June Jobs Report

archer wrote: Hmmmm...OK, the conservatives want to make government smaller, cut funding or eliminate some departments,but think unemployment is too high. (which it is). So what do the conservatives plan to do with all the unemployed government workers they will create?

I think you already know the answer, soylent green. Duh.

So you do realize the dilemma....shrink government and raise the unemployment numbers. How well do you think that will play with voters?

So the best course of action is to continue to grow the size of Gubment and continue to count on the Gubment for everything? That's no solution, that's Socialism.

No it isn't socialism, and I didn't say it was the solution. Nice deflection though. The question was how do the Republicans spin putting thousands of government employees out of work and increasing the unemployment numbers? All we hear is how Romney will create jobs, but reducing the size of government will destroy jobs

archer wrote: No it isn't socialism, and I didn't say it was the solution. Nice deflection though. The question was how do the Republicans spin putting thousands of government employees out of work and increasing the unemployment numbers? All we hear is how Romney will create jobs, but reducing the size of government will destroy jobs

Looks like Otis answered this one already.

otisptoadwater wrote: Well, let's see... If Gubment is smaller and more efficient then they need less revenue to operate. That would mean that the 99% would be able to keep more of their own money and do crazy things like start new businesses and invest in other companies that are succeeding. Imagine being able to pay off debts and not need to be as dependent on credit.

Or we could go the other way, everyone works for the Gubment and everyone in the 99% gets what the Gubment decides they should have. North Korea and Cuba are examples of how that model works.

mtntrekker wrote:

archer wrote: No it isn't socialism, and I didn't say it was the solution. Nice deflection though. The question was how do the Republicans spin putting thousands of government employees out of work and increasing the unemployment numbers? All we hear is how Romney will create jobs, but reducing the size of government will destroy jobs

Looks like Otis answered this one already.

otisptoadwater wrote: Well, let's see... If Gubment is smaller and more efficient then they need less revenue to operate. That would mean that the 99% would be able to keep more of their own money and do crazy things like start new businesses and invest in other companies that are succeeding. Imagine being able to pay off debts and not need to be as dependent on credit.

Or we could go the other way, everyone works for the Gubment and everyone in the 99% gets what the Gubment decides they should have. North Korea and Cuba are examples of how that model works.

A statement that unrealistic is hardly an answer.

.....read my previous post.....trickle down economics has never worked......although the right does love to pretend that it will ......someday......maybe......they hope.

So I ask again....how will the Republicans sell the American people on the idea of reducing the size of government, throwing thousands out of work, and increasing unemployment?

archer wrote:

mtntrekker wrote:

archer wrote: No it isn't socialism, and I didn't say it was the solution. Nice deflection though. The question was how do the Republicans spin putting thousands of government employees out of work and increasing the unemployment numbers? All we hear is how Romney will create jobs, but reducing the size of government will destroy jobs

Looks like Otis answered this one already.

otisptoadwater wrote: Well, let's see... If Gubment is smaller and more efficient then they need less revenue to operate. That would mean that the 99% would be able to keep more of their own money and do crazy things like start new businesses and invest in other companies that are succeeding. Imagine being able to pay off debts and not need to be as dependent on credit.

Or we could go the other way, everyone works for the Gubment and everyone in the 99% gets what the Gubment decides they should have. North Korea and Cuba are examples of how that model works.

A statement that unrealistic is hardly an answer.

.....read my previous post.....trickle down economics has never worked......although the right does love to pretend that it will ......someday......maybe......they hope.

So I ask again....how will the Republicans sell the American people on the idea of reducing the size of government, throwing thousands out of work, and increasing unemployment?

It's just the main difference between liberal and conservative economics. Conservatives believe that tax revenue increases more as businesses become more successful while liberals believe that tax revenues are increased more by simply raising taxes on the successful. If you believe that raising taxes on the more successful will not limit their future success, then you will never understand conservatives and we will never understand you.

There are going to be government caused job losses from the winding down of the 2 wars, and inevitable defense cuts. More "created" Government jobs are not the answer, state and locals need only the jobs that are required and affordable under their fixed state and local budgets.

Rick....the question wasn't about taxes.....nor was the question about military job losses due to winding down the wars lol ....I certainly didn't suggest creating more government jobs.

I'll try one more time....how will the Republicans sell the voters on their intent to shrink the size of government when that will involve putting thousands out of work and increase unemployment?

How did Obama sell the voters on the thousands of NASA scientists/engineers launch workers, contractors that were let go when the space shuttle program ended? Its only the start. The answer is its already happening and no one is telling the voters anything except the BS they want the voters to hear, they are politicians concentrating on their campaign commercials.