What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?
- Thread starter Ulaven_Demorte
- Start date
- Status
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Report: Drop In Unemployment Rate “Almost 100 Percent Due To Decline In Labor Force Participation Rate”….
What’s surprising is this piece was published in Obama rumpswab Ezra Klein’s WaPo Wonkblog.
Via WaPo:
For most of his presidency, President Obama has been focused on the economic short run — which makes sense, given that he took office in the midst of the biggest recession since the 1930s. With his big economic speech today, he’s shifting to the long-run, talking about the structural changes he thinks the economy needs to see for the U.S. to prosper going forward.
But anyone who thinks that the short-run battle is over should take a look at a new report by Daniel Alpert over at the Century Foundation. Alpert notes that while the headline unemployment number is well below its recession-era peak, that’s almost 100 percent due to declines in the labor force participation rate — that is, the share of the population that’s either employed or actively looking for work. Don’t believe him? Take a look at this chart [seen above].
The dotted red line is the U-3 unemployment rate, or the number you see everywhere. It can go down for one of two reasons: either more people are working, or fewer people are in the labor force. So which is it?
You see that solid blue line? That’s the employment/population ratio, or the number of employed people divided by the civilian noninstitutional population (aka everyone over 16 who’s not in prison, a mental institution, the military, or a nursing home). It’s barely changed since the nadir of the recession. The share of adults who are working isn’t going up; it’s stagnating. More people aren’t working.
Now, look at the blue dotted line. That’s the labor force participation rate. See how it nearly perfectly tracks the movements of the unemployment rate? That’s a pretty good sign that people leaving the labor force, rather than getting jobs, is what’s driving the latter down.
What’s surprising is this piece was published in Obama rumpswab Ezra Klein’s WaPo Wonkblog.
Via WaPo:
For most of his presidency, President Obama has been focused on the economic short run — which makes sense, given that he took office in the midst of the biggest recession since the 1930s. With his big economic speech today, he’s shifting to the long-run, talking about the structural changes he thinks the economy needs to see for the U.S. to prosper going forward.
But anyone who thinks that the short-run battle is over should take a look at a new report by Daniel Alpert over at the Century Foundation. Alpert notes that while the headline unemployment number is well below its recession-era peak, that’s almost 100 percent due to declines in the labor force participation rate — that is, the share of the population that’s either employed or actively looking for work. Don’t believe him? Take a look at this chart [seen above].
The dotted red line is the U-3 unemployment rate, or the number you see everywhere. It can go down for one of two reasons: either more people are working, or fewer people are in the labor force. So which is it?
You see that solid blue line? That’s the employment/population ratio, or the number of employed people divided by the civilian noninstitutional population (aka everyone over 16 who’s not in prison, a mental institution, the military, or a nursing home). It’s barely changed since the nadir of the recession. The share of adults who are working isn’t going up; it’s stagnating. More people aren’t working.
Now, look at the blue dotted line. That’s the labor force participation rate. See how it nearly perfectly tracks the movements of the unemployment rate? That’s a pretty good sign that people leaving the labor force, rather than getting jobs, is what’s driving the latter down.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Obama's Economic Report Card
As the President prepares to address Congress (and the nation) with his next new new 'better bargain' deal to secure the economic future for the US, we thought it appropriate to dust off the economic scorecard for how things are going under his old new deal. Obviously, the President of the United States is not really solely responsible for where we are economically. The condemnation, or praise, must be applied equally to all branches of government responsible for the fiscal and monetary policy decisions made. The problems that exist today were not due to just the last few years of excess but rather come as a result of more than 30 years of fiscal irresponsibility that spans both Republican and Democratic Administrations alike. However, since President Obama has taken the position of responsibility for "clearing away the rubble and getting us back to where we were", we can review the economic data to see whether, or not, this is indeed the case.
Full-Time Employment (Grade D)
Incomes (Grade C-)
Home Ownership (Grade F)
Household Net Worth (Grade C)
.
Via Lance Roberts of Street Talk Live blog,
In a recent Politico playbook posting the following paragraph caught my attention:
"POTUS last night, at an Organizing for Action dinner at the Mandarin Oriental: "Galesburg is where I gave my first big speech [June 2005] after I had been elected to the United States Senate. It was the commencement at Knox College, and it was a speech about the economy. ... And all these trends that had been taking place were visible at the time -- rising inequality, struggles in the middle class -- but they were papered over to some extent by the bubble. And by the time I took office, the bottom had fallen out. ... [O]ver the last five years,... because of the grit and resilience and determination of the American people, we've been able to clear away the rubble and get back to where we were."
