Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Friday, September 30, 2016

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

In a speech at an Amazon.com warehouse in Chattanooga, Tennessee, President Obama continued his assault on the GOP’s plans to demand more cuts in exchange for raising the debt limit and continuing to fund the government. He seized on increasing evidence that the public is tired of Republicans’ intractable partisanship by introducing a new offer to congressional leaders.

“If folks in Washington want a ‘grand bargain,’ how about a grand bargain for middle-class jobs?” Obama asked.

The president’s plan would simplify the corporate tax code, adding incentives for manufacturing and creating jobs in America, then use some of the proceeds to increase spending on infrastructure, manufacturing hubs that advance technology and training, and community colleges.

Along with this “bargain,” Obama called for more exporting of American goods and help for the long-term unemployed.

“I’m challenging CEOs to do more to help these Americans get back on their feet, and this fall, I’ll bring together the CEOs and companies that are putting in place the best practices for recruiting, training, and hiring workers who’ve been seeking work for too long,” he said.

He punctuated his plans with a challenge to congressional Republicans.

“I am laying out my ideas to give the middle class a better shot in a 21st-century economy.  Now it’s time for Republicans to lay out theirs. If they’ve got a better plan to bring back more manufacturing jobs, or create jobs rebuilding our infrastructure for the long run, or help workers earn the high-tech skills our businesses demand, let’s hear [it],” he said.

The president then ripped apart Republican talking points on jobs, with some pointed words for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.

  • Dominick Vila

    Since almost everything proposed, considered, and/or signed is considered a “jobs bill” nowadays, we would be better served if we focus on the big enchilada” the infrastructure bill. In addition to creating short term jobs that piece of legislation would address an issue that ALL Americans should take seriously. In addition to deteriorating roads, many of our bridges are in danger of collapse, our levees have proven to be inadequate and, in some cases, non-existent, our power grid must be modernized to improve its efficiency, reliability, and reduce cost, our airports and ports need to be modernized, and our public transportation system is substandard, to put it mildly. The need to invest in infrastructure should not be subjected to partisan politics. It is something of critical importance to our country and it must be done.

  • THS_Warrior

    The crazy Republicans wasted all four years of President Obama’s first term trying to defeat him. The crazy Republicans can be expected to continue to stonewall President Obama by refusing to consider or pass any legislation initiated or supported by President Obama– even to their own detriment.
    President Obama can be expected to continue to challenge the crazy Republicans by offering “jobs bills” and other good legislation up through the next general election in November 2014, because Obama knows that the American people will get rid of many crazy Republicans running for re-election in 2014.

    • latebloomingrandma

      We can only hope. He’s got to keep up the pressure and push back on Repub. talking points and fox News lies until the 2014 election. We’ve got to re-take the House and hold the Senate in order to get this country back to work and modernized!

    • bikejedi

      My question would be to Obama … Where is your jobs program ? You have had 5 years and the first two years you could of passed any jobs bill you wanted and now you are trying to make more excuses and pass the buck to the GOP who only control one side of the executive branch ? How many times have we heard that they are going ” pivot hard and focus on Jobs with laser like focus ” ? This after focusing on less important issues for months while Americans are jobless . We are in year 5 of Obama and the change you can believe in is that we have added twice as many people to the rolls of those dependent on food stamps as compared to those who have found jobs under Obama . All you have to do is go to the Dept of Labor website and cross reference that with Food Stamp enrollment to prove that .

      The GOP has put forth several Jobs programs that don’t involve using tax dollars for make work programs or to create more Govt Union jobs . The Plans they have put forth involve stimulating the Private Sector which would mean more people paying taxes rather then creating jobs for the connected on the Tax Payers dime .

      One of the biggest Job Plans that Obama could approve would be to green light the Keystone pipeline . The booming N and S Dakota oil jobs show what it can do for the economy and also what it could mean for domestic production . This would be a win win but Obama would rather cater to the powerful environmental Lobbyists . the Engineering Jobs that N and S Dakota are creating are paying way above what a Harvard grad is making fresh out of Harvard
      The President just delayed Obamacare because he knew it would cost the Dems seats in the mid terms that is the reason he is trying to change the dialogue on to the Republicans . Any political novice or anyone from Illinois would see right through that ploy .

      • TheGorf

        You can’t possibly believe anything you’ve said here, What planet are you REALLY from?

        • bikejedi

          I’m from Earth …more specifically the Land of Liberal Utopia and total mismanagement and corruption known as the State of Illinois the County of CROOK and the City of Chicago where we have seen this all before and we know BS when we see it . I am not from the planet Gorf but I like the name . Everything I stated I believe because it is easily verifiable as fact or derived from common sense

          • Sand_Cat

            It’s the “sense” part where things usually fall down: that’s the interpretation put on the facts.

          • bikejedi

            Right on Sand Cat …on the planet Gorf they don’t understand that and yes I’m just poking fun

          • Russell Byrd

            Why aren’t you on a boat for Texass? Why are you not driving to a right-wing paradise, like maybe Iraq? You could swim to Kamchatka! Why are you still in Chicago, if you hate it so much?

            “Everything I stated I believe . . .” is the only true statement you have made today. Nothing else, either in or out of context.

            No, you are not from Gorf, but Goof.

      • RobertCHastings

        Give a green light to Keystone, wow, that’s really a smart one. And what would that do for the economy?
        1)tar sand oil is more toxic than other fossil fuels and MUCH harder and more expensive to clean up – why do you think the other Canadian provinces have nixed such pipelines through their territories?
        2)the project results in fewer that 300 permanent jobs
        3)the thousands of jobs promised are temporary, for the purpose of constructing the pipeline
        4)the majority of the oil pumped through this pipeline will traverse the width of this country to the refineries on the Gulf coast, to be transported OUT of the US.
        The blossoming oil and gas jobs in the Dakotas are there why? Who approved them – Sarah Palin?
        Obamacare has proven to be an effective way to reduce the cost of insurance for an already burdened middle class, as has been amply proven by those states who already have their “marketplaces” in position.
        The private sector has been afforded ample opportunity and is sitting on plenty of money to invest in job creation – so tell us why they haven’t done so. Because of uncertainty? And pray tell us why there is uncertainty. While corporations commiserate about their burgeoning tax burden, they pay at a lower rate on average than the middle class, and hundreds pay NO taxes at all even though they are experiencing record profits.
        From the end of WWII until Reagan took office, the wealthiest were paying at the rate of over 70% in taxes, and the country had gone through its greatest period of growth and prosperity EVER! Since Reagan was elected, the American middle class has seen their wealth collapse and their debt explode, literally. By 1970, Average household debt burden was less than 40% of annual income. Today it is around 140%, wages (where available) are stagnant, etc., etc., etc.

        • bikejedi

          Wow your stats are so wrong on keystone that it isn’t even worth talking about . Most industry insiders believe it would create 20,000 jobs and about 10,000 permanent jobs …but I get that from people who work in the oil industry and not from the opinion of a Liberal Journalist sooooo
          Obamacare is reducing cost is just laughably so misinformed It’s hard to address that . Me and Dom just had a civil discussion on that over the last week . I would suggest doing a simple google search outside the realm of Liberal Propaganda will show you that all cost projected for the program itself as well as the costs to the individual consumer as well as the companies that employ them are all sky rocketing already and are projected to sky rocket even higher . The CBO has upgraded their cost projections 3 or 4 time already and it hasn’t even been implemented . Why on earth do you think Obama delayed implementation ? Do you think that might be to save Dem seats in the mid terms ?
          Your views on the Private Sector sitting on money sound like you just left an Occupier therapy session . Its not their duty to just hire people because they have money . It is their duty to maximize their profitability as a Company so they can stay viable . What would be the point of hiring if those people aren’t needed and they would have nothing to do ? Do people on the left even consider these things before they start with simple straw man class warfare talk ? A company should do everything to stay viable and profitable . Sometimes that involves investing in research or facilities . Other times it means maximizing profitability for their shareholders and investors . Companies have trouble hiring when no one knows what the rules are going to be how they are going to be applied and if they are going to applied fairly . Obamacare is causing so much anxiety NO one wants to hire . That is one of the reasons Obama delayed it . It also means the end of full time employment . Look even the Obamacare call center is no longer hiring any full timers so they wont have to cover them …So before you make a class warfare statement designed to appeal to low information people that don’t understand business take it up with the Obamacare call center .

          • Independent1

            Your as clueless as usual: Obamacare has already saved millions of people that have insurance thousands of dollars: the rate of increase in healthcare premiums has gone up at the slowest rate over the passed 3 years than in the past 50 years. Industry analysts have projected that without Obamacare having been enacted, people would be paying 25-45% more per month in premiums. And states that have actually made an effort to create exchanges, like New York and California, are already projecting that people will be able to replace their existing personal healthcare policies for 50% or more less than they are paying today. It’s possible that people paying $1,000/month today for insurance could replace their policies for less than $400/month. The state of Vermont several months ago advertised that they have insurance exchanges that will be allowing a family of 4 earning around $35,000/yr to purchase coverage for the family for $350/month. Try getting that kind of coverage today for that low premium. And the last thing many health insurers want is for Republicans to repeal Obamacare. Many of them are counting on the added business of 40-50 million new clients. Republicans aren’t acting like they’re business friendly – they’re acting like complete idiots!!! And the only reason that President is looking to push back the mandate is because so many Red states are balking at implementing the exchanges which would make it very difficult for employers with offices in multiple states to comply with the law (trying LYING JUST A LITTLE MORE WILL YOU!!!!) DO YOU KNOW HOW TO DO ANYTHING BY LIE???????

          • Fern Woodfork

            LOL NO!! LOL

          • old_blu

            No she don’t.

          • Fern Woodfork

            Just Like Fox Fake News All She Do Is Lie And Make Crap Up LOL!!! LOL Hello old_blu!!! 🙂

          • old_blu

            Hello to you Fern and Independent.

          • Fern Woodfork

            🙂 <3

          • bikejedi

            There you go with the civility again . I don’t know where you get your numbers from but every Insurance Company is projecting rates to sky rocket and they have done just that in the last two years . And at a much higher rate then ever before . this has been widely reported in the WSJ and Inv Bus Daily. EVERYONE knows why the President is pushing back Obamacare and that is to try to save DEM Seats in the Mid Terms . Before you try to convince me that the ACA is a good thing why don’t you work on your own side first . You had to bribe your own party members to vote for it with OUR Tax Dollars . Once passed they exempted most of the Public Unions . Most intelligent Liberals hate it so much that Nancy Pelosi has given most of her Liberal hypocrite constituents waivers because they don’t like it . Recently Howard Dean called it a HOT MESS that cant work and Max Baucus one of the authors of the bill called it a TRAIN WRECK that cant work or fund itself . The Unions who support Obama and once supported the ACA have issued a Public Letter citing that the ACA will be the end of the 40 hr work week as the bill incentivizes employers to only hire part timers . They rightfully point out that the bill will be the end of the middle class and don’t support it anymore . They all want waivers . The Obamacare call center has publicly stated they will not be hiring anymore full timers only part timers .. Even the IRS who is going to be charged with collecting for the bill wants an exemption . Try convincing your team first because they hate it . It seems the only people who like it are those on entitlements and the Public Unions …gee other people will pay for them so whats not to like …right ?

          • Independent1

            I get my numbers from reliable sources, not from the lies and distortions of the GOP like you apparently do. Everything you posted is a blatant LIE!!!!!!!

          • bikejedi

            Well it certainly wouldn’t seem so to ANY independent observer that happened upon what you posted . In fact all the evidence from Reliable sources would say otherwise …sooo

          • Independent1

            You’re obviously a pathological liar akin to Bush and Romney. Virtually everyone posting on the NM is aware that numerous states have projected that they will be able to offer healthcare premiums 25-50% lower than currently available when ACA takes affect on 10/1/13. For you to state that insurance companies are projecting skyrocketing rates is one of the most ridiculous statements virtually anyone posting on this site has read recently. It’s clear that discussing anything with you is a waste of time – it’s impossible to carry on a discussion with a pathologicial liar (as Obama discovered during the debates with Romney – when you have no ethics whatsoever and are willing to tell nothing but lies – any reasonable discussion or debate is a waste of time).

          • idamag

            I have found bikerjerk to be a liar in the past.

          • bikejedi

            And of course I proved it was the other way around …Bye Bye intolerant person

          • Russell Byrd

            Bye Bye? But you will never leave. Just another lie that you will tell over, and over, and over. . . .

            You are the Energizer Bunny of untruth! You cowardly sh*t.

          • bikejedi

            You are immature and intolerant . All you want to do is call others names because you cant debate on merit …Or maybe you can tell everyone you know the difference between U3 and U6 again ? Remember how I broke that down for you at a level you would understand ? Or do you want to lie about that too ? Coward indeed !

          • Russell Byrd

            Immature and intolerant. Turn away from the mirror now. Probably 80% of my posts directly address something of merit. You just lie, make up facts, and avoid questions. When pinned on a subject, you move to a new thread and begin again.

            Once again, I ask you to explain your sacred views on U3 and U6. The total I have, including your lies from our last encounter, I have asked you 16 times in all. I even threatened to post that fact off-topically for all to see. Yet, you are too stupid to figure you just look like a lying fool.

            AND I did give a brief definition of the terms on one occasion and later gave a more detailed explanation of the terms and the process. After 16 requests, you have still failed to explain one time. From now on, Mr. Mikey Troll, I will not explain further, but just post that you are simply a liar.

          • bikejedi

            Russell really you need to seek help . Please look back at the last three threads you and I have occupied . I have no trouble having a conversation with most of the Liberals here even though we disagree . You on the other hand have followed me around these thread to just immaturely and intolerantly call me names like a child and have offered nothing but your festering hatred . Maybe you have a man crush on me but it is unrequited OK . I am hetero . Please seek help . I mean that sincerely and them maybe we can have an adult conversation . You are only making yourself look small here not me .

          • Russell Byrd

            What a disgusting liar you are. I am going to cut and paste your post into the next thread we “occupy.” Really, “occupy” is an apt term for you. You think you are a conquering hero, that has the right to rule over your Liberal inferiors. Of course, you are the only inferior.

            Honestly, every poster in every group is on your a** every time. Small wonder. There are a couple of posters that will tolerate for about 2-3 posts, and then they stop feeding the TROLL. As I have said repeatedly” THAT’S YOU.

            How can you tell so many lies with a straight face. There is no possibility that you have any friends, or are welcome anywhere for very long. Why don’t you just play a little game with bullets. Then the taxpayers would not have to pick up the tab for treating your worthless hide.

          • Russell Byrd

            You are a coward. You know that none of us will ever come to your slum in Chicago and do you any harm. That means you can disrupt with impunity.

