Yeah... Heaven forbid we should give anyone with an '(R)' behind his name credit for actually accomplishing something.

Instead... revert to silly little attacks. Classy ;-)

FR: How do you spell relief?

At the moment, the market spells it d-o-w-n.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/01/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm?iid=HP_LN

While investors showed early enthusiasm for the debt ceiling deal, which still needs Congressional approval, they quickly moved past it to refocus on the fragile U.S. economy.

"We keep seeing data that shows the economy is getting worse," said Kim Caughey Forrest, senior equity analyst at Fort Pitt Capital Group. "Earlier this year, we thought the economy would improve -- albeit gradually. But all the negative surprises are concerning investors."

Last Friday's second-quarter GDP report in particular served as a stark reminder that the economy is growing at a sluggish 1.3% pace.

So, what part of this deal will stimulate manufacturing?

Because, personally, I don't see it.

Anyone?

The gloom continued into Monday, with a report that showed that the manufacturing sector nearly stood still in July. The Institute for Supply Management's manufacturing index slid to 50.9 in July -- much worse than the 54 that economists were expecting, and down from 55.3 in June.

Classy ;-)

Honey - you wouldn't recognize 'class' if it jumped up & bit you on your big butt! ;o)

PS: What exactly did Boenher accomplish? Other than reaffirming he's a failure as a 'leader'?

I have left trials, after getting the verdict on many, many occasions and experienced an immediate emotional reaction.

It's human nature to let it all go. THe more pressure, the bigger the result, the more intense and immediate. Sometimes I have cried, sometimes I have literally jumped for joy.

Pressure does strange things to people. Even the most stoic are not immune.

That fact that you make these comments indicates to me that you Feisty have never had a similiar experience. And that's really very sad. Yours is such a small, simple world.

Or your hatred and irrationality for the man, who is doing nothing other than his job, is just that over powering to you. SO you think Obama jumped for joy after this? I suspect not so much.

But the funny thing is - it is you who rolls around here every Friday all a flutter about the DDI, where you "tie a few on." Yet you poke fun at someone else for drinking alcohol.

So what do you sit on at the DDI? Perhaps a barstool? Does it miss you right now?

Keep on entertaining Feisty. You are really good at it.

Good point AM - how many of those manufacturing business are getting beat down with Obamacare?

You did see what it did to Merck?

Obama - let's tax the medical device manufacturers.

Device Manufacturers: Uh, don't or that'll negatively effect our business.

Obama: So what, this is my signature legislature. It is grand, you cannot stand in its way.

Merck 7/11: Yeah, we have to lay off 2,000 workers in our manufacturing division.

The Market: Suck it Obama.

Come on AM - debt ceiling done, on to the really, really stinkiy stuff. You ready?

I've heard some here talk about what taking money out of taxpayers' pockets would do in the middle of a fragile recovery.

I sometimes wonder whether they understand that taking money out of public workers' pockets isn't likely to do the economy much good, either. And if Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits are affected, that's money out of people's pockets, too.

Here's what others are saying about the utility of making such deep cuts in the middle of a pre-existing crisis --

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/31/news/economy/spending_cuts/index.htm?iid=HP_Highlight

It might do everyone some good to read it.

The cuts will start helping to get the nation's debt on a sustainable track. But will they hit the economy at a particularly bad time?

The unemployment rate stands at 9.2%. The government jobs reports for May and June were dismal. The housing market is not exactly vibrant. In fact, it's terrible.

And on Friday, the government reported that consumers all but shut their wallets in the second quarter, and GDP rose at an annual rate of only 1.3%. On top of that, growth was a paltry 0.4% in the first three months of the year, the government said.

At the same time, the Fed has taken its foot off the gas and stopped its bond-buying program. Recovery Act funds are dried up. And next year, unemployment benefits and the payroll tax holiday will expire.

In other words, the economic stimulus the government deployed in an attempt to get the economy back on track are all but gone. And now, spending cuts are on the way.

"The economic indicators are pretty disturbing in light of the fact that policy is going in the opposite direction of a normal response to an economic slowdown," said Chad Stone, chief economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

If lawmakers were to follow conventional economic models, they would actually increase federal spending to spur growth and make up for the lack of demand in the marketplace.

