Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (614819)	6/4/2011 12:12:59 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1578633

Editorial: Jobs Slump — It's The Policy, Stupid Posted 06/03/2011 07:00 PM ET Recession: Two years into a "recovery," the unemployment rate leaps to 9.1% and just 54,000 new jobs are created. Is this just "bumps on the road to recovery," as the White House insists, or something more dangerous? This has been the most miserable recovery in modern history. Not only are there not enough jobs being created, but also the economy itself looks to be stalling. Gross domestic product grew a paltry 1.8% during the first quarter, and most economists expect something similar for the second quarter. Double dip? It's possible. As we noted earlier last week before the new jobs data came out, the U.S. is already in a growth recession — defined as an economy that's growing too slowly to keep unemployment from rising. Yet the Obama administration is crowing about its accomplishments as if slowing growth and rising joblessness have nothing to do with its bad policies. "The initiatives put in place by this administration — such as the payroll tax cut and business incentives for investment — have contributed to solid employment growth overall this year, but this report is a reminder of the challenges that remain," said Austan Goolsbee, Obama's top economic adviser. "Solid employment growth"? Since the end of last year, job growth has averaged 130,500 a month — about the number of people who enter the workforce each month. That's not "solid" enough. By the way, the unemployment rate has been below 9% for just five months since Obama took office — and three of those months were in the first 12 weeks of his presidency, before his policies took effect. Even so, President Obama on Friday visited Chrysler workers, lauding the government's bailout for the re-emergence of the auto industry, which has added 113,000 jobs over the last two years. What he didn't say was that GM, the bailout's poster boy, lost taxpayers $14 billion, and the total cost of his stimulus and bailout plan has now risen to $830 billion. Obama was unflappable. "This economy took a big hit — it's taking a while to mend," he told Chrysler workers, reciting high gas prices, Japan's earthquake and the Mideast as the "head winds" facing the economy. How about the head wind of bad government policies that, based on Congressional Budget Office data, have cost the economy over $760 billion in lost economic output in the past two years — and millions of jobs? This lost output is the Obamanomics growth tax. Too much tinkering, too much debt, too much spending. "By failing to alleviate the uncertainty businesses are feeling, Washington continues to stifle hiring," said Chamber of Commerce economist Martin Regalia. This "uncertainty," by the way, is why businesses, with their $2 trillion in cash, stay on the sidelines. At this point in a recovery, they should be adding hundreds of thousands of workers each month. That they aren't is a damning indictment of Obama's big-spending, high-debt, Keynesian strategy that has emerged as one of the great failures of economic policy-making in modern times.

To: Alighieri who wrote (614819)	6/4/2011 12:20:12 PM
From: i-node	4 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1578633

>> In the middle of an economic catastrophe So, you will admit that eliminating the tax cuts would have furthered the economic crisis? That's progress. >> and with republicans calling for even more tax cuts? >> Let's remind the thread and YOU once again that he signed the portion that gave tax cuts to wealth against his will. AGAINST HIS WILL? Nobody was holding a gun to his head. He is the president. Spineless though he may be. >> That's NOT WHAT HE WANTED TO DO.... Then WHY did he do it?

To: Alighieri who wrote (614819)	6/5/2011 1:22:09 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578633

Al, > Let's remind the thread and YOU once again that he signed the portion that gave tax cuts to wealth against his will. That's NOT WHAT HE WANTED TO DO.... LOL, how much longer are you going to make excuses for Obama? Tenchusatsu