Nonfarm payrolls rose by 200,000 last month, the U.S. Labor Department reported Friday in its monthly survey of employers. Private companies added 212,000 jobs, while the public sector—federal, state and local governments—shrank by 12,000.
The unemployment rate, obtained by a separate survey of U.S. households, sank to 8.5% in December, its lowest level since February 2009. November’s rate was revised up to 8.7%.
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had forecast a gain of 155,000 in payrolls and a jobless rate of 8.7%.
Wow. That is, wait for it…unexpected.
So things are really getting better. I must have been wrong about not being able to spend your way to recovery.
Yet the unemployment rate trickery still continues, with labor force participation (prior revised), now at a 27 year low of 64%, and the labor force itself declined by 50K from 153,937 to 153,887. In fact, persons not in the labor force have increased by 7.5 million since January 2007! Bottom line – dropping out of labor statistics is the new killing it.
We’re still down 349,000 from the size of the labor force when Obama’s term began. The labor force hit its lowest point during that time in January 2011, at 153,250,000.
Now look at the labor force size growth over the preceding three years:
January 2006: 150,214,000.
December 2008: 154,626,000.
That’s 4,412,000 more Americans in the labor force.
And for all those still harping that things are getting better, remember: things were never supposed to get this bad. Obama’s Stimulus Plan was going to prevent unemployment from getting above 8 percent.
So let’s not pretend any improvement is because of leftist economic policy.
Jesse Jackson, Jr. was interviewed by The Daily Callers’ Nicholas Ballasy, (who I keep reading as “Ballsy,” but that’s beside the point.) Jackson made some frank and troubling statements revealing a tyrannical side to Democrats they rarely reveal publicly and a certain degree of idiocy all too common:
Jackson called for full government employment of the 15 million unemployed and said that Obama should “declare a national emergency” and take “extra-constitutional” action “administratively” — without the approval of Congress — to tackle unemployment.
…
“President Obama tends to idealize — and rightfully so — Abraham Lincoln, who looked at states in rebellion and he made a judgment that the government of the United States, while the states are in rebellion, still had an obligation to function,” Jackson told TheDC at his Capitol Hill office on Wednesday.
“On several occasions now, we’ve seen … the Congress is in rebellion, determined, as Abraham Lincoln said, to wreck or ruin at all costs. I believe … in the direct hiring of 15 million unemployed Americans at $40,000 a head, some more than $40,000, some less than $40,000 — that’s a $600 billion stimulus. It could be a five-year program. For another $104 billion, we bailout all of the states … for another $100 billion, we bailout all of the cities,” he said.
What wasn’t in the Daily Caller’s post was what Jackson said about the $104 billion to the states. He said, “The problem within the states ends tomorrow for $104 billion.”
He’s either a complete idiot or, well, I got nothing. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together understands that throwing $104 billion at the states is not going to solve the problems in the states. The problems in the states doesn’t come from a lack of revenue, but for heavy financial obligations created by the federal government.
Entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid are not going to go away, therefore the financial obligations associated with them aren’t going anywhere either.
And let’s not forget his call for bypassing a rebellious Congress in order to spend all this money.
Declare a national emergency for unemployment so the same failed policies tried under FDR can fail under Obama? Freaking brilliant!
And if you listen closely to the list of things he rattles off in that video, that’s exactly what he’s suggesting. How well did that work? Let’s ask a member of FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr:
“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . . After eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . and an enormous debt to boot!”
Why would we want to do that again? Answer: iPads.
When someone thinks that iPads are costing people jobs, it’s clear they are in economic illiterate. If in the year 2011, the man is still willing to go on the floor of the Senate and preach the Luddite agenda, he can’t begin to imagine how he’s proposing action based on the fallacious “Broken Window” theory.
Jackson Jr. has no idea how economics work. He’s made that more than clear. This interview only reinforces that fact, plus shows how willing he is to use force to implement the liberal agenda.
After President Obama addressed a Joint Session of Congress, Republican leaders issued a memo outlining possible areas of common ground, including extension of 100 percent bonus depreciation, small business capital formation, and payroll tax relief.
The president, however, demanded an “all or nothing” vote and vowed to take his plan to “every corner of the country.” The reception has been chilly. Economists and fiscal watchdogs have balked at the plan. An estimated 750,000 small businesses are threatened by the proposed tax hikes, and the Arizona Republic talked with small business owners who are “wary” and “skeptical” about the president’s latest proposal, fearing it could be little more than “another stimulus plan.” Fox News reported that “a majority of Americans don’t believe” his “plan will help lower the unemployment rate…” And the president has been greeted by tough front pages in city after city.
When the president demanded Congress “pass this bill” now, Democratic leaders in the Senate blocked a vote on it (just minutes before he railed against Republicans for standing in the way).
