Also note, the total would have been even higher had it not been for state and local budget cuts -- the private sector added 230,000 jobs, but the public sector lost 14,000 jobs. Those were jobs that could have been saved were it not for conservative fiscal policies

....Wow Steve-O.......those good old Republicans now feeling more comfortable hiring......but I guess the uncertainty is now gone?........but but 'jobs could have been saved were it NOT for conservative fiscal polities!'

Public Sector jobs add ZERO to the Tax Revenues they take from it. its quite Simple. If i pay you 1000 dollars from the Govt Tax collected money and I take 200 dollars back it is not a Postive increase. its a Negative .. I have lost 800 dollars not gained 200 dollars

Steve: If that $1000 dollars is used to teach your children, save your house from burning to the ground, particularly if it saved your life, I'd usually consider that a plus. Unless you happen to actually be named Scott Walker and are, at least currently, the Governor of Wisconsin. :)

nice try Steve-505729. You might also credit those trade deals with Korea that President Obama won for us this past December.

Obama boasted that the deal will contribute significantly to his goal of doubling U.S. exports over the next 5 years by opening up the Korean market to American aerospace products, electronics, and cars and trucks.

“In short, the tariff reductions in this agreement alone are expected to boost annual exports of American goods by up to 11 billion. All told, this agreement, including the opening of the Korean service market, will support at least 70,000 American jobs,” Obama said.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/12/obama-pleased-with-korea-trade-deal-disappointed-by-senate-tax-vote.html

Steve:

Now we will hear from the libbies on this page that the Novermber elections had nothing to do with it . but the american Public knows it did..........

Do they? Maybe you should check the polls again.

By the way, before I decide whether I agree with you or not, please tell me exactly what did November elections have to do with it, and show me a well-qualified, unbiased source that supports your analysis.

Dirp101,

I think all Govt Workers are parasites, some of them neccessary. Most of them not. I can live with paying for the GOOD ones. but i want the Bad ones gone, If they can't keep there jobs based on their Performance and need a Union to keep them Employed no matter how Terrible they are. I want those ones gone..

Amy,

Obama Said............ thats yoru problem you beleive everything he says...

Looks like an April Fools post to me about business being more comfortable with republicans--good one, too.

It is demand that creates jobs regardless of the party in power; there's been a steady increase in jobs created for over a year (long before the 2010 elections); more employed people have more money to spend; the demand increases and employers are forced to hire more people to keep up with. Not one thing to do the elections of 2010.

Thanks for your astute observation, Steve, on this- the 1st day of April.

On the one hand, conservatives and Republican say that five months is not enough time to make any policy changes. On the other hand, they are quick to claim credit for any positive numbers.

Interesting.

This all comes down to common sense. To wit:

Unemployment began rising at the end of 2007 as the housing bubble began to burst. Unemployment continued to rise through 2008, and particularly spiked after the need for bank bailouts was revealed. Bush bailed out the banks, but it didn't stop the bleeding, which continued into 2009, resulting in more unemployment and ultimately the stimulus legislation. Conservative economists told us we had to enact the stimulus to stop the bleeding. There are two choices here: either conservatives don't know -- how you say -- squat about economics, or the stimulus actually did keep the situation from getting worse. But when unemployment continued to rise for a time after President Obama took office, republicans immediately blamed him for it.

Common sense tells us otherwise.

Now, unemployment has been declining, and new jobs have been increasing, for at least the past year. 1.7 million jobs in 15 months I believe was Pat's number. The clear inference from this is either that the stimulus helped, or that it certainly didn't hurt. But rather than giving the President credit for the growth in jobs, republicans continue to complain, alternatively and contradictorily, that the President hasn't done enough, and that government spending doesn't create jobs, anyway, but we really need them to do something that, according to them, won't create jobs, anyway. Cloaked on the fog thereby created, the republicans win a mixed victory in the November election, and immediately take credit for all continuing decreases in unemployment.

And common sense, once again, tells us otherwise.

