E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSUpdated Friday Dec. 7, 8:45am ET Democratic senators said Thursday that the economy is still weak enough that it needs more federal stimulus spending as part of any year-ending fiscal deal with Republicans.
Senate Democratic Policy Committee chairman Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters, “I believe you need a stimulus. It could be a payroll tax (cut), it could be something else, but you need some kind of ‘oomph’ to the economy in this first year, particularly now that the statistics show it’s moving slowly.”
On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that non-farm payroll employment increased by 146,000 in November, while the unemployment rate went from 7.9 percent in October to 7.7 percent last month.
"The number of unemployed persons, at 12.0 million, changed little," the BLS report said. The number of long-term unemployed, those Americans who were jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million in November.
And the number of people in the labor force -- either working or actively looking for work -- dropped by 350,000.
Jacquelyn Martin / AP
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., right, accompanied by fellow Senate Democrats, gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 6, 2012, to discuss efforts to "boost the economy and prevent Americans from abruptly losing their jobless benefits at the end of the year."
Schumer and other Democrats said at a Capitol press conference Thursday that an extension of emergency unemployment insurance benefits must be part of any year-ending "fiscal cliff" deal.
The Democratic senators cited the need to spur a sluggish economy, which had a 7.9 percent jobless rate in October. An extended unemployment benefit “produces a major economic stimulus,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. His state has a 10.4 percent unemployment rate.
“We’re all talking about a stimulus. How do we get the economy moving? This is the best stimulus there is,” Schumer said.
He and other Democrats gave a textbook Keynesian argument for continued unemployment payments to those who might otherwise lose them at year end. People who get unemployment checks “are going to the local stores, they are increasing demand,” Reed said.
The Democrats said the heated, weeks-long debate on the fiscal cliff of spending cuts and tax increases seemed somewhat unreal and theoretical to some of their hard-pressed constituents.
While congressional leaders wrangle over the fiscal cliff, “two million Americans are now looking over a real cliff,” Reed said.
President Barack Obama headed to Virginia where he reminded the public that if the fiscal cliff isn't averted, taxes will increase on 98 percent of Americans next year. The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd reports.
Schumer said, “Many of the elements of the ‘fiscal cliff’ are abstract concepts to struggling middle-class families, (but) unemployment benefits are not abstract.”
“If there is an agreement on the fiscal cliff, unemployment insurance must be included,” Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said. And “if there’s not an agreement reached, we must extend unemployment separately.”
He added, “We must not leave here for the holidays until we extend unemployment insurance.”
Asked how this call for more stimulus spending was consistent with the idea of reducing budget deficits and the growing burden of federal debt, Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said, “Not all spending is created equal.”
Asked the same question later, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cited a story he’d heard Thursday morning on National Public Radio which said the European Union was “concerned about all their austerity,” that is, the reduction in European governments’ spending at a time of persistently high unemployment.
In the tense negotiations back-and-forth between President Barack Obama and Congressional Republicans, the chances of cliff-diving appear to be less likely, but there's still no hard deal on the table yet. Former communications director for the Blue Dog Democrats Kristen Hawn and David Winston, a veteran Republican pollster, discuss.
Reid argued that fiscal restraint and short-term stimulus aren’t mutually exclusive: “You can do both…. There are many, many things you can do to reduce debt, but still have (a) simulative aspect.”
According to the Congressional Budget Office, unemployment insurance benefits totaled $94 billion in fiscal year 2012, a substantial increase over the $33 billion paid out in fiscal year 2007 before the economy toppled into the recession. The total cost of jobless benefits over the past five years has been $520 billion.
The CBO said fully extending the current Emergency Unemployment Compensation program and temporary provisions of the Extended Benefit program for one year would cost $30 billion.
Democratic senators said they want the money spent on unemployment to not be offset by spending cuts elsewhere in the federal budget. “An offset, I think, is unnecessary and its bad economics,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.
At times the Democrats' portrayal of the economy Thursday sounded like the gloomy picture painted by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats said, “Sometimes, maybe especially here inside the Beltway, we forget that this terrible, terrible recession continues in many, many parts of the country. While official unemployment is 7.9 percent real unemployment – counting those people who have given up looking for work and those people who are working 20 hours and they want to be working 40 hours – is closer to 15 percent.”
Harkin told reporters after the press conference, “I don’t see us getting out of this high unemployment picture for some time. I think it’s going to be a gradual reduction.”
Leave a Comment:
This is beginning to become a joke.
Beginning?!?!
GOP Grinch want to take Christmas away from the people who bailed out millionarire and billionaire bankers????????
Inflation is not a danger, interest rates are essentially zero, and unemployment is high.
It's a perfect time to borrow in the short term to do badly needed infrastructure projects, and get this economy going again!
Increasing the length of unemployment benefits increases the length of time people are uunemployed. Tons of independent studies. When benefits run out, people get jobs. When the benefits are extended, people don't get jobs. All the "I have an unemployed friend" stories may all be true, but in the aggregate - the unemployed stay unemployed because of unemployment benefits.
Not saying do away with them. Just saying enough is enough. Try some tough love.
Here's a link to one of many studies
These benefits help the unemployed for lack of jobs caused ....not by the unemployed ... but by the bankers who started the worst recession since the 1930s.
.
Taking such benefits away from lower-middle class people will reduce demand for the marketplace, hurting the economy more. These folks tend to spend most of such benefits for their bottomline. Such spending is better multiplier than bailing out banks.
Bank bailouts lead to more 'moral hazard,' sending the message that reckless banking speculation has no consequences. No bankers have been prosecuted in the US for this crime of bringing down the US & world economy.
I'm not a Republican or Democrat but just how long do we keep paying people not to look for work? Also how did unemployed people bail out anyone. I watched my nephew and his girl friend collect unemployment checks for two years, during that time I asked on numerous occasions why they couldn't find a job. I was told there were no jobs to be found. After their unemployment ran out they both had a job in two days. I know this isn't an isolated incidence. I know unemployment benefits are necessary but give me a break.
who bailed out the banks and wall street??? OBAMA you dpoe!
Nope it was TARP, passed during the Bush administration. Keith Paulson, Tresury Secretary, Goldman Sachs banker, lead the fight for TARP. Paulson doled out the money.
oreo,
Sorry but TARP was started under Bush and he spent 1/2 and left 1/2 for Obama.
Pigotry,
Yes some bankers acted improperly but many of the problems caused came from Congress who wanted everybody to be able to buy a home. They forced bankers to make loans they shouldn't have and then the bankers took it further than they should have.
Markinbecker - that was one part. But Obama kept it going and did his own bailouts. Under the Clinton administration, bank were told (and held hostage) that they MUST loan to people wishing to purchase homes. They were told that their stipulations for qualifying for a loan was unfair and left "out" those with lesser incomes. Therefore, the banks had to find different ways of qualifying a person for a mortgage. That is what happened in this housing mess....it started under Clinton and perpetuated by Bush. Obama has done nothing that is going to help this problem - he has only continued to make it worse while wagging his finger at Bush.
"Stimulus"? Are you KIDDING me?? Yea, we see how well the LAST one went........Nearly $1 Trillion WASTED!!
Say, I have an idea!! Why doesn't this incompetent president FIX the economy rather than further damaging it?? All you have to do is give businesses certainty. Certainty as to what their taxes will be. Certainty what regulations will be added. Certainty as to what ObamaCare is going to ultimately cost.
Do you realize that businesses make decisions based on what is going to happen 3 to 5 years down the road and they don't even know what their taxes are going to be in less than 4 WEEKS?!?!?
Solution? Easy. Postpone ObamaCare implementation for 5 years. That will give businesses certainty that the Affordable Care Act will not be a landmine blowing up on their Income Statements 1 or 2 years from now. Second, tell businesses tax rates will stay the same for the next 5 years. Third, repeal all the needless regulations added over the last few years. Do you know Obama added 11,000 pages of regulations since he took office? ELEVEN THOUSAND!!
Do the above and this country would be growing at 5% to 7% for the next 24 months and unemployment would be below 5% within 12 months. The economic growth ALONE will bring in more tax dollars than this useless "tax on the rich idea".
But this president doesn't want economic growth. If there is economic growth then SOMEBODY must be making a profit and Obama can't let THAT happen. So continue to intentionally damage this economy all under the argument of "fairness".
But I don't know what is more scary - that we will have an incompetent president for ANOTHER four years or that there are THAT many unintelligent and economically ignorant people that would VOTE for Obama.
This is just an example of the demoncrats loading up their demands in order to sabotage the fiscal talks.
They don't want a solution to the financial problems, they want to score a "win" against the Republicans in the publics opinion.
Just like 0bama demanding that and resolution bill include the authority for him to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling any time he wishes.
0bama is holding our economy hostage and getting a free pass. But what do you care, just keep humping his leg.
People who tell lies go to hell. There is no republican heaven because it would be too lonely there. Clinton or rather his administration nor Barney Frank told anybody to do anything. The truth is when these people bough these houses they could afford them. They had jobs, however due too the Bush recession they lost their jobs couldn't make house payments, this and this alone contributed to the banking meltdown. This also effected the auto industry because banks stopped lending money people didn't buy cars which deepened the recession. This effected just about every facet of the economy. Enjoy your stay in hell righty's it is where you belong.
Republicans don't get it. Austerity in recessive times doesn't work, and this president has done things (in the face of total obstruction) that he could to get us out of the recession. And for the record, most of the financial meltdown came directly from the financial sector and NOT consumers with their mortgages. The banks were giving out the loans because they knew they could sell @!$%#ty loans on the derivatives market, which is a much bigger reason for the meltdown. And the trickle down/supply side economics is a FAILURE, the ignorance is coming from the fools who don't even understand macroeconomics. And by the way, postponing Obamacare would cause higher deficits and not do anything to help growth.
Ho boy. Do you think it's a good time to open up a second front right now?
I don't disagree with what the Senator is saying, but geeeez guys we havn't even pulled back from the fiscal cliff yet.
I'm just sayin.....
Pro business, and Elliot, more blah, blah, blah B.S. when are you going to figure out that is exactly why you lost and why you will lose some more if you don't get off of your ignorance and look at what is happening behind you. The stimulus was not a waste, we are living the fruits of that now. Most, if not all the numbers are in positive territory, some dramatic from four years ago when Obama INHERITED the biggest mess since the great depression. Not everything worked but enough did, I believe the number was 60% of the stimulus was tax cuts. So you clowns need to shut off Fox and get some real news.
Maybe if the Democrats had been serious to spark hiring of the 23 million unemployed and under-employed Americans, and work toward lowering the unemployment rate, from the 8% standard during the Obama administration, they would have considered not granting work permits to millions of illegal aliens as a payoff for the hispanic vote in the most recent election.
Why the hell do you people tell us to shut off Fox? We are here on NBC, are you simple?
