The Republican Thread

[DukeNukeEm]

It's about time.

[Cknolls]

It does seem odd that if you search Google for any articles in News with the key words here, the only articles that come up are from blogs and the Wash Times. No actual news sources. I'll reserve judgement until an actual journalist covers the story. Especially since, reading the linked article, you will note the complete lack of any official statement of any kind - just suppostiion from the writer.

 

 

 

Holds breath for a record two weeks, waiting for MSM to cover story, finally passes away.

[mr_genius]

oops

 

http://www.republicans.waysandmeans.house....cumentID=150826

 

7 Months After Stimulus 49 of 50 States Have Lost Jobs

America Now Over 6 Million Jobs Shy of Administration's Projections

[Balta1701]

Therefore; a much larger stimulus package should have been considered.

[mr_genius]

Therefore; a much larger stimulus package should have been considered.

 

well, that settles it. more stimulus money!

[Balta1701]

well, that settles it. more stimulus money!

You say so sarcastically, but that's exactly what Keynes's work says.

[NorthSideSox72]

oops

 

http://www.republicans.waysandmeans.house....cumentID=150826

I think its funny you choose the 7 months number, which is actually 5 months of big jobs losses, followed by the economic trends reversing the past two months.

 

But really, the stimulus bill was never going to be a huge boost within the first 6 months anyway. No one ever said it would be.

 

[Rex Kickass]

I think its funny you choose the 7 months number, which is actually 5 months of big jobs losses, followed by the economic trends reversing the past two months.

 

But really, the stimulus bill was never going to be a huge boost within the first 6 months anyway. No one ever said it would be.

 

Especially since the vast majority of the stimulus money hasn't left government bank accounts yet.

[Balta1701]

Especially since the vast majority of the stimulus money hasn't left government bank accounts yet.

Actually I think something like 25% or more already has, which is pretty good considering the contracting process.

 

it could actually have been better but we cut back on the aid to the states, which would have substantially cut job losses and gotten the money out even faster.

[Rex Kickass]

Actually I think something like 25% or more already has, which is pretty good considering the contracting process.

 

it could actually have been better but we cut back on the aid to the states, which would have substantially cut job losses and gotten the money out even faster.

 

Actually, that's not really true. Cutting back on state aid would have meant thousands more government layoffs from various states.

[Balta1701]

Actually, that's not really true. Cutting back on state aid would have meant thousands more government layoffs from various states.

Read what I said again.

[Rex Kickass]

Read what I said again.

I need glasses, apparently.

[mr_genius]

I think its funny you choose the 7 months number, which is actually 5 months of big jobs losses, followed by the economic trends reversing the past two months.

 

But really, the stimulus bill was never going to be a huge boost within the first 6 months anyway. No one ever said it would be.

 

ah, so you predict in another year and a half the Obama numbers will have played out? i don't think there will be any jobs recovery until, at best, 2014. if ever. I think those jobs are gone for good. but lets all hope i'm wrong.

[kapkomet]

ah, so you predict in another year and a half the Obama numbers will have played out? i don't think there will be any jobs recovery until, at best, 2014. if ever. I think those jobs are gone for good. but lets all hope i'm wrong.

They are. There's no manufacturing sector to retrain people for. And, these companies are learning that they can do without the employees termed during this downturn and still turn a nice profit. I keep hearing "GREEN" is what will save us, but that's just wishful thinking at this point.

[NorthSideSox72]

ah, so you predict in another year and a half the Obama numbers will have played out? i don't think there will be any jobs recovery until, at best, 2014. if ever. I think those jobs are gone for good. but lets all hope i'm wrong.

 

 

They are. There's no manufacturing sector to retrain people for. And, these companies are learning that they can do without the employees termed during this downturn and still turn a nice profit. I keep hearing "GREEN" is what will save us, but that's just wishful thinking at this point.

 

So you guys think that "this is it", huh? Unlike every other economic recession the country has endured, THIS one will end it all. Seriously? Because that is incredibly far-fetched. Anything is possible, but your scenario is extremely unlikely.

 

As for the stimulus play-out, it will happen over a period of years, I don't know exactly how many - maybe 2 or 3 or 5.