Anna - since obama has now embraced the Republican mantra of business is good, rather than what he previously thought of business.

If republican concepts of giving tax breaks, incentives and credits to businesses are those that obama now wants to embrace good for obama! Heck if obama keeps moving to the right maybe he will become the republican ,presidential candidate in 2012.

As Honeywell CEO David Coat said in a recent Bloomberg interview...

"The best way for government to create jobs is to build an environment amenable to hiring"

The 2009 stimulas plan failed when funds ran out.

Other than obama choosing to become business friendly in Dec 2010, what private sector job creation plans did obama and company create in late 2009 or thruout 2010??

I am more apt to believe this than the claim that obama has created the spurt in our current job growth...

Bill Gross, manager of the world’s biggest bond fund at Pacific Investment Management Co., said the larger-than-forecast gain in March employment suggests the Federal Reserve’s policy of quantitative easing is working

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-01/pimco-s-gross-says-gains-in-employment-show-quantitative-easing-is-working.html

Fieldon - businesses have been sitting on the sidelines for months waiting for government to clarify what costs businesses may face with obamacare, financial reform etc, as we go forward. Given a clearer picture (eliminate or minimize uncertainty) businesses will start hiring based on demand for their goods.

Think of it as water in a sink with the drain clogged. You want the water to drain, but until you clear the blockage it just sits there... waiting.

True american - it would have been helpful if you provided the following link...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704050204576219073867182108.html

After all it is April 1st and we already know howgullible many FR libs are to "unfounded" blogs. While I am sure that economists all have there own "truths" however I do like his comment on obamas comment and what moore points out in the article...

President Obama says we have to retool our economy to "win the future."

The only way to do that is to grow the economy that makes things, not the sector that takes things.

Such a concept, as the economy goes, so do jobs. Every recession has shown this concept to be true.

Since public sector jobs require private sector revenue to fund their wages and bennies, I wonder when the private sector will become fed up with giving more and more to the government.

At least obama has proposed in his suggested FY 2012 budget to cut $73 billion in discretionary spending, That should move a few government workers over to the private sector. Wonder why the democrats aren't clamoring about this?

Looks like our "free lunch" is starting to catch up to us.

True American (quoting):

Every state in America today except for two—Indiana and Wisconsin—has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods.

Gee, thanks, True. Useful numbers. I guess those wacky liberal public unions in Wisconsin haven't managed to destroy the state's private economy, after all.

No, really. Thanks.

True - not sure you can equate that with death panels, but the government is encouraging the use of computers to streamline healthcare histories. The clinic I go to has been going to a computerised medical history system since before obamacare. Lower labor costs to maintain I have seen my personal paper medical file, it could be used to rebuild muscles in rehab. LOL

Not too concerned with this path as long as I believe that my written permission is still required for someone else to view it. Hopefully it is as secure as my bank accounts.

Who knows, maybe big brother is watching!

Hope your wife checked out OK.

american:

Anna - since obama has now embraced the Republican mantra of business is good, rather than what he previously thought of business.

LoL -- keep trying american. I'm sure there's a winner in there, somewhere.

Anna - there is always a bright spot in life! Enjoy them while you can, I know I do.

It's all sunshine, lollypops, and rainbows, american .... ;-)

320000 people are employed last month. Thanks Mr President. Keep up te good work.

GOP gets NO CREDIT. They produced Zero Jobs Bills, zero job proposals or even ideas. They chose to obstruct, discredit and throw rocks while we manned a shovel and started digging. Now we are growing despite their 'We don;t need Solutions' mantra

Go f yourself GOP, please get out of the way of the Obama recovery, Just go back to the bench and keep poo pooing the job growth. The GOP...the waterboys for team Obama

Steve - government workers buy things, too. That remaining $800 that your government worker kept of his wages are spent in the economy buying goods and services.

