Obama's Budget Baloney

On the plus side at least his lies sound like he is a member of the tea party so all is not yet lost.


http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/05/o ... et-baloney

"This week, President Barack Obama proposed a budget "that will create new jobs in manufacturing and energy and innovation and infrastructure, and we'll pay for every dime of it by cutting unnecessary spending, closing wasteful tax loopholes!"

What? I must have fallen asleep and woken up in 2008. That could not be something he'd claim after five years in office—"...

BlazerBob wrote: On the plus side at least his lies sound like he is a member of the tea party so all is not yet lost.


http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/05/o ... et-baloney

"This week, President Barack Obama proposed a budget "that will create new jobs in manufacturing and energy and innovation and infrastructure, and we'll pay for every dime of it by cutting unnecessary spending, closing wasteful tax loopholes!"

What? I must have fallen asleep and woken up in 2008. That could not be something he'd claim after five years in office—"...

Why so skeptical Bob? Just do a quick Google search and you'll find all kinds of new companies that have created new jobs under Barry's tenure, take the green energy industry for example. The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:

Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Schneider Electric ($86 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

For those who just have to have a source because this just can't be the truth: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/18/president-obamas-taxpayer-backed-green-energy-failures/

Oh, wait... Well I guess the silver lining is that all of those unemployed people will have 2 years, maybe more of unemployment benefits and Obamacare (assuming they can afford the plans...).

BlazerBob wrote: On the plus side at least his lies sound like he is a member of the tea party so all is not yet lost.


http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/05/o ... et-baloney

"This week, President Barack Obama proposed a budget "that will create new jobs in manufacturing and energy and innovation and infrastructure, and we'll pay for every dime of it by cutting unnecessary spending, closing wasteful tax loopholes!"

What? I must have fallen asleep and woken up in 2008. That could not be something he'd claim after five years in office—"...

Man isn't that true. I wonder how ready those shovel ready jobs are now? He can always hire a million more ACA navigators and build them their own little Starbuck-like buildings so all his idiot voter base can have easier access to healthcare. I hear prisons are starting to release early in CA due to excellent governance, that would be a great recruiting area for the Preezy and his clueless HHS Secretary (He'd have to use his pen and his phone to allow felons to vote)

Here are some job numbers from the last few months...

Employers added 139,000 private sector jobs, payroll processor ADP said in its monthly National Employment Report, a figure below Wall Street’s expectations of 160,000, and only slightly stronger than January’s pace of 127,000, which was revised down from 175,000.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101465121

For my job at the newspaper, I get ALL the job numbers from Park County, State and Federal in emails, press releases and detailed white papers every month.

And I get all the REVISIONS that are released, usually a few months after the original figures. A big problem with the way they compile job creation numbers is that they release these preliminary figures, those get reported and then the real truth comes out later.

Most of the general public are not digging too deep to keep track of revisions, corrections and other factors that effect the overall job numbers. Most of the general public do not get (or ever see) the full set of metrics like I do every month.

And you always have to factor in the amount of people who drop out of the job market. But they don't use that figure as part of the unemployment percentages.

Between the anemic creation of new jobs, the revision and correction of job numbers and the dropout rate of job seekers, this job "recovery" is not anywhere near as robust as anyone wants to make you believe.

And I would be the last person to complain about a robust job recovery. I need a full time job. I would be thrilled if the job market was recovering at any meaningful rate.

That's my main beef with the whole job numbers calculation the government gives to us. You know damn well they know and understand the dropout rate and they must know that the actual job numbers will always be revised (usually down in a shaky recovery)... why not give us the real truth by not releasing the numbers until the actual ones are known? You know that if the job participation rate was to suddenly increase, therefore raising the unemployment rate, we would be hearing how great it is that so many more people were reentering the job market and we shouldn't be worried about a rising unemployment percentage.

But alas, only a small percentage of the public or the media seem to be concerned about knowing the real facts so there really is no incentive for government to be transparent.