President Obama Credits Bush Tax Cuts Extension For 243,000 New Jobs

[PearlHowardman]

YOKE!

 

"As your President, I am quite happy to see increases in recent economic activity and the addition of 243,000 new jobs in January. However, the facts behind this good news forces me to be 100% honest. We all know that the spending part of my economic stimulus went down the toilet. And my Jobs Bill never made it out of the US Senate. That only leaves the extension of the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy as the cause for recent economic good news and new jobs. Investors who benefited from the Bush tax cuts extension invested their money in Wall Street investment firms. Those Wall Street investment firms in turn invested that money into targeted, growing, profitable public sector American companies. American companies now have new capital to grow even further and HIRE NEW EMPLOYEES. Moreover, any future increases in economic activity and jobs will likely be a direct result of the extension of the Bush tax cuts and no other policy. I will not be taking any questions, thank you."

 

Reporter: "One question, Mr. President. Why do you suppose we saw an increase in new jobs right about the same time that your jobs bill died in the Senate?"

 

Obama: "Look, the teleprompter message says 'I will not be taking any questions'".

[IDBillzFan]

In spite of the real reasons we're seeing unemployment numbers drop, if people insist on saying this is good news, it would do them equally well to note, as a matter of fact, that the unemployment rate did not begin to drop until after the GOP won back Congress in midterms.

 

Coincidence?

 

The chart.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

In spite of the real reasons we're seeing unemployment numbers drop, if people insist on saying this is good news, it would do them equally well to note, as a matter of fact, that the unemployment rate did not begin to drop until after the GOP won back Congress in midterms.

 

Coincidence?

 

The chart.

 

Just the other day you were saying that the unemployment rate was actually getting worse and the 243,000 new jobs number was just the result of liberal spin.

[IDBillzFan]

Just the other day you were saying that the unemployment rate was actually getting worse and the 243,000 new jobs number was just the result of liberal spin.

Let's start with you linking to precisely where I said the unemployment rate was getting worse and the new jobs number was just spin.

 

Dude...conner is back. You're going to have to pick up your game.

[PearlHowardman]

Like all Liberals, Obama believes in spending to jump start the economy. But the spending part of his $840 billion stimulus was wasted. It went to unions, etc. No new jobs resulted and I really don't think it "saved" many jobs as he claims.

 

The middle-class tax cuts part of the stimulus was expected to lower the debt of the middle-class, which it probably did.

 

The extension of the Bush era tax cuts allowed investors to keep their money and invest it, because that's what they do!

 

Result is big gains on Wall Street and those gains are now flowing to Main Street - where private sector business are located. Those private sector employers are now hiring because they can expand their business with the expectation of making more money.

 

Credit goes to President George Bush!

[Buftex]

YOKE!

 

"As your President, I am quite happy to see increases in recent economic activity and the addition of 243,000 new jobs in January. However, the facts behind this good news forces me to be 100% honest. We all know that the spending part of my economic stimulus went down the toilet. And my Jobs Bill never made it out of the US Senate. That only leaves the extension of the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy as the cause for recent economic good news and new jobs. Investors who benefited from the Bush tax cuts extension invested their money in Wall Street investment firms. Those Wall Street investment firms in turn invested that money into targeted, growing, profitable public sector American companies. American companies now have new capital to grow even further and HIRE NEW EMPLOYEES. Moreover, any future increases in economic activity and jobs will likely be a direct result of the extension of the Bush tax cuts and no other policy. I will not be taking any questions, thank you."

 

Reporter: "One question, Mr. President. Why do you suppose we saw an increase in new jobs right about the same time that your jobs bill died in the Senate?"

 

Obama: "Look, the teleprompter message says 'I will not be taking any questions'".

 

Obama bad

[B-Large]

Like all Liberals, Obama believes in spending to jump start the economy. But the spending part of his $840 billion stimulus was wasted. It went to unions, etc. No new jobs resulted and I really don't think it "saved" many jobs as he claims.

 

The middle-class tax cuts part of the stimulus was expected to lower the debt of the middle-class, which it probably did.

 

The extension of the Bush era tax cuts allowed investors to keep their money and invest it, because that's what they do!

 

Result is big gains on Wall Street and those gains are now flowing to Main Street - where private sector business are located. Those private sector employers are now hiring because they can expand their business with the expectation of making more money.

 

Credit goes to President George Bush!

 

Wall Street does well because Main Street spends disposable income, plain and simlpy. The Tax Cut extension is fine in the short term, but the simple fact remains those tax cuts were inacted because of continued borrowing and financing with foreighn capital.... we have been doing that for a decade now.... all that means is this will have to be paid back with interest at some point because you can fund deficit with borrowed money forever. Our political representatives will NOT raise taxes nor reform programs...