Conservatives are not trying to win a popularity contest like Barack Kardashian and the rest of the learjet liberals. We are only concerned about the financial stability of our country. We aren't trying to buy votes with entitlements, we are trying to get people jobs so they can take care of themselves. We understand that cyclical Keynesian spending is not real growth and is not sustainable.
But carry on trying to win a popularity contest while we are circling the drain.
God, I wish I could be as naive as a liberal, just to see what the world looks like.
Where's Obama?! We need some more bailouts and stimulus money quick!
It's a perfect time to borrow in the short term to do badly needed infrastructure projects, and get this economy going again!
We already have been borrowing a trillion plus dollars a year in the short term. Newsflash: The economy still sucks!
MORE Stimulus spending ?????
The Progressives are just continuing their MANDATED agenda:
Tax + Spend + Redistribute and a lot more Regulations.
Yep, need more money for infrastructure, for more first responders and teachers, more for bailing out cities like Detroit, more for bailing out States like California, and more for giving Obama Bucks to those in the NYC Welfare lines.
Heya Progressive Congressional members: America is on the verge of a Fiscal Cliff because of your spending habits.
Progressives are a detriment to society.
John in Battle Crek
What about the mess that Obama just inherited from the last 4 years? You libbies are something else. You clowns are so full of BS blah, blah, blah. You don't have a friggen clue how this country got to be so great. And now you are going to tear it down with your assinie agenda of paying people to not work and always complaining about the mess Bush created. Total BS. What about the promises from the democrats in 2006 when they told us to elect them and they would fix everything that was wrong? We gave them all the power starting in January 2007. Then we gave them the White House on top of it. I would think that 6 years would be enough time to get something done. And don't start complaining about the republicans blocking everything. If the republicans hold so much power over the majority, where the hell were the dems when they supposedly saw everything going wrong? Were they asleep or are they just plain stupid? I'm going with stupid!!
My children will still be paying for Barry's first stimulus long after Pigotry is bacon grease in the pan.
I guess this new stimulus will have my grandkids' names on it.....
When will you Dems realize that just because your boy prints money does not mean it is free...
When you call me disillusioned and sour apples, I was laid off and chose NOT to file for unemployment because I had SAVED, and tightened my belt and checkbook strings and survived within my limited means...That's the American Dream people...not waddling my fat ass up to a window for sum more 'dem Obama bucks
Wordsmith865
I am already paying for the MESS that the babyboomers and every generation before that left for this country. Thanks to BUSH I get to pay even more and of course, the 11 TRILLION passed along from BUSH certainly did help matters either now did it. Obama added 5 trillion, but I guess that's not okay, because everything was JUST So great in this country when he came in the WH. Its okay for Republicans to create a debt but not the democrats? Seems to me, BOTH sides are spending money we don't have, and are not being fiscally responsible.
I think we have to continue unemployment benefits but there has to be a limit here. We can't keep doing this and watching our debt rise. There must be a cut here and in social programs that are abused. However, right along with it, we are cutting the Republicans sacred cows as well. There should be NO more corporate tax cuts for companies that move jobs to other countries. NO more corporate welfare period. I am also tired of paying 2 BILLION for a new bomber in the military while our own roads and bridges continue to decline.
John,
If you look at the numbers home ownership in the US was always around 65% of the population. When bankers were forced to make loans it went up to 75% and then we suffered a 10% foreclosure rate which caused the crisis. I am not blaming either party because they were both part of the problem but the facts are the facts.
I do blame the bankers for putting all of the loans and then reselling them and not advising people that there were bad loans in there which caused the AIG problem or the GMAC problems.
Republicans whining again. Had the Republican House not blocked EVERY SINGLE JOBS PROPOSAL made by Preisident Obama in an effort to make him a one-term President, more people would be employed today! Remember in 2010 when the Republicans ran on "JOBS!" then promptly reneged on that?
The stupidiy of the far right is never ending!
SeekingSanity
Thank you!! Great post as always. Maybe if the GOP doesn't REPEAT their success in the last session of congress:
"The numbers: Republicans have introduced 44 bills on abortion, 99 on religion, 71 on family relationships, 36 on marriage, 67 on firearms/gun control, 522 on taxation, 445 on ‘government investigations,’ and zero on job creation." http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/25/facebook-posts/blog-post-says-gop-has-sponsored-zero-job-creation/
and actually STOPs signing pledges to NOT work with the President on anything.. we'll be able to move our country forward. Oh but that means they actually have to stop interfering with our civil rights.
No, that's not what happened with the housing market at all. People that could not afford mortgages were given them anyway. Bankers were told to "make it happen". They handed out 3-1 or 5-1 ARM mortgages to people that didn't understand them and didn't care because all they thought was great, I get to buy a house. Well, in 3-5 years when all their mortgages came due the bottom dropped. That's what caused this mess. Unconventional mortgages given to people that couldn't afford them in the first place and did not undersand them. OR they thought they would turn around and sell. That didn't happen because everyone was trying to sell to get out of their own mess....too many houses on the market without the demand....hmmmmm. What do you think is going to happen?
Its about time, Bush added about 5 trillion in 8 years, the cost of wars and TARP on top of an average ~350 billion dollar deficit.
0bama managed to add 5 trillion in less than 4 years.
If you want to say that government spending is good for the country then wouldn't you also have to say that the Bush spending was good for the economy? I personally say it was bad.
Big problem we are facing: a REPUBLIC, in which we are, is there to protect our God given rights....and thats it. When government starts interfering too much in our everyday lives, ie welfare, food stamps, healthcare etc....well there just isn't enough money to go around and pay for all this....which is why we are in the situation we are in. A republic was not built on the ideology that the federal government takes care of you. That is YOUR responsibiltiy and yours alone. A rebublic will take make laws and defend your basic needs as a person ie. safety. Look it up. WAtch the youtube video that distinguishes this (10 mins). Republic vs democracy.
Bet you all can learn alot and will probably scare you a little. It did me.

elliot - your figures are not even close - but you know that!
About extending unemployment benifits, it is a great way to stimulate the economy. In fact it does far more than tax cuts for the aristocracy. These numbers don't lie.
"Where Are The Jobs?" The GOP Blocked Them | Political Correction
Seeking, why don't you tally up the cost of these so called "jobs" bills and see where our debt would be if they had passed. Those were not "jobs" bills, they were miniature stimulus spending bills.
A "jobs" bill doesn't have to cost a damn thing, all you have to do is remove barriers for entry into our economy. Why is it so damn hard and expensive to run a business or expand a business here?
It's free to cut regulation that hurts business.
Where are all of those jobs bills? Sittong on Boner's desk.
Oh, and some people like to be able to breathe the air and drink the water.
In 400+ days the GOP created 0 jobs and tried To Kill 7.4 Million Jobs
SeekingSanity, I know my numbers aren't exact but they are damn close. So I invite you to correct them for me.
Now comes the ho-hum of trying to tack everything under the sun to the fiscal cliff.... This is why we are in such deep sh1t, because ALL of congress is corrupt. Looks like the Dems want to make sure we sail over the cliff by adding more in order to strike a deal. I will p1ss the liberals off by calling it what it is (obstruction) by the party of no and it's my way or you get the blame. Happy flying to all!
What everyone needs to understand is this..ALL of our elected or most of them except maybe some of the newbe's are millionaires...who really have no idea what it is like to have to actually work for a living. None of them in congress are concerned that it is they who are ruining this nation while backing their many other millionaire friends. Check out the amount of money being handed to those of congress to get them to pay particular attention to any and all banking resolutions that might effect them in any way and stop them from doing what they did 4 or so years ago ...which put this nation where it is today. Donations to elections, bribe money...whatever you want to call it... is not in the favor of this nation or its people.
Elliott,
The President told us that TARP made money (not true) so you are counting the money spent ($700 billion) to Bush but the money received ($650 billion) to Obama which is not accurate math.
labor dept. just adjusted the October un-employment figures , it was really 8.3% un-employed(had to get it under 8% for the election)
ItsAboutTime-3704531
Did you realize you "cited" your zero GOP jobs bills with a politifact article that called that specific claim "pants on fire" rating?
Utterly hilarious. Further proof the left does nothing but repeat partisan talking points.
Hey, markinbecker
It's Henry 'Hank' Paulson.
Ironic that unemployment has done a major jump after elections... makes you wonder how the government got it so low so fast before elections.
Maybe if everything that you libs say that obama did so good, we wouldn't have be talking about extending unemployment.
Unemployment = the new 'entitlement' welfare program.
most of us already lost our unemployment over the last 3 or 4 months!!!
After applying for well over 300 jobs since then and losing the vehicle, the place where I stayed and the rest of what I considered important I have no faith in this society.
What I do have faith in is the real!!!!
Which is the fact that this society needs to be based on more than just capitalism & money that is only going to large corporation and the "GOOD OL BOYS."
What we need is Land to farm for ourselves in order to become self sufficient.
We need Programs and a healthy mix of money.
A society only based on money will never continue to workout for us.
We want the ability to educate ourselves with our land.
We can make our own green energy to produce electricity and build our own means of transportation.
But, so, many have been dumbed down and made dependent on false hopes that we can no longer continue on the path that we are on.
People are not smart enough.
I mean even some of the names on here are dumbed down like "BREADEX & BOBSTER"!!!
Who the heck names themselves this.
It just shows you the idiot state of mind that many have and they don't even know they are ignorant.
I mean with names like that you can't have an education nor a high school diploma.
We have to began thinking logically and take things step by step because I would hate to see others beginning to come up with crazy a$$ names like that and to see others with that type of mentality.
PLAYA
If I get laid off I'm gonna riiiide that gravy train until I HAVE to get off...Gimme mah muny!
So peel...You want Communism....Cool to know...
Peel,
I'm sorry. I call BS on your story. If you've applied for over 300 jobs and can't find one, the problem is with you.
His application to NASA was turned down again. Jerk...
elliot-3020456
Why did Bush add to the deficit at all? If our economy was doing so great, was there a need to take out a 5 BILLION deficit? How did we pay fo the two wars that he started? WHy did the GOP vote 19 TIMES to raise the debt ceiling?? Hmmm... you say Obama added 5 trillion in 5 years but completely IGNORE the 11 TRILLION that was passed to Obama from Bush? Is it okay for one party to deficit spend but not the other?
Also, let's remember.. Article 1 Section 8.. WHO is responsible for spending? Congress, and shouldn't Congress, (both parties) be held accountable here? Both parties are responsible and both parties have to pony up to cut spending all across the board.
You ignorant serf, Clinton left about 5.5 trillion in debt after 8 years, Bush left about 11 trillion after 8 years, and 0bitchboy is at 16.4 in less than 4 years.
I dont see anyone saying how great our economy was doing under Bush, It was actually pretty rough after the .com crash, 9/11 and the housing/banking collapse. But it was manageable, we still had a decent GDP growth rate and were expanding our economy till 2007.
