Obama is shovel-ready

First topic message reminder :

President Obama has abandoned the American people.
The American people are abandoning President Obama.

"Obama Faces Tough Fight for 2012"
http://www.newsmax.com/US/Obama-Newsmax-poll-vote/2011/06/03/id/398796?utm_source=outbrain&utm_title=Obama-Faces-Tough-Fight-for-2012

"Why Obama Is Likely to Lose in 2012 "
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304657804576401653113017130.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

The gridlock in Congress has brought our government to a halt.
The Republicans are willing to let the U.S. default instead of raising the debt ceiling.
The Democrats say they are powerless to help the unemployed because the Republicans block every attempt at job creation or the extension of unemployment benefits. Obama is unwilling to help the unemployed although he could do many things such as issuing an executive order to make E-verify mandatory for all states. President Clinton's suggestions in Time would create millions of jobs.

It seems like President Obama knows that he is going to be a one-term President and is digging his own hole by granting amnesty to illegal aliens, his illegal war in Libya, and his attempt at health care reform that has left millions of Americans mad at him. The list is long.

In June 2010 President Obama said that "Our economy . . . is now growing at a good clip," but last week admitted, "Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected." The only thing shovel-ready about the Obama administration is Obama. If Obama doesn't do something for the unemployed soon, then you can stick a fork in him because he's done. After the Republicans get finished tearing him apart, they will kick his carcass into a hole and kick some dirt over what's left. Obama is shovel-ready.

First of all, President Obama's job numbers are not in the negative. Please stop making crap up or pulling it from some right-wing web site that makes crap up. I'm not saying that his job numbers are great because they're not. But that last number is just nonsense. The other ones, BTW, are pretty much in line with my original premise that overall, democrats are better at creating jobs--so your point in restating it was...?

Three inconvenient facts about Reagan:

1. He raised taxes.

2. He raised the national debt.

3. He increased government spending.

Here's a nice little graph showing national debt over the years under various administrations (and I'd note that President Obama actually put Iraq and Afghanistan on the books, unlike Bush, or his portion would look much better, even with inheriting the disastourous economy):


http://thefastertimes.com/politicalanalysis/files/2011/04/debt.jpg

Also, I don't get my information from unions. I wish the hell unions would do a better job of getter their message out.

And oh yeah, FYI, this is what "my genius" Krugman actually said in 2009:

[url= http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ayAXvw0Mc3CY]http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ayAXvw0Mc3CY[/url]

Look I think you're probably a pretty good person, and I know that you really want to believe that Republicans are the guys that will cut your taxes and make everything better, but for your own good, at some point, you have to face the truth that wishing it just doesn't make it so. Republicans for sure have a plan. It's just that you (and I) aren't a part of it.

The shovel ready program actually could have and would have worked had the states that accepted the money used them for the purpose they were intended and not to hide budget pitfalls and then return the unused portions this year. So when you want to blame someone on the lack of shovel ready job creation you need to look at your State Government, State Senators, State Legislators, Governors, Representatives, Committee People who all voted on how, where and when to use this money, not at the President. When he wanted stipulations like this money was not to be used to settle budget pitfalls, he was trounced by the Republicans who, of course, want smaller Government. Posting things like the above are not only insulting, but factless, with the exception of Joan's supporting documentation.

Now, we have a real opportunity to get the President to hear "our" voices, not the "voices" people claim are ours. Can we please stop the debates for 24 hours and start formulating our questions for the President tomorrow? Please, a small group tweeting and retweeting are not going to control the tone or the questions that the long term unemployed, 99ers need which is real Job Creation, this year and help for the 99ers, this year with HR589. We can no long wait for Ways and Means to hear us. The President is giving us an opportunity, please, we need everyone, EVERYONE, to post their questions, tell their stories, ask for help. It's the one opportunity we have all to ourselves with the President. It is strictly Jobs and the Economy.

Please we need all members to help.