I don’t think it was ever meant to pass. I think it’s a tool for the President to use against Republicans in order to paint them in speech after speech as being against putting people back to work. You can see this in his continued lambasting of them, despite the fact they aren’t blocking anything, but have in fact offered to work with him on the bill.
Obama didn’t expect it to be Democrats who stood in his way, which can be attributed to his narcissism and to the fact he’s a SCoaMF.
In 2008, I posted a video that showed the Demcrat’s refusal to deal with Republican concern about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I wrote the following:
It is this meddling in the free market that has caused this crisis, this socialist redistribution of wealth. Since they did welfare reform in 1996, they had to find another way to redistribute wealth. And once again, socialism has failed. Stop blaming free enterprise when the businesses were just doing what the government was telling them to do.
To further illustrate how unconcerned Barney Frank was with the housing bubble, here’s a speech he gave in 2005:
“You are not going to see a collapse that you see when people talk about a bubble.”
We are just more and more generous. We even give the poor free cell phones. I couldn’t believe it till I checked out:
Lifeline Benefits
Lifeline Assistance is part of a program that was created by the government to provide discounted or free telephone service to income-eligible consumers. To help bring you this important benefit, SafeLink Wireless is proud to offer Lifeline Service. Through our Lifeline Service you will receive FREE cellular service, a FREE cell phone, and FREE Minutes every month! SafeLink Wireless Service does not cost anything – there are no contracts, no recurring fees and no monthly charges.
Any Minutes you do not use will roll-over. Features such as caller ID, call waiting and voicemail are all also included with your service. If you need additional Minutes, you can buy TracFone Airtime Cards at any TracFone retailer Walmart, Walgreens, Family Dollar, etc). SafeLink Airtime Cards will be available soon.
Your exact benefits, including the number of free Minutes you will receive, depend on the state you live in. Please enter your ZIP code to get the details for your state.
And to think, those of us who are retired and living on fixed incomes have to pay for our phones! What would be wrong with simply supplying a corded landline and a local calling plan? Just one more example of Obama’s “spread the wealth” philosophy, better known as socialism!
Or better yet, why can’t Congress work on what they are charged with doing, namely providing an annual budget on time and balanced and open for we the taxpayers to read and approve or decide to vote them out next year? We don’t have the income guarantees for life that Congress gets and they exempt themselves from anything they feel would not be in their best interest (aka Government Option Healthcare Plan). They even set the tax codes to give themselves preferential treatment.
It is time they learn that we are not as dumb or blind as they think!
Every sales person knows that it is critical to successful selling is truth in advertising and a clear, sincere sales presentation. Unfortunately, in the health care debacle, we are being fed lies and false promises that a true analysis shows to be false.
The true costs of the reorganization of 1/6 of our economy is still being computed, but the facts that are coming out are quite concerning, at best. Mr. Rove, who is known for his analytic abilities gives us a glimpse today in the Wall Street Journal:
The problem for Mr. Obama is that the Baucus bill is being sold on the strength of accounting tricks that make it appear that it won’t add to the deficit. This is true for the other health-reform bills, too. If fiscally conservative Democrats sign on to the bill now after publicly saying they are doing so because it doesn’t add to the deficit, they may end up bailing once the tricks are revealed to the public.One trick is easily explained. The bill imposes tax hikes and benefit cuts right away, including $121 billion of Medicare reductions between 2011 and 2015. But new spending really doesn’t start until five years out 2015 and isn’t fully operational until 2017. The bill uses 10 years worth of tax hikes and benefit cuts to fund a few years worth of benefits.
And that is just a start.
Some governors are also figuring out that the proposal in the Baucus bill to expand Medicaid will shift a big chunk of the federal health-care tab to states. States, after all, pick up an average of 47% of Medicaid’s costs—and expanding it will force states to spend more.
Then there are $400 billion in benefit cuts that are frightening seniors. Jeffrey A. Anderson of the Pacific Research Institute has pointed out that the Baucus bill cuts Medicare payments to physicians by 25% within two years and keeps payments at that level forever, without adjusting for inflation. If this becomes law, doctors who take Medicare patients will see their real income decline each year.
Karl makes the point that The President hasn’t sold his snake oil to us yet and the numbers, if made public will not strengthen his sale at all.
No wonder the leadership of the democratic houses in Congress are holding their meetings to complete the legislation behind closed doors! For a President who promised the most transparent administration in history and promised that C-Span would be broadcasting the proceedings for all of us to see, the hypocracy has reached absurd levels! And the ‘traditional media’ is ignoring the whole thing! Where is Bob Woodward when we need him?
(Another gem forwarded by my father for publication!)
Senator Kent Conrad, D ND, clarified for all of us the health care reform problem, with his appearance on Fox News Sunday, August 15th. He stated clearly and without any limiters that Obama does not have a plan for Health Care Reform. He has left that up to Congress!