I am not ignoring any spending as you can clearly see in my post that you quoted but seem to have not read.
To answer your question why did bush add to the debt, I explained that, war and TARP mostly.
Why did the GOP raise the debt ceiling? To pay for war. The cost of the wars was added to the debt as money was spent, thus requiring several increases of the debt ceiling.
You have a serious reading and comprehension problem.
Well, Republicans would have us cheer the 'global marketplace' - so are our unemployed supposed to work for much less, and have lower standards of living, to 'compete' with, say, our "ally" China?
Maybe the benefits should stop. Maybe then angry consumers will start asking some real questions instead of 'where's my handout?'
Where did your jobs go? Where did the money go?
Hint: not here, and not to the bottom 99%.
Why do you suppose that is? And will your sky-fairy help?
elliot-3020456
First, childish insults and name calling, would actually mean something, if I respected your opinion. Next, I do not have a 'serious reading and comprehension problem'. Why? I don't read all of your comments, and why? Because most of it is nothing but drivel, followed up with serious whining, complaining, and blaming. Which generally, shows just how childish someone can be. You 'defend' bushes spending, but not his failed track record nor acknowledge the damage that BUSH did to the country.
If you are so "FOCUSED on deficit spending, why don't you share with us from your vast economic experience, exactly what President Obama should have done to "PREVENT' the deficit spending.
P.S. You might also try to USE other sources other than the Faux News Department of Ministry.
Read my post #1.48 again, I did acknowledge the bad economy during Bush.
Again, reading and comprehension.
If 0bama wants to cut the deficit as he promised, he will need to return to 07 spending levels and remove burdens on American business. This will allow the economy to grow at a rate that will increase revenues to where we can cover our spending and eventually chip away at our debt.
There we go again with the Fox news line. I remind you, this is NBC, not Fox.
Mr. Schumer, you want to pay people for 99 weeks not to work. I'm confused. Would you please explain to me how that is an incentive to find a job. I'm sure it's me, but I'm missing it.
Harbinger-2218646
Inflation is
nota huge danger, interest ratesare essentially zerowill skyrocket when the markets find out we can't pay our debts, and unemploymentiswill go higher when the debt bomb blows up. Unemployment will skyrocket when the economy implodes under the weight of unserviceable debt. See Greece and Spain.It's a perfect time to
borrow in the short term to do badly needed infrastructure projects,stop the madness of record deficit spending and get this economy going again!There. Fixed it for ya Harbinger. Let Obama go over the clif. He'll go down in history as the president that killed the economy, like Herbert Hoover. Nobody will ever remeber who Boehner or any GOP House Rep. was in 40 years.
Blame the unemployed poor for not being able to find a job?
Real classy of you, real classy.
No, we're blaming the government for incentivizing people not to get a job.
The best encouragement to get a job is to miss a few meals.
Assistance weakens, adversity strengthens.
elliot-3020456
First, It's PRESIDENT Obama not 0bama. When did people in this country stop respecting our president? Oh wait, another sign of acting like a child. When President BUSH went around the country to 'sell his ideas', was that a popularity stunt, or acting like a President? Seems to me, (as you righties are always doing) is President Obama is held to a higher standard than your own potus. But then again, that's the influence of "the department of ministry" Faux News.
Yes, reading with comprehension. Please think about every comment you make on the newsvine. Seems to me, (as I have glanced at them), they are still FILLED with whining, blaming, and complaining. #1.18 - That one alone is a pure example of it. 1.55 - - Blaming again much?
Oh yes, 2007 level of spending. Does this include two more foreign wars on the backs of the American People? How about the continued loss of revenue by keeping the corporate tax cut for companies that SHIFT jobs overseas. What 'burdens' should be removed off American Businesses? Does this mean we can STRIP away the corporate welfare subsidies?
OK...RIGHTON...we should tax the top 2% at 105% of thier earnings to pay for these people that can't work because Obama hasn't created ANY jobs for 5 years!!!
TAX EM BABY.....!!!
Yes my petulant little child, it would include the two wars that gave us a annual spending deficit around 350 billion dollars (as opposed to your 0bitchboys 1 trillion+ deficits).
There is and never was a tax deduction for companies to outsource. A company may save money by outsourcing but the government will not lose revenue. The government actually stands a chance of increasing revenue when companies shed their inefficiencies and become more profitable (taxable).
Throw a stick in your house and you are bound to hit two or three items that that could be made more efficiently if they didn't have the government trying to wring avery cent out of a business.
And yes we should not allow any business to receive special treatment. They should all be allowed to take the same deductions on operating cost or none of them should. I am anti protectionism, pro free market.
I'm done with you, go relearn everything you think you know.
Calling for stimulus, Democrats cite 'real cliff' if jobless benefits aren't extended
Yet, Obama is ready to let us simply go over the falls if the dems don't get their way. So the gop is the only ones to blame? Everyone's got their arms folded on this one and it is We, the Taxpayer who is set for the worst. Think we've seen a recession come & go... 'aint seen nothin' yet!
This whole made-up cliff crap is COMPLETELY on Bozobama; he wanted it, he wants to go over it, have all the cuts and tax increases happen, then he can try to play saviorbozo and propose tax cuts, reinstating the Bush tax cuts, and he THINKS he'll get credit for it? The Bozobama has had one too many beer suumits. This fool is nothing but a TAX, TAX, TAX, then spend, spend, spend nutcase and we'd better find a way to shut his ignorant tail down before our grandkids are as broke as Bozobama has left us.
you seem to be overwhelmed with hatred. bozobama????????it's people like you who have and are trying to destroy our country. Fool?????you are the FOOL, fool..........He's done more for the working middle class than bush , his father and reagan ever did. It's all their faults that we are in this mess. Bush had a surplus and couldn't wait to spend it on his wealthy friends. And then when the surplus dried up he kept right on spending with his second tax cut for the wealthy, 2 false wars and dingbat prescription plan that leaves seniors in a hole for their medication. Obama will go down in history as one of the greatest presidents this country has ever had. They should built a statue of him and place it next to Lincolns.
So the solution is print/borrow more money? I was going to take an active interest in the 'fiscal cliff' type of seeds, but looking at the EU and human nature, as well as America's own track record, we will eventually borrow ourselves into oblivion.
You fools think government is free for "you" and other people pay for it.
Keep voting that way. Watch that debt climb.
The last thing Obama wants is for the Republicans to give him what he is demanding in the fiscal cliff negotiations. Which is why negotiating with Obama has become a moving target. Obama moved the goalpost during the debt ceiling talks, otherwise he would have had the deal he was seeking at the time. No this is all about destroying the Republican party by blaming them for not being able to keep pace with the demands that are on the table now. I mean now. Wait now. When you have a president that is now demanding no limit to the nations credit card, only a fool can believe he is serious about the financial health of the nation. The real dilemma facing Republicans in these fiscal cliff negotiations is that you can only take Obama at his word until he gets the deal he wants. Anything Obama promises to do after the deal, is forgotten the second an agreement gets signed.
Funny....the exact same ideas that didn't work in Obama's first term are being thrown out again.
Blaming the bankers for people taking out loans they shouldn't have. Blaming bankers because they expect to get paid for money that they lent to people. Blaming bankers for people running up their credit cards buying useless junk.
Payroll tax cut, the stupid idea of Obama that further damaged social security.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Here is out of the box thinking....Spend less than you earn, save for a rainy day, save for retirement, stop expecting govt to "give" you anything and take care of yourselves. The govt can not give anyone anything until it steals it from someone else.
What? 2 years of unemployment checks are not enough??
Many of those who are chronically receiving unemploymnent checks don't want to work because they do better with government handouts.
...and if they are so worried about the "fiscal cliff" why is the president going on vacation for what is essentially the remainder of the negotiation timeframe???
What time frame? You have what, 4 days left to do something? you republicons can't tie your shoes in 4 days. You are going off the cliff.
Reid and Pelosi have their plans in hand and are just waiting for January 1st. President Obama has pen in hand and is waiting for you to come to him.
Checkmate.
Jobless benefits pays 52 weeks.?? And this regime wants to increase that?? Where will the funds come from???
No worries the, federal boys checks will be there at the end of the month, and their vacation time will not be effected.
Time for the tax payer funded Hawaiian (money is no object) Christmas vacation.
Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. ~Thomas Jefferson~
Iwonder,
Actually many of us have missed more than a few meals.
I have been working since the age of seven until this recent recession and i continue to aggressively look for work as well as attend grad school for a masters in project mgt.
So, what you are saying is that we need to suffer in a capitalistic society that only cares about the bottom line.
Be grateful that you have lived a life that has allowed you an opportunity to survive because of the situations you were placed in.
The construction company that my dad owned went under because of the lowering of wages caused by saturation & corporate greed.
some things are beyond your control...
Peel Layer....
LOL!!!! Hilarious!
And yet you have the time and the money to have a computer and play like a grownup. Get off your butt and get a job. Going to school for a masters? LOL! College degrees are a dime a dozen. You were taken in by the Collegiate Educational Industrial Complex and you don't even know it! LOL!
LOL!!!! Hilarious!
And yet you have the time and the money to have a computer and play like a grownup. Get off your butt and get a job. Going to school for a masters? LOL! College degrees are a dime a dozen. You were taken in by the Collegiate Educational Industrial Complex and you don't even know it! LOL!
MSNBC reports that unemployment is at a 4 year low....Why would liberals want to extend unemployment benefits?
Doesn't make since with unemployment dropping.
I had several friends(some were staunch repubs) that got their unemployemt for as long as they could and laughed about it. THey had no intention of getting a job. How about they put people to work and then pay them instead of just giving out a check? I think, as a democrat, that the end has to come. 99 weeks is a long time to get a check and not be able to find some work.
svenolafson
when every one has a degree they don't think maybe their aren't enough jobs for so many degrees. I agree the ceic makes alot of money pushing degrees. then once you get a degree you naturally want more money. so some say i'm to educated for that job and will wait for one to come along. not saying all are like that but have heard alot of people say that. thing is when unemployment ran out they got a job by not being picky and even at min wage.
Yep, we should not have to "pay" for handing out unemployment insurance, but WE can certainly raid Social Security for our Progressive agenda.
Mrs. Peloski....time for you to retire.
Harbinger
The measure of inflation is jaded at best. Inflation is measured on sizes, not cost per ounce, pound, or gallon. Manufacturers have shrunk what a standard size is.
Example. A standard size of potato chips years ago was 1 pound. Under Carter that became 14 Oz. it slid to 12 oz 3 years ago. Today, that standard size of potato chips is between 10 & 10 3/4 oz. Three years ago I could get the 12 oz potato chip bag for $.99. Today that bag of chips is now $1.59.