#AskObama at the First Ever Twitter @Townhall at the White Hous

1. Does he support HR 589? What will/can he do to get it passed?
2. If he does not support it, what ideas does he have for the jobless to survive until jobs are made available (estimated between 2016-2020). Immediate relief and long term relief.
3. Is he aware that the job postings usually do not exist, skewing the available job #'s against the unemployed. Is he aware that the unemployment rate is much higher than touted, and that these numbers are also skewed against the unemployed, so that they do not get the benefits and assistance that they so desperately need?
4. Is he aware that the unemployed are discriminated against & are not being hired? Is he aware that this "policy" is causing us to lose our creditworthiness, our homes, our belongings, our pets and often our families? Is he aware that academic records cannot be accessed if student loans are defaulted? Is he aware that all of the above discredits us, eliminates us from consideration for various assistance/training and makes us even less marketable? What does he plan to do about this?

5. Is a public works project possible, where we work for the government/public in exchange for financial assistance, and are able to schedule time off for job interviews so we can move forward and prove that the program works?

http://www.publicrecordsdetectivesjournal.co.cc/2011/06/letter-from-99er.html#.ThBospBc93o.blogger
http://couth11.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-this-missing-persons-case.html
http://couth11.blogspot.com/2011/04/adding-another-extension-for-unemployed.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/06/30/askobama-first-ever-twitter-townhall-white-house

couth11. Can we add these to the list of questions for the #AskObama townhall twitter? They are great, direct and to the point. I will gladly do it now if it's okay with you.

Agree but to be clear I never said his numbers were in the negative and I only post facts that are undisputable. As for Krugman he likes to talk here is more of what he said;
“The end of the world appears to have been postponed. We’ve had an extraordinarily terrible crisis though we’ve probably hit bottom as world output has turned positive.”
“ On Monday, Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman said he expects the U.S. recession to end by September.”
“This looks an awful lot like the beginning of a second Great Depression," Nobel laureate Paul Krugman said in January. Catastrophe may have been averted.”
-Paul Krugman, Princeton University
http://epress.anu.edu.au/apps/bookworm/view/Agenda,+Volume+17,+Number+1,+2010/931/07-hardinglibich.xhtml
A few bullet points from Krugman’s comments in Helsinki:
• The U.S. may have emerged from recession at the end of July or in August
• Growth may be returning after 4 consecutive Qs of negative GDP — the longest contraction since record-keeping began in 1947.
• U.S. has $1.1 trillion in annual capacity “staying idle.”
• The world has become “highly subject” to financial bubbles;
• There was a “remarkable” willingness to ignore signs of the bubble — or more politely, to fail
I could go on and on with Krugman (who I like but unlike some on the left do not hold up as a God), the problem isn’t I believe that the Repubs are the answer (but I do believe they hve elements of good policy just as I see elements of good policy in some Dem legislation) the problem is that some hold the Dems out as the only answer and only savior (which they have demonstrated time and time again they are not); just as the Reubs have an agenda so does your side.
So moving forward to get us help I would suggest to quit buying all the left/right hype; blind partisanship and blind support is the problem. Some say I’m a troll but really I just like to show that both sides can sling as much mud as the other side and that for every chart supporting your “claims” there is a chart supporting the other side. As for Obama and the continual issue of blame here is an interesting inference: If the preceding administration is responsible for the following administration (which is Obama and the left's premise for reelection) then Reagan inherited Carter (spending debt) Bush inherited Reagan (Growth) and Clinton Inhered Bush (Growth) and Obama then inherited Bush Jr. (failure) you don't get it both ways.
For possum out there let me offer this paragraph: There are two income tax rates that result in zero Government revenue - zero and one hundred percent. All other tax rates between them will result in revenue. As rates are increased, revenue increases initially from zero dollars, peaks somewhere in the middle and begins to fall toward zero revenues as the rates approach 100 percent, the point where (official) GDP also falls to zero. Simply put, it is the law of diminishing returns applied to tax policy. Hard to argue against this, however, we could argue forever about the shape of the curve. This is an easy-to-understand free market concept where everyone has a unique Laffer curve, including you. End Paragraph. Properly using the Laffer curve as a thinking tool requires another paragraph. OK.

