Unemployment to Hit 10% this Year Says....Obama

[guido911]

Yep, that stimulus package is REALLY paying off:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-predicts-unemployment-will-hit-10-this-year.html

It's okay though, because Barry loses sleep at night about the deficit.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/16/AR2009061602610_pf.html

Maybe it's time for another Broadway or Paris date night to help him rest better.

[FOTD]

Yep, that stimulus package is REALLY paying off:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-predicts-unemployment-will-hit-10-this-year.html

It's okay though, because Barry loses sleep at night about the deficit.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/16/AR2009061602610_pf.html

Maybe it's time for another Broadway or Paris date night to help him rest better.

This is the best you can do?

[nathanm]

Yep, that stimulus package is REALLY paying off:

Did you honestly expect that the stimulus would have an immediate effect? It wasn't sold that way. These things usually take a minimum of 9 months to a year to have a meaningful effect.

[guido911]

Did you honestly expect that the stimulus would have an immediate effect? It wasn't sold that way. These things usually take a minimum of 9 months to a year to have a meaningful effect.

Barry told us unemployment would not surpass 8% if the stimulus passed. Ol' plugs said on Sunday the everybody "guessed" wrong on the true state of the economy before we saddled our grand kids with the new debt:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/14/biden-says-guessed-wrong-unemployment-numbers/

Nice to know we use "guessing" practices before we take $787M from taxpayers. Bottom line, Barry lied to use about the stimulus, just as he did with transparency, rendition, military commissions, signing statements, taking public finance, no lobbyists in his administration, and on and on and on.

[Conan71]

Come on now Guido, President Obama didn't lie to us, he just didn't know any better.  Get it right, bro!

[Gaspar]

How do you lie when your just guessing?

[Cats Cats Cats]

Guido, you spend 90% of your "valid" posts on making insults of the president.  Stick with facts instead of insults and people might read some of your posts and understand what the hell you are trying to say.  Everybody just thinks.. oh great, the moron is at it again.  (this is in response to your first post).  Not speaking in oneliners and weblinks might help too

I think if I explain it in non-angry, FOTD and nathanm will get it.

When Obama came into office they produced a paper that said that unemployment would be kept below 8%.  Stimulus passed, and now he is saying that it will hit 10%.  The whitepaper was wrong and the metrics put forth to define the effects of the stimulus have failed.  There obviously is no single variable metric to show what the stimulus bill has or hasn't done.  The "it isn't going to happen overnight" doesn't work because their white paper claimed it would basically.  Economic/Job forecasts are always wrong and it is pretty dumb to release specifics like (won't go over 8%).  Bush did the same thing with this tax cut that was going to create x million jobs in a year.  His job #'s were like 3 years behind.

[Conan71]

Projections are nothing more than an educated guess based on past data and forecasts of thin air.  All politicians guild the lily when they are holding office and shred it when they are running for someone else's seat.  Even figures released by the labor dept. and treasury are approximations.

I'm reluctant to hang all this on the shoulders of someone who assumed office five months ago, especially since this cataclysm has been brewing since the late 1990's at least.  POTUS Bush II simply put some large bandages on it early in his term and hoped his tenure would outrun the second coming of the consequences of the greedy 1980's & 1990's.

Don't get me wrong, I have grave concerns of how this administration and Congress are handling the economic crisis, but I don't know anyone who has expected serious signs of recovery until Q-4 this year.

Guido, I do find it somewhat pompous and disrespectful to refer to the POTUS by his first name or college nickname.  My dad taught me at an early age, during the Nixon administration, that you may not like the person in the office, but the office is deserving of your respect.  That's why I am pretty conscientious about referring to him as President Obama in my written posts.  I may not like the guy personally, didn't vote for him, don't like his politics, I may think he's doing everything donkey-backwards, but I am a citizen of the United States and he is my President.  I felt some real dooshy libs who would say "your President", "Baby Bush", or "Shrub" when GWB was in office were incredibly disrespectful and immature.   