            I challenge you for the 17th time, to give me an explanation of U3 and U6. You have not yet done so. In fact, you never have. You just stay on me about it. So post your proof. I posted an explanation twice. The second in detail, even though I said I would not bother because I was not going to do your research for you.

          • bikejedi

            Wow you just called the Liberal Utopia of Chicago a slum . The Neighborhood I live in is a very mixed and diverse community . It is mixed ethnically racially and from an income perspective as well . It is not a slum . The Dems have made a lot of those in Chicago however . Most are populated by Blacks who they have sated in generational poverty in exchange for votes .

          • Russell Byrd

            NO, lying dirtbag. I said in YOUR slum. Your stinking, roach, bedbug infested abode. Not anyone else’s.

            Answer a question. If you hate Chicago and its people so badly, then why is a white wonder like you still hanging there???????

            And about the blah, blah, generational poverty nonsense. No one except a moronic twit believes that. You are just showing your ignorance and racism. AND you are losing votes when you do so. Only the ignorant and racist will fall for that malarkey, and they vote for your gang of criminals anyway. Nothing to be gained. You are just wasting a few extra heartbeats typing that crap.

            Sheesh, how often can you lie. Can you type even one sentence without a lie.

          • bikejedi

            Why do you have to resort to casting assumptions of someone else ? Look , all you have to do is a simple google search . You seem to ONLY get your info from Liberal Media > they have been found out and proven to mostly be paid shills and PR for the Whitehouse . Why bring Romney into this ? What does he have to do with the discussion beside the fact that when you have nothing the left just spins and deflects . You are right discussing anything with you is a waste …Bye Bye

          • Russell Byrd

            No one is “casting assumptions.” When you open your mouth you remove all doubt as to your anti-American motivations and total untruth.

            After that “casting assumptions” please do not bother about the intelligence or educational qualifications of others. That was a Yogi Berra type boner. At least his were funny, and on purpose. Unlike you, stupid and vicious.

          • bikejedi

            Once again you prove your immaturity intolerance and hate …The Emperor would love the way you fester in your hate .

          • Russell Byrd

            As I have said, I hate you. You hate everyone that is not like your ideal. You are an Emperor in you own mind. Best I can do when a nitwit like you posts from fantasy land.

          • bikejedi

            Bye Bye Byrdie ..I don’t have time for you immaturity intolerance and most importantly massive ignorance

          • Russell Byrd

            Then why did you come, chicken shit? Lie Lie Mikey-Bikey. You are a coward. You come here because in your miserable, useless life, you know that you can abuse other peoples rights with your bullshit. You know that NO Liberal is going to go to Chicago, seek you out, and jack you jaw with a club hammer, like you deserve. It is you bastards that want to snipe and blow up day cares. You think we are all pushovers, but that was never really true, and thanks to f*ckups like you, we are getting a lot tougher.

          • bikejedi

            See this is exactly what I’m talking about . You are festering in hate just because someone doesn’t agree with you . Please seek help and please in the future just leave me out of your hate rants . I have several good conversations and debates here without a problem ….all except you following me around with your hate . So please seek help

          • Russell Byrd

            I explained this until I was blue in the face. I only bully bullies. The only ones I hate are useless little drama “queen” bullies like you.

            Mr. Hasting was just being very tolerant of you. I am really very tolerant as well. You shoot off your smart, ignorant mouth and try to take advantage.

            DID YOU NOTICE, that after about three posts, your “good conversation” posters all disappeared. They got tired of “feeding the TROLL.” That BE You.

            I do not have much trouble with anybody. As I said, until you showed up with your typical disrespect, I had not even posted once.

            You are the one that needs all kinds of “help.”

          • Russell Byrd

            Mike, none of your sources are worth a dime. You are a breathtaking liar. No change there.

          • bikejedi

            Sorry the truth hurts your feelings . If you don’t trust my sources do a google search and you will feel real bad

          • Russell Byrd

            What sources? I have not seen one yet. And you have one point, when I check out your made up lies, I get angry because the evidence proves you lie. Didn’t your mother ever teach you that no one likes or respects a liar. I bet the only reason she fed you in the house was, if she fed you out back with the dogs, the embarrassment of letting the neighbors hear your lies you would be too much to bear.

          • Russell Byrd

            Rates have not been skyrocketing. Unless of course, you consider that they have been “skyrocketing” years before Obamacare was ever conceived. With the new regulation requiring refunds if the premiums are not spent on actual healthcare, then rates will drop, even if it is not a huge amount.

            As to Baucus and the train wreck quote. ANOTHER LIE on your part. That statement was in response to shifting of funds to cover the gutting of the PR budget for the plan’s implementation. Baucus was questioning the HHR Secretary Sebelius about how the public would be educated on what is a huge, and confusing piece of legislation. He NEVER made that remark about Obamacare itself. Guess who gutted the funding for the PR budget? Anybody with half an honest mind can guess the answer.

            Here is just one link:

            http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/05/24 /the_secret_history_of_max_baucus_s_train_wreck_quote.html

            You know bikegirl, if you only listen to and believe liars, then what you believe and say is likely to be lies. That is why you inspire such impassioned replies. The Reid quote, is ACCORDING to Mitch McConnell. What a joke, Reid was talking about the same thing Baucus was.

            Unlike yourself, NO ONE really thinks we can convince a lying, idiot like you of anything. Just, some of us will not sit around and allow you to disrupt and lie, and control the conversation without responding with a little truth.

          • bikejedi

            I notice you cant dispute the facts or logic that I posted you just picked one thing and decided to call someone a Liar just like the intolerant person you are . Baucus has called Obamacare a train wreck on more then one occasion and he’s cited that it cant fund itself . You cant dispute anything else I posted but since you don’t like the truth you get butt hurt and become intolerant . Real mature …

          • Russell Byrd

            I did, and I did so successfully. Baucus has explained his own words and it is well known, amongst those that value truth, what, when, and where he was talking about it. I do not need to repeat, the link gives the truth, and is only one source amongst many. Yes, that is a very mature way of looking at the truth. Unlike your childish fascination with bigotry, racism, and lies.

          • RobertCHastings

            Um, let me see, you go to the OIL industry to get your stats about the viability of a project that is sponsored by the OIL industry and will bring billions to the OIL industry. How quaint. How stupid.

          • idamag

            I watched the PBS documentary where a man turned on his water tap and held a match to it and his water started on fire.

          • RobertCHastings

            Was that due to fracking? I heard, on the Internet, that those toxins and flammables did not leak into homes or groundwater. I think that was one of those commercials put out by the gas and oil lobbyists.

          • Mark Forsyth

            It has been revealed that every investigation by the EPA into groundwater contamination by way of hydro-fracking operations has been halted,and the results of industry conducted tests are to be used to answer the groundwater contamination question. I’d sooner ask a fox whether it has raided the hen house before I would believe what the industry has to say regarding the safety of hydro-fracking.

          • RobertCHastings

            The ATF, which, as part of its charter, gathers data on guns, has been prohibited from sharing this information. The CDC, while preparing a study on the public health impact of gun violence, was prohibited from continuing that study. While the NRA MAY have had no part in the EPA issue, I feel certain that ALEC did.

          • idamag

            They were discussing fracking.

          • RobertCHastings

            What is your take on fracking? The fossil fuel industry is claiming that it doesn’t travel upward into the groundwater, or get into peoples’ basements, or cause animal deaths in fields over where it is taking place. On the other hand, some reasonably reliable sources contradict this assertion. I had intended to see the movie Matt Damon made about it, but he has done another similar movie (I think on pharmaceuticals) a number of years ago, sort of like Erin Brokovich. I guess I am waiting for Michael Moore to come out with one. I believe the government has jumped the gun on this one, allowing it to go forward before all appropriate data is in. Same thing with “clean” coal technology. If they have the equipment to scrub the exhaust from coal-fired power plants, where do they put the residue they filter out?

          • idamag

            I think it should be halted until it can be completely investigated and perhaps by experts from abroad as people, in this country, can be bribed.

          • RobertCHastings

            Yes, but hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs have already been provided, for an industry that claims to be 40% cleaner than oil when used in electrical generating plants (that doesn’t really instill much confidence). Natural gas will supposedly bridge the gap between where we are now and a future of renewable and non-polluting energy. But, ya know, as good as that sounds, I think I agree with you.

          • bikejedi

            TY for being civil …Let me answer that . Even though they stand to make some money it doesn’t mean they have an agenda to fudge what they project as to hiring . There would be a lot of backlash if they are wrong . I will take that over the ponderings and musings of Liberal Journalists who make a living lying and doing PR for the Whitehouse and their agenda …And by the way those Journalists don’t know the industry at all

          • RobertCHastings

            Forbes which, by consensus SHOULD be considered a reliable CONSERVATIVE source for business news, disputes your estimates. While initial, temporary jobs may be in the neighborhood of as many as 21,000, like the Alaskan pipeline this number will drop dramatically when the pipe is completed. The permanent employment numbers for the Alaskan pipeline are fewer than 100 (and it is still in operation, with much greater capacity than Keystone), and Forbes projects the same kind of employment drop for Keystone. I would say that If you don’t trust Forbes, the only ones you WOULD believe have some sort of ax to grind.

          • bikejedi

            Cool …Lets go with your numbers and say they will be 21, 000 temp jobs . At least those jobs wont be tax payer funded temp jobs that cost the Tax Payers approx. 2 mil per job created like the Stimulus bill did . Since it wouldn’t be tax payer funded these would be real revenue and tax generating jobs . All of that is better then doing another tax payer funded stimulus that will just add debt . I haven’t seen the forbes thing but I will look at it when I get a chance . I don’t know where anyone came up with only 100 permanent jobs from the Alaskan line that seems impossible just based on the size scope and geography of Alaska .

          • RobertCHastings

            Simply because you have a hard on for the Obama stimulus, you totally ignore the Bush stimulus (most of which has not been recovered and was totally without oversight). What was the Roman god with two faces? Was it Proteus?
            Once the pipeline is built, all that is required (as with the Alaskan pipeline) is a very minimal force to maintain it. Since the Keystone pipe will be much smaller and carry a much smaller volume of oil than the Alaskan pipeline, maintenance should be cheaper. Interesting that you want to dispute what Forbes has published, even though they are a conservative source.

          • idamag

            Janus

          • RobertCHastings

            Thank you. Once again you have come to my assistance. I am indebted.

          • bikejedi

            Mr Hasting . unlike a lot of people on this site you seem pretty reasonable and civil . TY for that . I will try to respond . 1st I am unaware that Bush did a Stimulus . I don’t know to which policy or act you are referring to but if it was Tarp… well , most of the Banks have already paid that back with interest . That program was a great success as it saved some of the biggest banks that were holding too much bad debt from the Sub Prime housing debacle that was forced on them through the Community Reinvestment Act . The Govt made money on that I am unaware of any Stimulus other then that and that was not a Stimulus plan .
            I didn’t dispute what you said that you read in Forbes but I find it totally hard to believe when you factor in Geography and the scope of that project . In either event any jobs created by the private sector are much more valuable to the economy and to the treasury as they don’t require tax dollars to create them . If your contention is right ( that the Keystone Jobs will be temporary ) then these temporary jobs are still more desirable then temporary jobs that are funded by the Tax Payer …In a stimulus plan those Jobs are Temporarily funded by the Tax Payers …Once these people are on the job the localities that hired them , and their tax payers , are on the hook for them permanently . We saw this in Chicago . After the Stimulus they created make work jobs for traffic aides to mimic traffic lights ..These jobs were funded for two years and now we have 400 new city employees that the Tax Payers are on the hook for . Now I’m not saying that these people don’t appreciate the jobs or that they needed them . However when you have over 1.3 billion in Pension debt in your city and over 700 million in budget deficit besides that , then hiring people to mimic traffic light might not be a good idea . That is Especially true when you cant properly man a Police Dept and your city is the modern equivalent of the wild west

          • RobertCHastings

            While I can sympathize with you and understand much of your animus toward the political structure in Chicago, my experiences have been somewhat different. My locality is one year into a six year project to totally redo a major interstate highway interchange. I am sure the published costs will probably be at least doubled by the time the project is completed. But the vast majority of those working on this project are some of those most deeply affected by the recent recession – construction workers. As with ALL infrastructure jobs around the country being funded by the Federal government, the jobs are good paying (which gets money into the system). When the job is completed, the workers will hopefully be reintegrated into the residential or commercial building trades from which they were originally excluded by the recession – they will not be standing around acting as beacons or traffic lights. There are many more such projects in my area that serve a number of useful purposes, in spite of their drain on the public coffers. They provide meaningful and useful work for qualified people; they generate money to be spent and generate the creation of jobs; they generate tax revenue through paychecks and sales taxes; they serve to rebuild our long-neglected and largely-forgotten infrastructure.
            While this is a discussion going on around the country about whether the government needs to be involved in creating jobs, we have seen no movement from the private sector. Since the recession, the private sector has amassed a huge amount of money which it would normally invest in the creation of jobs. As I am sure you have noticed, this is not happening.
            During the period from our Revolution to the end of the War of 1812, there was much the same discussion going on. Happily, the issue was resolved and America went on to become what it is today.

          • bikejedi

            We had several good projects in Chicago also ( although I think they screwed up the ramps on the Kennedy Expwy ) In Chicago most of the work was done by the same heavy equipment companies that always get those projects because of their political connections . ( Kenney and Pepper ) They didn’t really hire new people because they have their own . Most of these projects were worthwhile and needed so I can see some of that spending . I think that only about 10% of the Stimulus bill was used for these projects but I could be off on that . While I agree some spending for infrastructure is needed you have to wonder why the massive amounts collected in fuel taxes isn’t doing this by itself .

          • RobertCHastings

            Fuel taxes (in those states where they are imposed) are generally earmarked for maintenance only. Estimates of the cost for renovation and rebuilding of our total infrastructure and getting it to the condition it was when it was originally built is upwards of $2T (as in trillion). Considering Congress only granted about $130B for the current round of infrastructure building, there is much more to be done.
            When America was a young country, the debate was over canals and a national road, all to connect what was beyond the Appalachian mountains with ports and cities in the east, at an estimated cost at the time of $20B, a sum that was almost triple what the government took in as revenues in a year. In perspective, what is needed to renew our infrastructure is less than twice what the government takes in in a year’s time. Without infrastructure, America would never have grown to what it is today, even with the acquisition of vast territories from the settled East to the Pacific coast. These are projects the private sector has traditionally not invested in, even though the chief economic beneficiaries throughout our history of infrastructure projects have been business and industry. Perhaps the only large infrastructure project built by the private sector has been our railroads. However, those, too, are rapidly deteriorating and that industry is, today, unwilling to invest in any renewal projects. As we saw just about 2 – 3 years ago, our electric transmission grid is old and ailing and, in taxing times like this summer may prove to be, is susceptible to failure. ALL of our infrastructure needs will require the input of workers from many areas of our currently un- and underemployed work force, as well as those industries that supply raw materials. When this country is close to full employment, everyone prospers, and jobs will become available as those temporary jobs in infrastructure rebuilding eventually disappear.