Steve, if you hire someone to repair your roof, do you not think it fair for that person be compensated for his work? If the government hires a garbage collector to haul your trash, a highway worker to plow your street or a teacher to teach your children, do you not think it fair that those people be compensated for their work? Your example above sounds as though you assume that public sector earned wages are a giveaway of your money to people who don't deserve it. I disagree. I think they earned the money they were paid just as people in the private sector do. They pay taxes on their money and they spend it in the economy. If there were no public sector workers, you would still have to pay someone to do what they do for you, and my guess is you would end up paying them more than the government does.

So true, Heartlight. Some people don't quite seem to be able to absorb the concept that once you pay someone IT'S THEIR MONEY. It's not yours anymore, you don't get to tell them how to spend it.

Just finished watching MSNBC evening news.

They aired a segment on unemployment and how it is calculated, and how misleading the calculations really are. the real unemployment rate stands at 15.4%

Again, this is from MSNBC television news.

Smoke and mirrors anyone??

Edward, the stats have been compiled the same way since the process was changed during the Reagan administration. If you're looking for smoke and mirrors look there.

tim - you transposed your numbers. Other than the 2009 job stimulas act what job creation bills have obama and company provided us with private sector job growth. Even considering his trip last year to India, china and korea didn't create new private sector jobs nor did he generate any job creation bills. Companies like boeing and GE only finalized deals that obama had no direct hand in brokering.

It is so refreshing to see our "republican" obama embrace republican/conservative beliefs that businsses are our friend and are worthy of tax credits, incentives and breaks in an effort to create jobs. Who would have thought that obama would actually create a commision of American business leaders to tell him what business needed from the government to create jobs

JohnB - lmao! so where were the democrats and the liberals? I know they must have run out of the DC area and hid!

If you were listening and reading all these years didn't the reports state that the numbers were based on claims filed? BTW - got the link to verify the time line you are suggesting. From a political ploy I can see it happening to make the recession, inflation and stagflation inherited from Jimmy carter look better.

Kind of reminds me of how the FED took out food and fuel from from the core inflation index. Was that another republican sponsered act?

Ron,

Unlike you i understand that Tax payers can't afford to keep payin people in Public Sector jobs, You seem to think that more Govt jobs are the Answer. The give nothing. Zero Nada. back into the Tax coffers since that is what they are paid from The only Jobs that add to TAX Revenues are Private Sector jobs.

Half full for certain Ron. Things aren't what they ought to be but we're on the mend.

Perhaps someone should ask the private sector employees of the GE Aircraft Engines in Evendale, OH if government spending generates no activity. The Republican lawmakers of Ohio are more concerned with LACK OF government spending at that facility.

And look at Steve on 1.0 He wants to give the GOP/TP credit for the job turnaround. Now that is a real April Fool joke!

These types are nothing but a bunch of sneaky hyena's, who scurry out of the brush with their tails tucked between their legs AFTER the hunter does all the heavy lifting...

And they have the nerve to refer to liberals as being parasites... LMAO!

I mean Afterall john

GE payed no Taxes....... its good to be Obamas friend...

Feisty,

Since the Shoe fits you. Wear it proudly...

Agreed, Ron. We all should be glad to see the numbers.

Everyone should just breathe a big sigh of relief, roll up their sleeves, sit down at the table and figure out the next right thing.

Steve-505729

General Electric didn't pay taxes because of the huge loses they incurred from Bush's Recession. At least they didn't lay off workers, as they would have if Mitt Romney had been CEO.

The goverment gets back all money spent, except for the money that is saved. Eventually that money goes back to the goverment as it is spent. I may lean a little left, but I realize that no matter what is taxed that the consumer eventually pays that tax. So as far as GE paid no taxes that had to do more with write offs for income tax. You forget that pay property, pay roll, medicare and an assortment of other taxes. The GE story is just another media sound bite that gets headlines and sells adds.

GE payed no Taxes....... its good to be Obamas friend...

No, it's good to have an army of smart accountants and tax lawyers. Which if you're GE you can afford.

Maybe that's all the Koch brothers need, and they would leave well enough alone, too.