First, let me just point out that the President of the United States is not really solely responsible for where we are economically. The condemnation, or praise, must be applied equally to all branches of government responsible for the fiscal and monetary policy decisions made. The problems that exist today were not due to just the last few years of excess but rather come as a result of more than 30 years of fiscal irresponsibility that spans both Republican and Democratic Administrations alike.
However, since President Obama has taken the position of responsibility for "clearing away the rubble and getting us back to where we were", we can review the economic data to see whether, or not, this is indeed the case. Have continued bailouts, financial stimulus and the myriad of other financial supports gotten the U.S. economy back to where it was in 2009? In order to answer this question for yourself, and grade Obama's success relevant to his statement, we will look at major aspects of the economy from full-time employment, incomes, home ownership and household net worth.
Full-Time Employment (Grade D)
Full-time, benefit providing, employment is the only type of employment that matters for the average American. Full-time employment allows for an increasing standard of living, household formation, and higher personal savings rates. The 2-panel chart below shows the total increase in full-time employment relative to the working-age population and the net increases in full-time and temporary employment since 2009.
Since 2009 there has actually been very little increase in full-time employment. What is often overlooked in monthly employment numbers is that the working age population has been growing faster than total employment. This has led to a coincident surge in welfare dependency, as represented by "food stamp" usage, as those they are forced to work part-time, or are just unable to find work, seek alternative measures to make ends meet.
Incomes (Grade C-)
For the average middle-class American that is primarily focused on working, paying their bills and raising their respective families, nothing is more sacred or valued than their paycheck. The problem has been that a weak economic environment, combined with a large and available labor pool, has suppressed wage growth and, ultimately consumption. This has been further fostered by a drive by businesses to boost profitability by suppressing wage growth through increases in productivity.
Wages-Savings-Consumption-072313
The failure of wages to keep pace with the real costs of living has put pressure on personal savings rates. Lower savings rates ultimately reduces future productive investments and consumption. The "feedback loop" is critical since the roughly 70% of the U.S. economy is driven by personal consumption. Slower rates of consumption drags on economic growth, which suppresses employment and wages. It is a "virtual cycle" that is very difficult to break. The chart below shows the high correlation between economic growth, savings rates, wages and consumption.
Wages-PCE-Savings-GDP-072313
The current trends suggest, despite much commentary to the contrary, that economic growth is beginning to flag. However, as I stated previously, this is not a problem that is specific to the current Administration, but an ongoing deterioration of economic growth caused by the accumulation of debt, and deficit spending, that began in the 1980's.
However, the most important reason why the current Administration fails on incomes is clearly shown in the chart below which shows the amount of social benefits (welfare) as a percentage of real disposable incomes.
Social-Benefits-DPI-072313
Since the onset of the financial crisis government dependency has soared, and remains, near the highest levels on record. Despite the Federal Reserve's artificial inflation of asset prices, which only benefits roughly the top 20% of Americans that have investible assets, the bulk of the America is becoming more dependent on "handouts" to make ends meet. This is not a sign of a return back to where the average American was prior to the onset of the financial crisis.
Home Ownership (Grade F)
One of the signs of economic prosperity is a rise in home ownership. As employment increases, incomes rise and economic growth strengthens; individuals tend to form households, have children and buy homes. The chart below shows the current levels of home ownership in America.
Housing-Ownership-Renters-072313
With home ownership now at the lowest levels since the 1980's it is hard to suggest that the economic policies of increasing debt levels, higher levels of government dependency and ongoing bailouts have done much to improve the "American Dream." More importantly, policies to artificially suppress interest rates and encourage housing speculation has led to a nation of renters rather than homeowners. The question becomes who is going to buy homes from the speculators when they all rush to the market to sell?
Household Net Worth (Grade C)
There really is no better measure for grading the success, of failure, of an Administrations economic policies other than household net worth. The following chart shows household net worth which has been inflation adjusted using the consumer price index.
Household-NetWorth-072313
After every previous post-WWII recession household net worth has exceeded its previous peak within 3 years. While household net worth has had a significant recovery it has primarily been contained within the top decile of the population. Despite, the ongoing inflation of both the real estate and financial markets - real household net worth remains significantly below its previous peak. For the average American who struggles with employment, stagnant wages and a home that has little, or no, equity in it - there has been little recovery to speak of.
