliness. Our current over-regulated economy is one of the aspects spurring those who move to China to move.
Paddy O
September 28th, 2011
11:33 am
a, the typical liberal response: throw $$ at the problem – plus, the old tax/borrow & spend exercise. gotta love those deficit spending democrats. however, I don’t see the Democrats in the Senate doing much with Obama’s ideas – perhaps he has thrown too many fellow colleagues under the bus to elicit much support?
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
11:37 am
JF: Look, all I can say is that I’ve been saying this since before I got this job.
Hiring, or at least the kind of hiring that we ought to be promoting, is a long-term decision. You don’t prompt long-term decisions with short-term incentives.
Halftrack
September 28th, 2011
11:41 am
Forest Gump said it best about our Politicians and Obummer, & et. al. ” Stupid is as stupid does.” Now go figure for yourself.
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
11:41 am
This bill is absolutely guarenteed to create at least one job. There will have to be a government employee to sign all those checks.
BTW: Since infrastructure is one of the two primary functions of local government (according to my high school civics class), why do we need special taxes, and “Jobs” bills to repair infrastructure?
a dad
September 28th, 2011
11:42 am
Let us also not forget that Obama’s Job plan calls for it to be paid for with “future” cuts and tax increases, none of which are assured or set in stone. Will someone please tell me what our gov’t produces? Answer? Zip. Our gov’t simply pulls in revenue, then re-distributes in the form of entitlements, gov’t programs, etc., but it “produces” squat! Keynesians, am dying to read your responses.
As for taxes, if everyone truly wants everyone, even those “evil rich” to pay their fair share, why not simply impose a flat tax on everyone? Then everyone pays the same proportion of their income. Equally. What can be more fair than that?
Our corporate tax rate (35%) is one of the highest in industrialised nations, and I believe the Prez calls for that to increase. Face it folks, business are in the business to make money. If they have a choice between keeping their income high, or hiring new workers, guess which one wins?
Now, since I’m not running for anything, I don’t have to provide solutions, but if I were running, I would impose either a flat tax or a national sales tax to provide the govt’s revenue. Our tax code is a joke, so simplify. Wouldn’t it be much easier to predict income if you knew that 10% (arbitrary figure) of your income, your dividends, etc., were going to be paid as taxes? Or that when you spend a dollar, you’d atually pay $1.10? People with more money usually buy more, and a Maserati costs a heck of a lot more than a Corolla, so in effec those evil rich would be paying more in taxes than Joe Average.
Then again, we can just blame Bush for all of this, right?
Let the games, and discourse, begin!
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
11:44 am
Yeah Kyle, don’t cut and paste the whole article so that we can see the context the quotes are used in?
You also stated that President Obama didn’t talk about an infrastructure bill but only one that will create jobs. BS! He stood at a bridge and stated its usefulness as to capacity of cars and load capacity was below what is needed. He has alluded to many times the ASCE (American Society fo Civil Engineers) report that graded our infrastructure condition at a D- at best. Do you even read anything that doesn’t agree with you positions? Obviously you do not understand or remember it!
Ok since Kyle has no economic plan beyond what has failed the conservatives, how about the other conservatives. Do you have one with details and…er…facts?
Just remember that for every recesion up to Bush2, infrastructure spending has created jobs and brought us out of the recessions. How is this different? Now remeber you must use accurate history! Yikes!
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
11:54 am
Road Scholar: You have, I think proven my point. If infrastructre is a PRIMARY function of local and state government, why do we need special taxes and Federal “Jobs” bills to take care of infrastructure? I hope you an understand my point. Governments have abdicated one of their PRIMARY responsibilities to pay for other stuff and then want special consideration to pay for that PRIMARY function.
Maybe We Should
September 28th, 2011
12:02 pm
blkshepherd,
Just to keep you informed, your post was nothing but the same “WAH WAH WAH”ing done by the individuals you so lovingly called out.
In regards to your suggestion, If “we” were to leave the country, you would be left in a country consisting of 99% of the population on welfare, medicare, or medicaid. But seeing that you are in such favor of staunch Liberal plans, you would be more than willing to have your taxes increased to foot the bill no? The average working U.S. citizen age 22-25 pays upwards of 30-36% of taxes on their income. Then comes the sales tax into play, add another 6-9%; you’re looking at 36-45% of everything I earn being taken by the government. I’m being told I need to buy buy buy yet all i hear from the Left is I want to tax you more. Investment by individuals in the long-term is what made this country and now your trying to stymie it. Get rid of the IRS, consolidate the ever growing amount of departments in the government. The flat tax will do wonders, no one will be complaining on how things are “unfair” except the drug dealer on the corner who no longer gets his unemployment check or the family of 10 who don’t know how to control themselves or birth control and rely on others.
On another note, I believe it’s the state of New Hampshire that pays those that represent their state in the Senate and House an average wage (something like 60-80k). Why can’t this be done everywhere? The original intent was for those in Congress to represent us. We have turned it into a political forum for them to find ways to grow their own personal businesses. You cut their pay significantly and put them under the state or federal employee retirement plan; and only those who have it in their hearts to listen to and serve their constituents will run and win. It’s all about money, don’t let anyone fool you. Take that away and you will find a less corrupt, more for the people United States of America.