Hi Ron Indiana

So, is your glass half full or half empty? My glass is half full as it is really good news to see new jobs coming back.

My glass is full. It is correct that it will take a very, very long time to create enough jobs to restore the pre-crash levels of employment as long as the GOP/T-Baggers continue to talk about social and religious issues instead of J-o-b-s, J-o-b-s!!!

It's been 3 months and the GOP/T-Baggers have not created nary job.

Moody's: GOP Budget Would Cost 700,000 Jobs

According to Moody's chief economist Mark Zandi -- who the Washington Post reports "has advised both political parties" -- Republican plans to slash government spending will impact the GDP in such a way that would eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs this year and the next.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/moodys-gop-budget-would-cost-700000-jobs.php

Then there is Michelle Bachmann's slush fund' lie about health reform

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/31/961969/-Boehner-channels-Bachmann-with-health-reform-slush-fund-lie

Anna you know the COKE boys are not a corporation. They are a small business.

Yup, those 2 Koch boys just trying to make it through the recession and increase their Billions!

How they are a small business defies any logic!.....but wait, they have the team of lawyers, all kinds, that say so.......guess it works!

Ron- some see the glass as half-full, some as half-empty, but the 'baggers see the glass as 'too damned big'. (but then again, they ARE.....what's that term that is opposite of 'half-slow'.....??)

Lawrence O reported that GE's tax return was 24,000 pages. There are huge loopholes in the tax codes for businesses like GE, Exxon, Citigroup (all paid little to no taxes for 2010). No doubt in those 24,000 pages are some questionable deductions but the GOP plans to reduce the IRS budget which means layoffs in the only department that actually brings in money by going after fraudulent accounting on taxes.

I'm afraid the "we hate public sector workers" argument by conservatives is simply ignorance on purpose. I happen to like the idea of police officers, fire fighters, teachers, garbage collectors, etc. and I have those at a low cost to me individually because the cost is "shared" by all.

Koch Brothers is considered a small business based on the number of owners. Contrary to what most people think of as small business (pizza place, gas station, small town home contractor), small doesn't just mean the number of employees or size of the business. Bechtel is a "small" business. I think if most people realized that, they wouldn't be so quick to cut the business tax rate on business that is not acually "small".

Anna you know the COKE boys are not a corporation. They are a small business.

So true. How foolish of me to forget that the fourth largest concentration of personal wealth in the world is a small business. Thank you kindly for the reminder.

Jody:

Lawrence O reported that GE's tax return was 24,000 pages.

Plenty of pages to discourage audit, especially with the GOP promise to reduce IRS tax collectors, an action which -- mysteriously -- will also have no immediate effect on unemployment, but will clean toxic mold from your shower tiles and guarantee you a shiny new $30,000-a-year job somewhere down the line if you can just hold your breath and stay above water long enough.

Mine on the other hand will be -- at most -- 5 pages, resulting in a substantial additional payment, and I'll probably be audited. And I voted for the guy. Sigh.

Just finished mine last night 53 pages...

Anna - kind a hungry for more moonbat, can you send me some via newsvine?

Jody, reduce/eliminate allowable deductions and the IRS can be downsized or do it vive versa.

I'm a former public CPA. I guarantee you, the IRS and the SEC have permanent office at GE, as they do in almost every one of the the top 5000 corporations in America (those of the Koch brothers included.)

The only problem is, companies like GE and the Koch brothers have armies of lawyers and tax accountants down the hall from the IRS agents and SEC inspectors. Many of the company guys are the ones who actually wrote the laws they have to follow. They also employ another group on K street.

The only problem with President Obama promising to reform the tax code is that, once a truly reformed tax code is passed, it would cost millions of jobs, for lawyers.

dirp - I don't see a problem with lawyers having to find other areas of law to practise in.

I prefer my good news with a nice tall one poured by IR at the DDI.