More Than Just Data
There is no doubt that the current Administration walked into a horrible situation. It is only an assumption that anyone could have handled the situation any better. However, the same can be said for the previous Administration that was served an economy falling into recession, racked by financial scandals and a terrorist attack all of which were fostered by failed policies of previous administrations.
However, a real economic recovery must be more than just a data point. Much ink has been spilled in recent years both praising, and condemning, the current administration for their policies. It will only be in hindsight that we truly know whether the massive increases in government debt, government bailouts, and financial supports, not only domestically but globally, will truly lead to a stronger and more prosperous economic environment. While hopes are high that this will indeed be the case; centuries of history suggest otherwise.
As the President prepares to address Congress (and the nation) with his next new new 'better bargain' deal to secure the economic future for the US, we thought it appropriate to dust off the economic scorecard for how things are going under his old new deal. Obviously, the President of the United States is not really solely responsible for where we are economically. The condemnation, or praise, must be applied equally to all branches of government responsible for the fiscal and monetary policy decisions made. The problems that exist today were not due to just the last few years of excess but rather come as a result of more than 30 years of fiscal irresponsibility that spans both Republican and Democratic Administrations alike. However, since President Obama has taken the position of responsibility for "clearing away the rubble and getting us back to where we were", we can review the economic data to see whether, or not, this is indeed the case.
Full-Time Employment (Grade D)
Incomes (Grade C-)
Home Ownership (Grade F)
Household Net Worth (Grade C)
.
Via Lance Roberts of Street Talk Live blog,
In a recent Politico playbook posting the following paragraph caught my attention:
"POTUS last night, at an Organizing for Action dinner at the Mandarin Oriental: "Galesburg is where I gave my first big speech [June 2005] after I had been elected to the United States Senate. It was the commencement at Knox College, and it was a speech about the economy. ... And all these trends that had been taking place were visible at the time -- rising inequality, struggles in the middle class -- but they were papered over to some extent by the bubble. And by the time I took office, the bottom had fallen out. ... [O]ver the last five years,... because of the grit and resilience and determination of the American people, we've been able to clear away the rubble and get back to where we were."
First, let me just point out that the President of the United States is not really solely responsible for where we are economically. The condemnation, or praise, must be applied equally to all branches of government responsible for the fiscal and monetary policy decisions made. The problems that exist today were not due to just the last few years of excess but rather come as a result of more than 30 years of fiscal irresponsibility that spans both Republican and Democratic Administrations alike.
However, since President Obama has taken the position of responsibility for "clearing away the rubble and getting us back to where we were", we can review the economic data to see whether, or not, this is indeed the case. Have continued bailouts, financial stimulus and the myriad of other financial supports gotten the U.S. economy back to where it was in 2009? In order to answer this question for yourself, and grade Obama's success relevant to his statement, we will look at major aspects of the economy from full-time employment, incomes, home ownership and household net worth.
Full-Time Employment (Grade D)
Full-time, benefit providing, employment is the only type of employment that matters for the average American. Full-time employment allows for an increasing standard of living, household formation, and higher personal savings rates. The 2-panel chart below shows the total increase in full-time employment relative to the working-age population and the net increases in full-time and temporary employment since 2009.
Since 2009 there has actually been very little increase in full-time employment. What is often overlooked in monthly employment numbers is that the working age population has been growing faster than total employment. This has led to a coincident surge in welfare dependency, as represented by "food stamp" usage, as those they are forced to work part-time, or are just unable to find work, seek alternative measures to make ends meet.
Incomes (Grade C-)
For the average middle-class American that is primarily focused on working, paying their bills and raising their respective families, nothing is more sacred or valued than their paycheck. The problem has been that a weak economic environment, combined with a large and available labor pool, has suppressed wage growth and, ultimately consumption. This has been further fostered by a drive by businesses to boost profitability by suppressing wage growth through increases in productivity.
Wages-Savings-Consumption-072313
The failure of wages to keep pace with the real costs of living has put pressure on personal savings rates. Lower savings rates ultimately reduces future productive investments and consumption. The "feedback loop" is critical since the roughly 70% of the U.S. economy is driven by personal consumption. Slower rates of consumption drags on economic growth, which suppresses employment and wages. It is a "virtual cycle" that is very difficult to break. The chart below shows the high correlation between economic growth, savings rates, wages and consumption.