JoeFann
September 28th, 2011
12:05 pm
If Kyle won’t give you a fix, I will. Here’s the short version, focused on the biggest budget items. Doesn’t work overnight, but fixes a lot of long-term problems.
Defense: Close all but 10 (or less) foreign bases, spread strategically throughout the world (Ramstein, Diego Garcia, Phillipines, etc.) Close rest and re-deploy. Freeze all new weapons systems purchases, but continue to “reasonably” fund R&D for future review. Get out of Iraq, Afganistan, and the UN, after presenting each with a bill.
Social Security: Keep Congress’ hands out of the kitty. Require repayment of the trust fund “borrowings” over 10 years. It’s self-sustaining.
Medicare: No change for the 55 and up crowd. New rules for under 55s going forward, to include coverage for annual wellness visits for life, with limited diagnostics. Diminishing future coverage by age in 5 year increments, until no coverage at age 90. Rework Medicare Part D to allow negotiations with all pharms, or repeal. Medicare PR tax continues as is for 30 years, but allow for private additional contributions (like a Health savings account,) that are inheritable and controlled only by regulation, not goverenment investment. Within 30 years, dismantle and replace.
Medicaid: Send $ to states and feds stay out of it, except to transfer funds. No mandates. Dismantle and replace within 30 years.
Other spending: End all corporate and farm subsidies that are not R&D-related. End all foreign aid to non-NATO countries. Emergency relief and humanitarian aid are acceptable.
Taxes: For five years, increase all tax brackets by 5%, including capital gains, with no allowable extension. Within the five years, revamp to three income tax brackets with no itemized deductions except for interest on up to $100,000 of savings, and charitable contributions, which should be encouraged. Corporate taxes in a similar three-tier system, based on revenue, not income. (Income should be taxed, but bracket should be based on revenues to allow for encouragement of small businesses.) Eliminate most corporate deductions and tax credits. Allow government monopoly of legalized drugs, including tobacco and alcohol. Sold and verified only through gov’t stores, taxed at 50%, 10% used for education and rehab, if needed. Employers still allowed to set rules for employees and drug test. Mandatory drug testing for all government program recipients.
It’s a start. Go Dawgs!
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
12:08 pm
Streetracer: Because our congress has not passed the next transportation or infrastructure bill in the past two years!!!! Safety-lu was passed in 2002 I believe and had a life of 6 years..pretty standard for transportation legislation. But since 2008 the Congress has been unable or unwilling to pass a new bill; the conserves want to link it to the present revenue stream from the federal gas tax, which is dwindling due to inflation and costs. The fed gas tax is not a % tax but a cost per gallon. Less people are driving less in more efficient vehicles!
The feds also have a roll in Interstates, US routes, and other federal transportation programs. While the Interstates also have state route designations, federal monies regularly pay for 90 % of construction and maintenance on them. They make up the National Defense Highway System…like the autobahn in Germanty since WW2. Where do you think that Eisenhower got the idea for the Interstates? Unlike the Chinese who are building an “Interstate ” system all at one time, we built ours over many decades and still add to it in new routes and expanding existing capacity.
Now how do you pay for the needed capacity, load limited bridges ( the politicians keep increasing the allowable weights for trucks), and wear and tear on our roads? Oh and the infrastructure is aging beyond its design life of 50 years.Try Spring Street (two sections of viaduct) downtown with a sufficiency rating of 4 out of 100 points!!! Check out the sufficiency ratings on Georgia’s bridges that GDOT inspect each year!!!
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
12:11 pm
JoeFann: I was with ya’ until the Go Dawgs!
redneckbluedog
September 28th, 2011
12:12 pm
One decent month of job growth is more than Cantor, Boehner, McConnell, Gingrey, and Chambliss have created thus far….It costs what it costs…..We can get the money by taxing the above…..Because their saviors, the Kochs, are laying off…….
Jefferson
September 28th, 2011
12:13 pm
Lack of income growth over the last ten years has caused the unemployment problem. No president caused it nor did congress. Between 2000-2010 jobs haven’t kept up with the population growth, if money is idle and not spread unemployment will be high and rise.
JoeFann
September 28th, 2011
12:14 pm
Road–It takes all types, and my tent is accomodating. I’m in the roads, too, and GDOTs lack of funds is about to cost about 30 more jobs in Ga. for us.
Ivan
September 28th, 2011
12:15 pm
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
11:44 am
Yeah Kyle, don’t cut and paste the whole article so that we can see the context the quotes are used in?
____
Clicking links is hard. Maybe Obama can offer a plan that will make it easier to click?
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
12:17 pm
JoeFann: What type of work do you do?
JDW
September 28th, 2011
12:21 pm
@ Kyle who wrote…”“Stanley estimated the program would increase payrolls by 50,000 and add 0.25 percent to GDP next year.”
Yes he did estimate that also using the current situation as the baseline. Using Stanleys estimate the net impact would be the cost of doing nothing plus the .25% or 1.95% net impact to the GDP…
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
12:23 pm
Kyle
Thank you for pointing the rules out to me.
That said I hope your tolerance for name calling as far as our President and elected representatives isn’t too high. Respect for the office and decorum are called for.
Now about that better way. Which way would that be?