ME TOO! lol

Speaking of the DDI, anyone know if the proprietor ever puts any band music in the old beat-box? IF he does, someone pop a quarter in and punch up "On Wisconsin", wouldja?

There's a whole section on the juke box of college fight songs, Drive-by. Not sure I know the Butler fight song but I'll be rooting for them this weekend unless someone pays me more to root for their opponent!

@SF

are you susceptible to bribes by alcohol? ...... IR ..... please get her another!

I was most pleased to see our President make note today of the fact that the unemployment rate has dropped a full point in the last four months.

Hmmm...

Did anything significant happen about four months ago?

About four months ago...

Well, let's see...

Good luck with that thought, Bagger boy. When the unemployment figures improve ahead of 2012, the vast majority of Americans will take note that it was on Obama's watch. Kick and scream as long and as loud as you want, but the sad fact is- that's the way it is! That's what they will see and understand. Ha Ha Ha Ha .....

See my posts on the Gingrich thread, DOB.

lol

Mixed Bag:

About four months ago...

We all got high on tryptophan?

The Food Network crowned the next Iron Chef?

The Packers beat the 49'ers in what turned out to be a critical game in their run to the Super Bowl?

No?

Well, then what?

Because that election thing was FIVE months ago, come Tuesday.

Language precision, doncha know. I learned that from Judge Joe. ;-)

Nice try, Anna Molly...

This is ME darlin'...!

I said...ABOUT four months ago.

I love precision in language...you don't have to be an attorney to appreciate it.

Of course...it wasn't four months to the day...but, "it's good enough for government work."

lol

Yep, 'about 4 months ago' there was an election.

HOWEVER:

1) None of those newly elected took office until about 2 months ago.

2) The Republican/TP Inc. party only controls, in the words of Speaker Boehner, 1/2 of 1/3 of the government.

3) Not one single job related bill has been passed by the new House majority in the 'about 2 months' that they have actually been in office.

4) For about half of those 'about 2 months', the House has not been in session.

LMAO at you, MB.

Matthew-

You're so silly...maybe that's why you're laughing.

Private sector job creation has nothing to do with jobs bills passed by Congress.

If only Democrats understood this.

-sigh-

Interesting, MB, you were the one trying to equate the Republicans gaining control of the House as the reason the jobs were created. And I thought that Congress passing tax cuts created jobs (it doesn't but that's what you on the right keep claiming despite evidence to the contrary).

Make up your mind. It will make your arguments more consistent.

If only Republicans would get an education. Here is your first lesson, MB, infrastructure projects do create private sector jobs, even beyond the contractors.

-sigh-

I assume then Matthew, that you were opposed to President Obama's extension of the Bush tax cuts for all American taxpayers...not simply against continuing the existing rates for the the top 2%? Apparently the President thought that was a bad idea and acted appropriately. That makes his views on the matter consistent with my own, actually.

And I never meant to imply that government doesn't create any private sector jobs whatsoever. Is that really what you thought I said? (-sigh-)

However, the fact is that the overwhelming majority of private sector jobs are created in and by the private sector.

We're you arguing otherwise?

Anyway, it was President Obama who reminded everyone that the unemployment rate fell a full point in the last four months.

I just offered you a little context for his remarks, Matt.

:-]

Wow MB, that was remarkably disingenuous. You know full well that Republicans through filibuster FORCED the Democrats to accept even larger tax breaks for the rich in order to get any help at all for the other 98%. It was such a high priority for Republicans and yet they don't seem to be bragging about their exemplary service to the wealthy elites. Why is that? Aren't you proud of what Conservatives accomplished?

So the real question is, why were Democrats intent on giving EVERYONE a tax cut, without giving the majority of the assistance to the rich? Quite simple--it would have been much less expensive to do so and middle class tax payers are simply too weak to withstand an increase.

Why is the GOPTP so intent on war against the middle class? Why were Conservatives determined to give so much help to wealthy people who've done extremely well even through the past recession?