Wages-PCE-Savings-GDP-072313
The current trends suggest, despite much commentary to the contrary, that economic growth is beginning to flag. However, as I stated previously, this is not a problem that is specific to the current Administration, but an ongoing deterioration of economic growth caused by the accumulation of debt, and deficit spending, that began in the 1980's.
However, the most important reason why the current Administration fails on incomes is clearly shown in the chart below which shows the amount of social benefits (welfare) as a percentage of real disposable incomes.
Social-Benefits-DPI-072313
Since the onset of the financial crisis government dependency has soared, and remains, near the highest levels on record. Despite the Federal Reserve's artificial inflation of asset prices, which only benefits roughly the top 20% of Americans that have investible assets, the bulk of the America is becoming more dependent on "handouts" to make ends meet. This is not a sign of a return back to where the average American was prior to the onset of the financial crisis.
Home Ownership (Grade F)
One of the signs of economic prosperity is a rise in home ownership. As employment increases, incomes rise and economic growth strengthens; individuals tend to form households, have children and buy homes. The chart below shows the current levels of home ownership in America.
Housing-Ownership-Renters-072313
With home ownership now at the lowest levels since the 1980's it is hard to suggest that the economic policies of increasing debt levels, higher levels of government dependency and ongoing bailouts have done much to improve the "American Dream." More importantly, policies to artificially suppress interest rates and encourage housing speculation has led to a nation of renters rather than homeowners. The question becomes who is going to buy homes from the speculators when they all rush to the market to sell?
Household Net Worth (Grade C)
There really is no better measure for grading the success, of failure, of an Administrations economic policies other than household net worth. The following chart shows household net worth which has been inflation adjusted using the consumer price index.
Household-NetWorth-072313
After every previous post-WWII recession household net worth has exceeded its previous peak within 3 years. While household net worth has had a significant recovery it has primarily been contained within the top decile of the population. Despite, the ongoing inflation of both the real estate and financial markets - real household net worth remains significantly below its previous peak. For the average American who struggles with employment, stagnant wages and a home that has little, or no, equity in it - there has been little recovery to speak of.
More Than Just Data
There is no doubt that the current Administration walked into a horrible situation. It is only an assumption that anyone could have handled the situation any better. However, the same can be said for the previous Administration that was served an economy falling into recession, racked by financial scandals and a terrorist attack all of which were fostered by failed policies of previous administrations.
However, a real economic recovery must be more than just a data point. Much ink has been spilled in recent years both praising, and condemning, the current administration for their policies. It will only be in hindsight that we truly know whether the massive increases in government debt, government bailouts, and financial supports, not only domestically but globally, will truly lead to a stronger and more prosperous economic environment. While hopes are high that this will indeed be the case; centuries of history suggest otherwise.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Obamanomics: Two Americans Added To Food Stamp Rolls For Every Job White House Says It Created…
During his speech today Obama declared “America back” after recession.
Via CNS News:
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said yesterday that the Obama administration has pulled the nation from the depths of the “Great Recession” with the creation of 7.2 million private sector jobs.
“And what is absolutely true is that we have come a long way since the depths of the Great Recession. We’ve created over 7.2 million private sector jobs,” Carney told reporters at a press briefing.
Here’s what Mr. Carney didn’t say:
Since February of 2009, the first full month of Obama’s presidency, 9.5 million Americans have dropped out of the labor force. Nearly 90 million Americans are not working today!
That means that 1.3 Americans have dropped out of the labor force for every one job the administration claims to have created.
There are 15 million more Americans on food stamps today than when Obama assumed office.
At the end of January 2009, 32,204,859 Americans received aid from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. As of April 2013, there were 47,548,694 Americans on food stamps.
That means that more than two Americans have been added to the food stamp rolls for every one job the administration says it has created.
During his speech today Obama declared “America back” after recession.
Via CNS News:
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said yesterday that the Obama administration has pulled the nation from the depths of the “Great Recession” with the creation of 7.2 million private sector jobs.
“And what is absolutely true is that we have come a long way since the depths of the Great Recession. We’ve created over 7.2 million private sector jobs,” Carney told reporters at a press briefing.
Here’s what Mr. Carney didn’t say:
Since February of 2009, the first full month of Obama’s presidency, 9.5 million Americans have dropped out of the labor force. Nearly 90 million Americans are not working today!
That means that 1.3 Americans have dropped out of the labor force for every one job the administration claims to have created.
There are 15 million more Americans on food stamps today than when Obama assumed office.
At the end of January 2009, 32,204,859 Americans received aid from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. As of April 2013, there were 47,548,694 Americans on food stamps.