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
12:24 pm
Get rid of those nasty regulations that make slave labor illegal here in the states so Republican job creators can bring those jobs back, once they get a sufficient number of job creating tax cuts, naturally. Praise be to the all mighty deregulated job creating tax cuts. Hey Kyle, what about that payroll tax cut from the corporate ledger. Surely you must concur that it is one of those all mighty job creating tax cuts so you must support the elimination of the corporate portion of the payroll tax cut. Just think of the added benefit of hastening the demise of social security and medicare. You’re probably feeling some trickle down just thinking about it.
JDW
September 28th, 2011
12:24 pm
O’ and Kyle…does your stand mean that you have revised your notion that tax cuts drive job creation? After all some $235 Billion of this proposal is tax cuts…
JoeFann
September 28th, 2011
12:25 pm
Road–DOT GC
Liberal Larry
September 28th, 2011
12:32 pm
What we needs is another big govt program to fix everything. Works all the time right?
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
12:33 pm
Road Scholar @ 12:08 – Yes interurban infrastructure is a federal issue (that is national hiways and the Interstate system). But a fair amount of the spending we are talking about here is appearantly intraurban, which is a local issue. To go a little farther; yes 90% of construction of the Interstate system was Federal funds, but what I remember from my days with Nebraska Dept of Roads is that maintainence was strictly on the States dime.
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
12:43 pm
JoeFann: I’m retired GDOT Planning and Design. I work part time supplying on call engneering services, when needed, to a MPO. I was BG (Before Gina); couldn’t have retired at a better time!
Between the accounting change, the decrease in federal and state revenue, and the recession, I know all in the industry has had to scurry. Design consultant staffs are down about 30%, maybe more.
Street racer: Most now in Ga is paid with Federal funds. Incidentally, GDOT used to overlay 10% of their state routes each year; now it is down to 2-3 % each year due to money shortages. Near my last year, GDOT let $2.3 B to contract; this year they might make $1B, if they are lucky.
JDW
September 28th, 2011
12:54 pm
O’ and Kyle, I took a look at the chart on the bottom and quite frankly don’t put much credence the median conclusions. As you state there are several organizations that show zero across the board. My guess would be that those organizations choose not to respond. Even if they thought the impact was low an estimate of zero is absurd on the face of it. The plan contains monies specifically for the retention of state and local jobs that will be cut without aid. No matter how you dice it that alone equals more that zero. Then you have the issue of SocGen who according to the chart estimate the impact to GDP to be 1.7% in 2012 and job creation at 1…pretty sure that GDP growth of 1.7% generates more than one job, even if it was Warren Buffett’s job.
Back the absurd out and the “median job growth number turns into around 500,000 which is likely closer to real life. Still lower than it should be but got to feed those Repugs some useless tax cuts.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
September 28th, 2011
12:55 pm
Will the Congress be voting on the Idiot Messiah’s “jobs” plan, or have Democrats achieved their wet dream of eliminating voting and investing all power with a liberal fascist chief executive?
yuzeyurbrane
September 28th, 2011
12:56 pm
Kyle, you convinced me. We should returned to W’s master plan that brought us job losses of over 700,000 per month.
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
1:01 pm
Road Scholar @ 12:43(?) – I realize that. But my point is what are governments doing with the tax money they collect to perform one of their Primary functions?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
September 28th, 2011
1:03 pm
Maintaining Sanity: Respect for the office and decorum are called for.
———–
Does the person who holds the office “respect” it by labeling half of Americans as the “enemy”?
Road worker
September 28th, 2011
1:06 pm
There will be NO infrastructure jobs created north of the Mason Dixon line in a month or so. Up here they post the roads when it gets cold so there go your jobs till April or May. Brilliant plan. Maybe we can start building an ark. Rain is in the forcast sometime in the future.
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
1:10 pm
$447 Billion? I wonder if Obama comprehends how much money that actually is.
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
1:26 pm
JDW @ 12:21: I think you missed the point, which is that the 1.7 percent figure is one economist’s opinion. You can’t just tack it onto everyone else’s figures. And @ 12:54: The orgs that chose not to respond are marked with an N/A; if you count the ones that aren’t, they total 28, which is what Bloomberg lists as the number of responses to that particular question about 2012 jobs.
How could some of them say it’s zero? Well, they could believe that the money Obama wants to use must come from somewhere else, and isn’t being used elsewhere. You might disagree with that belief, but it’s not absurd.
JDW
September 28th, 2011
1:36 pm
@Kyle…”How could some of them say it’s zero? Well, they could believe that the money Obama wants to use must come from somewhere else, and isn’t being used elsewhere. You might disagree with that belief, but it’s not absurd.”
I see, these must be the Republican economists…oooops can’t be that the Republicans in theory would have posited that the tax cuts alone create jobs. Maybe they are the Democratic economists…nope can’t be that building bridges and hiring teachers counts for something. Why these must be the Anarchist economist’s…for every government action there is an equal and opposite reaction…why that’s just absurd…ooops that is where we started this discussion now isn’t it?
Road Scholar
September 28th, 2011
1:39 pm
Road Worker; So all the needed projects are designed already? Right of way bought? I think not! Yes I am sketical about “shovel ready” projects esp since most that were ready have been constructed, but where did the money come to replace those projects already on the “shelf”? You can also do design build so that when the thaw comes, the private contractors are geared up to construct.