          • bikejedi

            I can agree with some of that . If what you say about 2 T is correct then we need to create more tax payers and wealthier tax payers ..and then do those projects . I would not blame the current Congress for the way the Dem Congress allocated the money from the Stimulus .

          • RobertCHastings

            And how do we create more and wealthier tax payers? A logical response would be to pay the EXISTING taxpayers more (increase minimum wage to 15$?) AND create more jobs through government stimulus (infrastructure jobs, more police, subsidize state governments to hire more teachers). The Bush stimulus, if you recall, did nothing to create jobs and was widely panned for benefitting ONLY those who cause the economic collapse in the first place. The Obama stimulus was actually directed at creating jobs, although a relatively minor amount was directed toward infrastructure. Many teachers and police around the country retained their jobs in 2009 due to the Obama stimulus, but today are facing state and local budget cuts because the economy has not recovered. The Crash of 1929 was precipitated by SOME of the same issues that caused the crash of 2007, and it was not rectified until WWII (12 years later) necessitated the huge influx of public funds into the economy, which resulted in an unprecedented period from the 40’s into the 70’s of economic growth for the nation AND for individuals(a period characterized by 70% or higher tax rates on the wealthy) of ALL income ranges. The wealth distribution during this period was about 20% of the nation’s wealth concentrated among the wealthiest. The situation today is entirely different as the wealth distribution is closer to 50% of the nation’s wealth concentrated among the wealthiest 5%. Throughout our history, when the wealth distribution is this inordinate, the middle class constricts and stagnates and the job market collapses and recoveries are what is termed “jobless”. Economic constriction in this scenario is caused by the inability of the middle class to purchase all that is necessary to keep the engines of production going performing at capacity, leading to job (and wealth) uncertainty for the large majority of Americans.

          • bikejedi

            Once again You are one of the people on this site that can have a legitimate conversation
            Well we disagree on the methods to create more tax payers . Govt Stimulus only creates temporary tax payers and it does so by taking money from the treasury . Raising the minimum wage would only increase the cost of living and also negating money to the treasury . I do support a minimal raising of the minimum wage myself but not the 15/hr that those restaurant workers want . That would just cause those restaurants to fire people to cut costs and raise the price of a Qtr Pounder over a dollar . You keep talking about a Bush Stimulus and I don’t recall Bush ever doing one . I also cant find reference to one in the Congressional record or by a google search . I did just find a link that showed that not only were more Police never hired but that only 6% of the Obama ( De ) Stimulus was used for road projects . The most Liberal of paper in America (NY Times )predicted the crash of 2008 and the reasons it would happen ( Community Reinvestment Act . bad debt from.sub prime loans …Fannie and Freddy handling things irresponsibly …Glass Steagall being repealed ) in an investigative report on 9 /30 /99 …Some of the other stuff we agree on .

          • RobertCHastings

            Bush finally admitted that the crash of 2007 – 2008 actually began in 2007. He pushed through the stimulus you spoke of previously, with the votes of many Democrats (including Obama). Obama’s own stimulus of an additional $700B was directed more toward business than the financial sector. The repeal of Glass-Steagall definitely was the beginning of the end for our economy, and Republicans refuse to accept their part in it, although what replaced it was co-sponsored by Phil Gramm, a Republican from Texas. Glass-Steagall had worked effectively for over 60 years to prevent the excesses that precipitated the Great Depression, some of the SAME excesses that precipitated our Great Recession. Regulation of the financial sector is absolutely necessary if we wish to avoid a repeat, especially since, without adequate regulation, speculators are still engaging in the same risky behavior with other peoples’ money. I did not say that Obama’s stimulus led to the HIRING of more teachers, etc., I said that it led to their not losing their jobs, a big difference.
            Examine the federal mandate behind the Community Reinvestment Act. NOTHING in that act gave the financial industry authorization or encouragement to bundle what they knew were faulty loans and sell them as unregulated derivatives, that were rated inaccurately by agencies like S&P who violated their own charters by doing so. The revolving door between the Fed, Congress, Treasury, and Merrill/Lynch, etc. has contributed to a chumminess between finance and government that is entirely inappropriate, and has, more than once, had bad consequences. Even before Obama took office, Geithner was an agent involved in determining the disposition of the Bush stimulus package. The package from which AIG received well over $100B. Many other financial institutions around the world(not just in the US) received monies from that stimulus, while businesses on the brink in the US had to wait over a year to get help. Financial groups are STILL reluctant to loan money to allow the economy to go forward, even though the government has made the money available.

          • Russell Byrd

            Do you know how to do anything but lie? I stole that line from another poster, but it is appropriate. Really, you do not use any reasoning and never use any sound information or judgement. Everything you post is about how bad “liberal, obama, the poor,etc.” Over, and over, and over, and over . . . ad nauseum. I am glad you find Mr. Hastings “civil.” He is, but unfortunately that is not a compliment from you. You are NOT civil, and that is the reason that I address you as I do.

            Maybe someday, you will learn to love America and want to see this nation excel. Rather than the armpit of the world you want it to be.

          • bikejedi

            You should take a hint from more tolerant posters and stop festering in your own Hate Russell .

          • Russell Byrd

            I think the hate is really yours. You hate yourself as much as you hate us. Really, stop lying to us AND yourself for once. If you cared about anything at all, you would stop judging people you do not know, stop hating anyone that is different, and stay away from places you are not welcome.

            Don’t give me that lie about waking anyone up. All you have done, moron, is toughened our resolve. In any normal person’s book, that is a negative waste of good effort.

          • Russell Byrd

            Still the same old sack of sorry sh*t.

            “TY for being civil. . . .”

            “Liberal Journalists who make a living lying and doing PR for the Whitehouse and their agenda.”

            What a f*cking hypocrite. You do not want civil, you want to bad mouth with impunity. You get mad when someone points out your lies. For instance, Obama did submit a job plan and Republicreeps did vote it down. The oil companies have BILLIONS of reasons to lie to us.

            To boot, after they get the “gravy” they will leave us taxpayers to clean up their mess. Exxon still has not settled the Valdez incident, after getting our politicians to cut the settlement to a fraction. And do not go about much they have spent. The losses to be paid are based on what they tore up, not on what they feel they should or should not pay.

            Ya want to start another posting war, you will only lose and run away again.

          • bikejedi

            Spin and deflect . What does Exxon have to do with ANYTHING ANYONE posted ? And If I remember that last time we did this you were telling me how gorgeous Rachel Maddow is .

          • Russell Byrd

            She is to a normal man. I never said I was going to sleep with her. You hate her because she is smart, she is liberal, and she is a lesbian. That is -1 point for stupid, and -2 for being a hater and bigot.

            As for Exxon, it has everything to do with the conversation. You bitch about everyone being a drag ass on the economy. Well, by giving Exxon even one red cent in subsidies, Exxon becomes exactly what you are bitching at.

            One of your problems, dirtbag, is you really do come here to disrupt the posting rights of others. You think you can decide what is addressed and you can control our conversation. You do not have that right.

            Have you noticed how many times I posted before your rotten ass showed up. Not once. I just bully the bullies, like I told you.

      • Independent1

        Here’s the president’s jobs program that the GOP House has been sitting on for over 2 1/2 years nitwit – stop being so stupid and clueless:

        Offering tax credits to encourage businesses to hire unemployed veterans.

        Preventing up to 280,000 teacher layoffs, and keeping first responders including firefighters and police officers on the job.

        Modernizing at least 35,000 public schools across the country, building science labs, internet ready classrooms, etc.

        Making immediate investments in infrastructure, roads, bridges, railroads, airports ,and more.

        Project Rebuild: an effort to put people back to work rehabilitating homes and businesses and stabilizing communities, leveraging private capital and scaling up successful models of public-private
        collaboration.

        Expanding wireless internet access to 98 percent of Americans and first responders by freeing up the nation’s spectrum

        The most innovative reform to the unemployment insurance program in 40 years. A $4,000 tax credit to employers for hiring long-term unemployed workers.

        Prohibiting employers from discriminating against unemployed workers when hiring.

        Expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults by investing in promising and proven strategies and programs like summer jobs and sector-based training programs.

        Expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults by investing in promising and proven strategies and programs like summer jobs and sector-based
        training programs.

        Cutting payroll taxes in half for 160 million workers next year.

        Allowing more Americans to refinance their mortgages.

        To ensure that the American Jobs Act is fully paid for, the President has called on the Joint Congressional Committee to achieve additional deficit reduction necessary to pay for the Act and still meet its deficit target. The President will, in the coming days, release a detailed plan that will show how the Committee can achieve the additional deficit reduction necessary to meet the President’s goal of stabilizing our debt as a share of the economy and pay for his plan to put Americans back towork.

        • bikejedi

          If the 1st De Stimulus proved one thing it is that we don’t need another one . That one cost the tax payers over 2 million for every TEMP job it created , It did not decrease unemployment in the construction trades as promised either . It did funnel projects and money to connected Dem contractors like Kenny Construction and Pepper Construction . The public jobs it created it only funded for two years and now municipalities like Chicago are on the hook to pay and pension all those people they hired to mimic traffic lights permanently , or let them go …The promised Teacher hirings let alone retention are a joke as we are laying off over 1200 of them here . We are 2000 police officers short of what fed guidelines call for a city the size of Chicago and we didn’t even hire to cover the loses to natural attrition and retirements . All this in the Gun Control and Murder Capital of America . Liberal policies don’t work SEE DETROIT .
          The Dems pay only lip service to the Vets while Illegal Immigrants are already getting funded jobs programs and Jobs themselves . They are getting these things OVER starving American citizens . It they get their amnesty part of that will be a ploy to not allow Illegal Aliens to have to comply with Obamacare making them more desirable to be hired over returning vets …The Vets don’t want useless spending of fellow Americans tax dollars they don’t want hand outs they want a level playing field and right now your party only cares to pander to ILLEGAL ALIENS ..so please don’t preach that your Dems care about vets and are trying to do something for them . Their history shows otherwise .
          I like the public Private stuff you mentioned if it is workable . Rahm is trying to do some of that in Chicago so far it has nit been a success

          • Independent1

            Would it be possible for you to stop lying?? The majority of economists have agreed that the stimulus program was probably the most successful job creation program that the government has ever run; and as I pointed out to you earlier, it, together with the auto bailout are the only things that kept Bush and the GOP from creating their 2nd world-wide depression. And even the stimulus directed at green energy was enormously successful – despite lying Ryan’s & Romney’s constant belittling of it. Of the 90 billion allocated for green stimulus, only 26 billion was ever allocated, and of that, 89% resulted in highly successful green projects. An 89% success rate for R&D type projects is phenominal – Solyndra, that the GOP loves to hype, was one of the few projects of the green stimulus that didn’t turn into a success. But then again, all the GOP, and apparently you, know how to do, is hype the little things that don’t work – neatly glossing over all the enormous successes that have been accomplished along the way.

          • bikejedi

            Whatever you are smoking hook a brother up …. The De Stimulus hasn’t created any real permanent jobs …can you name one ? If so can you tell me who is currently paying that persons salary ? The investment in green companies run by donors to Obama and funded as pay back for their support…well those failures are way too numerous to list here …Hook me up …If your supplier is that good maybe I can become a Liberal too ….

          • Independent1

            Keep on with the lies!! One right after another!! Just like Romney during the debates!! It’s a sad commentary that the American electorate is so ignorant about what is really going on in the country that they couldn’t pick up on Romney’s lies and distortions – an entire debate of them one right after another. Romney did not make one truely truthful statement in any one of the debates. Everything he said was a pre-recorded lie or distortion designed to mislead the electorate. Romney is one of the truely great scumbags of the world.

          • bikejedi

            Excuse me I don’t lie and didn’t lie . And what does Romney have to do with this discussion …Oh I forgot you are a Liberal and all you know is spin and deflect . By the way Romney has a impeccable reputation for honesty ….the Gay Kenyan not so much

          • Russell Byrd

            Logic again. Obama is not Kenyan. Proven!

            Therefore, you lie. . .

            Ditto for Romney’s honesty. By the why stupidity is not honesty, but stupidity, stoopid.

          • bikejedi

            Proven by what exactly ? A photo shopped fake BC ? Or the fact that all of his records are sealed ? Why don’t we ask that original birther Hillary ? Are you debating whether or not he is part Kenyan ? You cant be that ignorant can you ?

          • Russell Byrd

            Boy, you are really reaching insanity. Why would it be Photoshopped? For what reason, besides your desire to make up falsehoods. Because he is black, you f*cking racist. Let’s see your birth certificate or at least your AKC papers. I doubt you have anything proving a live human birth. I bet you believe in Yeti and the Easter Bunny. They must exist because no one has never been able not take a picture of something that is not there. Make no sense, exactly the same as you.

            As long as you can just make up your facts, then you cannot have a civil discussion with anybody. By literal definition.

          • bikejedi

            No way ???? are you kidding me ???? You still believe that BC even after several independent expert have proven it fake . Look at the name of the Hospital . It didn’t go by that name until 2yrs after that date . I mean there are so many discrepencies that you could drive a truck through it .

          • Russell Byrd

            No “independent expert” has proven it to be a fake. That is not even possible as the original is in the State of Hawaii’s custody. More Fake News. There are no discrepancies except the simple fact that you want to declare some for your own sick, racist purposes.

            Boy, you are wearing me out. I am getting tired of having to call you a liar over and over. Unfortunately for you, I like telling the truth, so I guess you will continue to be called a liar.

            Maybe, you could just drive that truck over a cliff. Hmm?

          • Russell Byrd

            Liberals rely on truth to prove points. Therefore, you cannot become a Liberal.

            Liberals have advanced thinking skills (i.e. intelligence). Therefore, once again, you cannot become a Liberal.

            Of course, you can keep smoking cow patty.

            Now be gracious and thank me for the elementary logic course.
            🙂

          • bikejedi

            Is that why a majority of Liberals now hate that term and want to be known as Progressives ? Might it be because Liberal has become synonymous with Hypocrite ? And as for intelligence I would refer you to the survey that the Liberal Pew research people did . They found Conservative to be by far the better informed group . Might be because some of them watch FOX

          • Russell Byrd

            We Liberals usually use the words interchangeably. Some prefer one over the other. I have no preference. I choose Liberal usually because you shitasses have spent lifetimes just trying to make a word, a very good word according to Webster, into something evil. You have never had any rationale except to make a word “bad.” No reason, just derision.

            And as far as research,Liberals have always been found to be smarter, and better informed, maybe because they believe less nonsense and are a lot less bigoted. Now if you are talking about the average citizen, then maybe. Even so, what you call conservative is just about three steps to the right of Hitler. Not exactly very smart, very balanced, or very caring about being informed.