MB, I was for extending them for the lower 98% but not the upper 2% since tax cuts for middle class and lower income canhelp (but is not the panacea the Republican/TP Party Inc. says it is) the economy. The middle class and lower income earners spend their extra money, the rich do not spend it in any significant way that helps the economy. And to say that President Obama ". . . thought that was a bad idea and acted appropriately." is to ignore his statements that the only reason the top 2% tax cuts were included is because it was the only way he could get what he wanted from the obstructionist Republican/TP Inc. party. Your statement is either a willful distortion of the truth or shows a lack of knowledge of the facts.

What else can one believe when you use absolutist terms like, "Private sector job creation has nothing to do with jobs bills passed by Congress."

No, as you would see from a careful reading of my posts, I made no such implication. What does President Obama mentioning the drop in the unemployment number have to do with anything?

Your 'context' was an implication that it was because the House became controlled by the Republican/TP Inc. party and that was the reason job numbers improved. No matter how you try to spin it now and no matter how you try to distract from your inconsistent arguments, that was the implication you wanted to communicate and the conclusion you wanted others to draw.

Well, said, John. We were composing at the same time and you were faster.

Matt-

Watch what President Obama does...never listen to what he says. That caveat applies to every conceivable issue.

From extending the Bush tax cuts...to closing Guantanamo Bay.

On the contrary MB, not closing Guantanamo Bay was also thanks to a Republican filibuster.

Why are Conservative Republicans so reluctant to take responsibility for their accomplishments? Is it possible that even they don't think of them as accomplishments, but sabotage? Why are Republicans sabotaging the US Government?

FR:

Liberal Comrade DougJ at Balloon Juice:

Do you think this is objective analysis, Bag Boy? I think it's either an April Fool's joke (I hope), or it's snarky evidence of slant -- and certainly not left.

C'mon, Anna Molly-

I always tell you what I really think.

Otherwise...who needs the heartache?

Here at First Read...ya gotta admit it would be a whole lot easier to go with the flow.

And the flow certainly is to the left, AM.

You are aware of that?

Being utterly clueless, no.

As for telling me what you really think, if that ever happened, I'd have done died and gone to heaven.

Shows how naive I am, Anna Molly.

I always assume that you're being honest with me.

Please read Guns, Germ and Steel regarding the cost of specialized workers for government.

How can the Public Sector add to tax revenue when 100% of the cost of government (not counting borrowing) is paid for by tax revenues. Consider if 100% of people worked for government. Would it be self-supporting? Examples include USSR, China before capitalism etc.

Good post, Buck Benny, and very true. It seems conservatives have done a really good job of pitting one segment of middle class workers against the other. I honestly do not understand the vitriol coming from the right about teachers, fire fighters, police officers and the folks who plow the snow off their street so they can get to their jobs.

@Jody

It's not vitriol. I've yet hear one realistic idea as to how you can allow a cop to retire at 48, after working 25 years, and then pay him pension and benefits for a further 30 years. Do you have a solution? This has nothing to do with the value of the job that the cop does.

www.businessinsider.com/new-report-reveals-san-franciscos-terrifying-pension-gap-2011-3

This is a link to the current fiscal condition of San Francisco public pensions. Hardly a conservative bastion. I hate to say it, its not a conservative issue its economics and increased longevity.

alan,

I for one don't think that a police officer who is 62 is going to be much use chasing a 18 year old down a dark alley trying to catch him for robbery. Or how about the 60 year old fireman rescuing your child off the 20th floor, do you really want him to carry your loved one down 20 flights of stairs? Do you really think that those who are in the business of first responders retire early because they have used up their bodies and can not longer do the physical part of their job? Just because they can still function for many more years, does not mean that they have the physical stamina to do the job that is required on them. Firefighting in subzero weather trying to put out a huge factory fire is very demanding...even for the young and fit.

Yet all these cops seem to get jobs after retirement. How is that?

And you don't answer the fundamental economic question, how do we pay for it?

