Barack Obama went on national television yesterday to insist that his jobs bill would add up to economic growth. CNS News points out that the math itself doesnt add up:
At a White House press conference on Thursday, President Barack Obama said the legislation he has proposed to create jobs could grow the economy as much as 2 percent. However, the White House estimates that the plan itself will cost $447 billion or 2.97 percent of the 2011 GDP of $15.012 trillion that is currently projected by the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. (See chart: GDP Chart from BEA.xls.)
Lets spend 3% of our GDP in order to get 2% back! That sounds like Obamanomics, all right. And it also sounds like a better deal than we got from Porkulus I, when we spent nearly 6% of our GDP in order to get, er, almost nothing back.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/07/2011 9:33 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Had the first thought that this is an attempt by the dims to block a forced vote on la prez' jobs bill, so dims did not have to be on record yet still throw eggs at the house.
#3
Senate Dems use the nuclear option to strip opposition parties to Obama of power while at the same time with tapayer money they build a statue of Reid. But back on the rantburg ranch yesterday the natives here got all queazy about the "Oath Keepers" standing up to the "Feds" with a counter demonstration. I am sure the best the "Bravos" here will do is "pass the popcorn" while sitting on thier asses and continue to squirm - as usual.
The post that has created all the conversation here, is now #27 by no mo -- in breezing through deleting Justice, I was moving through the "long post" and got no mo's. For that, I'm so sorry, cause I'm the one that requested we keep it through today, just for his comment.
Carried over for further discussion - see no mo uro's excellent comment below.
From weaselzippers -- his link is to Bill Ayers website and I won't link to that!
As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.
As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.
They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage. And it continues -- the list is, well, unbelievable. He ends with:
To the people of the world, We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.
Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.
To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal. Sounds pretty organized to me....
#3
It's true that there was much malfeasance on Wall Street.
I'd dispute this.
Wall Street were just selling what was legal and people would buy.
The problem is primarily with government failure to properly regulate and mandating high risk lending, and buyers who didn't properly evaluate the risks.
The banks main failing was failure to properly assess risk.
People who think banks are rife with dishonest and illegal acts get their reality from Hollywood movies, where bad stuff can always be traced back to bad men.
#4
I had to send no mo's rant to my adult children, because I think their parents did better by them. But then I had to educate them on Ayers, with a few quotes and the poster of him standing on the flag. Now I want to retch.
Hate Amercia, Bill-boy? Why didn't you move to Cuba years ago, you hypocrite! Syria's nice in the winter, and North Korea in the summer. I imagine you could work out some dandy retirement packages with their glorious leaders.
You have hated America for 50 years, so bad you want to destroy it.
I don't burn with that must hate, not even for you. I just want you to be irrelevant.
Again.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/07/2011 7:49 Comments ||
Top||
#5
#4 Phil B:
I'm not one of those who hates banks or bankers or financiers just because, Phil. Most of the ones I've worked with over the years both for personal and business reasons have been great and moral people. The bulk of the people in the financial industry are hard-working sorts trying to make a living, I get that.
And you're right that people were buying crap because they thought they were getting one over on the universe, or simply because they were stupid.
You're further correct that the bulk of the malfeasance rests with the government, both for looking the other way and for corruption and insidiousness.
Nonetheless, there was complicity on the part of some of the investment bankers and financiers on said corruption and it needs to be pointed out. Definitely not in the Hollywood "all bankers and capitalists are bad" nonsense fashion, but in an accurate fashion, just the same. Saying that there wasn't or isn't makes us as bad as the 99%ers.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
10/07/2011 8:06 Comments ||
Top||
#6
#5 Bobby.
Of course, not ALL parents did the things I mentioned, Bobby. The ones that didn't have kids who are productive instead of attending these protests.
I share your rage at Ayers, he fouls the universe by his existence.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
10/07/2011 8:08 Comments ||
Top||
#7
No Mo - that is a most excellent rant - definitely a classic.
The fact that the Labor Unions and Soros backed outfits make up the bulk of the 'protest' shows that this is not the 'grassroots' protest the organizers, media, and Administration claim it to be but just more astroturfing.
And the fact that the terrorist (not ex) Bill Ayers is involved should tell you everything you need to know.
#9
Where is big sis?. Big no show. I wouldn't be surprised if the protesters are paid. Then I wouldn't be surprised if foreign elements were not disinclined to acquiesce to their requests for funding. Pirates the lot of'em.
#10
People have to remember Rights are limitations on government (and not confuse Rights with entitlements and arguments over the proper function of the state and government).
