What's worse??

[cairns]

The fact that he lies through his teeth when he spouts this BS or that he's not lying and really believes it??

Question: What about the Republicans saying that you're blaming the Europeans for the failures of your own policies?

President Obama: The truth of the matter is that, as I said, we created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months, over 800,000 just this year alone. The private sector is doing fine. Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government. Oftentimes cuts initiated by, you know, Governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don't have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in.

And so, you know, if Republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is how do we help state and local governments and how do we help the construction industry? Because the recipes that they're promoting are basically the kinds of policies that would add weakness to the -- to the economy, would result in further layoffs, would not provide relief in the housing market, and would result, I think most economists estimate, in lower growth and fewer jobs, not more.

[island911]

Subtext:

President Obama: The truth of the matter is that, I don't know what the hell is happening, let alone what to do. .. so I'll blame Republicans.

[bivenator]

I wish he would spell out the reciepes the R are promoting. It would be fun to have him say it out loud what it is that the R are proposing that wont work and reasons why they won't work.

His saying that we need to grow local and state govt in order to help the economy grow is stupid. You can't grow the economy by growing govt.

[sammyg2]

He doesn't believe what he says but he believes his liberal political base is stupid enough to believe it.
And he's right.

[Eric 88 Carrera]

The private sector is doing fine. Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government. Oftentimes cuts initiated by, you know, Governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don't have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in. -- Our Dear Leader

The utter stupidity of this statement is amazing. This statement should be repeated regularly until election day.

The idea that Our Dear Leader thinks that he can create jobs in our economy shows his complete ignorance of economics. He believes that all goodness in the world flows from the Federal Government. His stimulus package, bailouts, green subsidies and his $5 trillion deficit proves that this is not the case. It never occurs to him that the reason that tax revenues are down across the country is that there is no economic growth in the private sector, and since there is no growth there aren't sufficient profits or prospects for profits to hire additional workers. His view of the economy is ass-backwards -- He doesn't understand that tax revenue comes from growth in the private sector not bureaucrats, welfare recipients, the unemployed and central planners.

Are you better off today than you were $5 trillion ago?

[Crowbob]

Originally Posted by Eric 88 Carrera

The utter stupidity of this statement is amazing. This statement should be repeated regularly until election day.

The idea that Our Dear Leader thinks that he can create jobs in our economy shows his complete ignorance of economics...His view of the economy is ass-backwards -- He doesn't understand that tax revenue comes from growth in the private sector not bureaucrats, welfare recipients, the unemployed and central planners.

Are you better off today than you were $5 trillion ago?

He understands. He's not stupid.

[Tobra]

You are being a bit generous there Robert. I don't think he understands, he just says stuff that he thinks sounds good and people want to hear. He is not as bright as people seem to think he is, or he would not say as much stupid stuff.

[cairns]

The good thing is LOTS of people noticed the statement and even the MSM couldn't pass on at least mentioning it. He couldn't have given Romney a nicer present if he tried.

This one's gonna have a shelf life folks. Republicans are going to make some hay (and some great ads) with this little soundbite....as they should.

[kach22i]

I don't think you guys want to understand, because you hate the messenger so much.

Here is an item from almost a year ago, maybe it will shed some light into the darkness.

If Public Sector Payrolls Were at 2009 Levels, The Unemployment Rate Would Be 8.4 Percent
Aug 6, 2011 at 12:00 pm
If Public Sector Payrolls Were at 2009 Levels, The Unemployment Rate Would Be 8.4 Percent | ThinkProgress

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the private sector added 154,000 jobs in July, while the public sector lost 37,000. And this is by no means a new phenomenon. As Matt Yglesias reported last month, the federal government alone has lost more than 500,000 jobs since President Obama took office.

All in all, BLS has found that federal, state, and local government payrolls fell by 1,130,000 between June 2009 and July 2011. So if government payrolls were the same today as they were back in 2009, the unemployment rate would be significantly lower, standing at 8.4 percent, instead of the current 9.1 percent. On the graph below, the darker line is the actual unemployment rate, while the lighter line is what it would have been in the absence of public sector layoffs:

RE:

.........further layoffs, would not provide relief in the housing market....