"Conventional mainstream economic analysis says when you have an economy like this one ... the thing you do is provide additional monetary and fiscal stimulus," Stone said.

But Pierre Ellis, a senior economist at Decision Economics, said the cuts would probably have a moderate impact because they are relatively small.

But, he added, they still have the potential to be one additional drag on an economy with a whole host of problems.

"The cuts are not that big," Stone said "But it's the straw that could break the camel's back."

Recession risk: Small, but growing

While initially small, the cuts will increase in size over the course of a decade, eventually totaling near $1 trillion.

They will hit non-security discretionary spending hardest, a small section of the budget that includes funding for food inspectors, the FBI and education grants, among many other programs and services people associate with government.

Read it and weep, Spanky. And remember when it hurts that you did it to yourself and rejoiced in what you had done.

Come on AM - debt ceiling done, on to the really, really stinkiy stuff. You ready?

Needless to say, the answer is no.

From the look on his face, I'd say he was get some relief right there on his stiff one!

I'm wondering whether someone can explain to me, how this kind of corporatist thinking will help create jobs.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/01/news/international/hsbc_jobs/index.htm?iid=HP_LN

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- HSBC announced Monday that it will cut 25,000 more jobs around the world, in addition to the thousands of job cuts already underway, after reporting a surge in profit.

HSBC (HBC) Chief Executive Stuart Gulliver said he expects to cut 25,000 jobs between now and 2013. The company's stock rallied 5% in pre-market trading.

This is in addition to the 5,000 job cuts that have been underway since the start of year in the United States, United Kingdom, France, Latin America and the Middle East. The cuts are part of the company's restructuring plan to save from $2.5 billion to $3.5 billion.

The banking company also posted increased profit. HSBC reported a net income of $8.9 billion for the first half of the year, up 35% from the first half of 2010.

Profits up. Market up. Jobs down.

I may be an idiot, of course, but I'm just not seeing the connection between record profits and jobs.

The connection, in fact, seems to work the other way. The more profits soar, the more jobs we cut.

And this is what you get when the only focus is on bottom line.

Someone tell me EXACTLY how the debt ceiling bill changes that calculus.

Let's go back to Clinton's budget [of course we would have to actually have a budget first].

Even that, just 12 years ago is a 25% cut in today's spending.

In '93 the government was about 1/2 of what it is today. Yet the poor and old were all taken care of, right? Now sure we got some war costs, which Obama could end today if he so chose, but where is all the rest of that money going?

Oh, and AM - you do not get a choice. Ugly and getting uglier it is.

"The cuts are not that big," Stone said "But it's the straw that could break the camel's back."

So much for lightening the load. Looks like this fight ain't over yet.

AM - a business exists to make MONEY. Not hire people. A corporation's responsibility is to it's owners, the shareholders. We [and that's you , me and everyone else with stock, a 401k, or an investment portfolio] demand profits and profitability.

In other words my caring, emotional, do-gooder, flower picking friend - the corporation is there to make money. And there in lies the end of this story.

But then you know that. Too bad some do goodie libbie couldn't just go out there and create a business and run it like you want. Now that would be something. Impossible, but something.

In other words my caring, emotional, do-gooder, flower picking friend - the corporation is there to make money. And there in lies the end of this story.

Indeed. How refreshing that someone finally admits this. Because some of us liberals have gotten the impression that wealthy corporate executives and shareholders are all "job creators."

Now, I wonder where that crazy impression came from.

And how that philosophy will, in the absence of spending government money on it, mysteriously cause demand for goods and jobs to be created is still a mystery to me.

I guess I should just go back to picking flowers, shouldn't I?

But then you know that. Too bad some do goodie libbie couldn't just go out there and create a business and run it like you want. Now that would be something. Impossible, but something.

You are under the impression that no liberals own businesses? Goodness gracious, then I guess we don't have to worry about the liberal media bias anymore, do we?

But in this town, that will severely limit your dining options, as well as your access to local wineries, bookstores, farm produce, repair and remodeling services, painters, and the myriad other small local businesses that make and/or sell unique products. Just to name a few.