In the south, there are days during the winter when it is warm enough to lay asphalt and pour concrete. Living in a state with 10.2 % unemployment ( Yes Ga leads in somethings!), any jobs, esp design ones which lead to construction jobs, are needed and wanted.
Streetcar: The gas tax…which can only be spent on roads…is being spent as quickly as possible on good projects. This crap from a contractor about GDOT holding onto money is either directed at the funding balances needed to finish jobs already under contract, or is sour grapes of desperation. From my previous post, going from $2.3B to about $1B in a few years has hurt the contractors who geared up and hired fo the alledgedly better years to come…then the recession
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
1:40 pm
JDW @ 1:36 – I don’t very often critize others, but, you sir, are dumber than a red brick.
Road worker
September 28th, 2011
1:41 pm
Ah…JDW and the circle jerk of logic. My guys are thinkers, your guys are biased. Half a billion went to Solyndra and nothing happened.
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
1:41 pm
You guys keep saying “Obama’s money”….you do realize that it is actually OUR money right?
Maintaining Sanity in Today's World
September 28th, 2011
1:42 pm
Kyle,
I came back to check to see if you had posted your better way.
I’ll check back later.
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
1:44 pm
JDW: Bastiat figured this out a long time before you or I came along.
Uncle Jed
September 28th, 2011
1:45 pm
The Republican Plan: Give BHO plenty of rope…
Gallup Daily Obama Tracking Poll
Approve 40%
Disapprove 51%
++++++++++++++++++
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds that Obama earns 39% support while Cain attracts 34%. A month ago, the president led Cain by seven percentage points. In March Obama held an 18 point advantage over the businessman and talk show host.
++++++++++++++++++++
The cost of health insurance has surged in the US this year, according to a survey of employers, dealing a blow to claims by the Obama administration that healthcare legislation introduced last year would curb costs.
++++++++++++++++++++
In a new Harris Poll, 2012 Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul beats President Obama 51 percent to 49 percent in a general election race.
++++++++++++++++++++
Obama’s Euro-Crisis Lecture Is ‘Pitiful and Sad’
++++++++++++++++++++
Two new Quinnipiac polls provide more evidence the 2012 presidential election may be decided in the Rust Belt.
In Pennsylvania, just 43% approve of President Obama’s job performance, while 51% say he doesn’t deserve a second term.
In Ohio, just 42% approve of his job performance, while 51% say he doesn’t deserve re-election.
++++++++++++++++++++
Generation 44, a supporter of the Democratic National Committee, said President Obama will be at the Renaissance Grand Hotel at 800 Washington Avenue at 5:00 p.m. October 4th.
The group has a limited number of $1,000 tickets available for $250.
+++++++++++++++++++++
And Jimmy Carter smiles broadly, along with the Clintons.
Road worker
September 28th, 2011
1:45 pm
I keep coming back to see what JDW posts. It makes me smile
Aurelius
September 28th, 2011
1:49 pm
We need to build a new factory to make the widgets that are the trademark product of our company. Where to build? Where to build so that in 30 years the factory is still productive and profitable?
Where is the market for widgets? Everywhere? True, but 95% of all consumers in the world live somewhere besides the USA. That number will remain stable. And per capita consumer spending is rising in most of the world and dropping in the US.
Both engineering and logistics warn that the US transportation system is on the verge of crumbling. How will we transport and distribute the widgets? Will or will not the US rebuild its infrastructure? Our lobbyist in DC say “not as of today.” The hot topic in DC is reduced spending and tax reform.
Indonesia has very low labor costs, a growing highly trained labor force and sits on the edge of 33% of all consumers in the world. The US labor force is getting weaker and they are now DC is talking about cuts in education.
We have not built a factory in the US since 1978. And we have record profits.
So, where do we build?
Uncle Jed
September 28th, 2011
1:49 pm
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
1:10 pm
$447 Billion? I wonder if Obama comprehends how much money that actually is.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In Britian they would call it Four Hundred and Forty-Seven THOUSAND MILLION…and Washington verbally tosses around trillion as easily as they used to billion and before that million.
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
1:53 pm
Uncle Jed – I think you are right. In Europe, a billion is 100 million not 1000 as it is here. Maybe that is part of the problem; folks use the European defination in their thinking.
Uncle Jed
September 28th, 2011
1:55 pm
The group has a limited number of $1,000 tickets available for $250.
++++++++++++++++
It just struck me that there is an illustrative lesson in liberal economics to be learned from the above pull quote: If one has a limited supply, why slash the price, especially when the stated objective is to raise revenue? It must be the need to make it look better than reality. Solyndra comes to mind.
Road worker
September 28th, 2011
1:57 pm
Road Scholar…Illinois has got Georgia beat hands down on unemployment and taxes. Right of ways only exist for new construction. We can’t seem to even get the old roads fixed. Not even grind and repave. I could draw the plans up on a napkin. Our wonderful Dem Governor passed a massive tax increase (maybe you heard of it, 45-66% increase) and the money went into public sector pensions. Our operator local has 400 out of 600 on the list waiting for work. Tax increases on the wealthy in Illinois haven’t done a damn thing for us, but wait we do have a college administrator that recieves $365,000 per year pension.