Sorry for getting on my high horse, but petty partisanship and dissention is why this country has been in a steady downward spiral for the last three or four decades.  I can understand your sense of frustration, irony, and cynicism- I share it.  Just because commentators like Olberdoosh don't show respect for a President they oppose, it doesn't make it right for everyone else.  Hell, I even think respect for the office is starting to lag in the MSM as well.

[Gaspar]

An actual Stimulus bill would have avoided this.  We know how to do it.  We've done it before, but the practice of lowering taxes and reducing restrictions is not popular with this administration, so rather than learning from history and experience, they will have to learn from hard knocks.  It may be a good thing, because in the process citizens will become more economically educated.

The term stimulus is defined as such:
Stimulus: a thing that rouses activity or energy in someone or something; a spur or incentive : if the tax were abolished, it would act as a stimulus to exports (LOL, that's actually the example given in the dictionary).

I'm not going to beat this horse again, it's unnecessary, those who don't understand, don't want to understand.

We will require an actual stimulus bill soon or unemployment will continue to rise, there is no avoiding it. 

[Cats Cats Cats]

An actual Stimulus bill would have avoided this.  We know how to do it.  We've done it before, but the practice of lowering taxes and reducing restrictions is not popular with this administration, so rather than learning from history and experience, they will have to learn from hard knocks.  It may be a good thing, because in the process citizens will become more economically educated.

The term stimulus is defined as such:
Stimulus: a thing that rouses activity or energy in someone or something; a spur or incentive : if the tax were abolished, it would act as a stimulus to exports (LOL, that's actually the example given in the dictionary).

I'm not going to beat this horse again, it's unnecessary, those who don't understand, don't want to understand.

We will require an actual stimulus bill soon or unemployment will continue to rise, there is no avoiding it. 

Didn't you read the part above about how Bush's tax cuts didn't show the effect they claimed.  So if the stimulus is a failure by not meeting the metrics, the tax cuts didn't work either.  In fact, the exact same thing is happening.  Bush claims tax cuts are going to create x MORE jobs than if we didn't pass it.  We didn't even meet the forecast for job growth without the tax cuts.  Obama says we are going to not lose as many jobs if we pass the stimulus.  We end up over the job loss projection that was made (I would bet, note they claimed unemployment % not what it WOULD be in the articles). 

Also, if putting money into the economy isn't going to help.  How is putting money into the economy going to help?  $787 billion in 1 year tax cuts vs $787 billion in spending on projects = $787 billion the government doesn't have.  Which is also the same as if they just sent everybody that is in the US $2,500 checks.  Or the tax cut approach and you give 1% $50,000 checks, 10% $1500 checks,  39% 500 checks and 50% $100 checks.

[guido911]

Guido, you spend 90% of your "valid" posts on making insults of the president.  Stick with facts instead of insults and people might read some of your posts and understand what the hell you are trying to say.  Everybody just thinks.. oh great, the moron is at it again.  (this is in response to your first post).  Not speaking in oneliners and weblinks might help too

I think if I explain it in non-angry, FOTD and nathanm will get it.

When Obama came into office they produced a paper that said that unemployment would be kept below 8%.  Stimulus passed, and now he is saying that it will hit 10%.  The whitepaper was wrong and the metrics put forth to define the effects of the stimulus have failed.  There obviously is no single variable metric to show what the stimulus bill has or hasn't done.  The "it isn't going to happen overnight" doesn't work because their white paper claimed it would basically.  Economic/Job forecasts are always wrong and it is pretty dumb to release specifics like (won't go over 8%).  Bush did the same thing with this tax cut that was going to create x million jobs in a year.  His job #'s were like 3 years behind.

Here come's the Obama apologists...What makes you think I give a rat's a$$ about your opinion as to who reads my posts. We are consigned to pissing away nearly $1T in money going to repair bridges, feed fish, signs telling people about stimulus money being spent, renovate unused train stations, checks to 10,000 dead people, and gosh only know what else that will do nothing to stimulate the economy. How's that for FACTS wiseguy?  