No pizza for you, Spanky. At least, no GOOD pizza.

Walmart, however, will still be there for you. Low prices. Always.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Classy ;-)

Honey - you wouldn't recognize 'class' if it jumped up & bit you on your big butt! ;o)

Like I said...

So Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL,

With a Progressive Party of NO tabling a proposal, how would you satisfy the debt issue? You always have an answer. What is you solution?

Spanky, a business exists to provide goods and services. If they make money at it, so much the better. But they can't make money if they don't have something to sell. And it needs to be something people need to buy. Something other than just money.

Without people, workers, no goods or services will be produced. Without goods and services, no one will buy and there will be no money.

No wonder conservatives don't get it. Not everyone can live on stocks, 401Ks, portfolios like you do.

You are under the impression that no liberals own businesses?

_________________________________________________

AM: I'm just curious about how many people you employ in your law practice (liberal-owned) business?

I don't own the practice, Joe ... but it's about 30 people.

Fiesty - what is your solution to the problem we have? We spend more than we take in and will continue to add to the national debt.

What is the solution?

What is the solution?

Two step simple balanced approach...

Sensible spending cuts & tax hikes...

I don't own the practice, Joe ... but it's about 30 people.

______________________________________

Sorry, I thought you were on your own in solo practice.

fielden

Spanky, a business exists to provide goods and services. If they make money at it, so much the better. But they can't make money if they don't have something to sell. And it needs to be something people need to buy. Something other than just money.

WRONG! You obviously have not taken any business classes in college. The main objective of EVERY corporation is to "MAXIMIZE SHAREHOLDER's WEALTH."

Look it up. Your idea of what a business is for was applicable in Communist Russia.

Poor Speaker Boehner, that was the sound of turning down $4.5 trillion in cuts because heaven forbid corporate jet tax loopholes should be eliminated.

Sickof. Seriously, you use the GOPTP's usual Communist Russia line to debate business--where Government owned everything and there was no such thing as private business or profit for anyone other than Government.

So AM - where are all these libbie owned businesses? Why are they not stepping up and hiring folks to help out? Could it be that they are being run to make money, not do go?

That's horrible, as it clearly shows that libbies run their businesses in greedy, conservative like ways.

fielden, you are wrong. It's about profit, not hiring. I I could make the same amount with no employees then they'd be gone. See employees are huge cost factors. The hiring and the products are just the by-products. THe goal is to make cash.

See - it's why bank went with ATM, and canned the tellers. It's why everything is automated, as much as possible. Look at a Ford line in 1920 v. now.

Hell - take Amy. She's a receptionist. Many law firms and other business are going with automated systems. Cheaper, which allows for more profit.

Nope. I'm just a little economic island in a larger stream.

I bet it's a lovely little island full of puppies and flowers.

No way you'd get rid of Amy in favor of an automated answering service ["If youare looking for economic analysis from the libbie perspective, press one for AM"], right Anna?

Plus, a butt load of pro bono work for the less fortunate, right AM?

Actually, we have automated phones, too, but we kept the receptionist and found other things for her to do in addition to phones.

I do pro bono work, as well as reduced fee work, as do others here, Spanky. You?

In case you haven't heard, Wall Street crashed and the recession didn't just hit conservative businesses. And I doubt that Walker's recent budget cuts and the attacks on public workers' pay and benefits have done much good at all for business. It's hard for the smaller businesses in particular to create jobs without demand because they don't have the cash reserves to invest, like the big corporations do.

That's why we have what they call "economic incentives." You know, like Rick Perry has used in Texas, if you read the article I posted both last week and last night about that.

Hundreds of millions of government dollars, in fact. Keynesian stuff, you know? And some of it to large campaign donors.

Just like the stimulus.

But your side promised us -- about 10 years ago -- that if we just gave those rich folks tax breaks, those jobs would flow like water ....

.... well, where are they, Spanky?

As far as I know, the only net job growth since 2001 has come during the Obama administration.

Coincidence?

SOTB, Spanky :

Why does business exist?
We can give three main reasons:. . Because of profit.. To give job opportunities.. To provide good and services..