Just think about that! He does not have a plan, or if he does, he has not shared it with the Democrat leaders in Congress, but, instead has left it up to them to create a reform bill. According to Politico.com:
Linda Douglass, communications director of the White House Office of Health Reform, e-mailed: “Nothing has changed. The president has always said that what is essential is that health insurance reform must lower costs, ensure that there are affordable options for all Americans and it must increase choice and competition in the health insurance market. He believes the public option is the best way to achieve those goals.” (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26180.html#ixzz0OSpxwOZe)
The obvious problem is the fact, reaffirmed by Senator Conrad, that The President does not have a Health Care Reform Plan. Therefore any plan will achieve his objective and you can bet he will sign it! This seems to result in his ability to promise that almost anything that the polls say is important, is in his plan. If he hasn’t got a plan, then anything can be promised as in it or not in it. Instead of the details required in a plan we hear of his essential ingredients which vary based on the audience. In his initial speech to Congress on the State of the Union he promised to reduce the cost of health care while covering every American.
The biggest problem in The President’s ‘essentials’ is basic arithmetic! Including all Americans currently uninsured, which has been defined in various circles as between 20 and 47 million people, will add a major stress on the current system. If they must be assigned to the existing doctors and if they are able to go in for wellness checks and minor problems at no cost to the patient, government cost and provider stresses will be increased dramatically. The President has promised to keep costs down and even to turn the rising cost curve to a negative curve. At the same time he has assured us that there will not be rationing for older Americans who need medical care the most. This defies all logic and cannot be calculated using basic arithmetic or even new math!
There have been numerous attempts to do this through nationalized medicine such as is the case in most of Europe and Canada and so far there is not a single example of success. In the US it has been attempted in Massachusetts and Oregon. In every case cited, the programs are under fierce financial strains and coverage is rationed in one way or another. The newly elected head of the Canadian Healthcare System has declared this month that their system is about to implode and Vancouver is closing emergency care facilities due to lack of funds.
But none of the cases of failure seem to matter to our legislators and our President. The President sets lofty, mutually contradictory goals and the legislators rush to create plans tailored to give them full power over our lives without any concern for our feelings. They have forgotten or ignored the line from our Declaration of Independence that reads: “Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
It is time for the governed to make it clear to the government that they are not given the power to do as they please for their own aggrandizement, but, they are to use their powers to meet the wishes of “We the People” within the strict framework of the US Constitution. If they do not understand this basic principle, then they should be replaced by those who do.
Here’s how I define it. A zero accountability voter is a person with the ability to vote and has nothing to lose personally from the results of their vote. This person can vote for a politician who promises to give them anything, and they think they will not have to pay for it.
In general, it’s a person who contributes nothing, but collects benefits from the collective.
For example, a person votes for Obama, thinking he will pay for her gas or pay her mortgage:
Obama isn’t paying anything. He’s taking from someone else, by force of government, in order to give it to you.
“It’s free money!” said Alecia Rumph, 26, who waited in a Morris Park, Bronx, line 300 people deep for the cash to buy uniforms and book bags for her two kids.
“Thank God for Obama. He’s looking out for us.”
Free money? In her mind, it’s free money.
But it isn’t. It’s federal taxpayer money, and a bit of charity. From the New York Daily News:
The no-strings-attached money went to families receiving food stamps or welfare.
Every child between 3 and 17 was eligible for $200, which worked out to 813,845 kids across the state – including 498,866 in the city.
…
Billionaire philanthropist George Soros gave $35 million toward the program, with $140 million in federal stimulus funds routed through state government making up the rest.
So, even though the Daily News says the money “magically appeared on their electronic benefit cards,” there wasn’t anything magical about it. The government took the property of others, and gave it to those they thought needed it more. That’s not magic. It’s just plain force. But in the mind of the zero accountability voter, “it’s free money!”
Well, it’s free in one sense of the word. The recipients are free to do whatever they please with it. There is zero accountability. They simply withdrawal the money, and spend it however they please. While it’s supposed to go to school supplies, there’s nothing stopping it from going to cell phones or flat screen televisions or PS3s.
Who do you think they will vote for next time? The person who promises to give them the most.
For those who say the rich don’t pay enough taxes anyway, consider this:
According to newly released Internal Revenue Service data, the top 1% of American tax filers earned 22.8% of the nation’s income in 2007 and paid 40.4% of the nation’s federal income tax.
This would mean the top 1% of tax filers pays more federal income tax than the bottom 95% of tax filers combined, according to a Tax Foundation analysis.
…
The top 1% of tax returns in the U.S. for that year had an average gross income of more than $410,000.
What do you suppose will happen when you have more people depending on the government? You will have less people paying in. When you have an increase in the demand for money, but less people to draw from, you find yourself needing to soak those people more. And when they see themselves getting soaked, generally they find a better place for their money. You see this on the state level. People are leaving California, Michigan and New York because of the taxes being so oppressive.