Ice cream used to come as a 1 gallon unit. Today that 1 gallon unit is 3.75 Quarts.
1 pound butter tubs used to be 16 oz, and they are no only 15 oz.
This is all inflation that you don't see unless you are the one doing the grocery shopping or cooking and your recipe calls for one full pound.
This isn't greedy manufacturers, but instead it is manufacturers trying to keep the price of products at a price range that they know from marketing people will buy.
ddw1946.
This depends upon what you do, your qualifications, age, and years of experience. 1/3 of the unemployed and under employed are people with advanced degrees. It is a employers market for those folks. Those with the most experience have the hardest time getting a job for someone because most ownership is willing to accept less experienced people to fill the job at a lower wage. I know people who "dumb down" their resume's to get other jobs because the last thing an employer is going to do is hire someone who is overqualified.
John in Battle Creek
Barney Frank was running around from 2003 - 2009 saying nothing was wrong, even though in 2003 there were a number of regulators talking to the committes he sat on and chaired telling the committees that loans were going places that they could not track because they had no authority to do so.
Barney Frank, Senator Dodd, and Charley Rangle basically told them to shut up or they will investigate the regulators.
Dude, the were tons of Youtube videos on this.
Lib 50
The last time austerity and tax increases were mandated by congress was in 1919. The 1919 budget was written and passed in 1918 by democrats. The budget was $18.5 Billion up from $12 Billion the previous year. 1919 was also the 4th year in a row of huge budget increases and 20+% increase in tax rates.
People voted to make the republicans in charge of the house. The republicans cut the budget from $18.5 Billion to $6.6 Billion for 1920, but allowed taxes to increase 20% for the fifth year in a row.
The result was unemployment jumping from 4.9% to 9.5% in 12 months. Republicans continued in 1921 to cut the budget by about 20%, but also cut tax rates by about 20%. The same was true for 1922 & 1923. By 1923, unemployment had returned to 4.9% and was the beginning of the "roaring 20's".
Lib, it is the overspending and overtaxing that is the problem, not austerity.
jerrry L #1.37
Jerry the first tarp money was returned with interest. The interest was enough to pay for funds that they do not believe will ever be returned.
Also, TARP was a $700 Billion proposal in which only $465 Billion were every used. Over half of that lent has been returned.
So the politicians are telling us that if we don't spend a lot more debt money on extending unemployment benefits that we'll really feel the effects of overspending using debt money. Pretty amazing isn't it?
Lets go down this path a bit. We are currently closing on the self imposed fiscal cliff- a deadline that if the "Super Committee" couldn't learn to talk and figure out a bipartisan method to control national spending/debt that we'd implement a number of austerity cuts in federal spending (that no politician really wants- bad for getting votes) and the deaths of a series of tax breaks and increases that would further pinch their voters. Well, they couldn't get that talking thing going and here we are. Not only that but the same Congress has also recently said that they have no plans on making a federal budget (yet again their job and haven't had one for 4 years) because they have to focus on federal spending and the fiscal cliff(kind of go hand in hand, don't they?). Now the President is going on campaign styled press tours blaming the Republicans and Congressional democrats are demanding that the Republicans give them what they they want because they have a mandate. The Republicans in response are not engaging the press (or getting limited time on the air) and making their case for why they can't come to agreement. So we are back to "nothing is better then something" politics, spending money because we've got a spending problem, and "it's them not us" blaming.
Cutting to the chase- It's all of our problems and we have to face the fact that our country is so overextended that if we eat the rich it'll only pay our governmental costs for about 3 month, if we don't cut everything from the military(automatic annual increases to their budget- just cutting those alone would make a dent) to foreign aid, to cutting and restructuring our government programs (looong list) we are going to debase the dollar and no one is going to invest in the US. Yay, unemployment is down- guess what it's the holidays, the number of employed is further contracting, and people are not looking/falling off the back end. It's only a tidy number if you exclude all of the realities around it. The politicians only pushed the gas while driving towards the wall and now that we are in sight of the wall they are advocating pushing the gas harder. Brilliant!
Peel-Layer
I've interviewed at dozens of places only to find out they winner was always someone with less experience.
I'm a design professional. I get to see people making decisions to invest. The problem isn't that they don't want to invest in to expand (capitalism at work), it is that can no longer make the numbers work well enough to ensure they can pay their employees and benefits and still make a profit. The reason the numbers don't work is because we are experiencing a 2% growth in GDP and expecting expenses to increase in energy, regulations, the ACA. This is a result of over-regulating capitalism.
The company I consult with has been unable to get signed contracts for two apartment complexes and do not have enough work to keep themselves busy. If they cannot get contracts signed, I do not have work. I'm running out of ways to stay ahead of the bills myself whether it is odd jobs, or some kind of part time employment.
Krussk
In a historical sense we are similar to 1919 & 1920. We are looking at a spending cut of only 3% and a tax increase of 38%. Back in 1920 there was a 60% decrease in budget and a 20% increase in taxes. The results was an increase in unemployment from 4.9% to 9.5%.
miklkit
The Republicans choices from the democrats are increase some taxes with no real cuts to spending (other than defences) or increase taxes drastically with no real spending cuts. Either plan is a loser for Americans.
If I thought Americans would learn their lesson about democrats, I'd say Republicans walk away and let the cliff happen. The trouble is that Americans have been so indoctrinated into the marxist theme that the rich have stolen, they probably won't anything regardless of the results.
These jobless benefits have been extended for so long that they really aren't jobless benefits anymore but just another form of welfare, and as such only serve to discourage people from looking for work.
This is the insidious nature of entitlements as they destroy any initiative and self respect and induce people to become completely dependant of the state for their existence.
Yes, this is the new America. An America where people are all too willing to live on government entitlements while thinking they have anything resembling dignity and self respect. Yes, this is obama's America.
The democrats are indeed correct about a stimulus. This has been, and continues to be a long, costly, and very tiring recession, or, as I see it, depression. The country cannot continue with austere measures, which in reality, only serve to maintain the depressed economic state of the country, while waiting for the natural recuperative powers, ie., obsolescence, decay, use, etc. to eat away the existing stock of buildings, machines etc. to create the demand required for full employment. The country will never get there depending on such a way. Schumer, Coons, and Reid are all correct in their analysis. All spending indeed is not created equal as Mr. Coons said. The Country desperately needs an overwhelming spending stimulus directed to the countries overall infrastructure. Roads, bridges, power grids, water and sewer systems, and a myriad of others. Here, I do not mean tax credits to states. I do mean good wages and benefits paid to millions of workers, and businesses to perform the work. The country will gain incalcuable value, and the great American capitalistic system will again become super charged. Once these are accomplished and in place, then, through the federal reserve, some modest amount of inflation can be infused into the currency which will quickly begin to repay these costs, the debt, and fashion good management of future spending that helps keep low deficits. This works. This is needed. Those in power need to pay no attention to those politically inspired economists, who say otherwise. History proves this proposition. There is much power in relief. Let us get about doing It. I caution too; however large the required amount is, we must go even larger. Problem with the "recovery act" was; it was waaay too small, and most of it was directed to the states. While it did help, let us not make such a failing error again.
Deleted - wrong group
Extending unemployment benefits is a stimulus? Did a human being with, I hope, an IQ at least 10 points above a turnip ACTUALLY say that??
Let me tell you why that argument doesn't fly:
1) If it WERE true then why don't we just give EVERYBODY $50,000 and tell them to go spend it!! Just IMAGINE how much THAT will grow the economy!! But one major problem: We don't have the money. Even extending the unemployment benefits require us BORROWING the money. The borrowed money creates an equal offset in the economy. So, in summary, borrowing money to extend unemployment benefits has ZERO effect on the economy.
Now, in fairness, that is not to say we don't try to help those unemployed but what we do is for ASSISTANCE and not for economic effect. But how we assist the unemployed I will leave for another discussion, however, the BEST thing to help those unemployed is to create a business climate of expansion which leads to hiring. What this administration is doing is the complete opposite and is actually DAMAGING the economy (as proven by a lackluster GDP growth and an even worse Employment Situation Report that came out today).
2) If we extended unemployment benefits and actually DID have the money then THAT would be a "stimulus" but, at the same time, we have increased the costs of business with ObamaCare, new regulations, and new taxes not to mention a desire to increase INCOME taxes as well. You CAN'T pay money out as unemployment benefits (even if you had the money) THEN raise taxes even more than the amount of the benefits and expect something good to happen. The net result is economic decline - not stimulus.
Of course trying to explain economics to a liberal is like trying to teach a goldfish to balance a beach ball on its nose. Just can't happen.
True security is found in self-employment, not living off the scraps the producers provide. 99 weeks of unemployment? What do you think is the result of paying someone that long not to work? It certainly is not an incentive to find it.
"In the past, economists observed that a large fraction of unemployed people suddenly started working again within a week or so of their exhaustion date, despite having been without work for so many weeks prior: evidence that the benefits themselves were sustaining unemployment."- Casey Mulligan, University of Chicago economics professor, 2010
Nuff said?
One news organization did some of their own research so they sent some of their interns into an unemployment office in New York, where they were quickly told "There aren't any jobs" and given forms and instructions to sign up for government unemployment benefits. They left the office and then went out looking for jobs, and within a few block radius of the unemployment office, found over SEVENTY job openings! The conclusion? The unemployment office is much more about signing people up for benefits than about helping anyone find work.
In the same report, they talked to people who hadn't worked or even looked for work in years. Why should they? We give them food, housing, healthcare, and even a cell phone to do nothing. How about we supplement low paying jobs so they pay better for those who take them instead of just giving money to those who do nothing? Also, without the hundreds of thousands of illegals here, there would be LOTS of roofing, landscaping, housekeeping, etc jobs.
Eliot,
because you come from Fox/Rush to spread the crap you get from there, here. People are tired of having to disprove the Fox/Rush litany of lies time and time again.
Pro,
The stimulus halted our bleeding of jobs. Many economists say that the stimulus was not big enough to stop the recession but it was big enough to stop us from slipping further into depression. With a bigger stimulus we may have seen some positive growth in 2010 or 2011 and it may have continued to grow throughout this year.
Well Chuck, what is it worth to you?? How do you fund this?? Where does the additional money come from? What happened to the cuts you were supposed to make?? What about the Doc fix?? I'm sure you need that too. What about the AMT?? If you don't fix that then you will really screw the middle class. Then of course you'll want to continue the payroll tax cut. Is that free??
Yes elections have consequences and the consequence of this past one was keeping a president who has no plan other than raising taxes on the 2% which will not even pay for one of these must haves!!
I suggest you attack this as a whole and not piecemeal and come back when you are ready to talk real tax and spending reforms and not when you want to drop another shoe. Just my opinion.
couldn't agree more.
GOP has no plan other than 'cutting taxes.'