          • Russell Byrd

            Independent, there is no chance mikey-bikey will stop lying. She came here to “wake up” the posters. That is in her own words. Notice that when you pin her to the wall on a point, she changes subject and increases the volume of lies. She is just here to disrupt. She wants to punish people like you and I for having an open mind, telling the truth, and caring for the nation and world around us. You should realize that mikey-bikey is a total failure that is self-entitled to have more than she has earned. A very wrong minded attitude, that is nonetheless an old and pervasive one.

          • bikejedi

            This coming from the guy who finds Rachel Maddow to be a ” gorgeous woman ”
            Wow fester in your hate Russell . Wow real mature with the ” she ” ….anyone who looks at my picture can see I am 100% hetero and male . And if you think I lied why don’t you just point it out …Like I did in decimating your posts .

          • Russell Byrd

            Keep on about Rachel Maddow. Please do. Everyone just gets to see you as the self-loathing closet “queer” you really are. As I have said, I am not going to sleep with her, but attractive is, wait for it now . . . attractive. I know that is too much for you.

            As for hate, I hate you. On the other hand you hate minorities, gays, the poor, people that tell the truth, people that are smarter than you. In other words, just about everyone. I guess you are not really a bigot. YOU HATE EVERYONE EQUALLY!

      • disqus_fsqeoY3FsG

        President Obama submitted the American Jobs Act in September 2011 and the Republicans refused to pass the bill. The plan included stimulus spending in the form of immediate infrastructure investments, efforts to shore up state and local budgets to prevent further layoffs of teachers, firefighters, police officers, and other public safety officials. Multiple economists predicted if the bill passed:

        http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/07/812251/republicans-blocked-jobs-act-one-year/
        “–Moody’s Analytics estimated the American Jobs Act would
        create 1.9 million jobs and add two percent to gross domestic product.
        –The Economic Policy Institute estimated it would create
        2.6 million jobs and protect an addition 1.6 million existing jobs.
        –Macroeconomic Advisers predicted it would create
        2.1 million jobs and boost GDP by 1.5 percent.
        –Goldman Sachs estimated it would add 1.5 percent to GDP.”
        http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/news/092811_GLI_study_finds_Keystone_XL_pipeline_will_create_few
        _jobs.html
        Lara Skinner, associate director of research at the Cornell Global Labor Institute, said: “The company’s claim that Keystone XL will
        create 20,000 direct construction and manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is
        unsubstantiated. There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material input for KXL – steel pipe- will not even be produced in the U.S.”

        Overall, she said, “Keystone XL could kill more jobs than it creates.
        I rather the President listen to environmental lobbyists than people like the Koch Brothers who don’t give a damn about the air they pollute, the water they pollute or the land they contaminate.

        • bikejedi

          We tried that tack before and the Liberal economist were wrong . De Stimulus created temp jobs at a cost of about 2 mil per job . as to you assertion of hiring teachers and cops tell me again why we in Chicago are 2000 officers short of federal guidelines in a city that mirrors the wild west and we laid teachers off after the De Stimulus ? I don’t think we need another train wreck that just creates temporary positions or temporarily funds them to later leave the localities to handle the expense of these new hire when the money runs out . Plus these plans will just increase the national debt . I can post real economists links all day but what would that prove other then the ones that I would cite were right under the lens of historical precedent.
          Your contentions of Keystone seem rooted in the propaganda of some Liberal Journalist who knows nothing about the industry and is basically a paid Liar and PR shill for the Whitehouse . And why bring the Kochs into it without also mentioning the destabilizing currency manipulating that George Soros made his ill gotten gains from . The Kochs aren’t going around destabilizing third world countries and force them into pollution creating industries

          • disqus_fsqeoY3FsG

            I am always amused by Republicans/Conservatives, when a liberal states a fact it is propaganda – that is your argument no facts just false accusations. The only job plans the Republicans have is Boehner standing behind a podium waving a brochure saying our main focus is on jobs. Voting to repeal Obamacare 40 time is not a jobs plan. The Republican Party is the party of gloom and doom. They have done NOTHING to strengthen our economic condition, they have done NOTHING to create jobs. They have DONE NOTHING.

          • bikejedi

            Weren’t you paying attention ? I just posted facts and you know they are facts because we can look at them threw the lens oh history ..such as the stuff I posted on De Stimulus . Meanwhile what you posted from Liberal economists is pure conjecture and if you look at their history of misses …well you get the point . They GOP has legitimate Jobs plans that don’t involve a lot of Tax Payer spending and piling on of debt . But keep drinking the Kool ade and ignore the logic I just posted

          • disqus_fsqeoY3FsG

            Last word – you would not know a fact if it bit you in the a$$

          • bikejedi

            As I pointed out it was I who showed that MY FACT have historical precedent while you spout feelings . Sorry you are butt hurt

          • Russell Byrd

            You have no facts. And feelings are pertinent when they are based on truth. That is what makes humans, human. Your cold blooded denouncement of the least decency is not a precedent at all. By definition, you seem to be trying to prove that you are not a human.

          • bikejedi

            As I pointed out …historical precedent ..sorry you don’t like the truth

          • Russell Byrd

            Dirtbag, what historical precedent. You did not recite one and as you have been told by other posters, YOU LIE. Your data is false nonsense generate inside your more than vacant cranium. So, I love the truth, but your lying suppositions do not equate with true.

          • bikejedi

            Well if you could read then you would know that is what I cited and no one else disputed it .

          • Russell Byrd

            We have reached this point once again. THERE IS NO ONE HERE TO DISPUTE YOUR LIES. Bwwwwaaaaaahhhhhh.
            How stupid a little twerp can you be. Everyone has left!

            The sad part is, that is what you want. You hate me because I will not go. Sorry about your rotten f*cking luck, dirtbag.

            You even lie about leaving.

            Do you steal all the candy from neighborhood children and then tell them they had it coming because they were “Liberals.” Your a nutjob.

          • bikejedi

            You are immature and very very disturbed . Seek help

          • Russell Byrd

            You are a weak-minded moronic child and very very very disturbed. Jump off a bridge and do everyone a favor.

          • bikejedi

            There is that hate you are festering in again …Look Russ if you hate me so much why are you following me from thread to thread ? That is an Illness …seek help . stop living in your own feces filth and hate

          • Russell Byrd

            Unpleasant facts for mikey-bikey:

            I do not follow you.

            I just find you plying your trade of disruption, lies, bullying, and ignorance. Then I go into action disrupting you.

            I should be following you, but I do not.

            IF I did follow you, what of it.

            If you posted in groups more suitable for your warped views, then you would never see or hear from me.

            If you had posted like you had some sense, then, once again, you would never see or hear from me. Of course, the time for being sensible is long since past.

            I only hate people that exhibit hate for their fellow man.

            What is really happening is you follow me and others to new threads that you have been told you unwelcome at. Yeah, you have a right to post, but only an idiot cannot see that you have inflicted this pain on yourself.

            For the above reason alone, you are exhibiting symptoms of substantial mental illness.

            If you had the sense to notice, I am VERY successful at disrupting you. After I start on you, your harassment shifts entirely to me and leaves others in peace. That gives me great joy. How stupid can you really be. As I tried every way I knew how to explain to you before, when you start on me with all your lies and nonsense, you are only giving me great joy. I am succeeding at what I am trying to do.

            I can tell you all this, because you either cannot read, are too lazy to read, or are too stupid understand the simple game that I have always played with you.

            So, stay fired up. All the better.

          • idamag

            Through the lens of history, Reagon’s trickle down did not work. Reagan and his administration were smart enough to see that and raised taxes. Through the eyes of history, Bush’s trickle down did not work and is not working. Now show us the GOP’s legitimate job plan.

          • bikejedi

            Its funny how Liberals try to rewrite history . Lets see at this time in Reagans second term we were out of a near depression and inflation was under control . We were adding about 280,000 jobs a month not 80,000 . and we were not adding to the rolls of those on entitlements . It was a smashing success . Income disparity under Reagan shrunk and the middle class grew and made gains . Under Obama income disparity has grown at the fastest rate ever . We have increased the number of those dependent on food stamps to record levels . You cant win this argument why try . Obamanomics is a train wreck . anyway you paint it . And before you start with the Obama saved us arguments answer for yourself if he was so successful and he has created all these jobs why are there way way fewer Americans working then when he took office . Why are there record numbers of part timers and why have we doubled the numbers of those on entitlements . Of course we are going to hear how He saved the auto industry right ? and saved us from a worse fate …all that is speculation and the Auto industry could of had small bailouts and structured BK’s instead of being tax payer subsidized companies

          • Russell Byrd

            So now you admit that you lied when you said that Obama had not submitted a job plan. . . .

          • bikejedi

            I didn’t Lie . What Obama submitted were spending programs . The last time we did that it cost us 2 mil for each temporary job that was created . It took money from small businesses who could’ve hired full time permanent employees who would be real tax payers rather then people who get temp jobs derived from tax dollars . See no Lie just the facts so stop accusing people of lying just because you don’t understand reality K

          • Russell Byrd

            Yes, you did. Like your hero Goebbels, if you tell a lie long enough it becomes truth. Not on my watch. If you were right, 10 billion dollars created 5000 jobs. Nonsense, and we both know it. I will continue to accuse you of lying until you reform your ways. You lie so often, no one believes ANYTHING you say. Why do you bother when you only come here to insult and lie. Are you that mentally ill? Are you clinically a masochist? Do you get off with whips and chains? Or are you really a sadist?

            Let’s face facts. When you show up, you are going to be called a liar. Did you notice that the one person you were trying to buffalo with your snide, bullying, malarkey, dropped you like the cold, smelly turd you are, and went elsewhere. Of course, that is why you are here, to break up lawfully protected conversation.

            I say lawful for a reason, because I did turn you in for the implied threats you made against Ms. . . . . They have not figured out who you are yet, so I guess you lied about that to. I told you that was what I figured anyway. But in my position, I am obligated to report such talk. What I do here is on my own time, but potential criminality must be dealt with regardless.

          • bikejedi

            You are one sick puppy . I don’t say that to be mean but you need serious help . WTH are you talking about with threats ????? You are sick pal get help

          • Russell Byrd

            Yeah, well I almost hope you were telling the truth. Maybe, you will get a little knock on your door at an inconvenient time in the early A.M. I hope they are wearing full body suits. Wouldn’t want anybody to get any mikey-bikey on them. . . .

            For the record, for anyone that reads. You made derogatory remarks about someone you claimed was “near” to Obama. You said things that I would have to consider might be dangerous to that person. You derided me because I did not know who you were talking about. However, you made it clear that they did not know your true view of them and that you could get very “close” to this person.

            I really think nothing is going to happen at all, because just about every word you say is a bold face lie. So I guess I over reacted, but we will see. Like I said, beyond that, these posts are my views on my own time.

            You are the closest thing I have seen in a long time to a pathological liar. I guess you cannot help it.

          • bikejedi

            Really Russ …you are a disturbed individual . Seek help . Ms Cutter is a customer of mine and we respect each other . You need help .

          • Russell Byrd

            First, I do not believe you know her.

            Second, if you do know her, she does not know you.

            Third, and the crux of the matter. In the unlikely event that she does know you, then obviously she does not REALLY know you or she would distance herself from you.

            From what I have been led to believe, you do not know her. You brought it up so you could get all puffed up over another imaginary issue.

          • bikejedi

            You are a disturbed individual …seek help .

          • Russell Byrd

            You are an incredible pathological liar and borderline personality. I would tell you to seek help, but it is a waste of taxpayer money and a therapist’s time.

      • neeceoooo

        You are seriously one delusional human being!!!!

        • idamag

          It won’t do any good to present bikejerk with facts. His mind is made up and he is not going to weigh the evidence if it disagrees with his preconceived notions.

          • Independent1

            And it also could be that he’s a paid troll of the RNC, posting his comments from one of their offices.

        • bikejedi

          Are you cray cray ?

          • idamag

            I wouldn’t say that you are crazy, but you are dogmatic. You will not even consider anything that does not fit your pre-conceived notions.

          • bikejedi

            I would say you are the same . The Major difference is that I have an open enough mind to read and listen to what the other side puts out and you on the other hand only listen to Liberal Journalists

          • Russell Byrd

            I offer a translation of mikey-bikey that places him in the proper context: The Major difference is that I don’t care a rat’s a** about the truth or what the other side has to say. I read and interpret as I please, and say what ever I want regardless of the lies I tell.

          • Russell Byrd

            You know, bikey, that you have lost every one of these discussions. You are just not woman enough to face the truth. You do not have the written skills, reasoning skills, originality, or ethics to be an effective poster. You have no positive skills at all. What you do have is an idiot’s persistence. That is not a skill but a mental defect.

          • bikejedi

            Immature and intolerant . If you think that I have lost just jump in and debate or at least have an intelligent conversation without name calling . All this talk about woman coming from the “guy ” who thinks ” Rachel Maddow is a gorgeous woman ” and as for your intelligence why don’t you explain for everyone the differences between U3 and u6 ..You do remember I broke that down to a level you could understand the last time you couldn’t debate on merit …right ? So enlighten everyone with your brilliance why don’t you ?

          • Russell Byrd

            You come in here to disrupt and hate. Everything is bitch, bitch, bitch. Obama this and liberal that. Then we are supposed to treat you with kid gloves. You call me intolerant, but then you show your closet “queer” side by taking a swipe at Rachel Maddow because she is a smart, liberal, gay woman. And attractive. If she is not to your taste then say so, but you are trying to make a fool of my by denigrating her. That says volumes about the man or lack of a man, that you are.

            The difference between U3 and U6 were explained by me. You have never made any attempt to explain the difference or what they are. For the record, in front of all the other posters, what are they and how do they work? You have been asked this at least a dozen times in our little posting war. I have not seen a response yet.

          • bikejedi

            On the U3 / U6 NO they were NOT explained by you because you don’t understand what they are . You have proven that you don’t understand simple economics . I pointed that out when I explained it to your at least 4 different times You have seen several response so don’t act stupid …oh wait its not an act ..sorry . And as for you man crush on Rachel you stated that hetero men would find her gorgeous and that simply isn’t the case but since you find her so awesome what does that say about your preferences ..maybe now would be a good time to come out .

          • Russell Byrd

            Pure lies and BS. For the 18 time explain in your own words what they are. Bwwwwwwaaaaaaahhhhhhh, YOU CAN’T. Lying shitsucker. I am a Geoeconomist, though I do not practice. I understand perfectly what U3/U6 is and I, unwillingly, explained to your moronic ass exactly what they were. You are the one that has not.

            There is a pattern here. You not only make up facts, but you claim to show proof in prior posts that you have never made. Do you think we do not notice. Or do you suffer from some chronic amnesia, as well as being untruthful?