#13
I dont think these kids are all asking for a collective handout, but rather they want the world of opportunity that their parents and grandparents had that has been recently sold to China.
A lot of their _stated_ goals with regard to the oil and gas industry, in which I work, is to continue the policies which have exported it to Saudi Arabia.
If they want to propose a you-scratch-my-back, I'll scratch yours deal, that's nice. I haven't seen anything to that effect yet.
They are the people their agitators riled them against.
#16
They do not seem to be protesting against the _socialist_ policies "Ominous1" and they mistakenly (and in some cases, deliberately) label "crony capitalism."
#18
I see the OWS (as it is at the moment) in a stage similar to the first couple of months of the Tea Party movement, with obvious widely held discontent, a set of contradictory goals, funny costumes (don't forget those white wigs!).
The MSM, Bill Ayers, George Soros, Michael Moore and the usual cast of leftist clowns are trying to co-opt OWS, which was only to be expected. They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage. That particular pattern of abuse of the legal system has been thoroughly documented as true, and I don't care if Bill Ayers agrees with that or not. There have also been cases of banks stealing homes they never lent any money on, whose real owners purchased with cash. To my knowledge, no criminal charges have been lodged in the most egregious cases. Worse, a cabal of states attorneys general are now working on a scheme to validate the corruption of real estate law, laws against fraud, etc., brought to us by, yes, the financial industry, and not the US government. Barney Frank and the Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with that issue, just the financial industry.
I hold that OWS blindly lashing out at the 'corporate forces of the world' is as stupid as saying 'government is the problem' and that all regulation of the financial industry is wrong.
#19
The funny thing is the more they talked about affordable housing and the more houses that were built, the more expensive it was. Then comes the mortgage meltdown, the cost of housing finally starts coming down a bit and they're freaking out about that. "Oh, no!" they say. "People are under water! We've got to do something to prop up the housing market!" I find that most peculiar.
I see nothing whatsoever peculiar about those contradictory goals. "They" don't really exist as a single entity, but are made up of competing special interests. Propping up housing prices and making housing cheaper are simply incompatible once you think through it. Growing an economy by piling up massive public and private debt is also ultimately impossible.
#20
Credit is the answer and credit is the problem.
Why Credit? Increasing Credit causes a temporary bump in Money velocity simulating economic growth (but long term slowing it down with Interest hence credit needs to increase to keep the illusion going).
Why do Governments want this? The taxation favoured by governments is taxation on incomes (sales, income, savings, investment, corporation etc) and that harms economic growth, as fining people for wealth creation will of course do (they also reward people for not creating wealth to compound the problem).
How did they increase Credit Volume? Simple they lowered the reserve requirements so that one persons loan was another banks asset and this debt/credit cascaded into faking economic growth.
What happening now? You're seeing economic reality with real eyes.
What do you have to do? Go back to Classic Capitalism (see Adam Smith and David Ricardo) and tax what governments create namely land rights, contracts, patents, copyrights and other legal monopolies and STOP taxing wealth creation.
#21
Propping up housing prices and making housing cheaper are simply incompatible once you think through it.
Right. But what I'm trying to say is the goal never was to make housing affordable. It was all a crock of crap. It was never anything but a big lie. You don't think Bawney Fwank understood that all those fraudulent exotic mortgages were going to result in housing inflation?
There were people who were making a helluva lot of money from the housing bubble and their pet politicians were only too happy to grease the skids as long as they got their bribes campaign contributions.
#22
Poor justice. Another year of no sex for you was it? You seem terribly frustrated in incoherent.
Maybe your arranged rape/marriage thing in a black-sack isn't doing it for you?
#23
Here in Sacramento the organizer of the sometimes two dozen people who showed up could not outline his plan. When I passed by ground zero this am on my way to work, there was a tent and maybe ten people milling around it. Might have been homeless or could have been SEIU.
#24
Imagine you had a group that liked to protest from time to time but they kind of liked the President, yet had this need to get out there and feel good about themselves by protesting their pet causes. I wonder what such a protest movement would look like....
I suspect it would look exactly like what we're getting out of the Wall Street Occupation and we've got Dem operatives trying to guide and aim it but I suspect they won't have much success.
#25
But what I'm trying to say is the goal never was to make housing affordable. Some were fooled into thinking that was the goal, and statements to that effect were swallowed thoughtlessly by the MSM & the many other supporters of the housing bubble. Hardly any politician has pointed this out. Certainly NINJA loans, Alt-ARMS, 0% down loans, and failure to use traditional standards of mortgage lending created the illusion of housing that was easy to buy through a mortgage, although not so easy that it was possible for the original borrower to pay off. There were people who were making a helluva lot of money from the housing bubble. And those same people are all still behind 'propping up real estate' by means fair or foul.