Bush cut taxes for the rich to bring on the Greatest Recession since the 1930s. Adter destroying the US and world economy, the GOP still wants to cut more taxes. After people said 'NO' to tax-cutting Mitt, you still want to cut taxes.
.
Are the RepubliCONs suffering from poverty of ideas?
We borrow it.
We need stimulus now, and once we get the economy going again, then we can deal with the debt.
Otherwise, the economy will continue to limp.
Pig are supposed to be smart?? The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time: The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH Remember the day... January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy. And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush.. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets. And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th."
Pigotry,
There is a falsehood thought out there that the only people who benefited by the bush tax cuts were the rich but that just is not true, 75% of the cuts went to the poor and middle class. The child deduction was raised, the AMT was put in, rates were lowered, etc.
oreo - the Democrats had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate for a scant 44 days of President Obama's administration.
Bush put two wars on the credit card - not on the books. Bush did NOTHING to stop Fannie and Freddie - you're not even close to truthful. And, the debacle started before Clinton - but of course you'd forget that!
Harbinger-
Give us the money now, we will figure out how to pay it back later...so it was really the democrats who caused the housing bubble (give me the house today, and even though I cant afford it I will figure it out tomorrow), institutionalized by some cartoon guys, (I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a cheeseburger today...sounds an awful lot like what you just said)
Problem with you and 'ol Chucky's plan is you guys never come back with the dustpan to fix address the debt...you just raise taxes to cover the last loan...havent you ever heard of a pyramid scheme? That's this shuck and jive scam you guys are trying to pull again, while Barry pawns it off on, "To implement a realignment of the system..."
In banking terminology, the Liberal plan is nothing more than a check kiting scam....love it :(
Knew it, your tax and spend mentality just caught up with all of us...you're irrelevant in this discussion now. Click.
The best examples of how a stimulus works are the New Deal and the interstate highway program. Both worked.
The New Deal was coupled with tax increases on the rich and it produced 9% economic growth for years. That money was paid back in higher tax revenues later on.
Examples of bad stimulus programs are Reagan's military buildup. As soon as it ended the economy tanked because it was an empty stimulus that did not produce private sector jobs. That goes for the bush/cheney stimulus too. Thoase wars did nothing for the economy.
David Sirota: FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really? - Truthdig
miklkit, you are conveniently not acknowledging that much of the industrialized world was destroyed during those economic gains. That is the primary reason for growth, not the new deal. The New Deal was in the midst of the longest recession in American history. Obama is in the 2nd longest recovery in history.
Amazing how the left always forgets that half of Europe's/Russia's manufacturing was destroyed in WW2.
jerry -
The old CRA nonsense about "forcing" the banks to make loans has been discredited more times than I can count. First of all, if the government had the ability to "force" banks to make loans, why are they not doing it now??? If banks were lending, our economy would be on track. Did that ability expire or something?
Banks had simply run out of the market for good mortgages. What did they do? They created a new market for subprime loans. It was simple, old-fashioned greed that drove this, not some noble but misguided government policy. That was coupled with Greenspan refusing to regulate derivatives, so banks could bundle good and (mostly) bad mortgages, sell them as derivatives, take the profit, and let someone else worry about what happened when the loans went bad.
Irresponsible bankers, total lack of any meaningful regulation or oversight, along with plenty of suckers to take out the loans, and more suckers to insure them (AIG is still broke) were the causes, as with the Savings and Loan debacle under Reagan that was a dress rehearsal for this one.
Funny but the military found the money to start three new class of carriers over the next years. Cut back the entire military thirty percent and you have your savings.
They are paid to Look For Work. It's really sad that some people will take advantage and try to find ways to game the system to keep their benifits without actually looking for work. I know some of these people, and let them know that they are only hurting themselves. UE benefits are not nearly as much as a paycheck.
The other problem with the last stimulus is that Banks used to money to help other corporations, and not the average Joe.
During the Bush years, corporations got a lot of what they wanted, i.e. tax cuts, labor rules changes, and etc... The problem is this didn't do anything to help the country or the economy. Instead, wages were cut, jobs were outsourced, and cut domestically.
I also don't know why people can't see this point; For the capitalist, high unemployment is a positive, because it lowers the cost of labor.
The Rich used our government to enrich themselves, and are still attempting to manipulate our political system to their advantage. I don't need an independent study to see what is happening outside my front door.
I'm all for extending the payroll tax holiday another year. I'm 46 and don't honestly believe I'll get full SS anyway so I can put that money to better use like paying down some more debt and investing the rest.
scalzo -
WRONG! The entire DOD gets less than 20% of the annual budget and it is mandated by the Constitution as a required duty of the federal governmnet. As we currently borrow about 40% of the budget it will not cover the deficit spending currently taking place.
Entitlement spending amounts to 60% of the annual budget and it is not a Constitutionally mandated function of the federal government. I know it includes Medicare and Social Security, so we can't cut it in its entirety, but it definitely needs to be cut back as it is the primary reason that our budgets are running yearly deficits.
So sorry you are so brainwashed that you are unable to see the truth.
@Tammy, Would you like to cut Medicare and SS in it's entirety? Or do you think the DOD could be reduced, taxes raised for the wealthy and a little increase in for the middle class to balance the budget and pay off the national debt? It was the Congress of the 70's and 80's that stole most of the SS money, IMO, and is their responsibility to fix it. Don't blame it on scalzo's comment.
You have to love the tenacity of liberals that can spew the same exaggerations over and over. Yeah, that 86 billion a year in tax cuts for the top earners drove this country into recession. Add on top of that the 68 billion per year in prescription drug benefits and liberals claim those are the two reasons the nation has a trillion dollar annual deficit. Of course the two wars that cost 120 billion a year will get tossed in during the next liberal rebuttal. Liberals actually believe that despite the fact the government claims that during Bush's final two years he ran a 460 billion dollar deficit, liberals claim that was under reported. A liberal doesn't exist that believes for one second that the reason for Obama's trillion plus in annual deficits is because he came into office and increased spending. But I guess when Obama can fool liberals into believing that raising 86 billion a year in taxes on the top earners is going to get this nations fiscal house in order, why be honest? Liberals didn't elect the smartest person to ever sit in the Oval Office, they elected someone that can fool them into believing he is.
@ Seeking Sanity
You're right. Start with Jimmy Carter
Jesswe-Az: Ummm, the New Deal and its 9% growth rate happened in the 1930s. That was well after WWI and before WWII. Everyone was building and competing.
The principles are the same now as then. Prime the pump and let the people work their way out of the Depression into Recovery. Or you could kick them when they are down and send your money to the Cayman Islands and Swiss bank accounts.
seekingsanity
are you throwing facts out again that you get from dems- are- us without doing some research. obama wants america to go bankrupt just research his dealings with a.c.o.r.n. and their true aim for america. he will spend and borrow us into bankruptcy.
Pig,
The Clinton administration started the sub-prime mortgage mess which, in essence, began the recession.
Patiot Tom,
No, housing had been at a steady increase for quite some time. Politicians created the market. That is the whole point of the CRA. Politicians from both parties were campaigning on making home ownership for the low income possible. They were designing rules to prevent descrimination against low-income. That is what actually expanded the markets, not business.
Added to the Graham-Bliley-Leachy act was banking enforcement that allowed the federal government the power initiate investigations and prosecutions (previously someone had to file a complaint with the federal government) banks on the basis of
1) not having branches in low-income neighborhoods
2) not making enough loans to Low-income borrowers. This had already been a requirement since 1977, but now they could increase based on what regulators thought "enough" was.
3) Fed was also promising to buy back bad loans if they became too excessive.
Business isn't stupid, if the fed is going to encourage certain behaviors with polices, business is going to try to take advantage of it.
BTW: I know a couple who had a home mortage company. All they did was follow the rules. They lost their business when the market fell in.
Oreo
And the first order of business after their leadership was installed was table all bills on mortgage reform.
2009 was even more priceless. Pelosi got the rules change so that republicans could not introduce bills unless they had a democrat co-sponsor. Yup, and once that was shut off it was real easy to say that the republicans don't do anything because they couldn't.
@Harbinger- miklit: You are both correct. Don't let these dimwits dissuade you. From their arguments, they must have heard something about economics while watching a dog fight, sitting in someone else's turnip patch. Pitiful!
Funny before the election all the left said was unemployment was coming down now after the election they are starting to state more realistic stats.
Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats said, “Sometimes, maybe especially here inside the Beltway, we forget that this terrible, terrible recession continues in many, many parts of the country. While official unemployment is 7.9 percent real unemployment – counting those people who have given up looking for work and those people who are working 20 hours and they want to be working 40 hours – is closer to 15 percent.”
@Dan T-880865,
What's funny to me is that you're unable to see how recent events, i.e. Hurricane Sandy, have had an effect on unemployment.
The other thing Republicans are doing is just repeating how bad it is. What solutions do they have? Keep doing the same thing that contributed to the situation, and try to get people to forget?
In just the past 90 days the Obama administration has proposed over 5700 new regulations. The Obama administration is posting 68 new regulations per day as an average. In fact the Obama administration has added over 11,300 pages of new federal regulations since taking office. It has been estimated that the cost to taxpayers and businesses will be 1.8 trillion per year, and that number is expected to grow because much of the 2700 pages of ObamaCare have yet to be written. Obama is far more to blame for the high unemployment and lack of economic recovery then will probably ever be reported, at least while he is still in office. After Obama leaves office, historians will treat him very harshly, and only time will tell if liberals can ever see the truth.
Ayup! We are reinstating all of the regulations that bush/cheney removed. Some people like to breathe clean air and drink water that does not catch on fire. It is not just fracking either. I still remember the Cuyahoga river burning.
rick
I think he will get another nobel prize for doing what he did to get the first one. I'm not sure what that was but had to lessen the value of the prize now i don't think its a special award anymore but a joke
More clueless banter from liberals. Under Bush federal regulations grew by 4.4%, with an annual cost of compliance to the economy of 1.7 trillion. Obama increased federal regulation by 7.4% in just his first three years, with a vast majority of it still in unwritten form being both ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank. In 2009 alone Obama added 3.4% more federal regulations adding 5359 pages, the most added over the past decade. Despite what liberals suggest, Bush expanded government, and for some reason his conservative base gave him a pass. Unfortunately Obama hasn't just continued the expansion of government, he has taken it to a whole new level. The lack of fiscal sanity displayed by Bush it being trumped by Obama. Funny how liberals bash Bush, and yet Obama has expanded upon what he started, and now they applaud.
We don't have a debt crisis, we have a jobs crisis.
Until we start spending on infrastructure as well as jobless benefits, the economy will continue to limp.
The first stimulus helped. But we need to do it again.
Harbinger,
You say start spending but unemployment benefits have been 99 weeks for the last four years and are actually being reduced to 76 weeks so it is not starting.
