Granted. What I have said is that it is not working. And to pretend like this administration has no responsibility is equally incorrect.

I think it is worth a shot to provide $5,000 tax credit to small businesses for each new hire and using money repaid to the TARP fund to help community banks offer small-business loans through incentives to those banks.

But you have already declared this a failure.

We're not gonna agree...surprise.

That is because any small business owner knows this is not going to make a difference in the long run. What is to prevent them from taking on a few people to get the tax break and then when it runs out just let them go as in the example I gave you?

First, I'm not making the assumption that our current admin has no responsibility. I was only responding to your skewed statistics. Obama's policies has not lived up to its hype, big surprise there, but unemployment rates have not drastically increased under his administration either. Whether they would be higher or lower under someone else I do not know.

But seriously, just make an Excel scatter graph from the past 12 months, the rise of unemployment rates under Obama isn't nearly as dramatic as the rise when Obama was just coming into office.

I've read alot of positive feedback to the proposal from small businesses as well as skepticism from others. Generalizing doesnt really work.

And if some want to scam the system (any system) as you suggested, they will, while others will use it more constructively.

Because it costs more than $5000 to employ someone. They won't gain money by doing that unless they actually have profitable work for that employee to do.

Some companies may not be able to continue that employment without the extra $5000, but some will. And even for the ones who can't, they will have employed someone for the duration of the stimulus, and the person will hopefully be in the job market in a better economy. This is a job stimulus bill, after all, designed to boost the job market while the economy recovers.

IMHO if it is not sustainable for more than one year it is a total waste of taxpayer dollars and only preventing a more meaningful recovery.

How does putting people to work, even if it's only for a year for some of them, prevent a more meaningful recovery?

Because in one year they will be right back where they were again and we will have spent all that money for a non-fix. Looking at the larger issue here.

They won't be back where they were. Some of the people won't be fired, and even the ones who are will have had a year's worth of employment; a year's worth of income; a year off of the unemployment rolls; and a year's worth of participation in the economy.

It is to be hoped that the $5000 will buy more than that for as many as possible, but it's a good deal even if that's all it buys.

And how is any other recovery prevented by this?

So where are Merc and Classic?

They are always the first to post economic and jobs reports as soon as they are released by the govt.

But they missed the report last week on the 5.7 percent annual growth rate in the fourth quarter (of 09), the fastest pace since 2003 and the report today on the unemployment rate for Jan dropping to 9.7%. Small incremental improvements...but who can argue that they are not moving in the right direction?

Perhaps they are at the National Tea Party Convention where all the fun is. :)
The bitching about socialism and fascism... the Nazi signs and rhetoric...the calls for the end to multi-cutluralism and the return of a literacy test for voting...the threats to take back the govt (by force, if necessary) or secede.

And the best is yet to come... tomorrow's general session on "“Correlations between the current Administration and Marxist Dictators of Latin America”...followed by Palin's $100,000 speech at the closing banquet. :D

She needs the money.

How come all the tea-baggin' women are those fat pasty grub-worm looking things, with thin lips and prominent sagging jowls? Is it inbreeding?

False. I don't thin that I've ever posted one, but lemme see what I can find real fast for you. . .

Link

Happy now?

SO what was the real unemployment rate before Obama took office.

Or doesnt that matter if you start using that figure now.

And happy to see you and offer my perspective on your negativism.

"Always with the negative vibes MerClassic, always with the negative vibes."

I apologize if I am wrong about you posting the monthly econ/job news reports...maybe that is just Merc...but you and he both post so many "interesting" and negative links, its hard to keep track. And more often than not, you post those links w/o offering an opinion and rarely, if ever, offering a solution of your own.

And, to your credit, you dont make constant references to Socialism and Nazis. :thumb:

Relax...Lighten up. (sound familiar) :)

Via Talking Points Memo:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/ima...verystats1.jpg

:lol: So I bet this Nazi is eating her words now...

Nancy Pelosi.

How is this determined? Just wondering...

I think they measure the people who go off unemployment without having a job. Which is hardly the same as giving up looking. And they don't measure people who were never on unemployment, or who took freelance work, etc.

:lol2:

So how should we go about stabilizing and then correcting the worst economic trends in 60+ years?

From 2000-2009: job growth was essentially zero, economic output (as measured by GDP) saw the lowest growth in any decade, and for the first time, household net worth decreased.

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-...0010101478.jpg

Or is it just a laughing matter?

Link
Another partisan AP article.

As I stated earlier, smoke and mirrors to make everyone feel better, sort of like he is doing something for small business. When in fact he is not. Although I am tempted to hire my family members to get a tax break.

Have they been out of work long enough?

Oh, hell yea. Easily qualified. :)

So will every cocksucker that's just looking for ways to scam the system, and siphon off help that would really help boost the economy.

I guess if you feel using a legal means to hire someone to get a tax break makes one a 'cocksucker'. If it is a balance between taxes being raised to screw a small minority and trying to get a little bit back from a legal way to hire someone, why not? That is how the system works. How is that a scam of the system?

If you want to attack people who "siphon off help that would really help boost the economy" you are looking in the wrong places.

Smoke em if you got em....:apimp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QoG5u_6kjI

:corn:

fixed that for ya.