      • idamag

        If you were a better informed person, you would know there are four jobs bills tabled that the house refused to take any action on.

        • bikejedi

          Thank you for being civil … I am getting tired of all the arguing and name calling so it is refreshing …I’m totally informed and if you took the time to read and understand those so called Jobs bills you would see they are just spending bills designed to create temp jobs on the tax payer dime and create a mountain of debt . We have seen that trick before with the DE STIMULUS bill. We spent over 2 mil for every job created while taking money out of the private economy and creating mountains of debt .

          • idamag

            If the nation’s economy is losing ground, and the poverty level is rising, for a family that is hurting, it doesn’t matter if the job is temporary. It will help the economy rebound. And, if the private sector wants to send all the jobs overseas, then the government will have to provide jobs.

          • bikejedi

            See we agree . The Nations economy IS losing ground . There are fewer Americans working then when Obama took office , there are record numbers of part timers and he has doubled the number of those on food stamps . I also agree that even a temporary job is better then no job . Why do the Dems give ILLEGAL ALIENS jobs over returning American Vets ? And don’t blame the Private sector when the Dems have given us the highest Corp tax rate in the industrialized world . Illinois proves that when you make your State uncompetitive in terms of taxation that businesses and jobs will leave your state for greener pastures . The Dems have taken that approach federal over the years . And before you whine about private businesses doing what they need to do to stay in business maybe you should ask why GM is building plant in China with OUR bailout money or why GE has offshored 26,000 jobs to China ( X ray div ) when they too have gotten tax investment and tax breaks .

      • Independent1

        I forgot to correct your lie/distortion of “and the first two years you could have passed any jobs bill you wanted ….”. The Dems only had 7 1/2 months of sufficient control of the Senate to “get anything they wanted passed, passed”. They gained a controlling majority in the Senate on 1/1/2009 which lasted until Ted Kennedy died on 8/15/09 and Mass. made the disasterous mistake of electing Scott Brown to replace Ted. This negated any chance the Dems had on furthering their agenda. (It was this incident that started Mitch’s nefarious use of the the filibuster rule – more than 420 times since Ted died.) The Dems used that 7 1/2 months to get the Stimulus approved in February which the GOP fought, and the auto bailout, which the GOP fought, and Obamacare passed, which the GOP fought.

        I’ve reminded you of this several times before, that the Dems DID NOT have 2 yeas of Senate control, but of course, being a GOP lover, you’re obviously just like a duck – you let the truth roll right off your back (when it serves your purpose) just like a duck lets water roll off of its back. The truth is, the DEMs have only had 7 1/2 months in the passed 18 years with sufficent control in Congress to follow through on their agenda.

        • idamag

          The first two years, and the ensuing ones, have been hampered by filibuster. Mitch McConnell said, “The Republicans number one goal is to make Obama a one-term president.” Therefore instead of governing, they worked to that end.

        • bikejedi

          Remind yourself that Scott Brown didn’t really change a thing . And as history has proven the GOP was right to fight that ridiculous spending spree .

          • Independent1

            Oh yes! That ridiculous spending spree of stimulus and auto-bailout which virtually every economist in America agrees kept Bush’s disaster from becoming another GOP created world-wide depression!! (Their wonderful management skills created the Big Depression in the 1930s) It’s that ridiculous spending spree that’s kept you and me from standing in a breadline right now!!!!!!

          • bikejedi

            Yeah because we all know 8% unemployment 1.7% growth fewer Americans working then when he took office and doubling those on entitlements is saving us …right …and how about that $4.50 /gal gas in Chicago ? GM could’ve gone through a structured BK and gotten a very small bailout rather then becoming a Tax Payer funded company that is offshoring jobs and building four major plants in China . TARP saved us from a depression as it stabilized the banks . The only economists that believe what you are saying are the ones Obama cites while never naming when he LIES and says” economists from across the Country agree..”.. and you buy that ????

          • Independent1

            And the lies and distortions just keep coming – the unemployment rate in January of 2009 when Obama took office was 10.1% – and the country was losing jobs at about 900,000 jobs/month. The auto bailout and stimulus stopped the slide of jobs faster than during any previous recession in history – the negative job slide was turned around by July of 2009, within 7 months. And the fact that you’re asking me about what permanent jobs were created by the stimulous only makes your ignorance of the purpose of the stimulus more clear – THE STIMULUS WAS NEVER INTENDED TO CREATE PERMANENT JOBS!! Just so you don’t take my word for that, here’s an excerpt from wikipedia:

            To respond to the Great Recession, the primary objective for ARRA was to save and create jobs almost immediately. Secondary objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy. The rationale for ARRA was from Keynesian macroeconomic theory, which argues that, during recessions, the government should offset the decrease in private spending with an increase in public spending in order to save jobs and stop further economic deterioration.
            Actually, very little of the stimulus was directed toward creating jobs, a great deal of it was allocated to preventing further damage to the country and economy – here’s a brief summary of where a lot of the money was allocated:
            -Tax incentives to help retain jobs and slow down the slide of lost jobs – $288 billion
            -Monies to keep healthcare flowing for Medicaid, community health centers, etc. – 155 Billion
            -Money to help students continue their educational programs – Pell grants, enhanced educational technology, etc. – 100 billion
            – Aid for low income workers, the unemployed and retirees – to continue their benefits – 82 Billion
            – Money to quickly create jobs in fixing infrastructure – for the state and federal governments – 105 Billion
            – Money for miscellaneous projects that city mayors and others had identified to make quick jobs – 70 Billion

            In actuality, economists do not question the need or efficiency of the stimulus, the major criticism of the stimulus from economists is that IT WAS NOT BIG ENOUGH!! To have actually accomplish turning the country around, the stimulus should have been at least twice as big as it was (closer to 2.5 trillion).

          • bikejedi

            You are right about ONE thing . A DE STIMULUS bill would ONLY create TEMPORARY Tax Payer funded Jobs …then some of these jobs become permanent and the tax payers are on the hook for those jobs pensions and health plans permanently . In Chicago we hired 400 people to MIMIC traffic lights . they get paid to wave their arms and if you ask ANY driver in Chicago they IMPEDE the flow of traffic . These jobs were funded for two years and now have become permanent . So instead of hiring cops in a city where we are approx. 2000 members undermanned we get traffic aides instead .

          • Russell Byrd

            Dumber than a sack of hammers, but he is persistent.

          • idamag

            Try getting your statistics from the National Labor Relations Board.

          • bikejedi

            why would I do that ???? What does Labor relations have to do with these Stats ? I do get them from the Dept of Labor website and so could you .

          • Russell Byrd

            Dumber than a sack of BROKEN hammers, but still persistent. You just literally said that a compiler of original data is not worth consulting. I guess you only listen to the made-up, manufactured, reworked, hate filled facts you get from Rush or Faux.

          • bikejedi

            Yes you are . Now if you can read I correctly pointed out that Idamag shouldn’t cite employment numbers from a source that does labor law . I rightly pointed out the right source to get that info …fester in your hate K

          • Russell Byrd

            I’ve looked, you did not post a source. You never do! You just popped off out of line. So you are saying that someone that wants government labor statistics should not go to a government labor source. Typical, you are only here to disrupt.

            Idamag had the good sense not to bother with you further.

            The only hate I have is for liars like you. Even that is a mixed emotion because you are so strange you are hilarious.

          • bikejedi

            Um Excuse me Russ but it was I who decided not to deal with him …don’t put the horse in front of the cart

          • Russell Byrd

            I have a lot of intuition, but I am having trouble understanding what you are referring to. Of course, at the base of your statement must be another lie.

            I will venture that you think you can make a false claim about posting a source, then attack a well-known and valid source, and then shutdown another poster because you do not recognize his right to reply. Sound just sooooo like the mikey-bikey I know and love. Well, choke, gag, let’s drop the love bit.

            And dumbass, you generally do put the horse in front of the cart. Now we are getting to the root of your mental disabilities. You reason everything bass-ackwards. No surprise there.

          • bikejedi

            And if you want employment stats you don’t go the Labor relations board are you that dumb …Aww don’t answer you will only remove all doubt .

          • Russell Byrd

            Well, you still did not give a source, but you do continue to attack a valid source of labor data. As I have said, you are dumber than a sack of broken hammers.

            The disdain of a liar is a complement to an honest man. So, you have neither convinced me, nor do I feel any concern over any aspersions you may cast.

            You need to move into a different racket. Maybe, a nice Ponzi scheme would fit more with your talents. Your not selling anything to anyone here. . . .

          • idamag

            But is was okay to bail out the banks. Guess where the loyalties lie?

  • 4sanity4all

    I am glad that the president is calling out the obstructers, and putting his ideas out there for everyone to see. Those of us who have been following what has been going on, will get behind him and demand change. The ones who support the obstructers might hear something they want in the President’s ideas, and maybe they will start asking their legislators why they are fighting progress. The President needs to get the people on his side again, so we can demand some movement toward the worthy goals he has set out. Our infrastructure is collapsing, many people have lost their homes and have been out of work for too long, our schools are being destroyed by corporate entities who are trying to take them over only to make a buck, and we are way past the time when we should have begun to address these things. Good re-start, President, keep pushing!

  • RobertCHastings

    With four out of five Americans near poverty, if the Republicans don’t do what their constituents have asked them to do (govern) and enter into some cooperative agreements with the Democrats, they WILL become irrelevant. Millions of Americans are still looking for jobs that aren’t coming back, still looking to be trained in new skills, still looking for something to tide them over until they finally DO get a job, and the Republicans are still congratulating one another for toeing the line against the black guy. Where is Obama the dictator all those folks are talking about? Socialism / Marxism / communism would be looking nice about now, especially the deal about pogroms against the obstructionist elites.

    • Joseph Squerciati

      Republican jobs plan is on view in NC where they will employ more Poll Watchers to detect voter fraud . Voter fraud to a Republican is allowing ANY member of a group that votes Democratic to vote .
      You have to love the Governor who ran by saying he would pass no laws reducing access to abortion and just signed a trap bill that would to close all but one . He also signed the nations most repressive voter bill in the country . When he was asked how cutting down early voting and no longer allowing High School seniors to preregister to vote would contain voter fraud .He said he hadn’t read the bill and so couldn’t comment .

      • RobertCHastings

        Of course he has read the bill. What kind of stupid prick would run for governor, get elected with a majority of his buds in both houses of the state legislature, and NOT read what they sent him to sign? Oh, excuse me, a Republican. Silly question.

        • plc97477

          A republican stupid prick.

    • Kurt CPI

      First, you misread that report. The headlines may have said “4 out of 5 Americans near poverty”, but if you read the article it said 4 out of 5 have been in that situation at some point in their working careers. I definitely have, how ’bout you? Do you really believe that Republicans are purposefully doing something that would lead their constituents to cast a vote for someone else? Your statement about looking for jobs that aren’t coming back is spot on. Being trained in new skills is great, but you still need jobs in order to put those skills to work. Tiding people over is a necessity. But unless jobs somewhere out there in the ether come into the earthly realm, that tiding over could become perpetual. Broken record that I am, the solution to all these woes is domestic industry.

      • RobertCHastings

        I have been on unemployment three times in 45 years of working. The last job I was laid off from (after 13 years) I was on unemployment for almost two years, and decided to take Social Security two years early. Obama’s action on COBRA kept my insurance affordable.
        I am reading a book about the development of the finances and economy of the early US. Alexander Hamilton felt just as you do, that domestic manufacturing, along with the sectors available at that time, was necessary to a vibrant and thriving economy. He would be shocked to see how policy makers have allowed the drain of manufacturing jobs.

        • Kurt CPI

          I agree completely. I, too have been on unemployment for a total of about 18 months after being laid off from my 25 year job. I also received a supplemental grant as a “displaced worker” that paid for part of my community college, where my new-found skills put me immediately to work (almost 12 years ago) in the job that I still hold today. It was partly because I seem to have a knack for data network management, but mostly because the industry I trained in was in a state of growth at the time that could only be described as a boom. If we can’t have a booming job market, maybe we could at least have a decent one. Policy, I think, could go a long way toward accomplishing that.

          • RobertCHastings

            Which is precisely what Obama’s Jobs Bill provides. It not only encourages industries to bring off-shored jobs back to the US, it provides for the training of a workforce to accommodate the changing face of the workplace. HS level work is provided in some states to prepare students for the increased technological demands of the modern workplace, community colleges provide training in emerging jobs, and colleges and universities are getting more and more into emerging technologies and preparing our workforce for jobs that are only predicted to exist in the future. It has been said that within the next ten – fifteen years, millions of jobs will be available in this country to a workforce that is currently untrained for them.
            Until other issues are dealt with, such as the inequitable distribution of wealth in this country, the middle class will face a dim future. Jobs will NOT be available in the numbers needed to obtain full employment, a condition that is necessary for the middle class AND others to thrive together.

          • Kurt CPI

            I think the education/training problem runs much deeper. At the risk of sounding like a pessimistic snob, I have a challenge for you: Take an online college class. In the “group project” assignment, volunteer to be the group leader. Then you’ll be able to compile the “research” of all the other group members. I learned early on that being the leader was the only way to produce a cohesive collaborative research paper. If you want an A, plan on doing the entire thing yourself. I took a course of about 45 credits and did nine of these projects in varied subjects. I can say without reservation that MOST of the college students I was working with, even accounting for them being mostly in their 20s, had the researching and writing skills of a 3rd grader, if that! I’m not being facetious here. With the occasional exception, submissions ran from 99% plagiarized to completely incomprehensible. I would show them to my high school aged kids and ask them to read them and tell me what they said – like me, they couldn’t even decipher the language. There’s no way I could hire one of these people. No amount of training could ever make up for the prior two decades of poor public education. At this late point, these people are never going to work in tech – the only consistently growing US sector – as anything but entry level workers. I make the challenge because I know you think I’m exaggerating. The only way to believe it is to experience if for yourself.

          • RobertCHastings

            While I do not question your experience nor your evaluation of the state of public education in this country, I have been out of the game of education for some years. During HS, I spent some time at a local college and observed that, while its standards may have been acceptable, student performance was not. I spent a couple days there taking the LSAT and readily learned that the student body achieved at a level well below what my HS class did. Upon entering teaching, I met others in the profession who, through deficiencies in various areas, should NOT have been in the profession. I have to say I was blessed to have matriculated at an excellent HS. How does this apply to your experience? Levels of education are frequently determined not by the level of your achievement, but simply where you attend school. Students exposed to a challenging curriculum by good teachers will do better than those exposed to mediocre curricula and middling teachers. State and local standards in more “backward” localities will eventually be replaced by a national standard which will require the same curriculum for all students and the same level of skill for all teachers.
            My experience with “online” courses (in the 1970’s, they were called correspondence courses) allowed me to eventually graduate as they were much easier than classroom teaching. Our experiences have been different, and our conclusions will of necessity differ.