From wiki.answers.com. There are more sites as well.

You should try Google yourself before you berate someone who thinks differently from you.

LOL!!!!!!!

That sounds like one of Feisty's tasteless zingers! You know the ones that the lefties here love to laugh out loud about!

Way to Go Rob!

So, SOTB, you blast Feisty, but give Rob a pass?

Classy, indeed...

Oh fielden,

Could this be just a similar Feisty blast but from the conservative side? Stick up for the Feisty gal and her Gang of 15 or so of the NewsVine Fan Club of Progressive thinkers.

Oh fielden...

Feisty likes to talk about Karma... and how it's a B#$@TCH...

and you know what they say... what goes around comes around...

the way I look at it rob gets about 8,237 more before he has caught up to her ;-)

Then all is even and we should just all play nice.

Amen !!!!!

It's refreshing to see every day Americans change the course of America's fiscal well being.

Refreshing? Ah no! That unwillingness to compromise for the good of every American is shame. You Tea Bags should go back and reread your history books, they didn't toss the tea into the harbor until the British wouldn't give us fair representation in Parliament.

Hey devie...

consider your tea tossed you bugga!

I'm sure there were some back in 1773 (who wernt paying taxes) who also beleived it was a better deal for them to stay under the care and feeding of the British. Thankfully enough people stood up and said we'll be independent and take care of our own needs.... An entitlement society for those other wise healthy enough to fend for them selves is one destined to failure. LET"S VOTE FOR MORE CHANGE IN 2012!

UAW:

Finally people got elected who don't care about being re-elcted

So, are you saying that they take unpopular positions and are willing to blow things up to get their own way?

Because we already knew that.

Now, in the brief time they have remaining, what will they do about jobs?

AM: Now, in the brief time they have remaining, what will they do about jobs?

What do you want them to do about jobs? Please, rather than whine about it day in and day out, lets see you Libs sketch out a "Jobs Bill" of your liking. What would it look like? How much would it cost? Would it fund 'shovel ready ' jobs? How many jobs would it create? How would you pay for it?

Please, lets see what kind of "Jobs Bill" you want out of DC.

Ready, Go!!

Let's face it 90% of the country had a job or a means to support themselves and that will continue based on thier own efforts. That figure is probably higher for a Tea Party supporter. Most non-union companies shed thier lowest performers 1st resulting in the 10% who arent working now. I wish we could improve the future for that 10% via some form of legislation. It's probably not going to happen regardless of how much we spend on it. When business improves enough companies will dip lower into the employee pool. Artficially subsidizing this group tends to prolong thier path to success and puts them further behind. It's how generational welfare spreads....

JAS,

A jobs bill would include stopping the export of manufacturing jobs out of the U.S. Tax incentives to the wealthy Corps for jobs created in the U.S. Tax Penilties for jobs created out of the U.S. Put our people back to work in the U.S. Caps on CEO salaries and bonus payments (Golden parachutes).

Spanky, you show your colors with your statement to "make money not hire people" what planet are you from. How does a company make money without employees? How does a company expand without hireing more employees? What job would you have now if no one hired you? Talk about vision just short of your nose. Oh I just got it, of course companies do not hire employees, they buy slaves to do the work, sorry I am just so thick sometimes.

pat....

I didn't vote for my rep to go to DC to compromise and continue with the same ol crap of continuing to spend like a drunk sailor. My vote was to rein in the un-necessary spending. I did not vote for him to increase taxes on anybody.

If the DC idiots were to ever clean up the current spending mess, then I would (as a voter) agree to a really honest, true tax reform...

Just Saying...

Fixing the spending mess is one thing. Holding America and her financial stability hostage is quite another.

Personally, I think the Tea Party just shot itself in the foot big time.

Just Saying ...

BS

How?

Holding the American People as Hostage. In 2012 we are voting these Tea Baggers out.

Numbers like this can be very misleading. It would be better to segregate the numbers into classes of income (people making < $25000; $75000; $150000; $250000; $500000; $1 million; $5 million; $10 million or more) and then show what percentage of that income went to taxes.