Bart Abel
September 28th, 2011
1:57 pm
I’m a little surprised, Kyle, that you didn’t correct the “net new jobs” phrase when you were making your corrections. You’ve since agreed that this isn’t what Bloomberg reported.
Also, given that the survey figures are specific to 2012 and 2013, it actually would be absurd to assert that Obama is proposing a jobs plan that destroys precisely as many jobs as it creates during 2012 and 2013, when the proposed pay-fors would be spread out over a decade.
Seriously, the survey results show little to no jobs saved or created defy basic arithmetic. Again, this survey isn’t credible.
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
2:02 pm
Uncle Jed….Amen
JDW
September 28th, 2011
2:04 pm
@Kyle, who wrote…”Bastiat figured this out a long time before you or I came along”
If we were talking windows or if we were talking shifting dollars from one IMMEDIATE purpose to another I would agree with you that Bastiat might apply in this case. However he does not in this specific case because the money that is to be spent is for all intents and purposes “borrowed”. The impact of the “window” will not be felt until after the two years in question when The Law will prevail. If the economists in question used Bastiat as their foundation for zero they have overstepped the timeframe of the exercise.
Now if you want to get right down to a macro view, Bastiat is the very foundation of why Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2/Cheney were so wrong regarding the importance of deficits. We are paying for those “broken windows” today.
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
2:05 pm
JDW….so what about the record deficit that Obama has accumulated?
USMC
September 28th, 2011
2:05 pm
“Obama’s jobs plan: $447 billion for one decent month of employment growth”–Kyle
Comrade Obama has got to be the dumbest President in our history; while also blinded by ideology.
Unbelievable
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
2:08 pm
Road Worker @ 1:57 – When was the last time you drove on I-57 from I-24 to Mount Vernon? If you think that Illinois does a better job with roads you really should drive that stretch. In December, it pretty much sucked compared to the rest of the route from Atlanta to Omaha.
USMC
September 28th, 2011
2:08 pm
“You critics best bite your fingers or else Kyle will whip out proof that the Bush tax cuts created all those jobs that we don’t have.”–Now with 10% more flavor
Proof that WELFARE cheese creates brain damage. Typical Socialist Blather.
Dusty
September 28th, 2011
2:09 pm
Thank you, Kyle, for honest journalism. I don’t find any twists or turns in your evaluations.
As to the president’s job plan, is it possible he does not know that spending $447 billion will add that much to the deficit that is sinking us?
Does he really think that a “job plan” can take immediate effect on an economy?
Considering those two questions leaves me with only one answer. The president does not know what he is doing and has no common sense. His “inspiring” speeches now only remind us that they must end in the next election or the economy will be nothing but a huge Walmart store. Everything cheap but no customers with money and the help on minimum wage while thousands line up outside looking for work.
It is a picture of the future with Prez Obama. No money, no jobs, no inspiration, just DEBT!.
JDW
September 28th, 2011
2:13 pm
@Streetracer
A blind man knows he cannot see, and is glad to be led, though it be by a dog; but he that is blind in his understanding, which is the worst blindness of all, believes he sees as the best, and scorns a guide.
-Samuel Butler
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
2:14 pm
Dusty @ 2:09 – Are you all knowing? ( Can’t spell “omnisient” without looking it up). Kind of seems to me that maybe you are. At least it seems to be where we are headed.
JDW
September 28th, 2011
2:18 pm
@UGA1999…”so what about the record deficit that Obama has accumulated?”
Actually Duhbya holds the deficit record and most of what has happened since has been cleaning up that mess. BTW if you go back and read what I have posted you will find that I believe Obama should have moved faster to clean up the mess, however turning the responsibility for a solution over to those that created the problem seems a bit shortsighted to me.
ODD OWL
September 28th, 2011
2:20 pm
The Bush/Cheney tax cuts for the rich ====> 3 trillion dollars… The number of jobs created by the rich, the elite and their coporate bosses in 8 years of Bush/Cheney ====> 3 million… Democrats have made the future of America their priority… The Republicans have made the future of America their option…
EJ Moosa
September 28th, 2011
2:26 pm
The velocity of money spent via the government is LOWER than the velocity of money overall. Therefore the logic that giving it away to people that spend it stimulates the economy is a false belief and wrong.
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
2:30 pm
JDW….read again. To date….thus far into his presidency Obama wins!
Typical
September 28th, 2011
2:44 pm
Typical Republican response Kyle. Obama proposes a jobs bill, so instead of working with Obama to improve, the Republicans throw up their hands and dismiss it altogether.
When will the Republicans in Congress be submitting their jobs bill Kyle? Why has it been 2 years, and still the Republican-led House has NOT DONE A !#@) THING about jobs Kyle?
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
2:45 pm
Typical….about the same time Obama submits his budget bill…..haha.
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
2:49 pm
Can some democrat on this blog please tell me what Obama is going to run on this time around? Hope and Change is not going to work…..
Typical
September 28th, 2011
2:53 pm
Kyle Wingfield
September 28th, 2011
10:11 am
Bart: Fine, so they would “add or keep” zero. Does that really make you feel better? As for the part about the bill including tax cuts: I’ve long said not all tax cuts are created equal from an economic perspective.