          • Kurt CPI

            I’ve always considered my own lack of formal education to be one of my greatest weaknesses. If experience is the best teacher, then knowledge is foundation from which it springs. I, too attended an excellent HS. After being laid off my 25 year job, that 18 months at the community college I spoke of was to acquire microsoft and cisco certifications. There is a required placement exam for new students (the “Compass” I think) that’s just an assessment of general skills. There are several parts and the test administrator commented that the reading/writing was the one where most people scored below expectation. The test was nothing more than making sentence corrections, determining the main point of a paragraph – grade school stuff. My later experience with the on-line classes gave me the experience to understand where that test admin was coming from. Consequently, the certification rate in those courses is less than 5%. Out of 32 in my group, two of us certified. I agree there are bad teachers. We’ve all experienced that. But my brother, a sister-in-law, and my next-door neighbor, all teachers, say the same thing: lack of discipline is the #1 problem, and lack of support in maintaining discipline is the root cause. Bad teachers should be fired – just like in any other profession – but even the best of teachers can’t produce excellence from chaos.
            So how does this apply to economic policy? Politicians, not excluding the President, address only the superficial the majority of the time. The root causes of economic decline parallel the root causes of academic mediocrity. It’ll take a generation of solid education to produce a workforce of competent trainees. Similarly, it’ll take a decade of sound economic policy to reverse the trend of borrow and spend that is the only thing propping up our economy. The longer it continues, the more fragile it becomes. It’ll all balance out in the end, I prefer the controlled burn to the explosion.

          • RobertCHastings

            Alexander Hamilton, the chief writer for “The Federalist” papers and the founder of the first national bank, as well as a decorated officer of rank in the Revolution and the first Secretary of the Treasury received no formal education. Only his personal experiences AND a reading list that would make anyone shiver got him where he got to be. And he was not the first individual in American history (nor will he be the last) to make it to the top without a formal education.
            As for the eventual implosion of our economy, I subscribe to Robert Reich’s theories regarding its source and its eventual resolution. A basic point he drives home is that the wealthy are NOT job creators. Capital is produced by the selling of goods and services. When the middle class is making a reasonable share of the wealth, everyone prospers because employment will be very high and the NEED for public intervention will be very low. When the equal distribution of wealth (which DOES NOT mean that everyone makes the same, only that wealth is equitably spread around) gets out of whack, jobs are lost, goods and services are NOT bought/sold, leading to a cycle of losing jobs and less to spend. From the end of WWII until the 1970’s, the US was in a period of great prosperity. Starting in the early 1980’s, this changed as the wealth started being inordinately concentrated with the very wealthy, the middle class was increasingly unable to maintain their standard of living and amassed huge personal debt, and the burden of taxes shifted drastically from the wealthy to the middle class. This is not a theory based upon smoke and mirrors or any economic mumbo-jumbo, but upon a practical analysis of the various factors that affect our economy.

      • idamag

        Low information voters and ideologues vote for people who do not have the best interests of the general populace in their agenda.

        • Kurt CPI

          ooh, now you’re crossing into far right territory. Are you saying that people should have to demonstrate that they have at least a rudimentary understanding of what they’re voting for before being permitted to just throw a dart at the ballot and hope?

    • CPAinNewYork

      Can we pause just for a moment? The first clause in your opening statement bothers me, so I’d like some clarification. Are you saying that 80% of the population of the United States is at or below the poverty level as defined in terms of family income?

      That’s not hyperbole, right? Eighty percent? You’re sure of that? I’m nitpicking you on this, because I don’t believe it.

      I want you to cite your source. and, don’t tell me to look it up, or some crap like that. You made the accusation, so you need to back it up.

      • RobertCHastings

        “at or near” does NOT mean they are actually at the poverty level. However, if you use some reason instead of unreasoned panic, you yourself like to claim that there are no jobs out there (so, reasonably, there are people without jobs), the jobs that ARE out there pay very little, millions out there are either unemployed or underemployed, without benefits, etc. My source was ABC news (evening with Dianne Sawyer) perhaps a week ago. Sorry I didn’t include quotes. While the median income may be no place near the poverty level, the AVERAGE income is entirely too close to the poverty level. Today one family in six is AT or BELOW the poverty level. There are tens of millions more families close to the AVERAGE wage level who are within 10 – 15%of the poverty level. It may depend upon what your definition of poverty is. You don’t like what I said, sorry. You never have been one I was especially interested in winning over to my side of the aisle.

        • CPAinNewYork

          That’s better. One in six or 16 to 17 percent is a hell of a lot different from 80 percent. Try to be a little more precise when you quote numbers. Also: I never claimed that “there are no jobs out there.” Where did you get that? Did you pull that out of a hat, too?

          I do agree that too many people are suffering a loss of their share of the national wealth. I believe it was thirty years ago that the rich controlled ten percent of the national wealth. Now, the rich control twenty percent of the national wealth.

          This is a very serious trend, because the rich are insatiable in their desire for more and more wealth. It will eventually lead to the destruction of the middle class, which means the destruction of democracy and the emergence of violence and repression.

          • RobertCHastings

            So you are happy with that many in poverty in this country? That comes out to about fifty million, you know. How many kids (and adults) going to sleep every night on an empty stomach? That’s what poverty is, along with having no home, no medical care, only the barest necessities for supporting life, let alone building a better life.
            Your 20% figure is just a tad low. Of course, this, again, depends upon your source. It is quite a bit closer to double that, depending upon you definition of wealthy. If you look at the top 3% or the top 0.3% or the top 15%, the level of wealth ownership does differ quite dramatically. However, the level of tax liability does NOT differ that much. You and I both have lived through a period in which the wealthiest were liable for 70% or more in taxes, and a time when the middle class could easily own a home and car and be in debt for no more than 40% of their annual income. If you are like MOST middle income people in this country today, you are in hock, literally, up to your eyeballs, you really can’t afford your mortgage on your underwater house, and your kids are just going to have to settle for a local, affordable community college.

          • CPAinNewYork

            No, dum-dum, I’m not happy with 16 percent. I’m just pointing out that you’re loose with figures.

            As I said in my posting: Try to be a little more precise when you quote numbers.

          • RobertCHastings

            The Associated Press published a researched article on July 28 of this year regarding poverty in America. For a number of reasons, 4 out of every 5 Americans with struggle with joblessness, poverty or being on welfare in their lifetimes. This article was remarked on on at least MY local ABC station last week, being the source of my previous comment. The Federal poverty level is $23,550 for a family of four, with the poverty level being at about $12,000 for an individual, a level that works out to even below the current minimum wage for someone working forty hours a week. However, since so many are NOT full timers, it isn’t so much a question of hourly wage, is it? Without assistance, I cannot imagine people at this income level having decent insurance to protect them from a devastating illness unless it is provided by their employer (forget that if you are part-time, although some temp agencies DO provide cheap insurance).
            Readily available statistics indicate that as of 2010, the top 20% owned 88% of the nation’s wealth while the remaining 80% owned 12% of the nation’s wealth. In 1983, these figures were a little different, with the split being 82 to 18. From the period after the Civil War until WWII, there were huge fluctuations in wealth distribution, with periods of prosperity being characterized by fairly equal distribution of wealth between the wealthy and the middle class/poor. From the end of WWII until the 70’s, the country faced the greatest period of prosperity EVER, for EVERYONE, with the wealthy paying 70%+ for the highest tax rate. The end of the Nixon years and the Carter administration saw a devastating recession not much better than the one many feel we are still in – Nixon even instituted wage and price controls (he was a Republican?) Since the debacle of the Reagan and Bush “trickle down economics” (referred to by some as voodoo economics), the middle class has seen their share of the wealth erode and their share of personal debt loads increase as their wages and salaries have fallen or, at best, remained stagnant, and the gap between hourly workers and their CEOs has mushroomed. Fewer than 1/2 of 1% at the very top have more wealth than the bottom 50%. Where are all the jobs all this wealth will supposedly create?
            Excuse me for venting, but I have been talking with some rather simple-minded people who should not even be on this site.

  • Kurt CPI

    The problem is that the President doesn’t have a viable “jobs creation” program either. His plan is mostly to create jobs the same way the Federal Reserve creates money – out of thin air. If indeed corporate tax code simplification and incentives will produce American jobs, the President is to be commended. But the article mentions tax code simplification and “proceeds” in the same sentence, making that unlikely. Folks, we need private sector jobs to finance government programs. Government (and government sponsored) jobs add nothing to the kitty, can’t do anything to help the root of the problem. I believe that if the President could approach the problem in that light he’d find some cooperation coming from the other side of the aisle.

    • Independent1

      When you’re totally clueless it shows: The GOP House has been sitting on two of the President’s jobs plans for as long as 3 1/2 years. Here’s some excerpts from his latest jobs plan: The American Jobs Act which would have created millions of private sector jobs if the GOP hadn’t stalled it:

      -Offering tax credits to encourage businesses to hire unemployed veterans.

      -Preventing up to 280,000 teacher layoffs, and keeping first responders including firefighters and police officers on the job.

      -Modernizing at least 35,000 public schools across the country, building science labs, internet ready classrooms, etc.

      -Making immediate investments in infrastructure, roads, bridges, railroads,
      airports ,and more.

      -Project Rebuild: an effort to put people back to work rehabilitating homes and businesses and stabilizing communities, leveraging private capital and scaling up successful models of public-private collaboration.

      -Expanding wireless internet access to 98 percent of Americans and first responders by freeing up the nation’s spectrum

      -The most innovative reform to the unemployment insurance program in 40 years. A $4,000 tax credit to employers for hiring long-term unemployed workers.

      -Prohibiting employers from discriminating against unemployed workers when hiring.

      -Expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults by investing in
      promising and proven strategies and programs like summer jobs and sector-based training programs.

      -Expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults by investing in
      promising and proven strategies and programs like summer jobs and sector-based training programs.

      -Cutting payroll taxes in half for 160 million workers next year.

      -Allowing more Americans to refinance their mortgages.

      -To ensure that the American Jobs Act is fully paid for, the President has called on the Joint Congressional Committee to achieve additional deficit reduction necessary to pay for the Act and still meet its deficit target. The President will, in the coming days, release a detailed plan that will show how the Committee can achieve the additional deficit reduction necessary to meet the President’s goal of stabilizing our debt as a share of the economy and pay for his plan to put Americans back to work.

      • Kurt CPI

        Well, Independent, as Forrest Gump might say, “Clueless is as clueless shows”.

        “Offering tax credits” is the one and only thing you’ve listed that has the slightest thing to do with creating revenue. Every other one of your line items SPENDS tax revenues. We’ll see if “in the coming days” the President has a real plan for economic development or if, as usual, his “deficit reduction” encompasses the same creative accounting strategies that shift debt off the budget to make it look appear that the books are closer to a balance. This ain’t rocket science. Government spending, whether its on jobs or jello, creates ZERO revenue. ONLY the private sector can do that. Tax credits are a step in the right direction, but not a big enough one to entice industrial development here at home. The US needs a long-term, guaranteed, internationally competitive corporate tax structure so US corporations can actually create a balance sheet in an environment where the rules don’t change every 4 years. Otherwise, just wave bye-bye to American industry as it floats away.

        • Independent1

          Are you GOP lovers going to be forever clueless?? Generating revenues isn’t the problem at the moment, it’s getting the economy rev’d up so the private sector will start spending again. Because Bush trashed the economy, people and corporations have been holding onto their money – corporations have trillions socked away in overseas accounts to reduce their tax liabilities and Americans themselves are holding back from spending.

          The only way, and I say again THE ONLY WAY, to get corporations and people to start spending (increase revenues) is for the GOVERNMENT to start spending to create jobs. Therefore, providing money for projects like fixing the roads, upgrading and expanding our schools, and all the other non-revenue things in Obama’s American Jobs Act, will push PRIVATE companies into creating jobs which will give Americans more money to spend, which will increase their outlook on the economy, getting them to spend more which will eventually push larger corporations to pull money back from overseas and create jobs. CUTTING SPENDING, that is austerity, willl only do what it has done to virtually all the European countries – thrown them further into recession.

          Hoover, the Mitt Romney of his day, thought like you, that the private sector could spur the economy and get him out of the recession in 1929 (a ression very similar to the one we had in the early Bush years), and look what happened – by cutting spending and raising taxes, Herbert eventually pushed America and the world into the Big Depression.

          By the way, since you seem to think you know it all, just exactly how would the private sector go about spurring the economy?? With the economy sort of struggling and business profits looking iffy, would hundreds of corporations start giving their employees significant enough raises to allow them to start spending?? Would they say to their employees – Hey, so you’ll have more money to spend we’ll cover some of your taxes for the next year??? Would they lower their prices so that people with tight money could afford to buy more (realizing that their profits would go down)?

          Just exactly Mr. Know it All, How would the private sector spur the economy enough to give Americans enough confidence and money to start buying again??? Remembering, IT ISN’T COMPANIES THAT CREATE JOBS – IT’S CUSTOMERS THAT COME TO BUY THEIR PRODUCTS. WITHOUT CUSTOMERS WILLING TO SPEND – NO COMPANY WILL CREATE A NEW JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Kurt CPI

            The reason Americans aren’t spending money is because they’re unemployed and don’t have any. I don’t claim to know it all, and here you go again accusing me of being a Republican for disagreeing with a Democratic President’s policies. Let’s all just suck it up and fall in line like good little comrades. Let’s put it in perspective. You want the government to pay people to spend money, so that 15 -20% of the money they spent can come back in the form of taxes. There’s nothing the government can do short of nationalizing our business infrastructure that will produce what is referred to as “value”. Value is something that can be exchanged in like kind for something else of value. Currency has no inherent value, it is a medium whereby I can trade 5 lbs of flour today for a fish next week. In order to have a viable currency America must produce things of value. The consequence of production is employment, a strong currency, balanced trade, tax revenues… in short, all the things you keep saying the government can provide. Roosevelt’s New Deal policies couldn’t undo the depression, only the devastation of European industry during WWII could do that. The reason is because we had the products, the rest of the world had demand. Everybody was working. Our exports were booming. That’ll never happen again (hopefully), but we’re losing our share of that on a daily basis. The short-term economic policy you speak of (the President keeps referring to as “investment”) is only valid if there’s a yield to be had at the other end. Otherwise all that “investment” just ends up on the debit side of the balance sheet. We need to be clamoring for something with a hope of meeting the underlying problem, not just policy that issues free credit cards.

          • idamag

            And they are unemployed because of three things: Not enough skilled people to fill the open jobs. 2. jobs are overseas. 3. The jobs bills languish on the table.

