Its hard to keep up with all the news in real time.
On July 3rd the Washington Examiner published an editorial in which they mention the loss of nearly 2 million jobs since the economic stimulus package was approved. How do you spell failure? Simple. You hire spin merchants to create clever sound bites such as “we would have lost many more jobs if we hadn’t approved the original stimulus.” OK brain trust. What’s our plan “B”?
Easy. Spend, spend, spend. We will worry about the source of those funds later. We can always tax the rich. If they object, where will they go? Need I remind you that “I won.”
Following is the opening two paragraphs of the Examiner Editorial along with the full story link below.
No second stimulus, please
By: Examiner Editorial
Be sure to thank the President and Congress. This week, with news of some 467,000 jobs lost in June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the U.S. has now lost about two million jobs since the economic stimulus package passed. Even more notable is that the average workweek has been slashed to 33 hours the lowest number on record. When the President signed his $787 billion stimulus package into law, he confidently asserted that unemployment would not exceed eight percent. If Congress hadn’t passed it, he warned, it would rise to nine percent by 2010. Well, unemployment reached 9.5 percent last month, meaning, by the President’s own logic, that his stimulus package has failed.
If you listen to Obama, however, whatever jobs weren’t lost were either “saved or created” by the stimulus. In other words, credit for whatever hasn’t gone wrong goes to the Obama administration and its Democratic allies who control Congress. Which is why we have already started to hear hints of a second stimulus package on the way. On CNBC Thursday, White House economic advisor Christina Romer answered the question of whether there would be a second stimulus with: “We’ll do whatever it takes.”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/No-second-stimulus_-please-7917465-49725982.html
Questions for Juice readers.
As we read of the number of jobs lost and created, were you one of those impacted?
If so, have you found a new job yet?
If you have a “new” job, is the compensation and benefits the same, more, or less than the job you lost?
If you are still without a job how long have you been among the unemployed?
Was you job outsourced to a foreign country?
THIS GUY NOBAMA has no clue and SOME OF YOU VOTED FOR HIM . but you wanted CHANGE , well you got it , for the worse . im not saying mccain or some of the other choices we had would have done better . but since this guy took office he is going to spend us to death with his ideas . dont belive me see what is going on in california .
“How do you spell failure?”…. excelent question Larry.
I spell failure as follows: R.E.P.P.U.B.L.I.C.A.N.
Republican socialists voted taxes which killed small business in California and forced others into the exile to neighboring states.
They also voted new SERVITUDES as amendment to the “Davis-Stirling Act” (Civil Code section 1350-1378)
Good morning Stanley.
The real test for elected officials is decision making during recessions rather than expanding programs and expanding staff levels when we enjoyed the short lived “dot com” boom.
Taxation. An ugly word for sure. In CA we compete between cities for big box stores and auto malls for sales taxes. I have seen ad’s from as far away as OK used to entice CA firms to move east where taxes are lower, working conditions are better, less red tape and hurdles to jump over etc.
Some states have lower property tax rates. Others do not collect a sales tax such as “Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon.
A total of 41 states impose income taxes. New Hampshire and Tennessee apply it only to income from interest and dividends. Seven states (Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming) do not tax personal income.”
On taxation pick your poison. We do require a revenue source to provide the “basic services” of the government. The problem is how elected officials envision what those services include.
“The real test for elected officials is decision making during recessions rather than expanding programs and expanding staff levels when we enjoyed the short lived “dot com” boom.”….. excellent statement again Larry.
So why the Republican elected officials decided to vote for expanding programs and expanding staff levels when we are in the recession?…… Huh?
I think you have no clue…. do you?
We are talking about the Republicans. So stick to it.
*Tell you what..let’s all hold hands and discuss
what great things would be happening NOW under a
McCain-Palin Administration.
The realities are a little more complicated than changing Party Affiliations…even though people like Spectre, Franken and others don’t think so!
Amazingly, we are doing pretty good compared to what we were facing way back in January of 2008!
A Second Stimmy? Nah…we didn’t like the first one that much! Let’s try stabilizing world crude
prices….and go from there! In any reasonable market….increasing gas mileage for new vehicles would have caused Crude Oil prices to fall:
“Last year, the Bush administration had ordered a one mile per gallon increase for light trucks from 22 to 23 miles per gallon by 2010, which Brown challenged in court, asserting that the plan failed to consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.
A 9th Circuit decision issued in November struck down the inadequate national standard and directed the federal government to come up with a new plan.
The latest vehicle standard, an increase to 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015, falls short of state efforts that curb greenhouse gas emissions directly and are estimated to be equivalent to 36 miles per gallon by 2016.
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) required the Bush Administration to increase gas mileage standards. But in the newest regulations, buried on page 378, there is an attempt — in violation of law, according to Brown — to ignore the Supreme Court’s ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA and two district court opinions that affirm that gas mileage standards are separate from state greenhouse gas regulations.”
