How Can Obama Expect To Create Jobs?
January 15th, 2010when the Federal Government is borrowing all of the money in the world?
He says banks aren’t lending, but that’s another lie.
They’re lending it all to the U S Treasury!
when the Federal Government is borrowing all of the money in the world?
He says banks aren’t lending, but that’s another lie.
They’re lending it all to the U S Treasury!
He cannot, has not and does not truly wish to. If the libs can succeed in maintaining this false crises attitude in our populace they will be able enact much of their marxist agenda.
umm do you create job security by borrowing money to buy a car? a house? A boat?
Borrowing has nothing to do with it. consumption and cash flow is what creates jobs.
The businesses selling the products do not care where the money comes from that buys their product and the economy doens’t care either.
But to think you can sustain an economy while you produce relativel nothing and all you money goes overseas, you are delusional. Deregulation of trade has gutted the American economy and left America lying in a ditch to bleed out, while you want to blame Obama.
Blaming Obama is nothing but the height of intellectual laziness.
Happy you just don’t understand. First they have to hire people to un the presses to make the money, then they have to buy more presses and hire people to fix em. then the tree people have to cut the trees and bring them in and then make paper. Then they make ink. this creates a lot of jobs. Makes sense.
Maybe he should change from “change” to “makes sense” or “makes cents”, ha, ha. Great answers and these are classic. Some should go to the hall of fame.
All have a great new year.
The job loss rate is now LESS THAN 2% of what it was when Bush left office. The stock market has now regained nearly 60% of its value back. Housing has stabilized everywhere and has recovered in a number of places. And gross domestic product and the worth of the average American were both up last quarter (3.5% and 1% respectively) and are only doing better this quarter.
And what is even more amazing, Obama did this while drastically CUTTING the deficit. Upcoming will be proof of that. First up are Republican numbers (which focus on deficits), then the Democrat numbers (which focus on budgets); but both are covered. And no matter which number set you choose, they BOTH find Obama cutting spending by hundreds of billions of dollars. And if you have a problem with this, just remember that the Republican numbers come from Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity. I just did the math for you. If you have a problem with it, tell those three to quit lying so much. If you trust them, then trust their numbers, and by extension trust what those numbers say–Obama CUT spending. Here’s the proof. Enjoy!
________________________
REPUBLICAN NUMBERS:
According to Republicans, Bush’s deficit last year was $400 billion, and Obama’s this year was $1.42 trillion. However, what one must remember is that the government’s fiscal year ends on Sept. 30th, and the new one begins Oct. 1st. Well, in mid-September of last year, Bush attempted to get a $700 billion bailout passed. He failed. It was defeated by House Republicans. So Bush added $150 billion in REPUBLICAN PORK to attract those votes. That works, and the Republicans cave and pass the now $850 billion bailout. But they did it in October; AFTER the new fiscal year, Obama’s fiscal year, had already begun. In other words, Bush’s bailout is counting against Obama. So now we must take Bush’s bailout away from Obama, and add it back to Bush.
–All numbers in trillions–
$0.4 (Bush’s initial deficit) + $0.85 (Bush’s bailout) = $1.25 trillion (Bush’s ACTUAL deficit).
$1.42 (Obama’s initial deficit) – $0.85 (Bush’s bailout) = $570 billion (Obama’s actual deficit).
$1.25 (Bush’s deficit) – $0.57 (Obama’s deficit) =
—$680 billion (Obama’s savings from Bush’s spending)—
____________________
DEMOCRAT NUMBERS
According to Democrats, Obama’s budget for this past year was $3.4 trillion. For 2008, Bush’s budget was $3.1 trillion. However, this leaves out some info.
First up, deficits. Each President has to deal with the budget deficit/surplus from the year before. Well in 2007, Bush left himself a $500 billion deficit to deal with. Certainly large, but not even half as large as the budget shortfall he left Obama–$1.4 trillion. That is a $900 billion advantage Republicans give to Bush by ignoring previous year’s deficits.
In addition, Bush left out the costs of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars in all his budgets. The estimated cost of Iraq was $3 trillion; Afghanistan was $1 trillion. But we are only working with one year budgets, so we only need one year totals. Iraq was estimated last year to cost $10 billion a month–$120 billion last year. Afghanistan was $2 billion a month–$24 billion last year. We add the yearly totals to find what needs to be added to Bush for the costs of the wars for 2008–$144 billion.
We add Bush’s bailout back to him for the same reason we had to do so in the Republican numbers–$850 billion.
We subtract Bush’s bailout from Obama for the same reason we had to do so in the Republican numbers. But we must also add the costs of the stimulus ($787 billion) and the omnibus ($410 billion), since they are not included in Obama’s budget.
–all numbers in trillions–
3.1 (Bush’s budget) + $0.9 (Bush’s deficit advantage) + $0.144 (Bush’s war costs) + $0.85 (Bush’s bailout) = $4.994 trillion (Bush’s actual spending for 2008).
3.4 (Obama’s budget) – $0.85 (Bush’s bailout) + $0.787 (stimulus) + $0.41 (omnibus) = $3.747 trillion (Obama’s actual spending for 2009).
$4.994 (Bush’s spending) – $3.747 (Obama’s spending) = $1.247 trillion (Obama’s savings from Bush’s spending).
But while this number does take into account Bush’s deficit, it does not take into account Obama’s ACTUAL deficit of $570 billion (as found in Republican numbers). So we must now take that deficit away from Obama’s savings.
$1.247 (Obama’s savings) – $0.57 (Obama’s deficit) =
—$677 billion (Obama’s ACTUAL savings on Bush’s deficit)—
___________________________
So with Republican numbers, we find Obama saving $680 billion; with Democrats numbers it’s $677 billion. A difference of only $3 billion, which can be accounted for by the fact that our numbers are estimates in the trillions of dollars. Which means that our number estimates were within a 0.001% margin of error.
Obama doesn’t need to do this and can even pass unpopular bills behind closed doors but PROUDLY bribing or threatening true Democrats to support His redistributive “legacy”; you really don’t have to accomplish anything after you pass Amnesty for Illegals thereby guaranteeing your Progressive Party a landslide victory from a grateful hispanic community and the millions of grateful “new citizens”!
Harvard graduate. I think he would fail in 3rd grade math.Most third graders would know you cannot spend your way out of debt.He pulls money out of the job creater sector, runs it through bureaucracies, and trickles it back to the folks minus huge sums for political payoffs.
Here is President Candy-mans quote he did today during his press conference when asked this question…”Well, er ummmm mmmmmm hhhuuuuhhhhh and then we’ll give some hope to the changes that people need to have faith and oooohhhh ummmm er, ahhhhh. Yeah, that is all.”
How can you expect anybody to take your questions seriously when your name is “happy2bwhite”??
Well, you’re out of luck. Move out of the country and begin a new life.
Unemployment is a lagging indicator. Ben Bernanke has said that a recovery is underway, so just hold your horses. He is a scholar of the Great Depression