Hey Now Here is Job Creation For Ya! [/taxpayersdollarswasted]

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2...10/581592.html

Waste, Fraud, and Abuse....

PROMISES, PROMISES: Jobs bill won't add many jobs

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100210/...s_what_jobs_11

Because NO ONE would have predicted this would happen in isolated instances!!!

I agree. This bi-partisan compromise bill dilutes the potential positive impact of a real jobs bill and is far from the best solution.

So Merc, what do you stand for? I mean something other than a "good outrage and removing Nazis from Congress"

Just wondering if you have anything positive to contribute? ;)

Can I get an I-Pod?

Made in China.

Why of course, along with everything else in this nation.

Can I play Devil's Advocate for a minute and suggest that actually, if a small bribe is what it takes to get parents involved with their kids' school, then it very well may be worth it? Parents are far more important than teachers when it comes to churning out educated and well-adjusted citizens, and no amount of school funding is going to be able to counteract a poor district full of bad parents. But bad parents also tend to be shallow and bribe-able, and if you can convince the parents that the schools are on their side, that could maybe change a lot of the underlying attitude.

Damn straight.

School Board Rescinds iPod Giveaway Plan
 

Link
Well so much for that idea.

It would only work to an extent and then they would be looking for the next handout to do what they have a responsiblity to do all along. It is the nature of creating a welfare state. It only breeds more dependency.

Sure, it's not a magic fix. But from the school's perspective, they're only dealing with these students (and by extension, their parents) for twelve years. It's already too late to fix the parents, to be perfectly honest.* But there's still a chance that if you can finagle good behavior out of the parents for even a short time, it might coincide with that window of time when you still have a chance to help the kid.


*It's important to realize that in low-income areas, many of the kids in the special ed programs are there specifically because their parents used drugs/alcohol while pregnant, and/or emotionally abuse them. Certainly not all of the kids with disabilities fit this bill, but as a general rule, the worst of the worst parents are going to end up with kids in the program.

I don't disagree with anything you have said. I just don't think free I-pods are the fix. It is a huge waste of taxpayer dollars. I would rather see them give the kids money for good grades.

Feds push for tracking cell phones

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

As long as they're not tracking calls to foreign terrorists, I guess it's OK.:greenface

Yea, where is the liberal outcry? I thought this was a big deal.

It's mentioned in the article.

One of the best things Obama could have done...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,2338647.story

Fun pie chart there, Pie.

Here is a take on your Obama Cabinetmember at work. I figure Olberman's part of the Obamanation.

Lies, Lies, and more Kabuki Theater from Obamy.

Today the jobless rate was estimated at 9.6%, that totally biased news program, NPR, stated they continue to underestimate and not count those who have stopped looking (they interviewed a number of these people) and those who are in part time jobs because that is all they can get. The estimate actually is around 16%, btw, 36,000 more people lost their jobs last month...

The unemployment rate announced today is the "official" rate that has been used for years....the U3 rate.

It considers three factors: 1) those who were not employed during the reference period, 2) those who were available for work at that time and 3) they made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the reference period.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

The U6 rate, which is reported as well, has never been the "official" rate, but for political reasons, those on the right want to start using that rate now. What a surprise.

So now its "lies, lies and kabuki theater" to use the same official rate as previous administrations?

There's a partisan opinion if I ever heard one. :lol:

@ Pie :D

This bears repeating. While the U6 is more honest, the U3 is what they report and should be used to keep references apples to apples.

In Merc's case, it's bukkake theater.:stickpoke

Is that your fantasy for your face?

Tell it to the newly 36,000 unemployed last month. :lol: Oh, so funny right? Where are the jobs?

CBO: $10 trillion jump in debt under Obama budget

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/05/news...dex.htm?hpt=T2

The fact remains you were just spewing your usual rhetoric of "lies and more lies by Obama" and once again, you were wrong.

No one likes the job losses except perhaps those who take glee in wanting Obama to fail.

The number of jobs lost has gotten smaller in each of the last 6-8 months.....that is how you turn the economy around...one month at a time...not with a magic bean that goes from losing 779,000 jobs last January (when Obama took office) to the latest numbers.

In fact, with the exception of a few monthly blips, the last two months have had the smallest number of monthly jobs lost in nearly two years.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/Surv..._view=net_1mth

IMO, that is a good trend and attributable in part to the stimulus program, but we'll never know what the jobs lost would have been w/o the stimulus.

Where are the facts? What Gov't body has published data to support your comments? IMO??? Really? Your opinion? Means shit.

HOLD IT!!!!! Hold it!!! This is crazy! Why ridicule such a brilliant political commentator? This person is a genius! Everything based on fact from reliable sources and nothing ever based on fallible opinion! I admit it, I am wrong and redux is right! All hail redux! fuck stick

When you like what the CBO reports, you cite it....when you dont, you call it partisan propaganda and a tool of the White House.

:lol:

You cant have it both ways, dude.

I agree the projected debt is not sustainable...but short term deficits in times of deep recession have proven successful in the past.....unless you have a better way to turn the economy around more quickly.

I would certainly hope the 01 and 03 tax cuts for the top bracket are left to expire at the end of this year, as proposed in the original laws.....saving at least $1 trillion over the next 10 years.