That means that more than two Americans have been added to the food stamp rolls for every one job the administration says it has created.
koalabear
~Armed and Fuzzy~
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2001
- Posts
- 101,964
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Obamacare National Marketing Campaign To Cost Taxpayers Nearly $700 Million…
Adding insult to injury.
CHICAGO (AP) — It will make you stronger. It will give you peace of mind and make you feel like a winner. Health insurance is what the whole country has been talking about, so don’t be left out.
Sound like a sales pitch? Get ready for a lot more. As President Barack Obama’s health care law moves from theory to reality in the coming months, its success may hinge on whether the best minds in advertising can reach one of the hardest-to-find parts of the population: people without health coverage.
The campaign won’t come cheap: The total amount to be spent nationally on publicity, marketing and advertising will be at least $684 million, according to data compiled The Associated Press from federal and state sources.
About 16 percent of Americans are uninsured, but despite years of political debate and media attention, more than three-quarters of them still know little about the law known as “Obamacare,” according to recent surveys.
“It’s not sugar cereal, beer and detergent,” said Brooke Foley, chief executive officer of the Chicago-based Jayne Agency, one of the advertising firms crafting messages to reach the uninsured.
Adding insult to injury.
CHICAGO (AP) — It will make you stronger. It will give you peace of mind and make you feel like a winner. Health insurance is what the whole country has been talking about, so don’t be left out.
Sound like a sales pitch? Get ready for a lot more. As President Barack Obama’s health care law moves from theory to reality in the coming months, its success may hinge on whether the best minds in advertising can reach one of the hardest-to-find parts of the population: people without health coverage.
The campaign won’t come cheap: The total amount to be spent nationally on publicity, marketing and advertising will be at least $684 million, according to data compiled The Associated Press from federal and state sources.
About 16 percent of Americans are uninsured, but despite years of political debate and media attention, more than three-quarters of them still know little about the law known as “Obamacare,” according to recent surveys.
“It’s not sugar cereal, beer and detergent,” said Brooke Foley, chief executive officer of the Chicago-based Jayne Agency, one of the advertising firms crafting messages to reach the uninsured.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Obama Pivots Back To Class Warfare, Blasts America’s “Winner-Take-All Economy,” “Inequality Of Opportunity”…
Chicago Jesus can spew class warfare rhetoric with the best of them.
Via Washington Examiner:
President Obama told an Illinois audience that vicious trends in the United States “winner-take-all” economy have diminished the economic opportunities available to Americans.
“The trend of a winner-take-all economy, where a few are doing better and better and better,” Obama said, “those trends have been made worse by the recession. This growing inequality — not just of result, [but] inequality of opportunity — it’s not just morally wrong; it’s bad economics.”
Obama then faulted Republicans for opposing Obamacare, “despite the fact that our businesses have created nearly twice as many jobs in this recovery as they had at the same point in the last recovery, when there was no Obamacare,” as his prepared remarks have it.
Chicago Jesus can spew class warfare rhetoric with the best of them.
Via Washington Examiner:
President Obama told an Illinois audience that vicious trends in the United States “winner-take-all” economy have diminished the economic opportunities available to Americans.
“The trend of a winner-take-all economy, where a few are doing better and better and better,” Obama said, “those trends have been made worse by the recession. This growing inequality — not just of result, [but] inequality of opportunity — it’s not just morally wrong; it’s bad economics.”
Obama then faulted Republicans for opposing Obamacare, “despite the fact that our businesses have created nearly twice as many jobs in this recovery as they had at the same point in the last recovery, when there was no Obamacare,” as his prepared remarks have it.
U
unregistered
Guest
mercury14
Pragmatic Metaphysician
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2009
- Posts
- 22,158
Since you're focusing only on the last economic report with your part time jobs thing maybe you should take a look at how the labor force participation rate went up.
And it went up the month before as well.
mercury14
Pragmatic Metaphysician
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2009
- Posts
- 22,158
Clearly Obama is a pusillanimous benighted jackboot talking like that.
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 72,556
Gotta be some bifurcated statists in the background somewheres, too.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
You can't understand it, therefore you must be high?
Would you rather hear about a thousand points of light in a shining city on a hill?
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Demented Dunce, STFU
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
President Alinsky Threatens Americans with Rising ‘Social Tensions’
You can take the community organizer out of the South Side, but you can’t take the community organizer out of the community organizer.
Today, America heard threats from the increasingly predictable President Alinsky.