On the other hand, the charitable donations of the rich are a different story. First, they don’t get the attention of the media like “free” and “magically” appearing money, but there is a major difference. It isn’t forced from them. They give it, just like Soros did. I’m sure Soros had his reasons, as I don’t trust him any further than I could throw him, but he did willfully part with $35 million bones here.
He said it meant more to him because he received charity as a child also:
Gov. Paterson and Mayor Bloomberg joined Soros to announce the payments at Public School 208 in Harlem, where the billionaire reminisced that as a penniless student in London, he survived because of a handout he got from Quakers.
“This gift has a special personal meaning to me, because I was once also a recipient of charity,” Soros said in a choking voice. “I’m very pleased that I’m able to repay what they gave me.”
Maybe if we stopped looting people and businesses so much and let them donate more to charity, people would stop voting in leftists since there is nothing in it for them. Which is what the mind of the zero accountability voter boils down to: what is this person going to give me?
While the money may be magically appearing and be free now, there are long term repercussions of the looting of the rich in favor of the poor. It’s that long term outlook that the zero accountability voter lacks, or refuses to consider. As long as the government encourages them to suckle, they will never be weaned. They will become dependents.
And the rich will either be slaves to a repressive government, or they will leave. What would you do?
President Obama is in Mexico with Stephen Harper for a summit with America’s neighbors. While standing next to the leaders of two nations he has started trade wars with, he said there was no problem with the trade between the countries because of his protectionist policies:
“This in no way this has endangered the billions of dollars of trade taking place between our two countries,” Obama said, standing beside Harper and Calderon at a final news conference.
This is an interesting, and false statement, which become obvious when you read the second paragraph in the article:
Obama told journalists at a summit with the leaders of Canada and Mexico that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has raised the issue every time they have met.
So, help me understand this. If this is no big deal, like Dear Leader says, then why would Harper bring it up, every time they meet? It seems to be a serious concern of Harper’s. And for good reason. Here’s what I wrote about the trade war with Canada:
The $787 billion stimulus bill Obama signed into law contained a “Buy American” provision that economists warned against. The protectionist provision mandates that “only U.S.-made goods be used in projects funded by the bill.” At the time, the Canadian government voiced concern.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper attempted to calm fears, saying, “I think President Obama himself said that he wants to ensure that these stimulus packages do not lead to protectionist measures in the U.S. or anywhere else.”
Fast forward three months and you find The Washington Post reporting that Canadian suppliers are being turned away from jobs in America.
Ordered by Congress to “buy American” when spending money from the $787 billion stimulus package, the town of Peru, Ind., stunned its Canadian supplier by rejecting sewage pumps made outside of Toronto. After a Navy official spotted Canadian pipe fittings in a construction project at Camp Pendleton, Calif., they were hauled out of the ground and replaced with American versions. In recent weeks, other Canadian manufacturers doing business with U.S. state and local governments say they have been besieged with requests to sign affidavits pledging that they will only supply materials made in the USA.
What happened is simple, and rather devious. Rather than create federal programs to spend the stimulus money, Canadian firms say the United States is “filtering billions of federal dollars, which are subject to NAFTA rules, to municipalities, which let out the infrastructure contracts and are not subject to any trade agreements.”
Canadians have responded in kind, with towns in Ontario putting measures in place to bar U.S. companies from municipal contracts. This could be the first shot in a growing trade war with Canada that threatens to lock U.S. based companies “out of billions of dollars worth of Canadian projects.”
Nothing to see here. There is no problem. Everything’s fine.
It reminds me a lot of Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, aka Baghdad Bob, who held press conferences during the 2003 invasion of Iraq to tell us things like Americans were committing suicide in mass at the city gates. Obama says there is no problem, but Harper thinks there is, and the facts show, things are getting tense between the two trade giants.
Sales under the U.S. government’s “cash for clunkers” auto incentive topped 180,000 with Toyota Motor Corp overtaking Ford Motor Co with the top-selling vehicle, officials said Wednesday.
To give you an idea of how funny this is, you really have to understand the true purpose of the Cash for Clunkers program. On its face, it looks like a program designed to get gas guzzling, CO2 spitting Gaia killers off the road and a few more green, electric mobile coffins on the road. However, if that were the case, why is the new Hummer part of the program? Is it because of it’s killer 16 mpg? Yeah, that’s probably it.
Vehicles made by the three largest U.S. automakers — General Motors Co., Ford and Chrysler Group LLC — comprised fewer than half of sales under the program through Aug. 1, according to the Transportation Department data obtained Aug. 3. The companies accounted for 47 percent of the clunkers transactions.
The data didn’t break out where the cars sold were manufactured. Some vehicles sold by foreign companies are manufactured in the U.S.