          • Kurt CPI

            1) You’re saying that there are jobs in abundance if only all the unemployed has the skills to fill them? OK.
            2) Bingo.
            3). The jobs bills artificially create jobs – address the symptoms – but do virtually nothing to address the real problems.

          • dpaano

            Kurt: What you don’t seem to realize is that the economy is like the saying….”what comes first, the chicken or the egg?” Without money to spend due to joblessness, consumers don’t consume. When consumers don’t consume; companies slow down production. When companies slow down production, they lay off employees. When they lay off employees, employees (consumers) don’t have money to consume. Do you see the circle we’re going in? If President Obama can get people back to work in ANY sector, private or otherwise, these people will have income to spend again…..thus, companies would have to produce products and would benefit. What’s bad about that? It boggles my mind that the GOP doesn’t see this…it’s such a simple thing! Continued obstruction to jobs is killing our economy…..

          • Kurt CPI

            Absolutely, it’s a self-perpetuating cycle. But you’re wrong about the lack of a “jobs bill” being responsible for killing the economy. That already happened. The Jobs Bill only band-aids. I’m not opposed to a jobs bill as long as it has strict limits in both debt acquisition and duration. But only if it also includes real measures to address the underlying failing that got us into this mess in the first place. I repeat what I wrote in an earlier post: debt-backed currency is exactly the same thing as mortgage-backed securities. We all condemn this practice in private financial markets. Why would anyone condone the same open-ended practice by our government?

          • idamag

            Temporary relief is better than no relief at all.

          • Independent1

            You’re wrong, government debt backed securities ARE NOT THE SAME as mortgage-backed securities. Individuals can’t print money to cover their debts – federal governments can. You’re living in the GOP world of let’s run a government like a business – which a government isn’t – Governments aren’t businesses and they are not restricted to the same rules. When are you going to wake up to that fact?? Governments have far more reaching responsibilites than companies will ever have and therefore can’t always play by the same rules!!!!!!!! When a company decides to cut spending and it doesn’t work, basically all that gets trashed is the company – admittedly some folks lose their jobs and end up on unemployment but it doesn’t trash the entire country – people outside the company generally don’t get hurt. But when a government cuts spending and it puts a country into a downward spiral which further deepens a recession- the entire country suffers; there’s a big difference in the levels of liability and responsibility.

            Exactly what do you think the Fed has had to be doing over the past 4 years while company after company has been putting American money into offshore investments to avoid taxation and therefore not paying their share of taxes, all the while taking trillions of dollars out of the money supply??? The fed has been printing money!! So wake up and stop trying to compare the government creating a stimulus program to create jobs and get the economy rev’d up again, with a company doing the same thing – THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING!!!!!!!!!

          • Kurt CPI

            Your thinking is so wrong on so many levels.

            “Individuals can’t print money to cover their debts – federal governments can.”

            You’re minimally correct here. Governments can print money. Just look a Zimbabwe, They are the perfect example of what happens when a government attempts to print itself out of debt. The US Government, by the way doesn’t print a single dollar. That is the domain of the Federal Reserve, a PRIVATE bank. The Federal Reserve charges the US government interest on every dollar it prints. That’s right, for every $100 the Fed issues in currency, the government has to pay back $101 (or whatever the interest rate is that day). US currency can be printed out of thin air because it is the international medium of exchange. No other country has that privilege. However, if at any time the international community decided to use the yen or euro, our currency would certainly lose value. Just how much depends on the extent to which it is leveraged.

            Finally, using your logic, why do we produce anything at all? Why not just print up money and give it to US citizens? After all, debt doesn’t make a hill of beans worth of difference, right? We could pay people who perform work for the rest of us, let’s say a million dollars per year each. Sounds like a great idea! And the rest of us, who will just use our free US currency to buy stuff from China, can just take what we need/want as the situation requires.
            “Good morning sir, thank you for choosing the Bank of the USA. How can I help you?”.
            “I’d like $78 thousand dollars please. I really like the look of that 2014 Lexus”.
            “Here you are sir, I hope your enjoy your new car”.
            “Don’t I have to sign for this or anything?”
            “No need, sir, the US can print as much money as we want. Isn’t it nice that we finally decided to give it to our citizens?”

            In your dreams….

          • idamag

            You have it. Why is something so simple so hard to understand for some?

          • dpaano

            God only knows……but the GOP and the TP group seem to have a brain fart that keeps them from understanding simple logic!

          • Sand_Cat

            Once people start spending money, businesses can grow and get new revenues. Your assumption seems to be that ALL of the new revenue is simply 10-20% of what was spent, which is absurd on its face. Your plan is nothing but a recycled and prettified (slightly) Republican tax cuts for the wealthy plan which hasn’t worked and won’t work, which in fact has been shown not to work. You may not be registered as a Republican, but you might as well be one. Since you haven’t said, can we guess you’re a Libertarian who must deny reality to maintain a pure position? What you choose to call yourself isn’t necessarily what you are: your actions and political views are a better indicator. You seem like an intelligent and fairly-educated person, but your magical thinking is more of the same old Republican stuff.

          • Kurt CPI

            Once again, your logic is devoid of mathematical reason. How is it that putting to people to work on the backs of businesses and taxpayers creates growth? The very businesses that will receive the benefits of the spending are the same people who are financing it in the first place? Taking $5 out of your back pocket and putting it into your front only looks like you gained if you don’t check your backside.

          • idamag

            Okay, so don’t put them to work and the economy will continue downward.

          • Kurt CPI

            Here we go again with an out of context interpretation. Putting them to work in the manner described can only amount to short-term relief. But to date, the President’s plan embraces pretty much only things that can’t be sustained. I’m all for short-term relief policy – if and ONLY if there’s a long-term strategy that accompanies it.

          • plc97477

            I’m not sure that is where she/he has his/her head stuck.

        • Independent1

          I forgot to respond to your last comments about the tax structure – I couldn’t agree more with that. AND THAT is exactly what Obama has been pushing the GOP to do for the past 4 plus years – but guess what – THE GOP isn’t willing to give up EVEN ONE of the tax loop holes that send billions of American taxpayers dollars into the pockets of millionaires, billionaires and corporations that already are holding 90% or so of America’s money.

        • Independent1

          Oh! and you’re trying to claim that Obama has reduced debt by shifting it off his budget!! What total BS!! It was America’s worst president, Ronald Reagan, who was not only drunken-sailor- spender in chief, but also the 1st president to keep 25-40% of his spending outside his official budget – a practice followed by the two Bushes which allowed the 3 of them to be responsible for more than 90% of our current 16.8 trillion in debt. Obama actually STOPPED THE PRACTICE!! The almost 1 trillion he has actually reduced spending this past 4 years from the 1.6 trillion in deficit spending he inherited from Bush in his last budget (10/1/08 to 09/30/09) – is a TRUE reduction in spending.

          • Kurt CPI

            Fannie and Freddie are two significant examples of off-budget debt. Here you go again implying that I’m a Republican. I disagree that Reagan was the worst president, I reserve that distinction for GW Bush, but the trio you mention definitely worked on behalf of their elitist agendas. Whether the off-budget stuff is/was moved by accountants during Obama’s tenure is just a technicality. Either way, it exists and is still being utilized. Like I said, we’ll have to wait and see what the plan looks like after letting the sunshine in. I’ll gladly eat crow if a substantial, realistic, future-looking economic plan is proposed. And I’ll join you in condemning efforts to curtail such a plan if that should be the case.

          • Independent1

            Fannie and Freddie have nothing to do with Obama’s budgetting – those are totally the responsibility of Congress- Remember, the President only recommends a budget, it is Congress that creates the final budget and approves it.
            And let me explain while I now say Reagan was the worst President ever – Like you, for years I considered Bush jr. the worst president ever, but looking back, Georgie only created a onetime disaster – whereas, Reagan actually created the culture that is creating America’s problems today.
            Ronnie Boy took it upon himself as President, to go out and bust a union – the Air Traffic Controllers Union – And to create a fantasy in the minds of Republicans, which continues into today, that the Rich are benevolent benefactors of the world and therefore there’s such a thing as “trickle-down economics”. What nonsense. The only “trickle-down” the wealthy do when given excess money is trickle-it-down into their own pocketbooks. And Ronnie even created another misguided notion among Republicans that tax-cuts coupled with budget cuts will spur the economy – another fantasy that couldn’t be further from the truth-
            George Bush proved that was a fantasy during his 8 years
            when he gave the wealthy the biggest tax cuts they’d seen in a decade and the economy over 8 years was the most lack luster in American history – and had the second-worst job creation over 8 years since the Big Depression.
            And it was Ronny’s busting of the Air Traffic Controllers Union that started the corporations caring less and less about their workers. It was during Ronnie’s early years in office that companies started totally disregarding company loyalty to their employees totally focusing rather on the bottom line – which resulted in companies laying off their older more expensive hard working loyal employees and replacing them with younger, cheaper, who couldn’t care less, younger workers.
            Ronnie is also responsible for destroying the culture in America’s workforce. He has turned out to be an absolute disaster to America.

          • Kurt CPI

            Like I said, the blame for incurring debt is inconsequential. It’s still debt. Was it you in an earlier discussion said we should look at what works in other countries? One thing that works is enticing corporations to 1). Build infrastructure – creating short-term jobs like a stimulus, and 2). employ Americans to staff that infrastructure’s production after completion – long-term employment.
            Fact: For-profit Corporations are required by law to work toward profit. That’s why the financiers (shareholders) lend their money to finance them. If the grass is greener elsewhere, if US tax code, regulatory requirements, etc. make it more profitable to close down existing buildings and erect new ones (at tremendous expense) far from home, something’s wrong. Lining the pocketbooks of wealthy individuals obviously won’t help, as you point out. But enticing the kind of commerce that generates product, requires employees to do so, generates exports, etc. provides real economic growth and reduces rather than increases public debt. Look at it this way, Apple, GE, et.al. keep their assets offshore and manufacture (OK, they outfit and finance foreign operations that they may or may not wholly or partly own). They’re never going to pay a dime of taxes on any of it. How about this for a long-term plan:
            1) A one-time opportunity to repatriate off-shore holdings with no tax burden – ever. HUGE stimulus.
            2) A stone-carved corporate tax structure that removes uncertainty and is competitive with its foreign counterparts.
            3) A tariff on all imports that makes domestic manufacturing (leading to exports) more attractive. At least that provides a way of taxing offshore manufacturing operations even though holdings would remain untouchable – that’s what #1 is all about.
            I’m sure we can still be competitive, but we don’t even try. We stand idly by and watch the exodus of our core business sectors. If policies like this were part of the short-term “jobs” stuff, there would be more outrage at the politics of obstruction.

          • idamag

            The money might be greener where they can employ slave labor and people for 83 cents an hour. Could you exist on 83 cents an hour? It is not greener grass they are seeking, it is greed that drives them.

          • Kurt CPI

            That’s why there must be conditions, checks and balances. Tariffs on imports could be used to cover part of the gap in labor costs. There’s already a large advantage in not having to maintain overseas operations, reduced shipping costs. There would be some impact on individuals, likely higher prices for some things. But the overall effect on the economy would be nothing short of spectacular.

          • idamag

            You may have some good ideas. Write to your legislators with them. However, I wouldn’t bank on anyone in the House to even understand what you are talking about. You should also research the present tariffs, how much would be feasible to lay on them, how much importing is done and how much revenue would your plan raise.

          • idamag

            Even Reagan eventually realized that “trickle down” doesn’t work.

          • plc97477

            Ronnie was also the one to start the distrust of our government.

          • idamag

            And would you plan, in order to build the economy, give more tax breaks to the so-called “job creators.” The tax payers and the businessmen would benefit from the jobs bills. An employed man pays taxes and buys things. The most important factor a business has is consumers.

          • Kurt CPI

            As a matter of fact the President’s plan includes tax breaks to those “so-called job creators”. As I pointed out, that is the only part of his plan that seeks to address the problem. Once again you fail to understand that the money being spent is also being supplied by the same people you list as the beneficiaries. So once again let’s try an analogy: If you give someone $5 bucks and they spend that $5 bucks in your store, did you make $5 bucks? If I borrow money and use it to pay a new employee that does not create any new revenue, how do I benefit? I paid the wages. I paid the taxes. Now I have to pay interest on the money I borrowed to pay the employee and their taxes. If the government borrows the money and gives it to me to hire an employee, in the long run I still have to pay the principal, interest, and taxes for that money. On the other hand if I hire an employee to fill my backlog on orders, I’m collecting revenue for the product that I sell. That employee provides a return on investment. The government gets a cut (taxes) that offset the public operations.

        • idamag

          Clueless is not Independent. People who have jobs pay taxes and consume. The jobs program would increase our tax base and increase spending so business would be better off. I know this is simple, but it is true.

          • Kurt CPI

            This seems to be a common utterance by supporters of government created jobs. Here’s the truth: Government employees take 80% more out of the tax reserves than they put in. You can’t pay people with tax dollars, collect 10% of that back as taxes, and call it tax revenue.

        • Sand_Cat

          The other items are necessary for the flourishing of private businesses: good roads, bridges, an educated workforce. You really are limiting your sights to what you want to see, not what builds jobs or the economy.

          • Kurt CPI

            Once again, no argument on that. The problem is that the private businesses you speak of have all started moving to China. The things you outline once again suppose that there are jobs waiting after the infrastructure is upgraded. That’s not the case. Any “jobs bill” must include serious, primary intent to do something about the erosion of industry. Otherwise you’re building bridges to nowhere.

    • idamag

      With 19% of our bridges unsafe to use and our highways crumbling, those are needed jobs.

      • Kurt CPI

        idamag, no argument. Infrastructure is necessary. The point isn’t that government doesn’t produce anything useful, but that it doesn’t produce anything of value in the way it’s defined in commerce. From an economic standpoint a bridge is an asset that is required to ship product, receive supplies, etc. But that’s only a fraction of the equation’s sum total. To be economically viable, expenditures on assets must yield something of equal or greater value in the long term, otherwise they’re just expense. My problem with the President’s economic philosophy is that it has, at least to this point, done nothing significant to address this, the underlying disease. It seeks only to spend more debt-backed currency (exactly the same thing as the Wall Street “mortgage-backed securities” that became toxic in 2008) to address the symptoms. Maybe you can explain to me why you (rightfully) condemn this practice in private finance, but cheer it on when government falls into the same pit?

  • The GOP has created plenty of jobs…in India.