“The position of the middle class will erode further,” Mr. Obama said. “Inequality will continue to increase, money’s power will distort our politics even more. Social tensions will rise, as various groups fight to hold on to what they have, start blaming somebody else for why their position isn’t improving. That’s not the America we know.”
This is standard-fare Das Kapital by Karl Marx. Obama doesn’t even attempt to disguise it, leaving out only the original author’s name. Obama merely adds the threat of social tensions.
For that, thank speech co-author Saul Alinsky.
Alinsky saw social tensions as a necessary circumstance to effective community organizing. Without anger, without the have-nots blaming the haves, it is harder to accumulate power. Alinsky considered the creation of social tensions, or the exploitation of them, as essential to move wealth and power from those who have it to those who don’t.
Once “social tensions” are stoked, all that is left is the tactical organization.
Compare how conversant President Obama is in the ominous language of the economically illiterate left with President Reagan’s faith in the economic power of American freedom. Obama’s economic worldview flows from Marx and Alinsky, when the free-market oxygen of Reagan is so badly needed. Instead of uplifting Americans, Obama threatens them.
Republicans must match Obama’s dark vision with something equally aggressive and directly confrontational. One idea? Defund Obamacare instead of another in a series of phony House votes to repeal it.
The Founders gave the House the power of the purse for times like these. Defund Obamacare and watch the economy accelerate overnight.
Unfortunately for now, it seems some in the GOP don’t understand their opponent. Speaker John Boehner gravely misunderstands the situation if he truly believes Obama’s address was devoid of content — a mere “Easter egg with no candy in it.”
There was plenty of content in that speech, if you know what to listen for. Boehner’s response might have worked during more civil times. But with soaring debt and a new muscular federal government, sweet quips don’t cut it.
You can take the community organizer out of the South Side, but you can’t take the community organizer out of the community organizer.
Today, America heard threats from the increasingly predictable President Alinsky.
“The position of the middle class will erode further,” Mr. Obama said. “Inequality will continue to increase, money’s power will distort our politics even more. Social tensions will rise, as various groups fight to hold on to what they have, start blaming somebody else for why their position isn’t improving. That’s not the America we know.”
This is standard-fare Das Kapital by Karl Marx. Obama doesn’t even attempt to disguise it, leaving out only the original author’s name. Obama merely adds the threat of social tensions.
For that, thank speech co-author Saul Alinsky.
Alinsky saw social tensions as a necessary circumstance to effective community organizing. Without anger, without the have-nots blaming the haves, it is harder to accumulate power. Alinsky considered the creation of social tensions, or the exploitation of them, as essential to move wealth and power from those who have it to those who don’t.
Once “social tensions” are stoked, all that is left is the tactical organization.
Compare how conversant President Obama is in the ominous language of the economically illiterate left with President Reagan’s faith in the economic power of American freedom. Obama’s economic worldview flows from Marx and Alinsky, when the free-market oxygen of Reagan is so badly needed. Instead of uplifting Americans, Obama threatens them.
Republicans must match Obama’s dark vision with something equally aggressive and directly confrontational. One idea? Defund Obamacare instead of another in a series of phony House votes to repeal it.
The Founders gave the House the power of the purse for times like these. Defund Obamacare and watch the economy accelerate overnight.
Unfortunately for now, it seems some in the GOP don’t understand their opponent. Speaker John Boehner gravely misunderstands the situation if he truly believes Obama’s address was devoid of content — a mere “Easter egg with no candy in it.”
There was plenty of content in that speech, if you know what to listen for. Boehner’s response might have worked during more civil times. But with soaring debt and a new muscular federal government, sweet quips don’t cut it.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Obama Echo Lytes say
TURN OUT THE LIGHTS
DANA MILBANK’S NOT SO HAPPY with Obama’s “lifeless” economic agenda.
And even Chuck Todd agrees: “”You know what they’re acknowledging? That they have nothing new to say.”
Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank has definitely soured on Barack Obama's repeated "pivots" to the economy. Milbank wonders how the President can make news on the economy by "delivering the same message he gave in 2005?"
By repeating the same talking points he has delivered since 2005, with seemingly no movement forward on any part of his agenda, Milbank says the President is signaling that he is "fresh out of ideas."
The columnist slaps Obama for this latest pivot. It is "roughly the 10th time the White House has made such a pivot to refocus on jobs and growth," Milbank says. The Post writer also jokes that "even a reincarnated Steve Jobs would have trouble marketing this turkey."