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/04/gas_mileage.html#ixzz0KhUU4BSF&C
A 2nd Stimmy? No, we don’t think so! By addressing the increase of gas mileage required..one might think the price of Crude Oil should plumment. The issues are far more complex than just changing Party Affiliations. Imagine what we might be facing with a McCain-Palin Administration…….
It would not have been pretty….
FYI –
“Last year, the Bush administration had ordered a one mile per gallon increase for light trucks from 22 to 23 miles per gallon by 2010, which Brown challenged in court, asserting that the plan failed to consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.
A 9th Circuit decision issued in November struck down the inadequate national standard and directed the federal government to come up with a new plan.
The latest vehicle standard, an increase to 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015, falls short of state efforts that curb greenhouse gas emissions directly and are estimated to be equivalent to 36 miles per gallon by 2016.
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) required the Bush Administration to increase gas mileage standards. But in the newest regulations, buried on page 378, there is an attempt — in violation of law, according to Brown — to ignore the Supreme Court’s ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA and two district court opinions that affirm that gas mileage standards are separate from state greenhouse gas regulations.
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/04/gas_mileage.html#ixzz0KhUU4BSF&C
=============================
I think it is a bit early to consider a second package, the first one does not kick in fully until October.
Jim. We do not know if this is another “trial balloon” by the Obama admin.
It could also be a heads up that even with the funds yet to be released, that balance may not cut down our virtually double digit unemployment numbers (of 9.5 %).
Lets not overlook president Obama’s projection of 8 percent unemployment in the second quarter of 2009 WITH his stimulus plan.
Stanley.
Every elected official, including Republicans who expand government programs, especially during a recession, should be thrown out of office. Are you happy now. You will discover that I am not a rubber stamp to the party. My focus is on conservatives whatever party they are registered with. Sadly while both parties have their bad apples, there are more of them in the Democratic camp who now have all the keys to the mahogany
row restrooms. As such you cannot continue to hammer Republicans without including Democrats in your feedback.
“As such you cannot continue to hammer Republicans without including Democrats in your feedback.”…. Larry, I am including Democrats in my feedback by a default.
However, it is Republicans who have control over 2/3 of vote in California assembly and they have surrendered it to Democrats.
The Republicans failed to be the tax firewall.
Good morning Stanley.
As of now there are 29 Republicans, 49 Democrats, 1 Independent and one vacancy in the CA Assembly.
As such your 2/3rds comment is incorrect.
Perhaps you are referring to the 2/3rd requirement for passage of financial legislation.
No need to “verify” my coment as I am providing the list of every assembly member and their party affiliation below:
Assembly Member Roster
Vacant
Adams, Anthony Rep
Ammiano, Tom Dem
Anderson, Joel Rep
Arambula, Juan Ind
Bass, Karen Dem
Beall, Jim Jr. Dem
Berryhill, Bill Rep
Berryhill, Tom Rep
Blakeslee, Sam Rep
Block, Marty Dem
Blumenfield, Bob Dem
Brownley, Julia Dem
Buchanan, Joan Dem
Caballero, Anna M. Dem
Calderon, Charles M. Dem
Carter, Wilmer Amina Dem
Chesbro, Wesley Dem
Conway, Connie Rep
Cook, Paul Rep
Coto, Joe Dem
Davis, Mike Dem
De La Torre, Hector Dem
de Leon, Kevin Dem
DeVore, Chuck Rep
Duvall, Michael D. Rep
Emmerson, Bill Rep
Eng, Mike Dem
Evans, Noreen Dem
Feuer, Mike Dem
Fletcher, Nathan Rep
Fong, Paul Dem
Fuentes, Felipe Dem
Fuller, Jean Rep
Furutani, Warren T. Dem
Gaines, Ted Rep
Galgiani, Cathleen Dem
Garrick, Martin Rep
Gilmore, Danny D. Rep
Hagman, Curt Rep
Hall, Isadore III Dem
Harkey, Diane L. Rep
Hayashi, Mary Dem
Hernandez, Edward P. Dem
Hill, Jerry Dem
Huber, Alyson Dem
Huffman, Jared Dem
Jeffries, Kevin Rep
Jones, Dave Dem
Knight, Steve Rep
Krekorian, Paul Dem
Lieu, Ted W. Dem
Logue, Dan Rep
Lowenthal, Bonnie Dem
Ma, Fiona Dem
Mendoza, Tony Dem
Miller, Jeff Rep
Monning, William W. Dem
Nava, Pedro Dem
Nestande, Brian Rep
Niello, Roger Rep
Nielsen, Jim Rep
Pérez, John A. Dem
Pérez, V. Manuel Dem
Portantino, Anthony J. Dem
Ruskin, Ira Dem
Salas, Mary Dem
Saldaña, Lori Dem
Silva, Jim Rep
Skinner, Nancy Dem
Smyth, Cameron Rep
Solorio, Jose Dem
Strickland, Audra Rep
Swanson, Sandre R. Dem
Torlakson, Tom Dem
Torres, Norma J. Dem
Torrico, Alberto Dem
Tran, Van Rep
Villines, Michael N. Rep
Yamada, Mariko Dem