Quit the spin (”tax cuts not created equal”) and just say what your thinking Kyle: $175 billion payroll tax cuts proposed in the Obama plan are bad because they don’t go to the ultra-wealthy and instead are targeted to the middle and lower income workers.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
September 28th, 2011
2:55 pm
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor: Those Bush tax cuts sure created a lot of jobs.
———-
Yes, they did. Enough to keep unemployment below 8%, and in fact between 4-6% for most of Bush’s term.
Too bad your incompetent Idiot Messiah blew it.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
September 28th, 2011
2:59 pm
“$175 billion payroll tax cuts proposed in the Obama plan”
——–
Your Idiot Messiah’s payroll tax cut has failed to create any jobs and should be ended.
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
3:09 pm
Typical @ 2:53 – Money that goes to the ultra-wealthy is more likely to create demand for goods and services in this economy than money to middle and lower income workers. Why? Because most middle and lower income workers are real uncertain about the future, so any extra we get goes to pay down debt or gets put in the bank. It doesn’t go to buying things that would create demand for more jobs. At least that is the way I, and those I know, act.
Typical
September 28th, 2011
3:16 pm
Another blog, another round of disingenuous numbers from Lil’ Barry Blowhard.
Bush lead us from an unemployment rate of 4.2% up to 7.8%.
Bush also stood by as the rate of GDP declined from 2004 (3.6%) through 2009 (-2.6%).
UGA 1999
September 28th, 2011
3:21 pm
Typical….and Obama has watched as unemployment has gone from 7.8 to 9.2%….great work.
Obama also watched as our credit rating was lowered to AA….nice.
buck@gon
September 28th, 2011
3:32 pm
Dear Kyle’s disingenuousness knows no bounds,
Once again you present us with a short, poorly conceived article citing cherry picked stats that do nothing but obfuscate. Here’s a suggestion: instead of baseless attacks, why not use your brilliant economic awesomeness to posit how you would fix the economy if you were Prez? And I’d like something beyond the standard vacuous platitudes of no taxes, no regs and no govt. I’d like specifics and data to show why your plan would work.
LoL!
Do you read what you write? Really! This is good stuff. Yes, if you want someone telling you just what you want to hear go to DailyKos, please, and leave us alone from your absurd requests.
buck@gon
September 28th, 2011
3:34 pm
Kyle,
Please tell us all what you think, whether or not it is what the above obtuse, puerile and cliched jerk “knows no bounds” wants you to hear.
Good article, by the way.
Just FYI, I think you don’t have to write such articles as your post above because the obvious answer to Obama’s proposals these days, is simply “duh! We ALL know it won’t work.” I think it’s better to start heaping derision on Obama now that his approval is heading straight for 25%. The media would do it for Bush, so let’s pile on!
These liberals whining on your blog aren’t even good for decoration. They remind me of grafitti in a public school bathroom–witless, brainless and meaningless; probably tinged with a lot of repressed adolescent sexuality too.
HDB
September 28th, 2011
3:38 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
September 28th, 2011
2:55 pm
It depends of which area of the nation you speak! Since unemployment is a LAGGING indicator, the results of the Bush presidency carry over from 6-36 months! For one who was adversely affected by Bushian policy, I know of many who LOST employment and wealth in the Bush years…and have YET to recover!! It’s a recession when someone else loses a job; it’s a depression when it’s you!! I had two depressions during the Bush Years…..and I know of many who have YET to find a job after losing theirs during the Bush years!! Your game isn’t the same for everyone!!
WOW
September 28th, 2011
3:46 pm
Carlosgvv…you are still an idiot
The Real Fletch
September 28th, 2011
3:46 pm
Wait, how can you all look at Stimulus III – Now with Slightly Different Wrinkles and think it could possibly work? Please stop citing right wing voodoo when the president says ‘its paid for, 100%’ when that claim is based on the potential additional findings of a committee that hasn’t been formed yet.
Sorry yall, this is pretty straight forward. We have been here before and it didn’t work. Math has a right wing bias.
FDRWannaBe
September 28th, 2011
4:12 pm
Excuse me Mr President but of all the idiot advisors that you have can’t someone come up with an original idea to lower unemployment?…
This admi is so out of touch with Americans…building bridges and roads when the Great Depression was in place made SENSE since the work force of America was primarily skilled labor…today the unemployed in a 3 piece suit who studied finance isn’t going to operate a bulldozer..we need job creation ACROSS the board not ONLY in construction…we need to create the Wal Mart and Apple of tomorrow by helping small businesses expand and hire…
Good luck with the copy of the FDR handbook…maybe you can employ someone to blow the dust off of it!
LookFoward
September 28th, 2011
4:14 pm
Can we please stop looking into the past of the “let’s blame bush game” and look to the future of “anyone with a brain throw us a lifeline to get back to the land of opportunity?”
