huffingtonpost.com— Two cheers -- for both the president's style and his words Thursday night before Congress. And one jeer: He failed on substance and strategy.
Sep 10, 2011View in Crawl 4
"...a jeer because the jobs plan he presented isn't nearly large enough or bold enough to make a major dent in unemployment, or to restart the economy."
True.
"Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell scoffs "This isn't a job plan. It's a reelection plan." That's precisely the problem. McConnell and company have stated publicly that their number-one objective is to unseat Obama and regain the presidency in 2012. They don't want to give the President anything he could possibly claim as a victory. And they're not terribly worried if the economy stays awful through Election Day because that's the best way to fulfill their number-one objective.
"The president would have done better with a plan that was big enough to make a real difference. And then, when Republicans rejected it, campaign on it."
True, and I've been saying exactly this since LAST YEAR right here on digg.
This guy said it perfectly! I was taking an econ class about 2 years ago and he roughly said the same thing. Unfortunately when it comes to DC, its too much political and not enough economic science.
It's an economic fact that direct direct stimulus spending is far more effective than tax cuts. Only about a 1/3 of the plan is for direct stimulus spending while a majority of it is for tax cuts. If we already had top notch infrastructure ---which we do not, we have among the worse roads/rail/bridge/internet systems of the wealthy nations -- then spending on infrastructure would not be wise targeted spending. Since we do not have top notch infrastructure, why not spend much more than $140B or $190B so that we improve an area we sorely need that will help business grow and at the same time it puts people back to work almost immediately!
I live in Chicago and it is the rail hub capitol of the US (we are also at or near the top as the Air capitol of the US) but our rail hubs are horrendous. There are trains that get stuck for a couple of days at our hubs due to poor infrastructure. Stimulus spending on this hub would not only bring thousands of people back to work (tens of thousands?) but it would it would help businesses who ship product through this hub and rely on their product getting from point A to point B as fast as possible. Besides, this railroad hub will need to be updated at some point, why not do it now while we have millions of people looking for work?
I also agree that the president should have started out with a more serious plan and even if it fails to go through congress, it would at least put the GOP on the spotlight of why they rejected it. He could then negotiate to something more middle of the road --- like this plan. But when you start in the middle against a group that is going to say NO to everything you bring forth, you will ultimately end up far to the right of the middle. Just like the debt ceiling debacle.
An overwhelming jeer for not pointing out the overwhelming need to get off oil and to keep the peace to keep the Earth alive.. This need to keep the Earth from permanent shift to vastly hotter temperatures with associated sterilization of the presence of life is big enough to create a symbiotic relationship between the presence of mankind and an ongoing lithosphere capable of sustaining life if such change is made as important and done in a most large scale among nations and peoples of the world. It wasn't addressed.
An overwhelming jeer for not pointing out the overwhelming need to get off oil and to keep the peace to keep the Earth alive.. This need to keep the Earth from permanent shift to vastly hotter temperatures with associated sterilization of the presence of life is big enough to create a symbiotic relationship between the presence of mankind and an ongoing lithosphere capable of sustaining life if such change is made as important and done in a most large scale among nations and peoples of the world. It wasn't addressed.
nygenxerSep 10, 2011Submitter
"...a jeer because the jobs plan he presented isn't nearly large enough or bold enough to make a major dent in unemployment, or to restart the economy."
True.
"Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell scoffs "This isn't a job plan. It's a reelection plan." That's precisely the problem. McConnell and company have stated publicly that their number-one objective is to unseat Obama and regain the presidency in 2012. They don't want to give the President anything he could possibly claim as a victory. And they're not terribly worried if the economy stays awful through Election Day because that's the best way to fulfill their number-one objective.
"The president would have done better with a plan that was big enough to make a real difference. And then, when Republicans rejected it, campaign on it."
True, and I've been saying exactly this since LAST YEAR right here on digg.
daimposterSep 10, 2011
This guy said it perfectly! I was taking an econ class about 2 years ago and he roughly said the same thing. Unfortunately when it comes to DC, its too much political and not enough economic science.
It's an economic fact that direct direct stimulus spending is far more effective than tax cuts. Only about a 1/3 of the plan is for direct stimulus spending while a majority of it is for tax cuts. If we already had top notch infrastructure ---which we do not, we have among the worse roads/rail/bridge/internet systems of the wealthy nations -- then spending on infrastructure would not be wise targeted spending. Since we do not have top notch infrastructure, why not spend much more than $140B or $190B so that we improve an area we sorely need that will help business grow and at the same time it puts people back to work almost immediately!
I live in Chicago and it is the rail hub capitol of the US (we are also at or near the top as the Air capitol of the US) but our rail hubs are horrendous. There are trains that get stuck for a couple of days at our hubs due to poor infrastructure. Stimulus spending on this hub would not only bring thousands of people back to work (tens of thousands?) but it would it would help businesses who ship product through this hub and rely on their product getting from point A to point B as fast as possible. Besides, this railroad hub will need to be updated at some point, why not do it now while we have millions of people looking for work?
I also agree that the president should have started out with a more serious plan and even if it fails to go through congress, it would at least put the GOP on the spotlight of why they rejected it. He could then negotiate to something more middle of the road --- like this plan. But when you start in the middle against a group that is going to say NO to everything you bring forth, you will ultimately end up far to the right of the middle. Just like the debt ceiling debacle.
skyislandSep 10, 2011
An overwhelming jeer for not pointing out the overwhelming need to get off oil and to keep the peace to keep the Earth alive.. This need to keep the Earth from permanent shift to vastly hotter temperatures with associated sterilization of the presence of life is big enough to create a symbiotic relationship between the presence of mankind and an ongoing lithosphere capable of sustaining life if such change is made as important and done in a most large scale among nations and peoples of the world. It wasn't addressed.
skyislandSep 10, 2011
An overwhelming jeer for not pointing out the overwhelming need to get off oil and to keep the peace to keep the Earth alive.. This need to keep the Earth from permanent shift to vastly hotter temperatures with associated sterilization of the presence of life is big enough to create a symbiotic relationship between the presence of mankind and an ongoing lithosphere capable of sustaining life if such change is made as important and done in a most large scale among nations and peoples of the world. It wasn't addressed.