 

And re: Kap's point about "green" and both of your points about manufacturing job losses, well, that's sort of true - many of those jobs are gone for good. Well, guess what - this isn't new to this recession, this is what economies have to do - mature into new realities. And you are damn right that means "green" tech, but more broadly, that means we need to all have a come to Jesus moment here, and realize that heavy manufacturing has not been the engine of success for the American economy for at least 40 years. This is NOT something new. The thing that put us over the top in recent decades, and at an increasing rate, was getting out in front of technology and beign innovators, inventors, and marketers. This is what drives our economy to be such a powerhouse. Green is part of that, but really any new tech or new business is what we need to focus on. I don't understand why people don't see this.

 

[Cknolls]

Actually, that's not really true. Cutting back on state aid would have meant thousands more government layoffs from various states.

 

 

Which wpould have been a good thing. Bloated state and federal payrolls are a huge problem that will not go away. I still have not heard how these states are going to pay for the cadillac retirement plans they give their workers. Without cutting benefits I think they should mandate no benefits before age 65, at least.When more than 2/3 and sometimes 4/5 of your budget is consumed by payrolls and benefits, action is needed. But we don't want to offend the unions now do we?....

[Rex Kickass]

Which wpould have been a good thing. Bloated state and federal payrolls are a huge problem that will not go away. I still have not heard how these states are going to pay for the cadillac retirement plans they give their workers. Without cutting benefits I think they should mandate no benefits before age 65, at least.When more than 2/3 and sometimes 4/5 of your budget is consumed by payrolls and benefits, action is needed. But we don't want to offend the unions now do we?....

 

So when unemployment is within striking distance of 10%, the U6 number is around 17%, you are advocating more layoffs? You can make the case that federal payrolls and state payrolls should be tightened up... but it would probably make sense to address that issue when there are less than 6+ unemployed people for every current available job.

[southsider2k5]

So when unemployment is within striking distance of 10%, the U6 number is around 17%, you are advocating more layoffs? You can make the case that federal payrolls and state payrolls should be tightened up... but it would probably make sense to address that issue when there are less than 6+ unemployed people for every current available job.

 

Yet by taking money out of executives pockets, and putting it back into the government, this is exactly what the Democrats are falling over themselves to praise today.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yet by taking money out of executives pockets, and putting it back into the government, this is exactly what the Democrats are falling over themselves to praise today.

The money isn't going to the government, its just staying in the company, in that case, as I understand it.

 

[kapkomet]

The money isn't going to the government, its just staying in the company, in that case, as I understand it.

Which is more or less the same thing in this specific example.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Which is more or less the same thing in this specific example.

Not really, not in terms of what the money will go to, or in terms of the effect on perception, which is key here.

 

[southsider2k5]

Not really, not in terms of what the money will go to, or in terms of the effect on perception, which is key here.

 

Perception a garbage reason for this.

[kapkomet]

Not really, not in terms of what the money will go to, or in terms of the effect on perception, which is key here.

So what about perception?

 

ETA, nevermind, SS said it.

[NorthSideSox72]

Perception a garbage reason for this.

Totally disagree. Sending a message to other executives to keep themselves in check, to not take companies barrelling down on immense risk and not caring because of their personal parachute, absolutely has value. It has value in the same sense that any criminal punishment would - sends a message to would be criminals to think twice.

 

Now, as it happens, I also agree with the move on its own, sole merits. You are into the government for billions because you failed catastrophically as a company - well, guess what? Now we, the taxpayers, own you, and you have to live by our rules, until you can get back up on your own two feet. Deal with it.

 

[southsider2k5]

Totally disagree. Sending a message to other executives to keep themselves in check, to not take companies barrelling down on immense risk and not caring because of their personal parachute, absolutely has value. It has value in the same sense that any criminal punishment would - sends a message to would be criminals to think twice.

 

Now, as it happens, I also agree with the move on its own, sole merits. You are into the government for billions because you failed catastrophically as a company - well, guess what? Now we, the taxpayers, own you, and you have to live by our rules, until you can get back up on your own two feet. Deal with it.

 

The idea that somehow the compensation packages of executives have pretty much any financial impact on the bottom line of these companies is a joke. GM as a company had revenue of $150 billion in 2008. Even if you want to use the extreme number of $100million, you are still talking about less than 1 tenth of 1 percent of the bottom line. The irony is that you can make a much, much better argument for the impact of the union negotiated wages having a much larger impact on the bottom lines of GM, and where is the outcry to limit their compensation, or to have the government take them over? Like I said, the perception is garbage.