SOTB, this is a very tired argument from the right that is simply not true. Google "47 percent of americans pay no income tax".

Here is a piece from sodahead.com:

A favorite talking point used by conservatives to justify giving more tax breaks to the wealthy is that 50% of Americans pay no taxes. The truth is that 86% of Americans pay taxes.

The truth is that the talking point that half of all Americans pay no taxes is a misrepresentation. Here is the full quote from the Tax Policy Center,

The fraction of tax units paying no income tax varies widely by filing status and type of unit. About 47 percent of single filers will owe no tax, compared with 38 percent of joint filers and 72 percent of heads of household. More than half of elderly tax units and tax units with children will pay no income tax this year.

The 47% statistic is not all Americans pay no taxes, but single filers who will pay no federal income taxes. According to the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities the real reason why 47%-51% of Americans paid no federal income taxes in 2009 is,

The 51 percent figure is an anomaly that reflects the unique circumstances of 2009, when the recession greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes and when temporary tax cuts created by the 2009 Recovery Act — including the "Making Work Pay" tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect. Together, these developments removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.

The combination of the recession and the Obama stimulus cut taxes to low and middle income Americans led to fewer Americans owing federal income tax in 2009.

the top 400 richest in this country make more than all the rest of us put together. They have most of the the discretionary income in this country, they can afford to pay higher taxes.

Hey Sueb1...

And what happens when they get sick and tired of being singled out jsut because they were successful... and take all their money (which you think shouldnow belong to the governement) and move to some other country... and pay NO TAXES... OWN NO BUSINESSES... and PROVIDE NO JOBS....

What happens then? I guess guys like me making $90K will be the new 'upper crust' and subject to your 'tax the rich they can afford to pay more' scheme... right?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

BTW fielden... you may be tired of those numbers... but they are factual. Being tired of them does not make them false. Live in denial all you want... I am no 'rick' man... but the fact of the matter is WE NEED A TOTAL REFORMATION OF OUR TAX SYSTEM... for the sake of EVERYONE!

SOB...86% of the total taxes paid

Well that's probably because they had an equal % of the total income of all filers. And just because their "group" paid the most tax dollars does not give them any advantage over the guy earning 50K (for example). We are all taxpayers. We all get 1 vote. We are equal.

How about we review the % they paid on that income as opposed to the % paid by those earning less than 1M, less than 250K, less than 100K? This is where alot of folks see the unfairness.

We all squak about Washington being beholden to the $$$, yet your argument supports that very idea. Do you really want to be part of that?

Fielden, nice semantic switch, but sickofthebickering was clearly referencing federal income taxes.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/08/john-cornyn/john-cornyn-says-51-percent-american-households-pa/

Vermont girl, I find a glaring flaw in your argument:

It does not matter if a person earns more than another. That person did not steal the funds, but earned them. You want more? Figure out a way to earn more.

And keep your hands out of the pockets of others.

Read the piece again NJNBNJ. Particularly the final paragraph. It IS referencing federal income taxes.

SOTBickering --

OMG! I can't believe you laid that card. Trust me, as long as there are people who believe as you do, these fat-cats (MBAs come to mind) who rotate through all the major Boards of Directors in this country; ship your manufacturing overseas; downsize your company; vote themselves outrageous salaries and even more outlandish bonuses for jobs any half-witted moron could do – they aren't going anywhere. On the financial side, these are the same people who brought you Credit Swap Derivatives and then had their fat-cat cronies in Washington bail them out at your expense. On that note, you could learn from watching "Inside Job".

Take all the taxes you pay on that $90K salary of yours – Federal, Social Security, Medicare, State, Unemployment Insurance, Sales Taxes and you will find you pay about 33% of your income to taxes.

Now take the average percentage of taxes paid by people making $900K and you will be quite surprised if not angry.

Fine, fielden-

You read MY piece again.

And remember- these are the people who get ALL the benefits.

There is something very wrong with a system that rewards the takers, and punishes the givers.

no joe, no bo, nj

Vermont girl, I find a glaring flaw in your argument:

It does not matter if a person earns more than another. That person did not steal the funds, but earned them. You want more? Figure out a way to earn more.