On the stimulus yes putting $1 trillion into the economy helped but it did not create any long term effect and that is why GDP is not growing at a normal pace.
Wrong. The first stimulus prevented a real depression.
Stop watching FOX, and get on America's team for a change.
You cannot say it stopped a depression because we do not know what would have happened. We do know that GDP growth has gone down every year since the stimulus. In 2010 it was 3% and in 2011 it was 1.7% which is lower and means that no long term effect came from the stimulus.
I think if the stimulus was done for infrastructure it would have created a longer term effect but it went more as Union paybacks.
Because I look at the numbers and see the slowest recovery ever does not mean I am not rooting for the US, it means I do not think the current plan is working.
Harbinger, Stop watching msnbc. You are just mouthing what they said.
Harbinger - you're right on target. Spending on building our infrastructure would produce long term jobs which would, in turn, produce more jobs. It's how we get the economy going again and it has a win win effect. It is exactly what has worked in the past and our infrastructure is in desperate need of rebuilding.
And, EVERY well-known economist has stated that President Obama kept us from going into a Depression.
Harb-
The only people stimulus helped were union bosses and then maybe rank and file. Non-union workers didn't benefit in any sense od dimunitive recognizable scale of your favorite contributors.
Tell you what, Convince me..sell me your house and I will pay for it when I am ready to sell it to someone else...
The New Deal helped everyone including Unions. We are still reaping the benefits of the long term building that was done in the 1930s. Think of the Golden Gate Bridge and the Hoover Dam. There are other examples, like the series of dams that were built all along the Sierra Nevada that store water for crop irrigation in the summer. Those were just the programs done here. There was more done all over the country.
David Sirota: FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really? - Truthdig
Jerry, you may be right that you cannot prove what could have happened, but when it comes down to the wire, do you really want to think about what could have happened as a result? We were in a rapidly increasing downward spiral. The stimulus had an effect, definately not what was hoped for, but give what was happen, one that appears to be for the better. However economist back in 2009 were saying it was not going to be enough to get the economy back on track. No, more needs to be done yet, and what I find quite astounding is the right is resistant to infrastructure spending, in a time when our infrastructure is going down the crapper, especially since infrastructure has been show to be a very effective form of economic stimulus. Do we need unemployment benefits extended as well? Yes, and take it from me, its not great, depending on your expenses you may barely get enough to make it each month on, but it is better than nothing and with the state of the economomy, that many people losing that income would be detrimental(by the way I spent 7 months of this year on unemployment, it sucked, I got barely enough to cover my monthly bills, and I wanted to go back to work to get off of it, but I was glad to have it while job hunting)
Eric,
I agree with you that the stimulus was not spent well. I am a fiscal conservative who sees a tremendous need to infrastructure spending but much of it can be done as a public-private venture.
For example I live in Florida and we were awarded money for a high speed rail from Tampa to Miami. The Governor said no because of fear of operating costs and cost overruns. A private company offered to be responsible for those things and return a percentage of profits to the state. That is a plan that would work but the Governor still said no.
Ha Ha! I love how bad it sticks in the craw of libs that there is a conservative news outlet. Man they hate it. Good stuff. Keep it up, we feed on your liberal tears.
"HELPED"? How?
All those "SHOVEL READY" jobs?
1) Let Obama crash the train. Keep borrowing money until our credit is downgraded, AGAIN, and no one, including China, wants to buy our debt at a reasonable interest rate.
What the non-educated libtards don't understand is that will result in-literally- an overnight collapse of our financial infrastructure.
Then, they'll get what they've been asking for, just like a family that takes out ten credit cards and maxes them out with no possibility of paying them off...
"Borrow more NOW, we'll pay it back when things are better"...
REALLY? You must be one of those that actually believes things are going to get better...yeah, tomorrow they'll be better...
"RECOVERY SUMMER 2010"....
I'd be in favor of giving the idiot in the WH everything he wants- and then get out of the way and let him OWN it...except it will take us past the point of no return.
I can't allow that to happen for the sake of my children.
"BALANCED" MUST INCLUDE ENTITLEMENT REFORM- NOW- NOT "MAYBE NEXT YEAR"
Mike,
It helps because anytime you put $1 trillion into an economy you are going to have growth, the question is was the growth close to what it should have been and did it create long term effects and the answer is no.
Harbinger = @EdShultz
The first stimulus was nothing more than payola for government unions.
Obama's Plan: Hire two million teachers. If that doesn't work, then rinse and repeat.
The stimulus saved 2.9 Million jobs and it was not used that well. The CBO says so.
CBO:The Stimulus Saved Jobs » Politics Plus
harbinger
really we don't have a debt crises? thats like obama hiring lots of teachers and saying your taxes aren't paying for them.
A good argument can be made that additional government spending would boost the economy but it should be in infrastructure and other needed expenditures not in transfer payments.
I agree in part that government spending and infrastructure repairs are good ideas because they create jobs. However, what I saw happen in several states during the last stimulus was this: A construction project was awarded to a local contractor, who then hired a subcontractor to do the actual work. The subcontractor hired illegal aliens, who then sent half or more of their paychecks to their families south of the border, thus stimulating the economies of, say, Mexico and El Salvador, but not the U.S. economy. This doesn't create jobs for many Americans, nor does it get converted into the purchasing of goods and services here.
Robbie, your logic might have some merit but you take it to a catastrophic level not based in reality. For 2010 migrant remittances (the amount of money people you have migrated to the US send back to their home countries) totaled 43 billion dollars. That is a minuscule portion of the annual US gross domestic product of 15 trillion dollars (about 0.3%).
I've been out of work since January. My dad was dying of pancreatic cancer, and I had to stop working to help take care of him. You only get once chance to help someone during the end of their life journey. I'm glad I did it. It was priceless.
But the reality is that it cost me immensely in so many ways including financially. Here where I live, there's just an abysmal market place for professional Directors, which I've been for more than 20 years. I've gone through all my savings, my credit, which is now destroyed because I don't have the means to take care of my obligations.
I am on UI, and need those benefits to feed and care for my retired wife. I've applied for hundreds of jobs, and am willing to do anything. The lower end technical jobs which I can do in my sleep I don't get because I'm overqualified. and there's just no movement on professional jobs. So I depend on the little that UI gives me to stay afloat. NOt that I'm floating, more like a slow sinking. If Extended UI doesn't go through, I sink completely. And then you have someone for decades who contributed positively to the economy to become another statistic of the evaporating middle class.
So go ahead...call me a mooch. Call me a lazy bum. Call me a loser. But the reality is that my professional salary, taxed, has supported others in their time of need for decades. Now I'm in need. And if Extended UI goes, I'm gone.
I shall call you an excellent son!
I am so very sorry for the loss of your father, I know only too well what that is like. I am also very sorry that you are experiencing such hardships. Have faith. I believe that UI will be extended again. Is there any way that you can "dumb down" your resume so that you might have a better chance at the lower end technical jobs? Just a suggestion that I am sure you have probably already thought about.
I wish you well.
I'm sorry plenty of other people have taken care of their loved ones without quitting their jobs, you chose to quit your job so now pay the price for your poor decision!!! My father also died of pancreatic cancer but me and my sisters took care of him without quitting our jobs, as far as I'm concerned you shouldn't get UI you chose to be unemployed.
Thank you, AlaskaGirl. That really means a lot.
I regret the times I chose work over opportunities to be with my family. At work, I'm a work-a-holic. I generally try to show the CEO my dedication to him and work by my choice very long hours...sometimes 16 hours or so a day on a regular basis.
I'm glad I had a chance to support my dad. It really was priceless. I do try to keep my faith. I know it's just a matter of time before I reenter the workforce and continue on. I pray a lot and try so very hard to keep my faith that God will care for me and open windows of opportunities.
I hope one day, when I am passing, that the love I showed in caring for others during my life is met with love and support during my passing.
But until that time, I will continue to fight to re-enter the workfoce, and then continue to use those resources to care for my family and others. Greatest commandment to Love God, and Love one another. this world needs plenty of love today.
Thank you so very much for your well wishes! It is wonderful to know there's caring people like you out there!
I'm sorry your father died, but I think a person with any common sense would have figured out a way to keep his job and provide some level of care (what about your wife who is retired caring for him) rather than throwing everything away. Instead, you did something that you found to be priceless, but which had rather predictable disastrous consequences, and then you expect the rest of us to pay the costs for your priceless experience.
You sort of remind me of the woman who had cancer and after she was cured, cancelled her policy, only to have it return and then someone published a huge sob story about how we need Obamacare to prevent people from suffering natural consequences of their own poor decision making.
You are very welcome. For what it's worth I do wish you and yours a Merry Christmas and a joyful holiday season.
As for you, IOWARETIREE: I also wish you a happy holiday season, but shame, shame on you!
I feel no shame I to was with my father when he passed, but I didn't quit my job in order to be there for him!!!!
Gosh, it must just be wonderful to be you.
Please note the very dripping sarcasm.
I didn't figure your type would feel any shame, but I am ashamed for you.
Well AlaskaGirl you just keep on feeling sorry for Bubbawny, he made a choice and it was a bad choice, dying is part of living, if everyone quit their jobs to take care of a loved one that is dying we would be a country of unemployed!!!
I'm not so sure he needs to dumb down his resume, AlaskaGal. All he has to do is tell folks he quit his job in an economy like this, when he likely didn't have to, and not even McDonald's will think he is overqualified.
Not that I'm calling b.s.......BUT, if a person quits their job they aren't eligible for UI. Something tells me that Bubbawney was let go which made him eligible for UI and it just happened to coincide with his father's illness.
I am sure there is more to this story than is being told. However, I still feel for ya!
Rather than giving folks money for doing nothing, except being unemployed, if they are going to do something, why not do something that will actually create jobs? Teach a man to fish and all that.
That is just a pitiful remark. There are many unemployed people who search all day long for a job. I would not call that doing nothing. And, how you cannot know this, but those on unemployment aren't just being "given" money as you put it, those that work or before they lost their jobs paid into that fund every single time they received a pay check.
Yes, there are special re-training programs available through the unemployment system, and I would venture to say that many have taken advantage of those programs.
I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but your comment seems kind of harsh to me. I agree with you in part, though. During the great depression, FDR actually created a program for exactly this sector. It put the unemployed back to work repairing roads, building bridges, working in war factories, etc. For the life of me I cannot come up with the freakin name of the program! I'm sure you know what I am talking about. There has been much talk about recreating a program like that again. I think it's a great idea.
It's going to get alot worse when Obamacare kicks in!
Actually employers pay into unemployment funds, not the employees. Furthermore the contribution rates are set to fund a standard term of unemployment benefits, not never ending benefits, as democrats would like to see.