From the article link above regarding San Francisco

"The city now spends $514 million on pension and healthcare. By 2016, that cost is likely to balloon to $1 billion - more than the police department, fire department, sheriff's department, DA's office and probation departments combined."

Do you understand that all these retirement costs are now greater than the operating budgets of the departments? By 2016 San Francisco will be paying more to retired cops than the ones still working. Can you get your head round that? And this is a city with high taxes, no union bashing, no revenue issues. The NUMBERS don't add up. Or to make the numbers work instead a 62 year old cop or 60 year old fireman there just won't be anybody because all the money has went to the retired guys.

it still is not in their chosen field.

Alan, maybe all public workers should go. How much do you think it will cost you to have to pay someone to track down those robbers that just stole your computer? How about the potholes in the street. How much do you think it would cost you to assume the responsiblity of fixing the street in front of you house. Or how much do you think someone could charge you to drive across the section of road that they have assumed responsiblity for?

Maybe all students should go to private schools. Think of the money that schools could charge if they were private. Only the rich could probably afford to get any higher education. Do you think that those rich offspring want to do your brain surgery? You will eventually require some type of health care in the future. Do you want the person doing your operation going to one of the private 2 week courses on surgery?

There are many jobs that are done by the public employee that would be out of reach for the normal person if everything was privatized. Then what would this country look like? Somali?

Great post, Buck Benny. The Conservative war on the middle class is particularly vicious when it comes to teachers, police, firefighters, EMTs, road workers, and all the other government employees it takes to make a modern society possible. Had they always been at the helm we'd still be getting to the West coast by wagon train.

I have nothing against the teachers, policemen/women and firemen/women, or any public service employee.

My only question is why do they need to belong to a Union when they work for the government? The only purpose of this in my eyes is to drive up their income/benefits. And as a result there is no reward for individual excellence, and no penalty for poor performance.

@sonokursh2

Alan, maybe all public workers should go. How much do you think it will cost you to have to pay someone to track down those robbers that just stole your computer? How about the potholes in the street. How much do you think it would cost you to assume the responsiblity of fixing the street in front of you house. Or how much do you think someone could charge you to drive across the section of road that they have assumed responsiblity for?

Maybe all students should go to private schools. Think of the money that schools could charge if they were private. Only the rich could probably afford to get any higher education. Do you think that those rich offspring want to do your brain surgery? You will eventually require some type of health care in the future. Do you want the person doing your operation going to one of the private 2 week courses on surgery?

There are many jobs that are done by the public employee that would be out of reach for the normal person if everything was privatized. Then what would this country look like? Somali?

Have you read anything that I have written or do you just see that this guy is against public employee pensions so I'll just argue with him.

I'll try one more time. The cost of pensions is eating up everything including current operating budgets. So your scenario above where there will be no cops, teachers, roads is going to happen unless we change the way benefits are financed. Do you understand that because I'm coming to the conclusion that you didn't attend reading comprehension class.

... and I have no idea what your talking about regarding health care and brain surgery but at least I admit when I don;t understand something.

sonokursh2,

Everything you mentioned is paid by our property taxes, well at least where I live. Public employees are paid by the people who pay taxes. Last I heard there's more people that don't pay than pay so right there the cities, counties as a whole are in trouble.

Your surgery analogy doesn't make any sense whats so ever. What ever happened to making good grades to go to school? This BS Dream Act is a joke, that's another topic.

Explain the similarities between a lawless country and privatization?

@Alan: Maybe the solution is not to change eligiblity (I really don't want to see the 62 year cop trying to chase the 24 year old drug dealers) but to change the pay out time. Have pay out begin at age 67, just like social security. And, just like SS, reduce payouts based on "early" retirement.

Assume for a policeman or a fireman, a normal career is 25 years, 80% of final pay pension. If they start to draw early, they lose 5% for each year (or part of a year) before age 67.

Teachers, same rules, except a 30 year career.

You could also work in vesting rules, to deal with the people who, although not "disabled" really should not continue as teachers/fireman/policeman, whatever, all the way until they would earn the full amount.