Milbank notes that the political climate has changed since Obama was elected in 2008. The GOP has a stiffer backbone than they then did and that is why the President's regurgitation of the same old talking points is a non-starter.
"If he’s to break through the resistance," Milbank says, "Obama will need some bold new proposals. That’s why his speech returning to the oldies would seem to confirm that the White House has given up on big achievements."
Finally, Milbank expresses some sympathy for Presidential spokesman Dan Pfeiffer, who is tasked with putting a sunny face on this tired agenda.
"I admire Pfeiffer’s pluck in trying to generate enthusiasm for what is largely a news-free initiative," he writes. "And it’s smart politics for Obama to keep his emphasis on economic matters. But it would be easier to rally enthusiasm if he gave supporters something big, bold and new to reach for, rather than leftover proposals coupled with lofty ideals."
Milbank is not alone in this negative characterization of yet another Obama pivot to the economy and jobs. NBC's Chuck Todd also criticized the move as nothing but political rehash.
"You know what they’re acknowledging? That they have nothing new to say. Because what are they saying? 'Hey, look back at this speech!' He’s said it all before, so he doesn’t have anything new to say. He’s just going to say it differently," Todd said on MSNBC.
TURN OUT THE LIGHTS
DANA MILBANK’S NOT SO HAPPY with Obama’s “lifeless” economic agenda.
And even Chuck Todd agrees: “”You know what they’re acknowledging? That they have nothing new to say.”
Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank has definitely soured on Barack Obama's repeated "pivots" to the economy. Milbank wonders how the President can make news on the economy by "delivering the same message he gave in 2005?"
By repeating the same talking points he has delivered since 2005, with seemingly no movement forward on any part of his agenda, Milbank says the President is signaling that he is "fresh out of ideas."
The columnist slaps Obama for this latest pivot. It is "roughly the 10th time the White House has made such a pivot to refocus on jobs and growth," Milbank says. The Post writer also jokes that "even a reincarnated Steve Jobs would have trouble marketing this turkey."
Milbank notes that the political climate has changed since Obama was elected in 2008. The GOP has a stiffer backbone than they then did and that is why the President's regurgitation of the same old talking points is a non-starter.
"If he’s to break through the resistance," Milbank says, "Obama will need some bold new proposals. That’s why his speech returning to the oldies would seem to confirm that the White House has given up on big achievements."
Finally, Milbank expresses some sympathy for Presidential spokesman Dan Pfeiffer, who is tasked with putting a sunny face on this tired agenda.
"I admire Pfeiffer’s pluck in trying to generate enthusiasm for what is largely a news-free initiative," he writes. "And it’s smart politics for Obama to keep his emphasis on economic matters. But it would be easier to rally enthusiasm if he gave supporters something big, bold and new to reach for, rather than leftover proposals coupled with lofty ideals."
Milbank is not alone in this negative characterization of yet another Obama pivot to the economy and jobs. NBC's Chuck Todd also criticized the move as nothing but political rehash.
"You know what they’re acknowledging? That they have nothing new to say. Because what are they saying? 'Hey, look back at this speech!' He’s said it all before, so he doesn’t have anything new to say. He’s just going to say it differently," Todd said on MSNBC.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
JAMES TARANTO: The Politics of Contempt: Obama pivots for the 973rd time.
When somebody feels the need to describe his feelings as genuine, it’s a safe bet that they’re actually insincere. The alternative would be to assume that he is admitting to habitual insincerity–saying, in effect: Unlike all my other pronouncements, this one is genuine. But that poses a liar’s-paradox problem: A candid acknowledgment that one is habitually insincere would be inconsistent with the underlying reality of habitual insincerity.
Thus pure logic dictates that the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent was merely posturing when he tweeted this morning that he was “genuinely sad to see supposedly neutral news orgs mocking the idea of a ‘pivot’ to jobs.”
Actually, our (admittedly cursory) search turned up only one such org, ABC News, whose website yesterday featured the headline “Obama Pivots to Economy . . . Again.” If that seems sarcastic, it is only very mildly so, given that reporter Mary Bruce thoroughly documents the president’s perseveration.
Plus:
Also, which scandals exactly are “phony”? The biggest scandal is the one that raises serious questions about the legitimacy of Obama’s re-election. Here is what President Asterisk himself had to say on the subject way back on May 13: “If you’ve got the IRS operating in anything less than a neutral and non-partisan way, then that is outrageous, it is contrary to our traditions. And people have to be held accountable, and it’s got to be fixed. . . . I’ve got no patience with it. I will not tolerate it.”