In case you've missed the last 6 years, we've been running trillion plus deficits. You simply can't keep spending money you don't have. You call my remark pitiful; however, I consider folks who are determined to mortgage the future of subsequent generations and saddle them with massive debt to fund an ever increasing level of handouts to be even more pitiful. Obama even talked about how wrong this was when campaigning for his first term. Unfortunately, he's not nearly as good of a leader as he is when it comes to giving speeches.
Maybe other states are different, but I just looked at my last pay stub and I do in fact pay into state UI.
No, we do not wish to see never ending UI benefits, but we also see that people still need help in a still improving, but slack economy, and our economy would be in much worse shape if we started kicking everyone off the rolls, who are putting their benefits back into the economy.
This is from Cornell Law.
"To support the unemployment compensation systems, a combination of federal and state taxes are levied upon EMPLOYERS. States base employer contributions on the amount of wages the employer has paid, the amount the employer havs contributed to the unemployment fund, and the amount that the discharged employees have been compensated from the fund. Any state tax imposed on employers (and certain credits on that tax) may be credited against the federal tax."
Employees do not contribute to it.
And liberals always find someone to help, AlaskaGirl. Once you do this, you'll think of another wonderful handout program that we have to have to "help" people. You'll never be done trying to "help" people. I agree it's good to help people (I give to united way and do other charitable things as well), but it's foolish to help folks with money you don't have. I would never put a contribution to the united way on a credit card, for example, much less one that is in the name of a child of mine.
Do you have something against children and the soon to be born? If not, why do you want to saddle them with debt so that you can "help" people? You're being kind with money that isn't yours? Is that kindness to you?
Yes employers pay which covers 13 weeks or so, the Federal Government has extended it to 99 weeks that the Federal Governments expense which is us the taxpayers.
Complain all you want, but extended unemployment benefits gives us the most bang for our buck for stimulating the economy, while tax cuts are the least effective solution.
"Where Are The Jobs?" The GOP Blocked Them | Political Correction
OK folks... let's have some facts here. Employees, along with their employers pay into UI (employers pay a higher % and pay all year). Employees pay a small percentage for the first six months of the year -- so if you look at a current paystub you won't see it. States cover the first 26 weeks (Tier 1). Tiers II, III and IV were created when the recession continued to expand and affect millions of more unemployed. Tier IV has been cancelled by the Federal goverment when states unemployment dropped to specific percentages. Here in Nevada, it was cancelled once we dropped below 12%. So, 76 weeks is now the max.
The recession affected both my husband and I. I was out for 19 months, then back to work for all of 10 months when my husband lost his -- and he's still unemployed, 27 months and counting. UI made all the world of difference between going through our savings, or through personal austerity break even. Neither of us are lazy, took the money and played 'retired'. We both spend/spent 8+ hours/7 days a week looking for work, networking, joined web sites like LinkedIn, re-educated. Las Vegas was ground zero -- first in and will be last out of the recession. Hubby was in the construction industry (materials purchasing) which is barely recovering here. Casinos won't hire him because he doesn't have casino experience. He's seeing mjore activity, but just can't get past that hiring line. Oh, he's 55 -- in a town that worships age, that doesn't help either. or, he's overqualified. It's like a dog chasing his tail.
Yes, UI needs to continue for Tiers II and III until the economy spicks up more steam. Unless you want more people to go on welfare and food stamps... those other horrible 'entitlements' that keep roofs over heads and food in their stomachs.
Thanks for the info, Vegas. For all the morons out there, my latest pay stub dated 11.30 shows that money towards Unemployment fund was deducted from my gross wages, as it is every single time I get paid, which is twice monthly. And yes, I am aware that employers put into the fund as well.
AlaskaGirl, not all states us morons live in have UI tax; it's something the employer pays which is why the employer has to certify the reason an employee is not longer with a company.
Vegas, I fully believed ya'll busted your butts looking for work, but please don't insult our intelligence by saying you spent 56 hrs a week looking for work.
And while I appreciate tales of woe, my brother was unemployed and since his ex-wife decided to divorce him because he was unemployed he was paying child support for 4 children from guess what, his unemployment even though she has a 6 figure job. Everybody feels the pain.
Three states: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Alaska, have UI deductions from employees paychecks. NC Yankee, your Cornell Law quote is off the mark, as I also pay into unemployment insurance, as well as my wife. We live in PA, and it's on both of our paystubs every week.
vegas
so wouldn't welfare/food stamps be coming from the same place as ui since the extension would be borrowed money. it might be tougher to live comfortably but it is doable. is doable a word ha ha
oreo
wonder if peelosi read it since it was passed? i don't consider myself dem or repub. if its a good idea and is fair to everyone and will pay for itself I don't care what party came up with it. so far all i've seen are bills that require more borrowed money. when the gov. starts financing the country with borrowed money it will never pay for itself. like a wheel we will need to borrow more money to pay the first loan and so on. oh yea the hcb will hit the middle class and so what, its to late now
We have to spend more now righties. Calm down, take a deep breath, exhale, ok. Now, I know that you are totally convinced that this is the wrong thing to do, but it isn't. It is the right thing to do but you are just too stupid to understand this. Running a country is not like running a household. Okay, now go completely bananas if you must...
Leroy - you are too stupid to understand the difference between "The Right Thing" and economics. Moron.
I get it.. sort of like fathering a bunch of children and then walking away isn't a bad thing to do. It keeps domestic violence down and provides federal income to a fat breeder. You betcha Leroy! Which in turn stimulates the economy with food stamps which are swapped for drugs but that is ok the kids are going to get a free lunch at school anyway. Then they in turn become breeders as well and abandon their kids like Jesse Jackson.
So you are a "baby daddy" to how many kids?
Geez, I don't know Navy, I didn't count! Oh, by the way, do you think you could send me a little extra this month? I need a new flatscreen...
Do you even realize the vicious circle that debt is? Just wait until interest rates on treasury bonds return to historical levels. You are going to see things get really bad in this country really quick.
Actually the obama admins is giving out 32" flat screens now along with obam phones. Got to keep the slaves happy. However I find it hilarious that the liberals who claim everyone else is a racists have now determined that the standards and expectations for black students should be lowered because the cannot compete with white and Asian students.
Sounds pretty racial to me. Ask one of your baby mommas if any of kids can read.
Moderators: You have really got to either remove comments from navyvet98, especially #8.5, or better yet, a suspension would be most appropriate. "Got to keep the slaves happy"? Are you kidding me?!
AlaskaGirl - these people have no place else to go as Fox doesn't have a message board. And the only reason I come here is to try to figure out how the right wing crazies think. If we could just find out what is wrong with them, maybe a cure could be developed.
I'm thinking at this point that it's a genetic defect as many human traits seem to be missing. If this is the case, I guess there wouldn't be much hope. But at least we can understand that chimpanzees are not our closest relative. Republicans are.
No, Jim, we aren't right wing crazies. I voted for Obama the first time.
Do you understand what will happen to our great country if we don't stop having massive deficits? Do you realize that the CBO predicts that by 2022, we will be spending 1 trillion on interest payments for debt each year, even under the most optimistic of scenarios!!! Google it if you don't believe me. In 2010, the government collected 2.2 trillion.
This isn't about being a right wing, cold hearted, facist. It's about understanding that if we don't close the budget gap soon (which is going to take a combination of cuts and taxes ... given this it's dumb to do more spending), we will suffer the fate of Greece and there is no one to bail us out. We are too big and our debt is too large. You will also see far deeper cuts and greater tax increases than we will face if we act now. We don't need anymore spending programs, right now.
Alaskagirl, grab an issue tissue and stfu.
I used to sponsor an angel tree kid every year....that is some of my way of helping the poor and needy. Ya know what? This year I didn't. Two reasons: I couldn't afford it - and I am NOT going to put it on a credit card. Number two - on the list of almost every kid - X box games, wii games, ps3 games - Now you tell me....if they are poor and need help and to get on these lists you have to be getting welfare/food stamps -why the hell do they have playstations, x boxes, wii's etc????? I'm done helping those that don't help themselves. Oh, the poor children, its not their fault. Well they can blame their parents then! NOT ME! If their parents don't care, why should I?
They don't have a quality gaming system Tenn, that's why that stuff is on their lists.
How has anyone "blamed" you for kids from broken homes? Are you really so heartless as to not care about these poor kids simply because they have uncaring parents? To normal people, these kids' horrible past makes us care that much more about them.
Really, bipolar? Just remember that you and your nutbags are guests on here and I can and will have you removed if you cannot behave yourself. Your kind was banished and sought a haven to further spew your hatred when Fox shut their comments section down due to the likes of you and the other fringe nuts who hide out on the back pages of the comments sections here, like some twisted little club, because none of you have the balls to post comments on the first couple of pages because you know we will run your asses out faster than you can blink.
Oh, hey, Oh Tenn: When you were a kid didn't you ever ask for a big ticket item for Xmas? Wow. Besides that, isn't it a list of things they are ASKING for?. Doesn't that mean that they don't have it? DUH!
No matter how many times history has PROVEN that Keynesian economics is a total farce and disaster, the left keeps spouting to spend more...spend more...
Krugman is an idiot- Nobel Prize or not (well, Obama got one too...that should tell you something)...
AlaskaGirl, "your kind"? What are you implying? Are you some form of racist that doesn't think opposing ideas are allowed?
I think the moderators should ban Alaska for using a word also used to describe a donkey for posters.
I agree with Tenn.....I give to the Angel trees but only to those needing clothing. I stopped because I wasn't going to spend $75 on a video game for a 14yr old boy.
alaska girl?
so why are we guest here? When will you relize all the utopian ideas the dems have must be paid for? seems you think the money fairy will give free cash. I do agree it would be very nice to give people money for the basic needs but someone has to pay. I knoww a few people that are on ui and they get job searches out of the phone book. its these people that we are enabling to screw the system. I know some use the money for the purpose its given but I know more that don't than do.
jim
wow and I come here to see why you dems think all should be free. If you and other dems would just send an extra 100 in to the irs we could pay down the debt. whats that you say you won't pay more than you owe. so what makes you think the wealthy wants to? they are just following the tax code. you dems are ignorant on how things get paid and letting obamas war on the wealthy take over your thinking process. what other ideas does obama have for more jobs and defecite reduction that does not involve borrowing more money ?
@ Alsaka Girl
I find it incredible that you are going to report someone whose comments are less inflamatory than most on this board, including your response. There isn't ONE damn person on here that isn't a guest. Well, except Feisting Redhead, Sicking Sanity, Bev, and some of the other nut jobs who jump on this thing at the crack of dawn. I'm so sure that NBCNews considers YOU a owner of this site. You're nuttier than fruitcake
Leroy, they already have the systems....they are asking for the games to go with the systems. My point is that if the families are so desparate as to needing welfare, how did they obtain these expensive gaming systems? Makes me think they don't really need the welfare. That's my point exactly....your side "blames" everyone else for not helping the poor and needy. Give them more...hand out more money, give them free phones and food stamps. Its a bunch of BS. Quit blaming people in society that have more than you for not giving to people that don't help themselves. Too many people have become to rely on others and the govt to live. Its just not right.