 

Under Bush, US Economy = house of cards

Under Obama, US Economy = house of cards

 

And Americans are fine with it because they're taxes have remained low..... but the tab will have to be paid at some point, just ask Greece, Italy, etc.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

Just the other day you were saying that the unemployment rate was actually getting worse and the 243,000 new jobs number was just the result of liberal spin.

 

Maybe you weren't one of them, but there were a number of righties complaining that the 243,000 new jobs was just a result of more people leaving the workforce. It was in the "Boom" thread by DIN.

[3rdnlng]

Maybe you weren't one of them, but there were a number of righties complaining that the 243,000 new jobs was just a result of more people leaving the workforce. It was in the "Boom" thread by DIN.

 

 

Talk to yourself much, Fatty? The amount of people participating in the workforce (whether employed or looking for a job)was reduced by a factor more than the "reduction in unemployment". You are a really ignorant person with no understanding of the economy, being sucked in by the magic of the Messiah. Wipe your chin.

[IDBillzFan]

Maybe you weren't one of them, but there were a number of righties complaining that the 243,000 new jobs was just a result of more people leaving the workforce. It was in the "Boom" thread by DIN.

I appreciate that you are wedded to the Wasserman-Shultz philosophy of saying things that are untrue in hopes that people aren't paying attention, but I would appreciate it moving forward if you think first, then post, so as to avoid further embarrassing commentary in the future.

[3rdnlng]

I appreciate that you are wedded to the Wasserman-Shultz philosophy of saying things that are untrue in hopes that people aren't paying attention, but I would appreciate it moving forward if you think first, then post, so as to avoid further embarrassing commentary in the future.

 

 

C'mon, it's fun when an ignorant liberal disputes themselves. BTW, your "slinky" sig is the best,...................ever.

[PearlHowardman]

The extension of the Bush tax cuts lead to investors having more money, and they want to make even more money, so they invest in Wall Street who then invests in companies who now have the new money to expand their business and hire new employees.

 

Hence, 243,000 new jobs in January.

[3rdnlng]

The extension of the Bush tax cuts lead to investors having more money, and they want to make even more money, so they invest in Wall Street who then invests in companies who now have the new money to expand their business and hire new employees.

 

Hence, 243,000 new jobs in January.

 

And a reduction in the overall workforce.

[DC Tom]

And a reduction in the overall workforce.

 

No, the overall workforce increased. But fewer people entered the labor force (~500k) than didn't (~1.2M).

[Magox]

Maybe you weren't one of them, but there were a number of righties complaining that the 243,000 new jobs was just a result of more people leaving the workforce. It was in the "Boom" thread by DIN.

That's not what was said AT ALL!

 

What was said is that there have been a bunch of people leaving the laborforce, therefore artificially lowering the unemployment rate.

 

I'll give you an example.

 

 

Lets say you have a total of 100,000 people that are of age and not disabled and that are able to work.

 

Out of those 100,000 lets say that 5,000 of them just for whatever reason don't really want to look for a job. So now the actual workforce that the Labor Department counts in it's unemployment is a workforce of 95,000 not 100,000.

 

So lets say we have 10,000 who are officially unemployed and another 5,000 that just aren't counted. The offical Unemployment rate would be somewhere around 11% and REAL unemployment of a little over 15%

 

 

Now lets say over the next 12 months that there have been 1000 more jobs added, so out of the 10k that were officially unemployed from before that drops it to 9k, but now lets say that out of the 9k that are unemployed, 2k of those decided to stop looking for work, shrinkng the offcially counted unemployed to 7k. So now the Labor department counts 7k unemployed out of 95k.

 

So now the official unemployment rate is somewhere around 7.5 to 8%

 

Wow! What a dramatic drop in just twelve month, from 11 to below 8%

 

But hold on! There were only 1k more added jobs, how can 1k more added jobs drop an official workforce of 95k from 11% to 8%?

 

well, because they have this screwy way of counting unemployment rates...THey don't count the people who have given up looking for work, and in this particular year there were twice as many people that given up looking for work, therefore artificially dropping the Labor Departments unemployment rate.

 

 

Then you have to take into account the population increases. The latest job figures added another 1.1M to the list of people who had dropped out of the workforce, but they really did'nt drop out of the workforce in one month,it was an accumulation throughout the year based on census bureau population info, but none the less, they weren't added into the Labor departments figures.

 

But what's worse, having someone actually look for work who can't find a job and therefore who gets factored into a higher unemployment rate or someone who has given up hope for looking for work in which gets dropped from the labor force but isn't counted towards the unemployment rate, which artifically drops the unemployment rate?

 

Without a doubt, it is more troublesome that people have been dropping out of the workforce in droves, but with the Labor departments unemployment rate dropping, I guess it's A OOOKAAAY.