It is common to put eveything in everyone's curve to obtain a national Laffer Curve, where many can now argue it would be unreasonable to expect people to substantially modify economic behavior as a result of a 10% average income tax rate . I would agree with that, but one needs to be a bit smarter. Income taxes are applied unevenly. Considering that 50% of revenues are paid by the top 5%, does cause a different picture to emerge (top 20% pays 80%) Over aggregation in economics can and does disable valid analysis and usually produces defective conclusions. Marginal tax rate during the 1980s' was 70% and when state taxes were added, marginal tax rates were up to 90% and the Laffer Curve effects on GDP then were sizeable. Despite claims to the contrary, revenues skyrocketed after the reduction of marginal tax rates in the 1980s(Reagan) well what Obama is considering is very much like the supply-side economics (given the nickname “Reaganomics”) that Reagan utilized in the 1980s in order to give the United States one of its greatest non-war time periods of economic growth and prosperity (undisputable). For those (that only know the dark side) supply-side economics is based on the concept that by making it easier for producers to supply goods and services, more goods and services will be supplied at more competitive prices. To make it easier for goods and services to be supplied, tax rates are lowered and the government eliminates unnecessary regulation. Government revenue from taxes will increase in the long-run, as a stronger economy will result in there being more money to tax. Essentially, volume makes up for lower tax rates. Would you rather have 30% of $2,000 or 25% of $2,600? The smart answer is 25% of $2,600, which is $650. Taking the other option, while a higher percentage, gives you less money (only $600.)
So to go further with a econ lesson on supply-side economics increasing government revenue is mathematically sound through the use of theExtreme Value Theorm and the Laffer Curve so build a chrt using the following: The Extreme Value Theorem states that for any closed function on an interval from point A to point B, there must exist a minimum and maximum value. The Laffer Curve uses the basic mathematical principle that any real number multiplied by zero will equal zero and the idea that if the government took 100% of income there would be no incentive for anyone to earn money since the government would simply take it all. The Laffer Curve shows government revenue from a 0% tax rate (point A) to a 100% tax rate (point B). Applying the Extreme Value Theorem to the Laffer Curve, it can be concluded the minimum value is zero, and that there must exist a maximum value. t* is the tax rate at which government revenue is maximized. In order to reach maximum government revenue, tax rates must be decreased if they are to the right side of t*, which is where today’s tax rates are. So what does this mean?, Under President Reagan, the median family income in the United States rose by $4,000 from 1980 to 1988, government tax revenues increased more than 50 percent, and the number of jobs in the country rose, as did the GDP. The economic policies that some, including Bush Sr, labeled as “voodoo economics” actually worked. “Reaganomics” was a success, and if Obama moves forward in 2011 with an embrace of supply-side economics (which he is doing while barking to his base about the opposite), it will only strengthen our economy and bring greater prosperity to the American people. may look back and credit “Obamanomics” for getting the US out of one of it’s worst recessions.


To Mary’s comments I believe that to be an interesting inference, and something I am surprised that hasn’t been explored. What if the money wasn’t used to pay down debt but injected? She very well could be right. In the end we need to make sure both sides know that our votes go to those who support us with Legs. today not sound bites, or look how I voted in the past or what party I‘m from. When were viewed as a group to pander too we will get results. As it stands right now one side knows we don’t like them or will ever vote for them. The other side knows as long as they bring up legs. (which they know won’t get passed so there is no risk) and that we only have there side

I think he said "We are not as shovel ready as he thought we should be"..Failure no matter how we look at it!!!

There was a few tweets that desp. and I saw today that got my attention...its 100% correct. We just need to get us all to stand together and DO something to step things up a notch.

#99ers" are bigger than the Tea Party and Moveon.org combined. You need to show your power.

The moment a group starts called "#99ers to defeat Obama in 2012" is the moment he starts taking your plight seriously.

As a group of MILLIONS and still counting, we have so much power!! We just need to find a successful way to use it.