Well of the 100s of thousands we have added to the welfare, disability and Social Security rolls has not stimulated the economy then what makes odumbo think this will work?
Once again this POS has no intent of cutting spending. Time for the GOP to walk away and let obama, Reid and Pelosi swim in their own sewer.
Good wishes to you this holiday season, Bubbawny, and I'm sincerely hoping that the New Year (if not sooner!) brings you the employment you seek!
We are told for over a year things are better now we are told we have to pay more for people to sit on their asses. Well I know two unemployed people that could have come to work where I do but they waaaa don't want to work 2nd shift.
Well Obama? Which one is it? Economy is ok or it's not? a hole.
Figures, the Democrats haven't even gotten the additional revenue from the rich yet and they are already figuring out how to spend it, instead of talking about cuts.
Literally I did not think it would be this bad if Obama won. It's so much WORSE than I could even imagine.
We are screwed unless the people wake up and soon.
Just stop there.
It's hard for fiscal conservatives to listen to the Demos talking about stimulus again when it was not successful enough the first time around. Also while I agree that extending UE benes is in large a good idea there are those who won't take a job beneath their station. They should be cut off of UE. Unfortunately it would be very hard to identify those people.
West - My X has been on UI for close to the 99 weeks. They have NEVER asked her is she is looking, how she is looking, whom she has contacted.
She simply sits at home. They just hand out the money. And she hates Obama. Cracks me up.
Sounds like your wife is a freeloader and your an enabler. You should both have your butts kicked.
The stimulus was successful. The CBO says so. But, its effect has worn off and the economy is slowing down again. We need to give it a little boost again. You do remember the famous Bikini Graph, right?
CBO:The Stimulus Saved Jobs » Politics Plus
The Stimulus was a bad joke ... only libs fell for it ! The "Shovel-ready" jobs weren't so "Shovel Ready" and Obama laughed about it. Meanwhile, there has been little accounting for how the money was spent.
I wonder if China has built that high-speed express rail from Los Angeles to Las Vegas so that California gamblers can lose their money faster !
You didn't see the Bikini Graph, did you? It is all right there in full color.
Democrats are right to call for stimulus. It's what is best for our current economy.
But economics, like science, baffles Republicans!
Hey bender - pray tell please enlighten us on your thoughts of the Micro/Macro effects the last stimulus had and why we need to keep spending. Please include the economic reality of a credit down-grade and what would happen if we received another one.
Or is economics really not your forte?
It created and/or prevent the loss of 3,000,000 jobs and kept us from going into a depression. It would have worked even better if the republicans had not block the spending for infrastructure and insisted on tax breaks instead (Susan Collins contribution). It was too little, should have been double the amount it was. Unemployment is a different story. That money gets spent immediately and helps prevent home/rental defaults.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time: The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH Remember the day... January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy. And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush.. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets. And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th."
Oreo Cookie - We have all heard that BS for years and nobody believes your spin. Bush tanked our economy, plain and simple and he is known as the worst president in the history of the united States, followed closely by Hubert hoover who lead us into the depression. Franaklin Roosevelt and Barack Obama are the presidents that did and are leading us out of the republican's economic debacles.
In the republicans alternate reality, FDR caused the great depression and Obama caused the great recession. And the sun rotates around the earth. Acorn (closed in 2010) helped Obama steal the election last November.
markinbecker..everything Oreo said is fact! You can spin it all you want, but I sure see a whole lot of "Miss me Yet" bumper stickers here in Northern Nevada. I also run a construction office and all that we do is insurance repair work since no one is building anything in Nevada. We go to peoples homes to do an estimate for their repairs and they are sitting on the couch playing games on their flat screens, drinking beer at 10:00 am collecting unemployment! This is what America is becoming! It sucks.....get off your butt and get a job!
Do you miss breast cancer? That is what you are so nostalgic about. this Great Recession and its deficit are all caused by republicons.
CHART OF THE DAY: Reminder, The Deficit You're Freaking Out About Is Bush's Fault
Harbinger= another Keynesian/Krugman fool...
Wanna have that discussion, based on economic FACTS?
The facts are that the stimulus worked, just like the ones in the 1930s and the 1950s did.
The stimulus that Reagan and bush/cheney tried did not work because they put the money into the military/Industrial Complex instead of the civilian economy. Do you remember Star Wars?
Democrats are already figuring out new ways to spend more than we earn.
But who really cares? It's all rainbows and butterflies here on the Federal Government plantation.
Isnt this enough proof that the democrat party is throwing our money out like a drunked sailor? All the liberals can do is blame everything on republicans even though republicans just barely control the house...Dont forget the president is OBAMA! Obama doesnt care about us the poor and the middle class. The rich have been better off under Obama.
Drunked??
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time: The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH Remember the day... January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy. And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush.. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets. And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th."
My benefits are for 26 weeks -- 99 weeks in my dreams - LOL
No problem.
GDP went from -9% before to +3% after the stimulus.
Done!
Are you kidding me??? MORE after 99 weeks already??? Why not let these "poor babies" get up and go do community service (picking up garbage, volunteering at nursing homes etc.) for the "EXTENDED" benefits! SURELY some of the government offices could use some "unpaid" help! I hope everyone that wants a job finds one soon. The fact that our leader can't figure out how to get this done should not mean that the burden gets placed on the few remaining taxpayers....or maybe someone can tell me where this money is coming from. What????? More spending and no cuts???? What a joke!
Oh, please end the mantra. The Democrats spend even when the coffers are empty. The tired saying "tax and spend" is their motto. In business I have encountered way too many people that have turned down jobs as the benefits they receive from the government are just enough to keep them satisfied. The Obama Administration just keeps adding insult to injury with their rapidly expanding deficit and their lust to just keep providing more at the expense of taxpayers.
I want my Obama watch! As long as you're handing out benefits there is no reason to find a job for them.
Believe what you want, but jobs are difficult to find. Extending unemployment is necessary. I have been looking since July and NOTHING. I really believe that my age is the problem at this point. I recently accepted a part time seasonal job - just to get out of the house. Because (except for the first $50), for every dollar I make at my job, I lose a dollar of my unemployment. So basically, I am working for 25-30 hours a week and making $50; because I WANT TO WORK AND CAN'T FIND A JOB. Yes, there are isolated people taking advantage of the system, but the majority of people out there are still looking and can't find employment.
LP13.....go to North Dakota.....plenty of jobs.
Oh Boy....another stimulus......the last one worked out real well. Trickle down Government just doesn't work. My town got some new sidewalks from the last stimulus, but I think it worked out to a cost of $260,000 per job. There are jobs in my state so I would suggest the people who are looking for work should be prepared to move. Reduce unempoyment benefits to 13 weeks so people know they have to actively look for work. 99 weeks is insane. "Lets see, I have my flat screen TV, my aprtment, a car, and I don't have to work. I am only on week 42 of 99. I think I will just chill for awhile." This is how these people think.
Right, sell my paid off house at a loss and pick up and move across the country - I don't think so.
LP don't let CRS get under your skin, he is just a deadbeat hatemonger.
LP13,
Government housing is not a paid off house.. it is a paid for house.
LP3, guess I'm going to sound like a jerk, but yes, sell your paid off house and go to where the jobs are. At this point you truly are choosing to live off the govt instead of doing whatever it takes.
If we're going to go over the cliff, let's go all the way over.
No deal, no increase in the debt limit, all spending approved by the House on a line by line basis.
If we're gong to crash, let's crash the planet.
We have entered the era of perpetual stimulus programs. As I constantly state, Obama and the Democrats are the US version of Stalinism without the gulags.
The communist Democrats seek to bankrupt the nation, end capitalism by stealing everything producers earn until the govt is our only source of sustaining life.
Larry..you watch...Obama will be proposing a Wealth Tax where they tax you on your assets intead of your income. Warren Buffet pays 15% becasue all his "income" are dividends taxed at a lower rate. Lets see how chummy Warren will be with Obama after this proposal.
The New Deal lasted for years because it was needed. The stimulus bill sitting on Boner's desk is needed and should last for years.
The New Deal delivered 9% growth for years and it still took 24 years before the average American was back to where he was in 1928. It might take us that long to get back to 2006 levels again.
David Sirota: FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really? - Truthdig
Damn Larry are you still playing that communist card. How many years had it been now that you have accused everybody you disagree with as being a communist, 50-60 years. You sound like by uncles back in the 60s accusing Martin Luther King of being a communist because he wanted equal rights and opposed the Vietnam War. Your living in the wrong decade in the past century.
"Either President obama is insane or purposely trying to wreck the U.S. Economy." Vladimir Putin. Russian President.
I don't accuse everyone I disagree with of being a communist. But Obama was raised and mentored by communists. Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate as a member of a Socialist Party. Obama was endorsed in 2008 and 2012 by the Communist Party USA. The Democrat Party Platform mirrors the Communist Manifesto necessary steps for transition to communism. And finally Obama has steadily pushed to move us from totalitarian socialism to communism.
that doesn't mean I think highly of the Republicans. For the most part Republicans have been willing to be socialists, but with an attitude of going slower than the communist Democrats.
Quoting Putin?
Stop quoting your heroes, and come around to America's side for a change!
Watch a video on youtube (about 10 mins long). Republic vs democracy. You will all be amazed. I know I was. EVERYONE in America needs to watch this. Would love to see some comments about it.
There are actually those who disagree with who you grant "non-communist" status Big Bird? Wow, how does one get on this hallowed list?
Navyvet98 @24.1,
actually the full quote is this....
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has warned the Obama administration against adopting further socialism, saying Russian history clearly proves it is a recipe for failure.
Economists say Putin’s comments serve to illustrate how worldwide markets have made even economic adversaries dependent on each other’s financial stability.
An Obama spokesman dismissed Putin’s claim, saying,
Taken from here Dated November 16th 2012
larry
all you said is true and also look at obamas connection with a.c.o.r.n. it mystifies me how people don't get what he's doing
ACORN?
Why are you resurrecting that FoxNews-echoed, zombie lie again?
If anyone lied and had any connections to ACORN, it was O'Keefe that started this whole thing with his spin-doctored videos that FoxNews latched onto, and hoodwinked Congress to unjustly end support of ACORN.
Raw footage reveals O'Keefe lied about ACORN tapes
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/04/07/maddow-raw-tapes-show-okeefe-lied/
After a thorough investigation, the charges were dropped against ACORN.
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/gao-little-evidence-support-charges-k
Well El Stupido just took the burden off the GOP. His plan to avoid the fiscal cliff by increasing the national debt to two trillion a year is so outrageous that even the moochers are going to get concerned we may run out of money and they may actually have to find a way to support themselves.