Whats wrong with 4million jobs created?

let's start a thread to start counting the many, many, many jobs and business that are created.

It will be a small thread, so you won't have to worry about keeping up with it.

Let's also see how many middle income jobs are created. My guess is none. Beause mid-class workers, do not want to build roads and bridges.

please do.
 
Werbung:
Do you think that less money is the result than? I am convinced, as someone who has sat on the local school board, and is somewhat in the know when it concerns education funding that an influx of capital dollars for new or upgrading school facilities should lead to higher achievement. As I said before, the best quality teacher cannot expect to have thier students achieve more when dealing with antiquated technology.
Problem with public school is not funding it goes back to the Teachers union. There is no incentive for teachers/schools to do better. You can be a bad teacher and get paid the same as a good teacher.

If the govt would get away from the schools and let it be determnned by free market. The schools that offered the best programs and had the best teacheers would then, offer the best educational opportunites.
 
No PROB!!!!

Now...you're on-deck.

Let's see you provide the (non-existant) list of his business-successes.

:rolleyes:

Sorry guy. I made no claims at all one way or another with regards to Bush. You are the one making claims that you can't substantiate. You are the one on deck who is unable to defend your arguments. You are the one looking like an idiot.

Now, can you back up your yap or are you really just yammering like a monkey in a tree.
 
Problem with public school is not funding it goes back to the Teachers union. There is no incentive for teachers/schools to do better. You can be a bad teacher and get paid the same as a good teacher.
....Kinda like those darlings of The Right; corporate/1%er CEOs, right?

:rolleyes:
"Recall, for example, the famous essay by David Brooks published in The Atlantic in 2001, in which he declared that, in one representative salt-of-the-earth Republican region, people had "no class resentment or class consciousness"; that complaints about the lopsided distribution of the economy's rewards were something one heard only from people in the wealthy and tasteful reaches of blue America.

Mr. Brooks's argument was powerful not so much because it captured reality, but because, by suggesting that to care about economic inequality was itself an act of snobbery, it ingeniously short-circuited the entire debate. Egalitarianism begins at home, liberal!

The need for new compensation rules is most urgent at failed banks. This is not merely because is would make for good PR, but because lavish executive bonuses sometimes create an incentive to hide losses, to take crazy risks, and even, according to Mr. Black, to "loot the place through seemingly normal corporate mechanisms." This is why, he continues, it is "essential to redesign and limit executive compensation when regulating failed or failing banks."

Our leaders may not know it yet, but this showdown between rival populisms is in fact a battle over political legitimacy. Is Wall Street the rightful master of our economic fate? Or should we choose a broader form of sovereignty?

Let the conservatives' hosannas turn to sneers. The market god has failed."
 
Do you think that less money is the result than? I am convinced, as someone who has sat on the local school board, and is somewhat in the know when it concerns education funding that an influx of capital dollars for new or upgrading school facilities should lead to higher achievement. As I said before, the best quality teacher cannot expect to have thier students achieve more when dealing with antiquated technology.

Some of the highest achieving students in this country are being taught in their homes. Without the benefit of giant bureaucracies, without the benefit of state of the art classrooms, without the benefit of teacher's unions.

In my particular school district there are 1.8 administrators per teacher and every time a large influx of money comes into the system whether it be state or federal that ratio grows. When you pour money into schools, the ony visible "benefit" is a growth of the school bureaucracy.

I see no reason to have more than one administrator per 4 teachers, do you? The money being poured into education, like money poured into any government interest is devoured by an every growing, grossly bloated and inificent bureaucracy. The solution to improving education in this country is to get the fed, and teachers unions out.
 
....Kinda like those darlings of The Right; corporate/1%er CEOs, right?

:rolleyes:

If a CEO performs, he earns his money. If he doesn't he should be fired. How many teachers who don't perform remain in their jobs, cheating students for 30 or 30 years. Aside from that, the CEO isn't operating with public funds so it really isn't your business unless you hold stock in the company. Teachers unions, however, are eating at a trough filled by my tax dollars so how they perform is my business.

You are a typical mind numb liberal. Logical fallacy at every turn and the worst part is that you believe you are bright. You are a prime example of the problems with government schools.
 
Sorry guy. I made no claims at all one way or another with regards to Bush.
Yeah....I've noticed that....you never DO!

Whatta safe, convenient, risk-free tactic; ya' can't be proven wrong, when you've got no opinion, at all.

How "conservative", of you.

:rolleyes:
 
Yeah....I've noticed that....you never DO!

Whatta safe, convenient, risk-free tactic; ya' can't be proven wrong, when you've got no opinion, at all.

How "conservative", of you.

:rolleyes:

As opposed to you who makes many claims and has a near perfect 100% error rate.
 
Yeah....I've noticed that....you never DO!

Whatta safe, convenient, risk-free tactic; ya' can't be proven wrong, when you've got no opinion, at all.

How "conservative", of you.

:rolleyes:

Unlike you, I don't make claims that I can't back up. That is why you have lost and I have won this one. That is why you will never win a debate against me. I don't state a position until I am sure that I can support it.

Sorry guy, you have shown up to an intellectual gunfight with a pen knife.

