Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The republicans in congress say the they have all of the job bills that will create jobs; however, the only thing that they do is help the rich get richer without creating any jobs, but it sure does sound good when they call them jobs bills.
So they interview 5 economists and not even those 5 economists agree, but the author still comes to the conclusion that economists agree that the jobs bill will not create jobs?
In reality none of them even say that it won't create jobs, they say they will.
There is no way to create jobs in the next 6 months which is what Obama needs. That is impossible.
Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's Analytics, agreed that the bills would have almost no effect on job creation in the short term, though he was slightly more optimistic about their long-term prospects.
So a bill that in the long term creates jobs is a bad thing? Sorry, this article is completely dismissable and I would have been embarrassed to have posted it.
So they interview 5 economists and not even those 5 economists agree, but the author still comes to the conclusion that economists agree that the jobs bill will not create jobs?
In reality none of them even say that it won't create jobs, they say they will.
There is no way to create jobs in the next 6 months which is what Obama needs. That is impossible.
Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's Analytics, agreed that the bills would have almost no effect on job creation in the short term, though he was slightly more optimistic about their long-term prospects.
So a bill that in the long term creates jobs is a bad thing? Sorry, this article is completely dismissable and I would have been embarrassed to have posted it.
Slightly more optimistic is not the same thing as will create jobs in the future. You have to admit that these bills are in fact not Jobs Bills, but bills to promote a Republican agenda, but it is nice to claim that you have proposed and voted on jobs bills. Pure politics.
Very poor job of unbiased presentation. Excellent job of propaganda.
For instance checking EPA regs that have stunted business. No detailed discussion is presented re page and verse. What specifically will cause health problems? The new EPA will have us living a cave man lifestyle to ensure our safety. However, all we hear are generalizations about downstream health hazards. This stuff is so nebulous it constitutes nothing but propaganda. the writer's conclusion that Reps are simply obstructions, reveal his true intent of propagandizing for the Dems. Game over, just another hack minion with access to media publishing.
Obama's suggested legislation has been soundly defeated in a bi-partisan fashion and is his only claim to his campaign promise of encouraging bi-partisanship. Let's hear a story of why Obama's offering have been so soundly rejected in a bi-partisan vote.
Are the thse the same economists who told Obama that he could say with confidence that if he hadn't got the economy on track by the 3rd year he wouldn't run for a 2nd term?
Are these the same advsiors who told obama to say the UE rate would stay under 8% if his legislation was passed?
Why wouldn't Harry Reid bring the Rep bills to the floor just to embarass them.
Heve any of the bills by the house been bipartisan and HR refuses to bring them up for a vote?
Same advisors who told obama solyndra and other sonn failed solar companies was a good investment?
Same advisors who think it is a good idea to print money? Remeber when Geithner was questioned he said no way would we monitize in the US! Oops!!! where is the news story to explore that flub?
Same advisors who shucked and jived the numbers to get obamacare passed?
Yep we believe just becaiuse these people are economists, who went to the same schools as the economists who disagree with their classmates conclusions. We the people have not been served by this article except to reveal the traitorous nature of the news media.
Slightly more optimistic is not the same thing as will create jobs in the future.
And it's miles from the conclusion of the article.
Quote:
You have to admit that these bills are in fact not Jobs Bills, but bills to promote a Republican agenda, but it is nice to claim that you have proposed and voted on jobs bills. Pure politics.
Is building the pipeline on the Republican agenda? Yes it is. Will it create jobs? Yes it will.
Who is simply playing politics here? I think you are.
The republicans in congress say the they have all of the job bills that will create jobs; however, the only thing that they do is help the rich get richer without creating any jobs, but it sure does sound good when they call them jobs bills.
The republicans in congress say the they have all of the job bills that will create jobs; however, the only thing that they do is help the rich get richer without creating any jobs, but it sure does sound good when they call them jobs bills.
Despite what you may think. I am not a democrat, but calling the Republican bills jobs bills is just an outright lie.
You don't have to be a Democrat to be political. I noticed you didn't counter that the oil pipeline would indeed create jobs. You may not like those jobs being created (hence your need to interject politics) but indeed it would create jobs.
The pipeline would create a LOT of jobs - GOOD paying jobs, for a very long time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.