Government doesn't pad numbers at all...

[TampaDude]

Obama to the economy: TAKE IT ALL, BITCH!!! TAKE IT ALL!!!

[Josh]

see PMAN?

[Joe]

Xynapse... In what industry is your full time job?

[1997 GA16DE]

Originally Posted by Josh

The stimulus wasn't meant to help anything but the chances of the current incumbents getting re-elected.

Didn't work out too well for the Republican Party.

Originally Posted by Rich

The government + state run media just doesn't know what the word 'net' means. If you save 100 jobs and loose 1000, you aren't a winner. But headlines are "100 jobs saved!"

Seems elementary, but obviously not.

Inevitability. Saving 100 and losing 1000 is still better than losing 1100. I've really just stopped counting. There's not a person alive who can turn around our economy. Is it getting better or worse? I guess it depends on what industry you're in and whether or not you have a job.

[Political_Man]

Originally Posted by Josh

see PMAN?

I still don't think he actually believes it. Look at the twists and turns he has to make to make his argument. Deep down, even he knows the stimulus didn't achieve it's stated objective.

[blacksheep-1]

Inevitability. Saving 100 and losing 1000 is still better than losing 1100.

Unless the headline reads " 100 jobs saved"
Nice spin, just like "we don't let illegals get healthcare"
but the (healthcare) document is actually moot on the subject, if the document counts out illegals then just say so.

[1997 GA16DE]

Originally Posted by blacksheep-1

Unless the headline reads " 100 jobs saved"
Nice spin, just like "we don't let illegals get healthcare"
but the (healthcare) document is actually moot on the subject, if the document counts out illegals then just say so.

The media will put it any way they want to. That's how they get readers.

Fox spins things one way, MSNBC spins things the other way. Glass half empty, glass half full. Or, in Fox's case, Obama broke the glass. I'll put it this way. If your house was burning down, and you could only save 100 items out of the 1100 things you own, would that be a loss or a gain? Well, it'd be a loss. Now compare that to if your house simply burned down and you weren't around. Those 100 saved items now feel like a gain.

You can look at it any way you please. I'll be honest, I think Obama could be doing a lot more things to help our economy. Things he's not doing or things he's taking way too long to do. But you have to admit it, our house is burning down, it's burning like California.

[Political_Man]

Originally Posted by 1997 GA16DE

Didn't work out too well for the Republican Party.

Exactly and it's not going to work out for the current group of politicians either.

Inevitability. Saving 100 and losing 1000 is still better than losing 1100. I've really just stopped counting. There's not a person alive who can turn around our economy. Is it getting better or worse? I guess it depends on what industry you're in and whether or not you have a job.

In a vacuum losing 1000 jobs is better than losing 1100. This is about the ineffectiveness of government as compared to the private sector at being able to create more jobs. It's that simple. The private industry can create more self-sustaining jobs using ~gasp~ profit than any government ever will.

Even if you take the White House's own numbers, and that's without providing any level of scrutiny to the numbers whatsoever, each job is costing $230,796 PER JOB "saved." That's not my numbers, that's not Fox News's numbers, that's by the White House's own numbers. And if they say it's costing $230,000 dollars per job you can go ahead and multiply that times 3.

Hell, why don't we just give these people the 230k and tell them to have a good life? It would be more effective at creating jobs than this big Socialist's wet dream we're conducting now.

[XYNaPSE]

Originally Posted by Joe

Xynapse... In what industry is your full time job?

Jobs. Education and IT.

Originally Posted by Political_Man

I still don't think he actually believes it. Look at the twists and turns he has to make to make his argument. Deep down, even he knows the stimulus didn't achieve it's stated objective.

Why am I the only one who listens? Did they not say in the beginning that most of the stimulus would not be used until 2010? Has the stimulus saved/created jobs?

Originally Posted by 1997 GA16DE

There's not a person alive who can turn around our economy. Is it getting better or worse? I guess it depends on what industry you're in and whether or not you have a job.

There is not one person you are correct. More than likely now it is up to the economy and everything involved to determine what happens. Once everything starts looking good again regulations will be imposed. Manufacturing is starting to do better this last quarter. The stimulus will boost an entire alternative energy industry. Solar panels will be getting a big boost. Nuclear ENergy, Construction, electric and hybrid vehicles. All of these are getting boosts because of the stimulus and they all involve jobs. For people to say the stimulus hasn't done any good is just ridiculous.

[1997 GA16DE]

Originally Posted by Political_Man

Exactly and it's not going to work out for the current group of politicians as well.

It never works out for any side, it's a losing battle for whoever's in power. The grass is always greener on the other side. People vote for a Democrat, they get sick of the Democrat, so they start to lean Republican. They, then vote for the Republican, get sick of the Republican, so they start to lean Democrat, again. Rinse, Repeat.

It seems that both parties are going down similar roads when it comes to the economy. Probably because it's always the same people who REALLY run our country behind the curtains, no matter who's "in power".

Originally Posted by Political_Man

Even if you take the White House's own numbers, and that's without providing any level of scrutiny to the numbers whatsoever, each job is costing $230,796 PER JOB "saved." That's by the White House's own numbers.

Hell, why don't we just give these people the 230k and tell them to have a good life? It would be more effective at creating jobs than this big Socialist's wet dream we're conducting now.