Now, can you back up any of your claims regarding bush or clintion or can't you. Let me guss....you can't. Of course, I knew that before I even challenged you.
 
The fact is that the Stim Package does both cut taxes (just as President Obama always said he wanted to do) and holds and creates jobs. When you built, repair or upgrade things that takes PEOPLE to do that... those people get paid and spend money everywhere and pay taxes everywhere.

Plus the environmental & energy provisions help us big time long term!

And most importantly... It's now on President Obama's desk to sign in record breaking time and I'm LOVING IT!!! The American people are getting to see what's been said over the last 2 years. When the Obstructionist Republican Party doesn't have the numbers to obstruct things... THINGS GET DONE!!!


iconatoreee704ee8fa9b9bum1.jpg

The "created" jobs are unsustainable, unless you want to spend into eternity to maintain them.

Added to that is the fact that Obama stated this is only a "down payment." Guess the trillion dollar stimulus, added to the already 7 trillion in potential liabilities the government has amassed, added to the potential 2.5 trillion our new Sec. of Treasury is saying we need to spend on the banks, added to the 2nd half of TARP is not enough?

Add all that together, and what number do you get? Around 11 trillion dollars. Our government intervention and bailout packages have almost equaled our GDP. At what point do you say "enough"?

Government does not work to do these kinds of things. Remember the first half of TARP? How our government overpaid 70 billion dollars? 70 out of 350 is not a good record. When is there to much government in your opinion?
 
The "created" jobs are unsustainable, unless you want to spend into eternity to maintain them.

Ding Ding! We have a winner!

Finely someone gets it! Government expenditures are not REAL economic growth. It is ARTIFICIAL economic growth! Sure the numbers on the GDP might jump because of all this blowing of money, but the moment the money runs out, it all comes to an instant end!

Real economic growth does not require a government mandate to sustain. I happens naturally in the open market. No government agency has to tell a hungry person to go buy food, or a farmer to bring his food to market. No one has to informer the owner of a beat up early 90s Chevy to go buy a new car, or the manufacture of cars to produce and sell them.

The one and only thing government can do to stimulate the economy, is to get the heck out of the way. Stop taxing the buyers so they don't have money to buy, and stop taxing sellers so they have to jack up their prices to cover taxes. And stop regulating everything under the sun, the prevents both from making transactions.
 
Ding Ding! We have a winner!

Finely someone gets it! Government expenditures are not REAL economic growth. It is ARTIFICIAL economic growth! Sure the numbers on the GDP might jump because of all this blowing of money, but the moment the money runs out, it all comes to an instant end!

Real economic growth does not require a government mandate to sustain. I happens naturally in the open market. No government agency has to tell a hungry person to go buy food, or a farmer to bring his food to market. No one has to informer the owner of a beat up early 90s Chevy to go buy a new car, or the manufacture of cars to produce and sell them.

The one and only thing government can do to stimulate the economy, is to get the heck out of the way. Stop taxing the buyers so they don't have money to buy, and stop taxing sellers so they have to jack up their prices to cover taxes. And stop regulating everything under the sun, the prevents both from making transactions.

They just don't seem to understand that government jobs equal economic liability, not economic growth. When they don't understand such a basic fact, it leads one to suppose that the entire discussion is so far over their heads that they simply don't understand anything that is being said. This is an article of faith for them, not a reasoned, and rational argument in support of the "stimulus" package.
 
The fuss is because it doesn't work.
Yeah....and, who knows better, than Republicans..... :rolleyes:

"Conservatives’ hidden agenda: we want to allow our wealthy supporters—the ones who benefited most from the economic policies that forced huge sacrifices onto American workers during the 1980s and 90s—to be able to keep more of their money.

Here’s what conservative politicians said about the 1993 deficit reduction legislation that raised taxes on the top 1.2% of our wealthiest citizens:

"Clearly, this is a job-killer in the short-run. The impact on job creation is going to be devastating." — Rep. Dick Armey, (Republican, Texas)

"The tax increase will…lead to a recession…and will actually increase the deficit." — Rep. Newt Gingrich (Republican, Georgia)

"I will make you this bet. I am willing to risk the mortgage on it…the deficit will be up; unemployment will be up; in my judgment, inflation will be up." — Sen. Robert Packwood (Republican, Oregon)

"The deficit four years from today will be higher than it is today, not lower." — Sen. Phil Gramm (Republican, Texas)

"The President promised a middle-class tax cut, yet he and his party imposed the largest tax increase in American history. We hope his higher taxes will not cut short the economic recovery and declining interest rates he inherited… Instead of stifling growth through higher taxes and increased government regulations, Republicans would take America in a different direction." — Sen. Robert Dole (Republican, Kansas)​

.....And, people were surprised that Republicans jumped-on Obama's economic-efforts....right from the start?

:rolleyes:
 
Werbung:
....Yeah....one way or another.....

:rolleyes:

Do feel free to bring forward any claim that I have made that I can't back up. Hell, in just this short conversation, you have made two. Rolling your eyes doesn't change the fact that you have lost. Making claims you can't support is just stupid.
 
Back
Top