#27
You can sum up the manifesto of the 99%ers in three main statements:
1. I am absolutely entitled to be happy, stress free, anxiety free, perfectly healthy, well-rested, and entertained every waking minute of my life, and if I cant pay for these things myself (for whatever reasons, including laziness and incompetence on my part) it is the responsibility of everyone else to do so.
2. If anything happens that all of these conditions arent met, then it is the primary police, regulatory, and tax-policy responsibility of government - and the primary obligation of taxpayers - to see that they are restored immediately.
3. If these things arent restored immediately, then I will use whatever means electoral or violent to smash anyone or any business who is better off than I am.
My response to these as follows:
1. There is no right to happiness. Only its pursuit. You are not entitled to a materially excellent, stress free, exciting life. Nobody who has ever lived is entitled to this. When you adopt the attitude that it is ultimately the responsibility not of yourself but of some agency outside of yourself to provide you with material satisfaction and happiness and freedom from anxiety, you void your humanity. The default condition of humans throughout millions of years of history is hungry, stressed, and in need of sleep. Until the past few decades in the Western and Westernized world and with a free market, capitalistic system, this is how most people lived. The capitalist system you all seem to hate also had some of this stress and is far from perfect, but it is the only one that gave people an opportunity (not a guarantee, an OPPORTUNITY) to do something about it. Its not my fault that your politically correct history teachers imbued with leftist agendas failed to teach you any of this, or that your demagoguing leftist politicians were dishonest about what were historical norms in terms of what to expect out of life.
2. The primary purpose of government is to guarantee civil rights (negative rights, not positive economic ones), be an impartial judge in civil matters, provide equal access to energy and commerce, and then get the hell out of the way and let people sink or soar based upon their native skills, work ethic, and the value of their particular work at whatever the existing level of technology might be. Period. It is NOT to make sure that you have enough money for all the trinkets and outward signs of success and status. Not to free up money that you would have spent on medical care so you can have a new car by taking that medical money from your neighbor who earns more than you do. Not to put in regulations which guarantee your job security and income security at bulletproof levels. Weve had governments that are like that in the last hundred years or so. Review them and their histories and their human rights legacy and then decide which is best, that way or this one.
3. Its true that there was much malfeasance on Wall Street. The bad actors should go to jail. But everyone on Wall Street isnt bad, and Wall Street is only a tiny fraction of the business community. It is insanity to paint all business people with a broad brush as you do and want to crush them with protests and support politicians who promote a ridiculous level of regulation. Smash business and your wealthier neighbors and you will destroy any opportunity for yourself. Everyone cant have a good paying public sector job with great benefits where you dont have to work very hard and can retire at 58. And what jobs there are that are like that will not be increasing in number as time goes by, given the obvious failure of the big-government welfare/nanny/hyperregulatory state. Success in the private sector requires that you learn to manage stress. That you purge envy from your life. Learn to multitask. Learn to work within a hierarchy even if you arent at the top. Learn that your are valuable to your boss if you need to be told how to do something only once and learn and retain it forever (something you would certainly demand if you were boss). Learn that you may have to move and make other sacrifices in order to be somewhere where your skills are in demand. Learn that you may not get all the material things you want quickly and at once. Learn to be happy with whatever pay rate your neighbors and community have decided your labor or product is worth on a free market . The very fact that youre in this protest and failing to thrive, and that other young people are doing well and happy with less education and even lower pay than you, is prima facie evidence that you have not learned at least one and possibly several of these necessary things. Its not the fault of George Bush or businesspeople or devout Christians or Republicans - or Democrats, even. Its your own deficits, or your own stubbornness.
Beyond these specific things, there are other points I would make.
Your anger and efforts would be better directed at the (largely government) education system. In this you have been ill-served. It is overpriced, staffed primarily with people who arent there to be excellent but to get thirty years of guaranteed pay and a pension, who are not at all averse to using the bully pulpit they possess to propagandize instead of teach and conveniently forget to mention aspects of philosophies or historical facts that blow holes in their narrative, and their marketing of their services with respect to ultimate financial expectations has been largely dishonest. If you didnt fit in exactly to their expectations or were difficult to teach they would put you on Ritalin or some other drugs. That said, nobody forced you to go deeply into debt for an education that is more often an indoctrination with no guarantees of a marketable skill.