Roadrunner
September 28th, 2011
4:15 pm
Most agree that the $1,000,000,000,000 (1 Trillion) dollars in the first stimulus created almost no long term jobs. Once the money was spent the temporary jobs evaporated. Why do we think that spending 1/2 that much again will be more successful? If anyone is serious about creating lasting jobs in the U.S. we have to rebuild many of the industries here whose jobs have already moved overseas. These are the jobs that we’re now paying the price for having lost. They say the gap between the haves & have nots has continued to grow and its the loss of these high paying manufacturing jobs that has caused much of this gap. I’m told these jobs are gone forever, but why is that so? Are we incapable of producing anything tangible in this country again? God help us if we ever get in another protracted war with virtually no industrial base to fall back on. So if Obama or anyone else wants to really fix this issue, do whatever has to be done to bring most of these jobs back to our shores or you’re just spinning your wheels and spending our money….
Republicans Are Idiots
September 28th, 2011
4:23 pm
In 2004, the Republican Bush administration flew nearly 12 billion dollars in shrink-wrapped $100 bills into Iraq, then distributed the cash with no proper control over who was receiving it and how it was being spent. How’s that Republican stimulus workin’ for ya…
Streetracer
September 28th, 2011
5:03 pm
Republicans etc @ 4:23 – I keep hearing about that, but noone so far has posted a credible source that I’ve seen. Do you have one?
BTW: 12 billion is less than 3% 0f 447 billion. Is there really a valid cost comparison?
@@
September 28th, 2011
5:18 pm
For those keeping score at home, that’s a “jobs plan” that costs more than $1.6 million per job.
Obama, skimming off the top. It’s the Chicago way. “Momo” Obama?
MoMoney…MoMoney…MoMoney
Gm
September 28th, 2011
5:21 pm
Please tell me Kyle what jobs bills have the rep party passed? what ideas have they had, at least when Dem were in the house they pass something, did it work completely? no, but at least they tried something these idiots have been in the house for 2 years and the only thing they have done is block the President for trying to do something.
This is why the tea party people are the worst idiots this nation ever seen, they are so bent on trying to destroy the President they are taking the rest of the nation to the toliet, these are not Americans these are in house terrorist.
CazLand
September 28th, 2011
5:27 pm
It’s oh so wonderfull to spend others hard earned money on failed policies is’nt it libs. Reduce debt by creating more debt has worked for decades right?……………………NOT. How bout reduce/stop the spending without monies to support, reduce or eliminate the freebies (personal & corporate) and rid ourselves of the IRS by implementing the fair tax.
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
6:10 pm
Typical: Bush lead us from an unemployment rate of 4.2% up to 7.8%
———————
Our President Bush got his tax cuts implemented in 2003, and unemployment declined in the next several years, while revenue increased. And your Idiot Messiah would kill to get unemployment back down to the highest it ever was under President Bush. Unemployment during the Obozo regime has been higher every month than it was in ANY month of President Bush’s eight years.
Typical
September 28th, 2011
6:19 pm
The Real Fletch
September 28th, 2011
3:46 pm
Wait, how can you all look at Stimulus III – Now with Slightly Different Wrinkles and think it could possibly work? Please stop citing right wing voodoo when the president says ‘its paid for, 100%’ when that claim is based on the potential additional findings of a committee that hasn’t been formed yet.
Wrong. Flat out wrong. The Aug. 2011 unemployment rate for college grads is 4.3% For those who have high school diploma it is 9.6%. For those without high school diploma it is 14.3%. Building infrastructure is not only good for the segment of the population hurting worst, it is good for American Business to have top notch ways to move goods. And look at those numbers — if you have a good education, you can weather the recession. So why do Repubs want to cut education budgets?
Waheema
September 28th, 2011
6:20 pm
Even if Obama’s jobs plan was a half a trillion dollars for one month’s job growth, it would be better than his last “stimulus” which was .8 trillion and nearly killed the economy. Of course Obama is so surrounded by academic ideologues that his more-of-the-same liberal nonsense won’t work at all. How long are we going to let this amateur run the country?
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
6:27 pm
How long are we going to let this amateur run the country?
——————————-
We took a big step towards him NOT running the country last November. His wasteful, obscene spending bills will go nowhere thanks to the Republicans in the House.
We finish the job in November 2012.
Typical
September 28th, 2011
6:28 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
6:10 pm
Typical: Bush lead us from an unemployment rate of 4.2% up to 7.8%
———————
*Our President Bush got his tax cuts implemented in 2003, and unemployment declined in the next several years, while revenue increased.*
US GDP Growth Rates by year:
2000: 4.2%
2001: 1.1%
2002: 1.8%
2003: 2.5%
2004: 3.6%
2005: 3.1%
2006: 2.7%
2007: 1.9%
2008: 0%
2009: -2.6%
Yeah, those Bush tax cuts did us wonders. We got 2 years of robust growth for 10 years of unfunded debt. It’s pretty obvious what those tax cuts and unfunded wars did to this country.
marko
September 28th, 2011
6:50 pm
The Republican plan seems to be blame Obama for everything. I think I understand how they feel. Black folks cleaned up white folks messes a lot faster in the good old days. But then again white folks weren’t so messy in the good old days.
Dusty
September 28th, 2011
7:17 pm
Marko,
Can you get it in your head that almost every citizen in American is losing something in this economic downfall? Can you understand that bigotry is not the problem in America except with people like you?