 

 

 

So we weren't talking about the jobs that were created, it was the unemployment rate.

 

 

 

The proportion of the total noninstitutionalized civilian population 16 years of age and over that is in the civilian labor force. The labor force participation rate is essentially the ratio of the civilian labor force to the total noninstitutionalized civilian population 16 years of age and over. The data used to estimated the labor force participation rate is obtained along with other labor force data from the monthly Current Population Survey conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor force participation rates are also commonly calculated using data derived from the Census of the Population.

 

The labor force participation rate indicates the proportion of the available "working age" population that is willing and able to work and is either employed or actively seeking employment. It is found by dividing the labor force (total civilian labor force) by the population (total noninstitutionalized civilian population).

 

http://www.amosweb.com/cgi-bin/awb_nav.pl?s=wpd&c=dsp&k=labor+force+participation+rate

Edited February 14, 2012 by Magox

[DC Tom]

That's not what was said AT ALL!

 

What was sid that there have been a bunch of people leaving the workforce, therefore artificially lowering the unemployment rate.

 

I'll give you an example.

 

 

Lets say you have a total of 100,000 people that are of age and not disabled and that are able to work.

 

Out of those 100,000 lets say that 5,000 of them just for whatever reason don't really want to look for a job. So now the actual workforce that the Labor Department counts in it's unemployment is a workforce of 95,000 not 100,000.

 

So lets say we have 10,000 who are officially unemployed and another 5,000 that just aren't counted. The offical Unemployment rate would be somewhere around 11% and REAL unemployment of a little over 16%

 

 

Now lets say over the next 12 months that there have been 1000 more jobs added, so out of the 10k that were officially unemployed from before that drops it to 9k, but now lets say that out of the 9k that are unemployed, 2k of those decided to stop looking for work, shrinkng the offcially counted unemployed to 7k. So now the Labor department counts 7k unemployed out of 105k.

 

So now the official unemployment rate is somewhere around 7.5 to 8%

 

Wow! What a dramatic drop in just twelve month, from 11 to below 8%

 

But hold on! There were only 1k more added jobs, how can 1k more added jobs drop an official workforce of 95k from 11% to 8%?

 

well, because they have this screwy way of counting unemployment rates...THey don't count the people who have given up work, and in this particular year there were twice as many people that given up looking for work, therefore artificially dropping the Labor Departments unemployment rate.

 

 

 

So we weren't talking about the jobs that were created, it was the unemployment rate.

 

Except in this case (January), people didn't drop out of the labor force as much as more new people were added to the available population that couldn't or wouldn't work.

 

'Cause, y'know...population increases, available labor increases, but not everyone who enters the work force when they turn 18 actually looks for a job. There's a difference between the population not participating in the labor pool increasing, and the population participating in the labor pool decreasing (which I know you know).

[PearlHowardman]

The extension of the Bush tax cuts lead to investors having more money, and they want to make even more money, so they invest in Wall Street who then invests in companies who now have the new money to expand their business and hire new employees.

 

Hence, 243,000 new jobs in January.

 

What?

 

No Obama voters or democrats dispute this?

 

I wonder if republicans think the same way about the effect of the extension of the Bush tax cuts having a net positive effect on the economy and jobs, but are staying silent until they feel ready to take full credit for all the good news.

 

What's Obama going to say when he's asked about the impact these tax cuts for the rich are having on business expansion and hiring. Can he claim that the tax cuts for the wealthy had no effect whatsoever? None?

[PearlHowardman]

What?

 

No Obama voters or democrats dispute this?

 

I wonder if republicans think the same way about the effect of the extension of the Bush tax cuts having a net positive effect on the economy and jobs, but are staying silent until they feel ready to take full credit for all the good news.

 

What's Obama going to say when he's asked about the impact these tax cuts for the rich are having on business expansion and hiring. Can he claim that the tax cuts for the wealthy had no effect whatsoever? None?

 

Still no disagreement from Obama voters. Very telling, indeed.

 

And the rumor now is that republicans are going to release three financial reports after Labor Day in September expecting to end the reelection prospects of Barack Obama.

 

Report One: Counts penny for penny the billions of dollars that Obama wasted/lost on the spending part of his economic stimulus.

 

Report Two: Counts penny for penny how much money investors have poured into the stock market as a direct result of Obama, reluctanctly, extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. The report will also count penny for penny how much of that investor money made it to American companies that are now hiring new employees - 243,000 last month alone.

 

Report Three: Obama's disastrous healthcare plan now has something in the neighborhood of 1400 exemptions. This report will count penny for penny how the collective employee workforce loss from those 1400 exemptions make Obama's healthcare plan completely unworkable from a cost and financial perspective.

 

So, I guess we can all just tune out Presidential politics until the end of the summer.