I think you will see many municipalities going to these kind of things. School districts and other governments will too. The alternative is to "privatize" many services, which end up costing the same, int the long run.

Jody--I think people tend to forget how horrible that free fall of job losses felt---every month it just got worse. It was a really scary time, especially since you had the sense that the Bush administration was helpless in addressing it. We should reflect on how bad things were before discussing whether they are good enough now.

Steeler Fan. Good idea, everyone needs to reflect but especially the media. It seems these days, they enjoy reporting only the bad news with any kind of enthusiasm. I do appreciate NBC's Nightly News when they do their segment on people and the good being done.

I remember the line I read in Richard Wolffe's book about the WH staff working so hard to stop the next depression and they succeeded. They said they'd be graded a "C" for "A" work because people wouldn't realize how bad it could have been and would have been. How true that has turned out to be.

Jody,

You think things are better today than 2 years ago? Ok, unemployment was what on January 19th? What was the price of gas then? What was the cost of food? The housing market? The debt of this country? Life in general? If you can justify any of those, that would be amazing. Don't put a Liberal spin on it, just a human opinion.

@3Wolves: I bet when you were a kid you complained that mom would only give you one cookie on the day before she went shopping. That there was only one cookie available did not matter, you wanted your three cookies.

Jody is right. Too often the media has been focussing on the gloom and doom. Even the headline of this thread "March Unemployment." Instead of pointing to the positive 91.2% EMPLOYED!!!! The headline getter is 8.8% unemployed.

It is a matter of focus. To some, it is purposeful (Obama dithered on Libya... Fox News) to others it is unintentional (the President delayed his decision on Libya.) There is a bias in almost all of the news, some just hide it better.

I, like Jody, would just prefer that MSNBC take some of the negative slant out of the news. I know that "if it bleeds it leads" but I don't need the gore, in my face, all the time.

June, F:...they have a jobs program. Many more people are going to have to be hired to make sure that men are only sleeping with their wives. That women who have a miscarriage did not directly do anything to cause that embryo to leave their body. They will have to have more people hired to be sure that gays have no opportunity to find love or get married. I wonder how much those positions are going to pay. I haave not heard yet who is going to do the training for those jobs. Do you think it will be in the technical colleges or will private industry have to do it. I am sure that I could start a private school here in WI that will have many available teachers ready to teach those "bedroom and pregnancy" police that are going to be needed. Just think of the private industry boom that could be done......the matching clothing (uniforms). I am so excited about this.....just can't wait till it all goes into effect. Will there be secret societies also that get to spring up also? You know, like the ones that popped up during prohibition?

"bottom line they "Lied" Republicans have not covered one Jobs Issue either before, during or since they were elected"

That's it exactly, June, FL

June,

It's piss on my leg, not on your head unless you're into things like that.

Amy,

Besides you posting a whole lot of lies, what lies are you referring too or are you just posting, the World according to Amy B."?

Did anyone hear about the BUDGET?

You know the one that the DEMOCRATS didn't pass last year?

The Republicans have been dealing with CR's. Hard to do with the party of NO WAY JOSE Democrats.

It's hard to create jobs when you average 5.1% employment for 7years and 10 months. Economists say the 4.5% to 5.5 % unemployment is FULL Employment.

Right Slodan,

Under Bush, we averaged just slightly over 5% unemployment for 7 1/2 years Thats until the liberal congress started having their magic effect , and the slide began. Still sliding today, but it was at least slowed somewhat by the last November elections.

Exactly Mruseurhead,

The administration is desperate to make a showing on jobs. Their "stimulus" was a farce, and just ran up the national debt, which in turn will run up inflation.

They will "cook the books" whichever way they can to show some glimmer of hope. The people who are out of work long term, those who have lost their home, their marriages, their business. Those who have finally given up, watch Obama enjoying himself at those lavish parties and on those super vacations, and wonder.........WTF??? Why should I vote for this clown again???