It is the economy! Get it Jobs! Debt! Americans voted for Prez Obama. They don’t care about his skin color but they do care about his policies. Get it? They don’t care for the way he is presiding over this country.
Take your prejudice and save it for Halloween. That’s when the scary stuff shows up.
mountain man
September 28th, 2011
7:19 pm
The only way the President could propose $449 billion extra spending is to provide it in a tax decrease for the wealthy. We know that would not create any jobs.
saywhat?
September 28th, 2011
7:20 pm
To Kyle’s credit, as his “candidate J” article submission proves, he has been consistent from day one in saying that not all tax breaks are created equal. Unfortunately, he has also been consistently wrong as to which tax breaks are more effective in stimulating the economy. But hey, at least he is batting .500.
mountain man
September 28th, 2011
7:20 pm
propose $449 billion in extra spending and only add or retain 275,000 jobs
Michael H. Smith
September 28th, 2011
7:42 pm
Oh wonerful (sic), back to saving, instead of creating.
Keeping, instead of adding? Whoopee a new phrase, how impressive.
Let’s all play the re-word it game and remember kiddies but only the words can change the meanings must remain exactly the same.
In dear mm,mm,mm… leader’s case the sum of the game remains “ZERObama!”
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
8:59 pm
Typical: Yeah, those Bush tax cuts did us wonders. We got 2 years of robust growth for 10 years of unfunded debt.
——————————
Yes, they did. Revenues went up. Unemployment went down. And guess what never happened during our President Bush’s eight years? 9% unemployment, $1.5 trillion annual deficits, and record levels of poverty and food stamp parasitism.
How Obozo blew the recovery he inherited is beyond comprehension.
Idiot Messiah: Fail.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:13 pm
Under Gee W., unemployment went from4.2% to 7.4%. Obama extended the Bush tax cuts to appease the Republicans because the Republicans said that the job creators had to have their tax cuts in order for them to hire people. The unemployment rate continued to climb. Those tax cuts for job creators were pocketed. No jobs were created by Bush tax cuts. Bush and the Republican trickle down philosophy failed.
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
9:19 pm
Our President Bush’s tax cuts lowered unemployment from 6% to 4%.
Your Idiot Messiah didn’t cut income tax rates, he left the rates where they were. Why you would expect NOT changing those rates to create jobs is a mystery.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:20 pm
I see little Barry bailout is trying to project his worshipping of an idiot onto other bloggers. That is a real loser strategy and so typically Republican.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:21 pm
The unemployment rate under Bush went from 4.2% in January 2001 to 7.4% in January 2009. The facts elude little Barry bailout.
Now with Ten Percent More Flavor
September 28th, 2011
9:23 pm
President Obama extended the Bush tax cuts, like I said, and the unemployment rate continued to climb even with the Republican “job creator” tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts are a proven failure.
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
9:34 pm
Obozo would love to get his years-long 9% unemployment number down to that one-month 7.4% you cited. He’d also like to get his budget deficit problem below $1.3 trillion. And he’d probably like to fix the record levels of poverty he’s created. Unfortunately, his liberal fascism and incompetence prevent any of that from happening.
Our President Bush: Superior to your Idiot Messiah.
What? What? What?
September 28th, 2011
10:01 pm
Michael H. Smith
September 28th, 2011
7:42 pm
Lay off the pipe dude.
Typical
September 28th, 2011
10:04 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
9:34 pm
Obozo would love to get his years-long 9% unemployment number down to that one-month 7.4% you cited. He’d also like to get his budget deficit problem below $1.3 trillion. And he’d probably like to fix the record levels of poverty he’s created. Unfortunately, his liberal fascism and incompetence prevent any of that from happening. Our President Bush: Superior to your Idiot Messiah.
Republican Policies: Turning 4.2% GDP growth into NEGATIVE -2.6%.
Typical
September 28th, 2011
10:07 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
September 28th, 2011
9:34 pm
Obozo would love to get his years-long 9% unemployment number down to that one-month 7.4% you cited. He’d also like to get his budget deficit problem below $1.3 trillion. And he’d probably like to fix the record levels of poverty he’s created.
Why don’t you run a little google on wealth disparity, and see who has been making all the money the last 10 years. Then you can re-phrase your last sentence.
JKL2
September 28th, 2011
10:46 pm
I see more flavor is trying to project his worshipping of an idiot onto other bloggers. That is a real loser strategy and so typically Democrat.
buck@gon
September 29th, 2011
1:42 am
Typical,
“wealth disparity”. ???
Yeah, why don’t we pull a “Jay Bookman” and try and consider what say, the World Bank thinks about doing business in America.
I don’t know about you, but seems to me that wealth disparity only increases when 15% of the country is unemployed. Still feeling hope-and-changey about Obama’s ability to tax the rich and pay you some of it in cash?
You must be abyssmally stupid.
Hey Typical. I’ll give you a million bucks if you vote for me!!
–My first supporter!
buck@gon
September 29th, 2011
1:56 am
A must READ
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/278526/obama-s-racial-crisis-victor-davis-hanson?page=2mments here
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 29th, 2011
6:40 am
If wealth disparity is such a problem, why isn’t your Idiot Messiah doing anything to get the record number of folks in poverty due to his policies into high paying jobs?
Idiot Messiah: Incompetent. Loser.