The more people with jobs, the better the housing market is, just a fact guys.

[Eric 88 Carrera]

This is the worst recovery since the great depression. Just look at the chart.



Our Dear Leader and some of the Lefties out there believe that Government Employment provides growth for the economy. This performance is the inevitable result of the failed stimulus -- Federal money was used to prop up Government employment. When the Federal Money went away, there was no money available to pay these people because the Private sector wasn't growing enough to provide the tax revenue, and states and local governments do not inhabit the make believe land of Progressive Big Rock Candy Mountain - they must live within their means unlike Our Dear Leader.

I don't know what is worse - Our Dear Leader is so stupid to believe that Government employment drives economic growth or Our Dear Leader does not believe that Government employment provides economic growth and he is cynical enough to think that he can con enough of the American people into believing it.

I thought this thinking died when Communism collapsed.

[porwolf]

Originally Posted by Eric 88 Carrera

This is the worst recovery since the great depression. Just look at the chart.



Our Dear Leader and some of the Lefties out there believe that Government Employment provides growth for the economy. This performance is the inevitable result of the failed stimulus -- Federal money was used to prop up Government employment. When the Federal Money went away, there was no money available to pay these people because the Private sector wasn't growing enough to provide the tax revenue, and states and local governments do not inhabit the make believe land of Progressive Big Rock Candy Mountain - they must live within their means unlike Our Dear Leader.

I don't know what is worse - Our Dear Leader is so stupid to believe that Government employment drives economic growth or Our Dear Leader does not believe that Government employment provides economic growth and he is cynical enough to think that he can con enough of the American people into believing it.

I thought this thinking died when Communism collapsed.

Funny how you Obama hating PARFers overlook that the deep red curve shows so clearly who put us into this huge mess: Yes, your beloved GW and his Vice Dick! No wonder it takes time to dig out of it!

[Tobra]

WTF are you talking about "beloved?"

You should probably talk to a head shrinker about that OCD about Mr Bush.

[maaak928]

Originally Posted by porwolf

Funny how you Obama hating PARFers overlook that the deep red curve shows so clearly who put us into this huge mess: Yes, your beloved GW and his Vice Dick! No wonder it takes time to dig out of it!

How does the red curve show that, any more than it can cure herpes? It shows no causation, nor does it imply it.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Eric 88 Carrera

This is the worst recovery since the great depression. Just look at the chart.

It's also the worst recession since the Great Depression, requiring new phrases to be created to describe it; such as the Great Recession or Depression II.

You charge Obama with the recovery, be thankful that there is one at all. If the R's were in charge it would be much, much worse. That I would wager good money on. But thankfully, we will never know for sure.

[cairns]

Kach is jsut as myopic as Obama. Here's another view of his statistics.....(from Bloomberg)

Does Obama Know Why the Public Sector Isn’t ’Doing Fine’?


By Josh Barro Jun 11, 2012 1:24 PM ET

On Friday President Barack Obama spoke about why the economic recovery has been so slow. People are focusing on his gaffe -- saying “the private sector is doing fine” -- and Ezra Klein admonishes us to focus on the president's substantive point, which is that job losses in the public sector have undermined the recovery overall.

Unfortunately, Obama didn’t mention a major barrier to job growth in the public sector -- and neither did Ezra: unsustainable compensation structures. This problem existed before the recession, but it’s gotten worse during the recession, because public pension systems are designed to have very rapid rises in current-year cost in the years following a recession.

Enlarge image
Ticker Chart: Full Time Employees City of San Jose, California Department of Finance


Source: City of San Jose, California Department of Finance
.Take a look at the attached chart from San Jose, California. As you can see, San Jose had an average of 7.5 employees per 1,000 residents from 1986 to 2005, and never dropped below 7.0. But in the last two years, that ratio has cratered -- to 5.6 per thousand this year, with further cuts expected next year.

This is partly because revenue has risen only modestly, with general fund receipts rising 19 percent in a decade. But the main reason is that costs for a full-time equivalent employee are astronomical and skyrocketing. San Jose spends $142,000 per FTE on wages and benefits, up 85 percent from 10 years ago. As a result, the city shed 28 percent of its workforce over that period, even as its population was rising.