Likewise, your parents did you no favors. They had you play soccer in leagues that didnt keep score and gave trophies to all the teams regardless of how good or bad they were, shielding you from the concept of winning and losing, the notion that not everyone has the same skill set, and the idea that actions have consequences. They supported the notion of getting rid of class rank for valedictorian, got rid of physical education and home economics and recess. They filled you with the poisonous notion of outcome egalitarianism, the greatest lie of all.
The minute you were unhappy your parents brought you to the doctor and put you on happy pills. They bubble wrapped you so you would never be hurt or suffer consequences for bad actions or words. They insisted you go to college instead of getting a trade because they wanted to impress everyone with how awesome they were as parents as evidenced by sending all their kids to college.
Your media and information industry failed you, getting you to think that supporting Obama in 2008 was a blow against Wall Street by not reporting that Wall Street gave him five times more money than McCain. Protesting Wall Street but not Obama is illogical but understandable if you arent aware of his campaign finance connections. (If you know about them and are still protesting Wall Street but not Obama, youre a hypocrite.)
However, your biggest failure is to yourself. Whatever people or circumstances led you to believe that you deserve to have perfect, stress free happiness and everything you wanted or the government would get it for you, they were wrong, and so are you. Want to be successful and ultimately happy? Youll need to learn that you will have to sacrifice much in the short term. Youll be best friends with the concept of delayed gratification. Youll have to learn to deal with high stress levels, lack of sleep, and lack of material status among peers, not for a few hours or a day or two but for weeks or months or years. Youll learn to exist not being fully happy for extended times in your life without happy pills. Youll learn that there are things in life that make you happy like religion, community, volunteer work, and so many other things that have nothing to do with pay.
Youll learn to deal with all of this with dignity and a sense of humor, not pouty aggrieved entitlement.
Or youll fail utterly and cosmically deserve to fail, regardless of what happens to Wall Street.
Occupying Wall Street isnt the solution.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
10/07/2011 15:29 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Had to repost, it seems like someone excised my original comment, a lot of work went into it so I did save it just in case.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
10/07/2011 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Subsidies have been necessary for several decades now, to prop up our 'shuck and jive' economy.
#33
Best criticism of OWS I found here:theyre not willing to put in the work to find out The world is complicated. It takes a certain amount of work and study to even figure out what the hell is happening, much more to figure out who to blame...
Does that mean these protesters should do nothing? I dont think so. I think it means that these protesters should learn more. Somebody needs to go down there with books, and research papers, and copies of the Economist. And instead of marching and chanting, everybody down there needs to take a day or two to sit and read..
I just think it would take quite a bit more than a day or two or reading.
#36
CHINA DAILY FORUM > JP MORGAN FUNDED NYPD WALL STREET ARRESTS.
and
* SAME > IN ABSENCE OF A CREDIBLE PLAN, WE WILL HAVE GLOBAL FINANCIAL MELTDOWN IN TWO TO THREE WEEKS, SAYS IMF ADVISOR.
* SAME > ECONOMIC APOLCALYSPE GOES MAINSTREAM: IT WILL SPREAD EVERYWHERE [around World], MOST SERIOUS FINANCIAL CRISIS EVER, WORSE THAN THE GREAT DEPRESSION.
The House Judiciary Committee passed a bill yesterday that would make it a federal crime for U.S. residents to discuss or plan activities on foreign soil that, if carried out in the U.S., would violate the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) -- even if the planned activities are legal in the countries where they're carried out.
The new law, sponsored by Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) allows prosecutors to bring conspiracy charges against anyone who discusses, plans or advises someone else to engage in any activity that violates the CSA, the massive federal law that prohibits drugs like marijuana and strictly regulates prescription medication.
"Under this bill, if a young couple plans a wedding in Amsterdam, and as part of the wedding, they plan to buy the bridal party some marijuana, they would be subject to prosecution," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for reforming the country's drug laws.
"The strange thing is that the purchase of and smoking the marijuana while you're there wouldn't be illegal. But this law would make planning the wedding from the U.S. a federal crime."
The law could also potentially affect academics and medical professionals. For example, a U.S. doctor who works with overseas doctors or government officials on needle exchange programs could be subject to criminal prosecution. A U.S. resident who advises someone in another country on how to grow marijuana or how to run a medical marijuana dispensary would also be in violation of the new law, even if medical marijuana is legal in the country where the recipient of the advice resides. If interpreted broadly enough, a prosecutor could possibly even charge doctors, academics and policymakers from contributing their expertise to additional experiments like the drug decriminalization project Portugal, which has successfully reduced drug crime, addiction and overdose deaths.