And keep your hands out of the pockets of others.

So I guess you just REFUSE to read and comprehend huh? Who said anything about stealing funds or questioning who EARNS what?

Once again for you, the argument is total $$ paid in taxes versus the % paid in taxes. The latter should be the discussion point, not the former.

Wow, record profits again! And if the GOP argument against new taxes is to be believed, how many new jobs will this create?

Not many, if HSBC is any indication.

That's not how it works.

If you feel Congress should do something about Big Oil, then contact your rep or senator. Don't whine on the next.

hunky, problem is the contacting your rep or senator...accomplishes exactly nothing.

Only during an election cycle. But you are correct in you assumption. Nothing get accomplished in the Federal Government. Why, those boys and girls we elect haven't a clue about the waste they create in govenment. And when the Gang of 6 exposed some of it, and Simpson-Bowles also did their report, it doesn't satisfy them and it is tabled, like legislation.

It is time to vote the bunch of professional politicians from office, along with Bartry O/

Are you rooting for failure of American businesses?

Are profits bad news?

No, but companies that make billions in profits; pay no taxes; and create no jobs ... is really bad news!

You dont like GE very much, then...Obama's favorite company, crony capitalism at its worst ...

Tell them Bob, profits are not a bad word, just in the Progressive Party where profits should be shared with those in a lesser class of people. Without profits, there are no taxes and without profits there are no jobs. Without a leader in the WH that can generate legislation to help business move forward, there are not jobs.

Seems like Barry O may be the reason for this lack of jobs. Didn't he campaign on creating jobs for every American when running last?

By the way Navy, care to share if you received you disability check over the weekend? You know, prior to the debt proposals being finalized by Barry O and the Republicans? Or am I on your ignor list?

It would go a long way towards civil discussion if some of you on the right would respect the office of the president enough to at least call Obama by his right name....I'll amend that and say the same for those on the left who make fun of Boehner's name. We're faced with problems that need to be handled by mature adults...let's stop the juvenile, 5th grade name calling.

Sueb1,

Yep it would be nice Sue. But, I can be as critical of Barry O as the libbies who attempt to infect the population with their comments attempt to do. Now during the end of the Bushie period, where were civil comments from the left or their media outlets? Didn't they condemn Bushie more strongly than me referring to President 'Present' as Barry O, RockStar?

Yep, we do have serious issues to face and unfortunately have no mature adults to work on those issues. We have, instead, professional politicians who aliegn more with party than with this great country.

hunky, c'mon I'm sure Sueb1 went after all those miserable,liberal nut jobs calling Bush "Dubya" (and so many other nasty names you all know them by now) all those years telling them "hey guys c'mon its not right let's make sure we call him Mr President or George W Bush hahahahaha

wow, you know the O'bama-mania is all crumbling down when you see posts like that LOL

hunky and Gregor--I voted for George W Bush. I'm talking about civility for all of us; from all of us.

Oh Sueb1,

Go out and enlist he Progressive Fan Club from this site, the Gang of 15 or 30 or 50 or however many there are. Perhaps then you can make a difference.

Speaking of the Gang, hey NavyBoy, did you receive your disability check over the weekend, you know before the vote and cut-off of funds? It's OK to tell the truth Navy, come on. did you receive your benefit or did Barry O just lie to you about checks? Really Navy, you can man up - or do you want to ' continue to play 'Chicken Little' to spout the party line and stir up the pot?

so Navy, what is the answer? Am I connecting the dots yet?

Elle, imagine if the mainstream media were actually reporting facts and going after truth instead of cheerleading for Team O'bama the last few years. Maybe they could have held his feet to the fire just enough to keep him focused on what the American people needed and wanted - jobs and the economy - and there would be less stories like yours

now we have to wait until 2012 for him to be tossed out, but hang in there happy days will be here again

Cheerleading for Team Obama Gregor? Wow, the image of Chuckie Todd in a cheerleading outfit is just too much to comprehend. Gotta go and have a toddy to erase that from my mind.

Jó kisimító Gregor. My great grandfather was also named Gregor.