< < I have been forced to concede that Barack Obama is one of the foremost and accomplished economic minds in the US today. Yesterday he claimed he has created 22 million jobs since becoming president, yet those of little faith quickly belittled him and his claim. But they simply do not understand how a truly brilliant mind operates and that he is infallible and incapable of admitting a mistake.
Therefore he must have created nearly 22 million jobs. He just didn't say where or how. So there must be an explanation for his statement -- and there is.
The answer is overseas. Since January of 2009 the US has purchased $1.03 Trillion dollars (average of $342.5 Billion per year) worth of goods from the Peoples Republic of China. Over the same period of time their annual Gross Domestic Product has increased by an average of $466.6 Billion per year.
But more importantly the Chinese have created an average of 11 million jobs per year over this time. Since the US purchases from China averaged 73.4 per cent of their GDP growth it is only logical to assume the US is responsible for creating an average of 8.0 million jobs per year for a total of 24.0 million new jobs created.
When the loss of 1.6 million jobs in the US since he became President is factored the result: job growth of: 22.4 million.
See, our brilliant and fearless leader is incapable of making a mistake or error so it is reassuring to know that his record remains intact. It is just that the rest of us are too ignorant to appreciate his unique gifts. > >
>And I was just listening to barry tell Congress to extend the tax cuts? Say what? A liberal asking for tax cuts? I thought they didn't believe in vodoo economics?<
Any economist will tell you that adding a couple of percent of income to the lower 75% of the economic strata will help stimulate the economy. I believe that is what Obama asked for via a continuation of the Social Security rate cuts. As far as I know, Obama is not asking for the Bush tax cuts to be continued, which would not be anywhere near as stimulative.
We gave our manufacturing base away in the 80's.Electronics,cloth,shoes,machine tools,auto parts.All for the sake of lower labor cost and offshore taxes.We lost millions of construction jobs recently in the housing bubble.Those jobs aren't coming back.New jobs are available in green energy but the oil and coal lobby are holding this back.Those jobs will eventually base overseas and we will be the last country to embrace green energy.But somehow or another it's the sitting presidents fault?
Outsourcing jobs that US guys are not interested to do- that is fine.
Assuming every worker in US is doing something more meaningful. But that is not happening, although it started that way as Cobol programming in the late 80s and the companies in india have come a long way since.
Perhaps the only way to redeem ourselves is to come up with very innovative energy solutions, and products.
Now the outsourcing business is simply a part of our lives, just like the internet, without it - we cannot access bank accounts, emails, pay bills etc.
The effect of outsourcing can be contained or neutralized if products - proprietary to US can be sold, not one but a list.
Or even if it continues to go this way, I dont see anything wrong in printing dollar bills and selling them to China and one day you nullify or write off the debt, becasuse China can never fight US for reneging on the bills. So I guess as long as there is a sucker to buy the bonds...
Bush beats Obama's deficit spending by 5 to 1, but Romney targets the wrong guy to whine about
Because front-running GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney keeps harping on President Obama's deficit spending, Washington Post columnist Ezra Klein teamed up recently with some folks at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities to calculate which recent president's policies have led to the largest growth in the national debt. George W. Bush was the winner. And not by a nose.
From 2001 to 2009, Bush's policies, including two wars, higher Pentagon spending in addition to those wars, tax cuts, higher discretionary spending and the prescription drug program contributed $5.1 trillion to the nation's debt. From 2009 to 2017 (using projections for 2011-2017), Obama's policies have added or will add $983 billion. Not even in the same ballpark. Klein:
Here are the calculations:
For Bush: $1.812 trillion from the "Bush tax cuts"; $853 billion from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; $616 in higher Pentagon spending outside those wars; $608 billion in non-defense discretionary spending; $480 billion in "other tax"-related matters; $293 billion in entitlement changes; $224 billion in spending for Trouble Assets Relief Program (TARP) and the Housing and Economic Recovery Act; and $180 billion for the prescription drug bill.
For Obama: $874 billion for the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (the stimulus package); $620 billion for the two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts; $324 in "other mandatory spending"; and $113 billion in "other revenue." Subtotal: $1.931 trillion. Subtracted from that are policies that reduce the net deficit: $502 billion in automatic spending cuts; $271 reduction in defense spending; $123 billion in reduced health care spending; $51 billion in reduced non-defense discretionary spending. Total: $983 billion.