Obama claims he will create 4 million jobs but "subject to significant margins of error"

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I hope he does create millions of jobs along with saving as many as possible. I hope he puts us on the upswing and the economy is thriving again in a reasonable time frame. I hope he put the US back on top again. I want him to be the most successful President in US history. That would be good for all of us. I don't think anyone in this country that has a brain in their head wants him to fail. If he messes things up more than they are now, we will have plenty to cry about. Until that time, I'm behind him 100%. This county is fcked up in many ways. We need to follow someones ideas to get it back to where it belongs again.

[peejay 327]

A good start would be to make E-Verify mandatory. Ridding the economy of illegal aliens would go a long way toward setting priorities. No need to deport. They'll pack up their marbles and go home with them when the golden cow quits giving cream.

There is a lot of bang to that buck and it won't cost billions. It would likely save billions along with adding jobs that really should be done by Americans.

Along with ending the corruption and illegality involved in this sorrid mess.

[Nagishkaw 510]

Well said!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A good start would be to make E-Verify mandatory. Ridding the economy of illegal aliens would go a long way toward setting priorities. No need to deport. They'll pack up their marbles and go home with them when the golden cow quits giving cream.

There is a lot of bang to that buck and it won't cost billions. It would likely save billions along with adding jobs that really should be done by Americans.

Along with ending the corruption and illegality involved in this sorrid mess.

Good grief. Peejay, you have no clue about the economics of it all....and no, I don't want to turn this thread into another argument over immigration.

[peejay 327]

A good start would be to make E-Verify mandatory. Ridding the economy of illegal aliens would go a long way toward setting priorities. No need to deport. They'll pack up their marbles and go home with them when the golden cow quits giving cream.

There is a lot of bang to that buck and it won't cost billions. It would likely save billions along with adding jobs that really should be done by Americans.

Along with ending the corruption and illegality involved in this sorrid mess.

Good grief. Peejay, you have no clue about the economics of it all....and no, I don't want to turn this thread into another argument over immigration.

Since you're the expert on economics and the wonders of illegal immigration...why not enlighten us.

[Dan J 277]

A good start would be to make E-Verify mandatory. Ridding the economy of illegal aliens would go a long way toward setting priorities. No need to deport. They'll pack up their marbles and go home with them when the golden cow quits giving cream.

There is a lot of bang to that buck and it won't cost billions. It would likely save billions along with adding jobs that really should be done by Americans.

Along with ending the corruption and illegality involved in this sorrid mess.

Arrests along the border are down, not because we put a wall up, or better enforced laws. But because the economy is tanking, there are few job opportunities even for illegal immigrants.

This problem has always been about economics. No matter what you do about enforcement, that will never change. People will always find a way in. There will always be someone to hire them.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A good start would be to make E-Verify mandatory. Ridding the economy of illegal aliens would go a long way toward setting priorities. No need to deport. They'll pack up their marbles and go home with them when the golden cow quits giving cream.

There is a lot of bang to that buck and it won't cost billions. It would likely save billions along with adding jobs that really should be done by Americans.

Along with ending the corruption and illegality involved in this sorrid mess.

Good grief. Peejay, you have no clue about the economics of it all....and no, I don't want to turn this thread into another argument over immigration.

Since you're the expert on economics and the wonders of illegal immigration...why not enlighten us.

We've been down that road many times, amigo.

[Jasman0717 9]

Clinton generated a lot of new jobs, maybe Obama can do the same

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Clinton generated a lot of new jobs, maybe Obama can do the same

We need to find the next bubble...if possible. The most tangible and promising venture is in alternative/renewable energy.

[mawilson 2,133]

Clinton generated a lot of new jobs, maybe Obama can do the same

We need to find the next bubble...if possible. The most tangible and promising venture is in alternative/renewable energy.

Oh no, do you really want Krugman to whine about the next impending recession for the next 10 years?

[mawilson 2,133]

From the same source:

University of Maryland economist Peter Morici said the analysis attempted an economic justification for a political decision. He said evidence suggests that working class families would spend the modest tax credits — $500 per individual or $1,000 per family — on low-cost, imported products that do little for the U.S. economy. He also said state and local governments don't need as much aid as Obama is proposing.

"They should stick to the infrastructure spending" in the plan and jettison much of the rest, Morici said in an interview, because that is the most likely proposal to provide a short-term economic boost and long-term benefits.

That sounds logical.

You think it's logical to to produce an analysis that can be described as an attempt at an "economic justification for a political decision"?

Can you imagine if Bush produced an analysis like that?

I thought we were going to get an economic decision, not a political one. Instead, we get a political decision with an economic justification. Pathetic!

That's Morici's take. I'd like to know how he can qualify that statement.

Oh Steven, Steven. What does he know that you don't know betta. When are you going to get the Nobel, Steven?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

From the same source:

University of Maryland economist Peter Morici said the analysis attempted an economic justification for a political decision. He said evidence suggests that working class families would spend the modest tax credits — $500 per individual or $1,000 per family — on low-cost, imported products that do little for the U.S. economy. He also said state and local governments don't need as much aid as Obama is proposing.

"They should stick to the infrastructure spending" in the plan and jettison much of the rest, Morici said in an interview, because that is the most likely proposal to provide a short-term economic boost and long-term benefits.

That sounds logical.

You think it's logical to to produce an analysis that can be described as an attempt at an "economic justification for a political decision"?

Can you imagine if Bush produced an analysis like that?

I thought we were going to get an economic decision, not a political one. Instead, we get a political decision with an economic justification. Pathetic!

That's Morici's take. I'd like to know how he can qualify that statement.

Oh Steven, Steven. What does he know that you don't know betta. When are you going to get the Nobel, Steven?

Right after you win that Emmy for comedy.

[aidan80 9]

Clinton generated a lot of new jobs, maybe Obama can do the same

Clinton did a great job, I've no doubt Obama will do a good job. After all he'd have to try very hard to screw things up as much as Bush has!

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Margin of errror: between -4.1 million (no net gain/loss) and -8.2 million (4.1 million jobs lost).

[mawilson 2,133]

Margin of errror: between -4.1 million (no net gain/loss) and -8.2 million (4.1 million jobs lost).

I'm happy to see I'm not the only one with zero faith in the Federal Government's ability to spend the money wisely.