A lot of that increase is due to rising required pension payments, as the assets in the city’s pension funds have lost value. But much also had to do with what Mayor Chuck Reed, a Democrat, describes as “irresponsible policy actions” over the last 15 years. Here’s his list:

1. Giving out raises faster than revenues were growing.

2. Giving out raises and increasing benefits when revenues were falling.

3. Giving out raises and benefits retroactively.

4. Allowing employees to cash out unlimited amounts of sick leave when they retire.

5. Providing lifetime health care for retirees.

He also notes that “the City Council and outside arbitrators also significantly enhanced retirement benefits. The maximum benefit for public safety employees grew from 75 percent of final salary to 90 percent, and a guaranteed 3 percent cost-of-living adjustment was awarded to all employees.”

In other words, the city made a lot of promises that it could barely afford when times were good, and now that times are bad, it really can’t afford them.

So, why doesn’t San Jose just take away some of these generous benefits so it can afford to hire? Well, Reed is trying. But California law makes it easy to give out a pension sweetener and very hard to take one away. And binding arbitration laws make it difficult for the city to claw back benefits from police and fire workers.

Reed and San Jose’s City Council have declared a fiscal emergency, and used that declaration in order to put a referendum before voters that would sharply cut the pension benefits that workers (even those on the payroll today) earn in the future. That proposal passed on Tuesday with 70 percent of the vote, but the city’s public employee unions are suing to block its implementation.

Obama is right that it’s a problem that states and cities can’t afford to expand or retain their workforces. If the president wants to know why state and local governments can’t afford to hire, he could start by asking his own supporters in public employee unions.

[jcommin]

I actually like this analysis better.

Obama on the private sector being 'fine:' Was he right? Wrong? - CSMonitor.com

[tabs]

The BO problem was that he didn't articulate his thought more precisely. He should have said the Corporate sector is doing fine...as corp profits have been beating estimates every quarter. And that they are sitting on 1.8T USD in cash. Then his statement would have flown. Otherwise the all seeing one didn't see clearly enough.

[tabs]

BTW my work is done here..on this Board as what I have been saying all along about Obama is now the conventional wisdom.

[tabs]

Originally Posted by kach22i

It's also the worst recession since the Great Depression, requiring new phrases to be created to describe it; such as the Great Recession or Depression II.

You charge Obama with the recovery, be thankful that there is one at all. If the R's were in charge it would be much, much worse. That I would wager good money on. But thankfully, we will never know for sure.

I so wana Beotch slap U...maybe that would give you a moment of clarity. maybe?

The moment that GW Bush came on TV and said, "We are in a CRISIS." was the END OF AN ERA...known as the Great American Post WW2 Prosperity Boom.

The Crisis of 2008 was the culmination of 40 years of bad US Fiscal Policy and as such the US was on an inevitable trajectory headed for a failure of the system. Nobody recognizes this yet. The current Financial and Political wizards that have led the world to this precipice are now just beginning to realize this reality. They are beginning to see that anymore QEing or Stimulus is not going to gain traction for the economy. That once that the sugar high wears off the economy starts to slip back down the slope.

The question that you have to ask is the downward slide in the world economy going to be arrested without the need for QEing or Stimulus?

Each of U Boyz has a slice of the situation but not a panoramic view.

[tabs]

We are in a NEW ERA of American history just as the US entered a new era after the Civil War or WW2. It is not usually that noticeable on a day to day basis because old ways die hard and the transition is gradual. In five or ten years people will look back and see that that moment GW came on the TV was truly a watershed moment of before and after.

The problem with BO is that he does not understand that we need the evil corporate and WS bastids because they provide an economy of scale that facilitates a modern lifestyle. BO wants to tax them to redistribute their wealth. This comes at a time when the system is fragile. BO policies are like pouring Gasoline on a fire, that is his idea of a solution. BO policies are an accelerant for the demise of the world economy. BO conventional wisdom Liberal philosophy is now obsolete, BO ideas are YESTERDAYS IDEAS. Larger governance is not the answer as it produces nothing and is an overhead expense to be born by the producing sector of an economy.

So the question is what kind of future are we going to forge?