    • Fern Woodfork

      And China Or Where Ever The Sweatshops Are At!!! 🙁 Just Like They Are Trying Their Best To Move America Backwards With Their Right To Work States Code For Sweatshops!!! 🙁

    • Independent1

      And a great deal of that is thanks to America’s greatest jobs destroyer – Mitt Romney. And not only to India, but also to China, Mexico, Bangladesh, you name it. Mitt has spent the past 15 years or so doing everything he could to buy up and destroy foundering companies – stripping them of their assets and pension funds, pocketing millions of dollars and leaving millions of Americans without jobs and with the American taxpayer holding the bags for their pension monies. Just ask the 25,000 Delphi (aka Delco) union employees who were sabatoged by Mitt and his hedgefund buddy Singer and left without jobs and pensions. When you buy and new car and all the small parts come from China, Mexico and elsewhere, you can thank Mitt and Singer for that!!! (Because the auto industry has come alive again, what was 25,000 jobs in America, have now turned into around 100,000 jobs in China and Mexico – as you pointed out, Mitt really knows how to create jobs in other countries.)

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    As some of the GOP Bull Males refuse to recall…In March of 2009, one of President Obama’s objectives for job creation was to increase jobs in infrastructure. The GOP Bull Males had better ideas…push Keystone Pipeline and weren’t they the ones touting 11,000 jobs? What a laugh. Then, we found out that the actual number of jobs would not only be limited to CanOil Canadians and Texans but the actual number was 1100. Wow…now that really would solve the nation’s job crisis wouldn’t it?

    These right wing idiots and GOP bull males are so hot to serve themselves that their party of domination is nearly dead from exhausting all their efforts to sabotage this president. And yet, like the proverbial wisdom of Solomon, this intelligent president prevails. How stupid do these GOP Bulls plan to get? The president fairly bounces them on their pointed heads and they ask for more. roflmao.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    The US employment scene is facing 2 very serious facts: Blue collar jobs are limited now to those who are electricians, plumbers and building contractors. White collar mid-level jobs are gone due to the huge infiltration of IT. Globalization hasn’t helped in a productively responsive way either.

    American workers have to forget all they thought they ever knew about finding jobs. The reality is harsh enough to make life for the Middle Class as miserable as it can get. This doesn’t mean there are no jobs. What is more serious is the lack of jobs created by Middle Class Americans.

    Consider…in every phase of American society, there have been immigrants who came to the US with no real financial support. Yet, they manage to start small Mom and Pop businesses to feed their families. Unfortunately, the vulture venture capitalists wait for these business to turn a stable profit and scoop them up. This leaves a huge hole in the fabric of small business, local tax ratables and….local unemployment. Every time a Walmart opens in a small town, dozens of Mom and Pop businesses close and are replaced by a multi-billion dollar corporation whose only concern is their bottom line.

  • montanabill

    This President is so busy talking that he hasn’t been paying the least bit of attention for the past four and half years. He challenges the GOP to come up with a plan? He would know a plan if it gave him a wedgie.

    • Raincolle

      You mean like the plan sitting in the House collecting dust that has Obama’s name written all over it, that Boehner refuse to touch for that very reason.

      Boehner backed away from the table after being threatened by Cantor that he would take his job if Boehner did not stop talking to Obama back in 2011, so Boehner sold it as it was Obama asking for more, while Cantor admitted it was he who talked Boehner out of working with Obama. Look what happened to Chris Christie for sharing time with Obama. Ring any bells?

      • montanabill

        The Senate is sitting on far more bipartisan House passed legislation than the simple ‘more spending’ bills offered by the President.

        • Raincolle

          More has been filibustered in the senate too.

          • montanabill

            More threats of filibuster than actual filibuster. However, a good law will have the support necessary to either prohibit a filibuster or overcome it. If Harry Reid doesn’t allow a bill to be debated, it is one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us. Not a valid comparison. But, I’m sure you know that.

          • Raincolle

            “If Harry Reid doesn’t allow a bill to be debated, it is one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us.”

            In comes John Boehner for the win. If John Boehner doesn’t allow a bill to be debated, it is one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us.

            Did you know that if the POTUS and VP were to die today, Boehner would be President? Yeah and did you vote for him or did his buddies on capital hill vote for him with out your say so. Most people don’t even know who Boehner is or WHO he is.
            Scary that we know more about Rush Limbaugh then we do about John Boehner. After Boehner comes Harry, but the chance of him getting in is less the likely because they guard the speaker in the event of a catastrophic situation where the POTUS and VP are dead or Impeached.

          • montanabill

            And you were happier with Nancy Pelosi third in line? If you don’t know much about Boehner, that’s your fault.

          • Raincolle

            I never even mentioned Pelosi, she is irrelevant at the present. My point builds upon your comment about Harry being “one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us.” That applies to both chambers one of which Boehner is “one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us” as well. Pelosi is neither Speaker nor Senate Majority Leader at the present.

            My point is that you have shared a similar concern that I have also had on the issue of “one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us.” I agree with you, but I take it further, because America did not choose who that one person should be in the house or the senate. It was the members of the majority in both chambers that hand picked their preferred leaders in a back room where the rest of America were left out of the decision making process thanks to our beloved Constitution. The Speaker of the House is to the House of Representatives is what the VP is to the Senate, except the Speaker according to the Constitution is mostly present where the VP is not required to be present except under certain circumstances. Thank the Constitution for that.

            I would like to Amend the constitution on how the “one man deciding what can be law for the rest of us” is elected. No longer should it the Speaker be elected by Washington insiders, it should be by the people that elected the leaders casting these votes without us at present.

            I don’t care if it’s dem or repub, I don’t want washington choosing for you or me as to who should decide what should be debated on, and what should or should not be voted on unless it’s convenient for them to be law for the rest of us.

            You and I should have that power not those guys, because this is our country and they work for you and I. They need to recognize we are the ones who put them in washington in the first place. We don’t need a Pelosi or a Boehner that’s beholden to other washington bureaucrats because they elected them. We need a Speaker that is concerned with America as a whole holding he or she accountable. We should be able to through the speak out with a simple vote at election time.

            Did you know that a speaker doesn’t have to be a member of the house to be elected to the speakership? Of course the tradition has always been to choose a member of the majority party in the house, but it is not a constitutional requirement to choose an elected official so long as they are eligible as a citizen. They can chose an unelected American Citizen to be Speaker of the House and you and I have no part in that process nor a vote. That’s the part I don’t like.

            Article I, Section 2 of the US Constitution explains this.

          • montanabill

            You have a valid point. At least things got changed so that we could vote for Senators. Perhaps we simply need to change the rules so that neither the Speaker nor Senate Majority Leader can prevent bills from being debated and voted upon once passed by the other chamber.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Hey Montana! I have to disagree with you on the issue of popular election of Senators. The Constitution was set up specifically to give the States a say at the federal level. The people were represented in the House, the States represented in the Senate, and the country represented in the Executive. This was another effort by the Founders to prevent their biggest fear from happening — an overpowering Federal government that would lead to tyranny. The ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913 correlates with the beginning of the takeover of America by the “progressive” ideology. The net effect of the 17th Amendment was to essentially allow the Federal government to steamroll the states into forced spending. A Senator that previously was beholden to a State Legislature never would vote for spending bills that were forced on his own legislature, lest he risk removal. Instead, what we have now is a Federal government that REQUIRES a whole litany of spending on the part of the states under the threat of reduced or eliminated funding if they do not do as they are told. The 17th Amendment is a disaster for American, a boon to progressives, and should be repealed.

            Just my 2 cents.

            Have a nice day!

            “In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.” — Voltaire (1764)

          • Russell Byrd

            So you are saying that the people are not represented in the States?

            Very contrived argument with a prearranged conclusion. Your “facts” follow your conclusion, not the other way around as it should be. Of course, that is why you are a TP’er.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Russ… you are about as ignorant as any other leftist freak about the Constitution. Your statement reflects that. Of course we elect representation at the State level, but that’s NOT the issue. The issue being addressed is the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT and the 17th Amendment, not the States, per se. The reason Senators were selected by State legislatures was specifically to give the State governments some representation and control over the Federal government. Instead, the 17th Amendment removed that control which was used to prevent the Federal government from gaining too much power over the States. Our form of government was never meant to grant the level of power the Feds now have over the State governments. This is the principle of Federalism that is the hallmark of our form of government in a representative republich, not a democracy. Absolutely ANY Constitutional scholar with a modicum of honesty will say the same thing about the reasoning for having Senators appointed by State legislators.

            You should go back and read The Federalist Papers. The argument behind the Constitution is laid out very well in those papers. Then you might be able to overcome your own ignorance…… maybe… but doubtful.

            Have a nice day!

            “Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.” — Frederic Bastiat, French economist (1801-1850)

          • Russell Byrd

            Bozo, you are too stupid to even reason with. The 17th Amendment was about giving “the people,” (remember them?) the right to vote directly on their representation. I have read the Federalist Papers and I must say that the election of Senators by state governments came from the same ideas that gave us the Electoral College. Of course, “Absolutely ANY Constitutional scholar with a modicum of honesty will” admit that was true. Of course, you are too stupid and dishonest to admit, or understand, that fact. The Amendment was put forth to stop little sh*ts like your Teatards from corrupting the wishes of the body politic. As for a “representative republich,” you are right EXCEPT that it is based on democratic principles. Regardless of our Founder’s fears of the common people, the basic precepts of the nation are majority rule. Not rule by elites like your beloved Kock brothers.

            Your ignorance is horrendous. Get this: Why don’t I agree with you? Then I can claim that every decree by OUR President has the uncontestable force of law. You are just a cherry-picking SOB like all your kind!

            Have a righteously f*cked day, you smart a**ed prick.

            And here is a quote that is base more in fact:

            “The complaints of the privileged are too often confused with the voice of the masses.”

            (John Kenneth Galbraith)

          • ObozoMustGo

            Russy…. you’ve hit rock bottom on stupid in your first post to me on this topic, and then started to dig again with this one. You’re a liar if you think I’m going to believe that you’ve read the Federalist Papers. Either that, or you have retard-level comprehension skills. I’ll go with the former. The fact is that you could NOT have read the Federalist Papers and possibly made a comment that we have a majority rule democracy. We do not. In fact, the Founders all knew that majority rule NEVER works for very long and always devolves into tyranny. This is why they set up democratically elected representatives, but insulated the entire process with State appointed Senators, the Electoral College, and even life long appointments in the judiciary, in order to specifically prevent majority rule. The 17th Amendment is a disaster to the fiscal sanity of America and is the number one contributor to the unrestrained growth of the federal leviathan that exists today. You’re just too stupid to understand this.
            One other point… the Founders did not fear the people, you dope. That’s leftist freak double speak in order to try to discredit the principles of liberty and freedom that are the hallmark of our Constitutional republic as they set it up. While they, nor anyone since, were perfect, the ideals of self-government, liberty, and human freedom are perfect ideals. Those ideals are the antithesis of the socialist, leftist freak confused thinking of you idiots on the left.

          • Russell Byrd

            Bozo, your just spouting whatever mish-mash that makes your snide right-wacker argument fly. The 17th Amendment changed EVERY part of the situation. You refuse to realize the reason for the amendment, and you refuse to understand who the “state” really is. It is ALL the citizens, not a bunch of rich elitists or right-wackjob Teatards alone. Remember, “no taxation without representation.” If elitists control the legislature or the election process, then we are not represented.

            I know I am talking to a total moron. Your ignorant, racist insult of a name makes that crystal clear.

            Have a real f*cked up day, loser, and choke on all that bigotry, hate, and bile.

            “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”

            John Kenneth Galbraith

            Fits you to a “Tea.” You were a prick before and you are still a prick. Fortunately, you Teanderthals are a dying breed. So gargle that sh*t while you have a chance. Numbnuts like you are doing our work for us. People with a mind are waking up to your selfish, me first, I hate everyone not like me nonsense.

          • Russell Byrd

            Oh, and fool. Obama is our President and he is not going anywhere! Bwwwwwaaaaaaahhhhhh!

          • Russell Byrd

            The 17th Amendment is a disaster only to the Bozos like you. In fact it has little to do with the truth of the growth of Federal power. As for me, I despise the entire States’ Rights nonsense. All that has done is give us 50 enormous law codes, created inefficiency, caused divisions between our citizens, and gave us a bloody, expensive Civil War. Its crap. You really think making Senators beholden to a bloc in the State legislatures will limit Federal power. Maybe, but it guarantees our government can be sold to the highest bidder and makes another Civil War inevitable.

            So as far as you believing I did not read the Federalist Papers, savvy this:

            I know you did not really read them. So we are even on that.

            If you have read the Federalist Papers, you only gleaned the parts you wanted to support your BS.

            In the end, the Federalist Papers are NOT the Constitution. They are not the law of the land regardless of your warped interpretation.

            As for your “march to tyranny.” That is exactly what we Liberals are trying to reform. You want tyranny as long as YOU are the TYRANT.

          • Raincolle

            Yes indeed. It there should be a vote by the entire chamber to decide if a bill should be voted on or not. It should not be left to a single individual. However, the filibuster should be suspended on whether a vote should take place or not, until the bill has been decided upon to be voted on. If the votes decide that the bill can proceed to be voted on, the a filibuster can be used.

            You and I can agree that many bill don’t get voted on because the one man deciding is afraid that if his party were to be caught voting for or against a poison pill bill, the party would be be caught showing their true colors so the Guy repping the Majority usually, holts the bill for fear of looking bad. Notice the bills both chambers are so quick to put up for a vote and the ones they quickly sweep under a rug? That’s both houses I’m referring too.

          • montanabill

            Here is one other thing that I would like to see: No adding extraneous items to any bill. Amendments and add-on’s must relate directly to the reason for the bill and must be voted approved before addition. Way too much pork along with other non-related stuff gets added at the last minute and never disclosed until after a vote.

          • Raincolle

            I too would love to see that. Damn I wish there was enough sanity in Washington that a reality, but there isn’t.

  • tax payer

    I don’t know, but the GOP isn’t responsible for creating jobs. Businesses are responsible for opening up more jobs, if they are making a Profit. If they are losing money it means less employees being hired by them and some of the employees therefore losing their jobs.

    • Russell Byrd

      Of course, that means we should make sure those people do not get any government assistance either, right? We should just let the unfortunate go to Hell and make no attempt to better the economy. One reason many businesses are not making profit is there are less people able to buy their products. No jobs, no profits. I know you cannot see this at all, but it is very simple. This is what government programs are trying to do. Stimulate the economy and reduce suffering. Of course, you do not need either one, so you say “those untermensch can kiss my a**”!

  • tax payer

    I would get a raise every year of at least $.70 an hour and some have to wait up to seven years for a raise since they don’t give raises to minimum wage earners every year. You have to work for a company that rewards its employees by staying there many years, but ( many of these ) employees work one year, so they can get benefits, while unemployed. The Government hires from within like many Private Companies, so the jobs go to those that know someone that can put in a good word for them and it’s usually family members that get those high paying positions.

  • tax payer

    McDonald’s, Popeye, Burger King, Wendy’s and many more are always hiring, so these people can always work there until they find a $10.00 an hour position, if they have at least a GED.