Nice dovetailing of bringing what Bush did into the equation. Interestingly, how often did the media and the likes of you call Bush a liar during his administration? Where was your outrage over that?

[Hoss]

Here come's the Obama apologists...What makes you think I give a rat's a$$ about your opinion as to who reads my posts. We are consigned to pissing away nearly $1T in money going to repair bridges, feed fish, signs telling people about stimulus money being spent, renovate unused train stations, checks to 10,000 dead people, and gosh only know what else that will do nothing to stimulate the economy. How's that for FACTS wiseguy?  

Nice dovetailing of bringing what Bush did into the equation. Interestingly, how often did the media and the likes of you call Bush a liar during his administration? Where was your outrage over that?

Four words:

"We do not torture"

[Gaspar]

Didn't you read the part above about how Bush's tax cuts didn't show the effect they claimed.  So if the stimulus is a failure by not meeting the metrics, the tax cuts didn't work either.  In fact, the exact same thing is happening.  Bush claims tax cuts are going to create x MORE jobs than if we didn't pass it.  We didn't even meet the forecast for job growth without the tax cuts.  Obama says we are going to not lose as many jobs if we pass the stimulus.  We end up over the job loss projection that was made (I would bet, note they claimed unemployment % not what it WOULD be in the articles). 

Also, if putting money into the economy isn't going to help.  How is putting money into the economy going to help?  $787 billion in 1 year tax cuts vs $787 billion in spending on projects = $787 billion the government doesn't have.  Which is also the same as if they just sent everybody that is in the US $2,500 checks.  Or the tax cut approach and you give 1% $50,000 checks, 10% $1500 checks,  39% 500 checks and 50% $100 checks.

LOL, we are not "putting money into the economy"  we are taking money from one pocket and putting it in the other.  Production of product is the only thing that creates money.  Private business, not funded by government, is the only way to create wealth and create sustainable jobs. 

Printing money or taking it from one group and giving it to another changes nothing.  Bush's tax cuts were not very effective.  They were dismal in size compared to previous stimulus actions.  Don't try to wrap your head around it, just let it happen.

[Cats Cats Cats]

LOL, we are not "putting money into the economy"  we are taking money from one pocket and putting it in the other.  Production of product is the only thing that creates money.  Private business, not funded by government, is the only way to create wealth and create sustainable jobs. 

Printing money or taking it from one group and giving it to another changes nothing.  Bush's tax cuts were not very effective.  They were dismal in size compared to previous stimulus actions.  Don't try to wrap your head around it, just let it happen.

If you cut taxes when you have a deficit you are taking money from one pocket and putting it in the other.  If you already are losing $10,000 a year and then drop your income another $20,000 you are still in the hole $20k that somebody has to pay back.  $20,000 in tax cuts increase the debt $20,000 - income taxes received.  $20,000 in spending on stimulus increased the debt $20,000 + administration fees (which should be taxed income) - any income taxes received off the money.

[Gaspar]

If you cut taxes when you have a deficit you are taking money from one pocket and putting it in the other.  If you already are losing $10,000 a year and then drop your income another $20,000 you are still in the hole $20k that somebody has to pay back.  $20,000 in tax cuts increase the debt $20,000 - income taxes received.  $20,000 in spending on stimulus increased the debt $20,000 + administration fees (which should be taxed income) - any income taxes received off the money.

Only in a vacuum. 
Result of cutting taxes is jobs and wealth creation.  Both deliver taxable income and cause the development of new business and industry, which creates more taxable income.  The law of unintended consequences in this instance produces positive results. 

Simply increasing debt on government sponsored programs and processes, continues to provide higher rates of dependancy, temporary low wage job creation, and more debt.

Please continue to argue your point.  Economic laws are strangely like the laws of physics.  They are usually steadfast. They only tend to change as our understanding of the situation increases.  We learn through the debate.