The Controlled Substances Act also regulates the distribution of prescription drugs, so something as simple as emailing a friend vacationing in Tijuana some suggestions on where to buy prescription medication over the counter could subject a U.S. resident to criminal prosecution. "It could even be something like advising them where to buy cold medicine overseas that they'd have to show I.D. to get here in the U.S.," Piper says.
Conspiracy laws in general are problematic when applied to the drug war. They give prosecutors extraordinary discretion to charge minor players, such as girlfriends or young siblings, with the crimes committed by major drug distributors.
They're also easier convictions to win, and can allow prosecutors to navigate around restrictions like statutes of limitations, so long as the old offense can be loosely linked to a newer one. The Smith bill would expand those powers. Under the Amsterdam wedding scenario, anyone who participated in the planning of the wedding with knowledge of the planned pot purchase would be guilty of conspiracy, even if their particular role was limited to buying flowers or booking the hotel.
The law is a reaction to a 2007 case in which the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals threw out the convictions of two men who planned the transfer of cocaine from a Colombian drug cartel to a Saudi prince for distribution in Europe. Though the men planned the transaction from Miami, the court found that because the cocaine never reached the U.S. and was never intended to reach the U.S., the men hadn't committed any crime against the United States.
It wouldn't be the first time. Over the last several years, a number of executives from online gambling companies have been arrested in U.S. airports and charged with felony violations of U.S. gambling, racketeering and money laundering laws, even though the executives were citizens of and the companies were incorporated in countries where online gambling is legal.
Really, the war on drugs is a failure and furthering this crap just erodes more and more of our rights and makes the police and federal agencies more tyrannical.
F@k you and F@k your committee. You are part of the problem, quit being part of the F@kn problem and put the small government guys back on the line.
I mean, tits on a turtle, its stuff like this which makes Paul's border fence keeps us in talk sound reasonable. The potential for government abuse has begun the second it passes and will just get worse especially if obamacare sticks.
#5
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law,.. - 6th Amendment
Part of the slippery slope when they started to extend jurisdiction beyond the sovereign territories of the United States for criminal acts* against Americans.
Forty-six House Democrats have joined forces this week to ask the chamber's Judiciary Committee to investigate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for ethics violations. The Democratic lawmakers' complaint argues that reports of Thomas' actions--including those related to the high-profile political activism of his wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas--have raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
"Public records clearly demonstrate that Justice Thomas has failed to accurately disclose information concerning the income and employment status of his wife, as required by law," Democrats led by Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) and Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) wrote in a letter (pdf) Wednesday to leaders of the Judiciary Committee. The Democrats also question whether Thomas accurately reported gifts and inappropriately solicited donations.
Blumenauer's office confirmed to The Ticket Thursday afternoon that 46 lawmakers have signed on.
Liberal watchdog group Common Cause recently reported that Thomas' wife earned around $1.6 million between 1997 and 2011--and that Justice Thomas did not report her income over the same time span. Thomas said he "inadvertently" failed to file information on wife's employment "due to a misunderstanding of the filing instructions." Now I know why Obama was happy to let the health care case go to the supreme court. They are planning on taking Thomas out.
#3
The only way a supreme court justice can be restricted is by impeachment, starting in the House, which ain't gonna happen.
Amusingly, while the Senate needs a 2/3rds majority to convict, the House only needs a simple majority to impeach. So if the Senate gets too obnoxious about it, the House can decide to impeach Kagan, Holder, Sotomayer, Biden, and even Obama.
The Senate would be *obligated* to actually hold a trial for them, even if it was for just a day.
#4
Impeachment can happen any time a House majority gets around to it. Conviction on articles of impeachment by the Senate is a different matter. Eric "Place" Holder richly deserves impeachment and removal from office.
#6
While the Democrat senate would never vote to impeach Holder, no matter the offense, the House has several ways to both utterly derail any Thomas harassment.
For example, they can demand a special prosecutor for Holder, or they could impeach him. In either case, nobody is going to be talking about Thomas for weeks, and the public will just see any Thomas investigation as political tit-for-tat. So they will ignore both.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Barack Obama went on national television yesterday to insist that his jobs bill would add up to economic growth. CNS News points out that the math itself doesnt add up:
Forty-six House Democrats have joined forces this week to ask the chamber's Judiciary Committee to investigate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for ethics violations. The Democratic lawmakers' complaint argues that reports of Thomas' actions--including those related to the high-profile political activism of his wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas--have raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