We’re sure his outrage over the phony scandal was genuine.
Ouch. And: “On the other hand, Obama’s certitude about his own superiority, his utter contempt for his political adversaries, even for those whose priorities differ from his–now that’s genuine. It is the central feature of his political character, and the proximate cause of–pardon the cliché–Washington’s current ‘dysfunction.’”
When somebody feels the need to describe his feelings as genuine, it’s a safe bet that they’re actually insincere. The alternative would be to assume that he is admitting to habitual insincerity–saying, in effect: Unlike all my other pronouncements, this one is genuine. But that poses a liar’s-paradox problem: A candid acknowledgment that one is habitually insincere would be inconsistent with the underlying reality of habitual insincerity.
Thus pure logic dictates that the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent was merely posturing when he tweeted this morning that he was “genuinely sad to see supposedly neutral news orgs mocking the idea of a ‘pivot’ to jobs.”
Actually, our (admittedly cursory) search turned up only one such org, ABC News, whose website yesterday featured the headline “Obama Pivots to Economy . . . Again.” If that seems sarcastic, it is only very mildly so, given that reporter Mary Bruce thoroughly documents the president’s perseveration.
Plus:
Also, which scandals exactly are “phony”? The biggest scandal is the one that raises serious questions about the legitimacy of Obama’s re-election. Here is what President Asterisk himself had to say on the subject way back on May 13: “If you’ve got the IRS operating in anything less than a neutral and non-partisan way, then that is outrageous, it is contrary to our traditions. And people have to be held accountable, and it’s got to be fixed. . . . I’ve got no patience with it. I will not tolerate it.”
We’re sure his outrage over the phony scandal was genuine.
Ouch. And: “On the other hand, Obama’s certitude about his own superiority, his utter contempt for his political adversaries, even for those whose priorities differ from his–now that’s genuine. It is the central feature of his political character, and the proximate cause of–pardon the cliché–Washington’s current ‘dysfunction.’”
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
DISCRIMINATION: College Republicans Dubbed Security Threat, Refused Entrance to Obama’s Campus Speech. “Ten College Republicans were dubbed a security threat and refused admittance to President Barack Obama’s speech at the University of Central Missouri on Wednesday. Despite the fact that the students had tickets to the event, security personnel turned them away at the door to the recreation center where Obama gave a speech on economic policy, telling the group it wasn’t about their politics but the president’s safety.”
This is consistent with the Administration’s general strategy of treating political opponents like enemies of the state.
UPDATE: What should people do? (1) Sue. (2) Demand that colleges not host Obama for speeches in the future. If he’s not safe around the College Republicans, he shouldn’t be on campus at all. If they do have him on campus, protest noisily outside — and file lawsuits trying to injoin his appearance. On public university campuses, barring people based on political affiliation — which is what’s going on here — is a first amendment violation. (3) Make a stink to the university’s big donors.
This is consistent with the Administration’s general strategy of treating political opponents like enemies of the state.
UPDATE: What should people do? (1) Sue. (2) Demand that colleges not host Obama for speeches in the future. If he’s not safe around the College Republicans, he shouldn’t be on campus at all. If they do have him on campus, protest noisily outside — and file lawsuits trying to injoin his appearance. On public university campuses, barring people based on political affiliation — which is what’s going on here — is a first amendment violation. (3) Make a stink to the university’s big donors.
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,083
Ajax_Prime
Fuck the Poor
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
- Posts
- 1,247
Obama says deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years
Politifact sez:
link
Spin that, bitch.
Don't have to. It spells it out right in your own link.
Similar to the tactic of removing people from the employment pool to get a reduced unemployment number, the Administration also recently rewrote the book on what should be included in the official GDP number, making it look higher than it had previously. However, I don't believe that they restated previous years' GDP to normalize methods. It ain't apples to apples, in other words.
Last edited:
U
unregistered
Guest
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,083
Random verbiage is not refudiation. I assume you have a point you're trying to make here?
Like I've explained to the Vettehomo, blame Hitler. Seriously. World War II resulted in a Baby Boom that began in 1946. The first of the Baby Boom tidal wave began retiring when they reached 65 in 2011.
Simple statistics. No nefarious evildoing by the government, no matter how badly you want to insinuate this.
I'd sure like to see some facts to back up this amazing conjecture.
Quiet, coward. Men are talking here.
- Status