To me, "$230K per job" would mean the country's losing that much for every job lost. Working people create money and exports for the US and moves us towards surplus. Non-working people create loss and less exports for the US, which moves us towards deficit.

Where would the $230 come from if no one's working?

[shoot]

Originally Posted by XYNaPSE

Jobs. Education and IT.

So your a head hunter/ teacher/admin? sweet gig.lol

[Political_Man]

[quote=1997 GA16DE;4033351]It never works out for any side, it's a losing battle for whoever's in power. The grass is always greener on the other side. People vote for a Democrat, they get sick of the Democrat, so they start to lean Republican. They, then vote for the Republican, get sick of the Republican, so they start to lean Democrat, again. Rinse, Repeat.

It seems that both parties are going down similar roads when it comes to the economy. Probably because it's always the same people who REALLY run our country behind the curtains, no matter who's "in power".

To me, "$230K per job" would mean the country's losing that much for every job lost.

What? WTF are you talking about? The White House claims they "saved" or "created" 650,000 jobs. They say it costs them $150,000,000,000 to do that. That means it cost the taxpayers $230,000 for every job the White House claims to have "saved." This is not that hard to understand.

Working people create money and exports for the US and moves us towards surplus. Non-working people create loss and less exports for the US, which moves us towards deficit.

Where would the $230 come from if no one's working?

Wow. Public school system at it's finest here. Skipping a few steps there, don't you think? Profitable opportunities bring investors who hire people to work in order to chase those profits. Non-working people don't "create loss," not-working people ARE loss, as in lost opportunity to create profits, which fuel investment, which create jobs, which chase profits, which fuels investment.... See how that works. Profits sustain jobs.

You want to create a bunch of jobs tomorrow? Get government out of the way, lower taxes, and make something really profitable. Oh and stop borrowing and spending taxpayers money.

[XYNaPSE]

Originally Posted by Political_Man

What? WTF are you talking about? The White House claims they "saved" or "created" 650,000 jobs. They say it costs them $150,000,000,000 to do that. That means it cost the taxpayers $230,000 for every job the White House claims to have "saved." This is not that hard to understand.

That's just the beginning. That money has been awarded, granted, contracted, but those recipients haven't spent all of it. Also, I think Friday they will be coming out with new data. We really shouldn't be debating specifics until a while after this new data comes out. I think we're all jumping the gun especially those who are so critical.

[Political_Man]

Originally Posted by XYNaPSE

That's just the beginning. That money has been awarded, granted, contracted, but those recipients haven't spent all of it. Also, I think Friday they will be coming out with new data. We really shouldn't be debating specifics until a while after this new data comes out. I think we're all jumping the gun especially those who are so critical.

Not so fast there, slick. The Obama Administration has already laid claim to this specific amount of money and touted this as a "success." Even under the Administration's own numbers (which are inflated) the stimulus has failed. Unemployment was never suppose to rise over 8%, remember?

[Notladstyle]

"If I give you a raise, it is going to save a portion of your job," HHS spokesman Luis Rosero said.

lol

[Graves]

And Florida sits at a 11% unemployment. Isn't that like 2,000,000 + people unemployed in Florida now? And every month it keeps rising. But hey all the people will have free health care and free from the swine flu, but they'll be jobless, homeless and watching the rich love life.

[TNathe]

Pasco County is at 12% . population of Pasco is 471,028, so that's 56,523 people out of work in Pasco alone...dont worry though, EVERYONE is hiring and people will soon be spending spending spending

[1997 GA16DE]

Originally Posted by Political_Man

Wow. Public school system at it's finest here. Skipping a few steps there, don't you think? Profitable opportunities bring investors who hire people to work in order to chase those profits. Non-working people don't "create loss," not-working people ARE loss, as in lost opportunity to create profits, which fuel investment, which create jobs, which chase profits, which fuels investment.... See how that works. Profits sustain jobs.

What does it matter if you think I'm skipping a few steps, cause and effect. Bottom line, less people work, less profit, more deficit. More people work, more profit, more surplus. You can't have a good economy when people are out of work and you can't have jobs if you don't have a good economy. It's not about steps, it's an infinite loop.

Originally Posted by Political_Man

You want to create a bunch of jobs tomorrow? Get government out of the way, lower taxes, and make something really profitable. Oh and stop borrowing and spending taxpayers money.

Doesn't work that way. I'm sure taking the government out of the picture will create TONS of jobs...but not for Americans. The only thing it'll do is expand on the corruption. The kind of shit that is COSTING Americans jobs and income.

[XYNaPSE]

Originally Posted by Political_Man

Not so fast there, slick. The Obama Administration has already laid claim to this specific amount of money and touted this as a "success." Even under the Administration's own numbers (which are inflated) the stimulus has failed. Unemployment was never suppose to rise over 8%, remember?

So far it is doing what it was intended to do. People are taking the money and using it. Jobs are being created/saved. Things would be worse without it. This administration has stated that the job losses are worse then predicted months ago.

Overall, the stimulus is working. People are using the money = people making money. While all that is going on, new businesses are being created, newer technologies are being implemented, collapses are being prevented and so on. It is doing exactly what was intended. Where is this fail you speak of? By the middle of next year the stimulus will be in full effect. That's why I said you should all wait to criticize it. You guys are the ones who are "speaking so fast." or "jumping the gun" on this.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by XYNaPSE

Things would be worse without it.

How? How can you prove that?