spin it…

A paste of the full article linked right here:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/08/who_can_we_blame_for_job_losse.html

“Obama’s America,” tweets Republican political consultant Patrick Ruffini, linking to this map of economic devastation.

Fairly or not, Ruffini raises an interesting question: How much unemployment can we blame on the Obama administration? Economist Rob Shapiro dug into some Bureau of Labor Statistics data and came back with the best numbers I’ve seen on the subject. He separated job losses into two buckets: Those that happened before the stimulus, which was Obama’s major effort to deal with joblessness, and those that happened after the stimulus. Here’s what he found:

From December 2007 to July 2009 – the last year of the Bush second term and the first six months of the Obama presidency, before his policies could affect the economy – private sector employment crashed from 115,574,000 jobs to 107,778,000 jobs. Employment continued to fall, however, for the next six months, reaching a low of 107,107,000 jobs in December of 2009. So, out of 8,467,000 private sector jobs lost in this dismal cycle, 7,796,000 of those jobs or 92 percent were lost on the Republicans’ watch or under the sway of their policies. Some 671,000 additional jobs were lost as the stimulus and other moves by the administration kicked in, but 630,000 jobs then came back in the following six months. The tally, to date: Mr. Obama can be held accountable for the net loss of 41,000 jobs (671,000 – 630,000), while the Republicans should be held responsible for the net losses of 7,796,000 jobs.

We can argue about how much of the job losses should really be pinned on Republicans or Republican policies, of course. Financial deregulation happened under Bill Clinton, for instance. And it’s hard to hold George W. Bush solely responsible for a global financial crisis. But insofar as the job losses go, it’s hard to credibly blame this White House for the vast, vast majority of them.

That said, though this wasn’t Obama’s economic crisis, it is his economic recovery. There’s a fair question as to whether another set of policies could’ve led to faster job growth over the last year or so. And the recent shakiness in the recovery is cause for concern on that front. So it’s worth looking at Shapiro’s proposal to strengthen the recovery, too:

First, create jobs by expanding an Administration initiative already in place: Deep cuts in the payroll tax for employers who expand their workforce. Second, shore-up the weak housing market and stabilize falling home prices with a long-overdue, new initiative: A loan program for homeowners with mortgages in trouble, modeled on federal student loans, to bring down foreclosure rates. Third, prepare tens of millions of Americans for the jobs the economy will begin to create once it’s back on track: Provide grants to community colleges to fund free computer training for any American adult who walks in and asks for it. And fourth, put in place some long-term deficit reduction to head off higher interest rates when the economy does begin to expand again.

I may have possibly been against it before I may have possibly considered being for it…

Who doesn’t love hypocrites and double standards?

http://www.slate.com/id/2251317/

http://www.newsweek.com/id/236421

http://www.newsweek.com/id/236632?obref=obinsite

I heard an interview with Romney a few weeks back. He managed to evade every single hard question without really sounding like he was evading every single hard question. Slick Mitt. You go boy…and then you get a guy like Ron Paul who gets booed for pointing out that Obama isn’t a socialist. Paul is my favourite republican cuz at least he’s honest and semi-intellectual. He’ll never be president.

Bill Frist: “You hear a lot of people on the extreme say that socialized medicine is going to come in and control everything. Socialized medicine is where the government owns the hospitals. They own the doctors and they decide how much people are getting paid. And that’s not what’s in these bills,” Frist told Washington Journal.

more boring health care talk…and useful italian talk

Cerume=earwax
Cerbottana=blowgun

I really like Cristinas dedication in trying to reach me to inform me of the words for ear wax. She called Luca, Massimo and then Matteo just to track me down…and tell me….ceruma!!!
That’s valuable 😉

The strangest thing I find about the “pro-lifers” reaction to the health care bill is that they were the ones repeating comments about ”Death panels” and “rationing” as a reason to oppose the bill a few months ago. Nevermind that those things are happening with private insurance companies already…but the implication with complaining about Death panels and rationing is that the government is going to put a price tag on a person, and thus choose not to treat a sick person because it’s too expensive (again already happening with private insurance companies).

Now this bill will save lives (you can dispute the last paragraph, but I’m not sure this sentence can be disputed) and many people who claim to be “pro-life” are opposed to it. If you’re a Libertarian and you want to oppose the bill for reasons that are true to your beliefs that’s one thing, but to be “pro-life” and oppose this bill makes you a hypocrite in my eyes (I’m not sure Libertarianism and pro-lifeism are compatible).

If you can’t see that this bill will save lives but you’re “pro-life” then I will assume you are not thinking for yourself and are just in fact repeating what the moving picture screen people are telling you to think. I’m surprised more dems havn’t tried to sell up the morality and religiosity of health reform.

Jesus was a communist.

congrats america…you might be about to go from being the only first world country without (semi) universal health care to having the worst health care system in the first world. Wait…might be an invalid argument….let me rephrase.
You went from having one of the better second world health care systems to having the worst first world health care system…
Baby steps…
You embarrass me.

A bill that reduces the deficit AND saves lives via the private sector…Thank you republicans for standing up for your principals and shepherding this through.
Anyone that calls the Pres a socialist is an ignorant idiot, and should instantly lose all credibility…Only in america.
This is a republican bill…This is Romneycare. This is Nixoncare. This is a disgrace.

I can’t believe there hasn’t been a bigger push for proportional representation (at a state level) via signatures. Someone wasted a crisis.

allow me to rephrase that…

I am a bloody frickin genius…
I was dinking around on my pre 2009 blog because the link in the Dec 2008 page is gone…anyways I clicked on a random page from 2008 (August 16, 2008) and found this:

so I’m following this U.S. election with my usual aplomb…I love politics as soap opera, but don’t get emotionally involved except when I get pissed/annoyed at stupid people…
anyways…
IMO it would honestly be a huge upset if McCain actually won this year.
…Me always more viewing the big picture is much more interested in the long term repercussions for the US two party system etc.
Can you imagine the disarray of the republicans if McCain loses?
They accidentally nominated the most centrist, decent candidate they possibly realistically could have (jayssssus can you imagine Huckabee as the nominee right now?) and if McCain loses what will those dissatisfied religious voters do in 4 years? They got the centrist-ish candidate they didn’t want and he still lost…they won’t possibly compromise their ‘values’ even more in 4 years. will they backlash and get behind a ‘real’ conservative candidate in 4 years only to lose that election as well (you have to expect the economy will be better in 4 years, and after the democratically controlled house and senate actually pass things that will help middle class voters, those crazy fiscally responsible democrats won’t be so distasteful to the football mom skeptics who aren’t so sure this time)…?
anyways point is…If Obama wins this year he will win re-election…and my best case scenario is that people realize the two party system is crap…the religious wackos will vote their own party, the progressive wackos will vote their own party, and the reasonable dems, pubs will just merge…
anyways ultimate goal…proportional representation…so everyone gets a voice…

then I can complain about people having a voice that are stupid and don’t deserve to have a voice, but that argument can wait for 50 years…
…as I said…politics as soap opera much more interesting then politics as extension of my emotions…

So I claim correctness on my prediction. It was probably not original thought, but it was my own (meaning someone else probably wrote or realized the same thing well before I did, but I didn’t read anyone elses prediction before writing this)…but if two people have the same thoughts in a vacuum does that mean the second person who said it is just as smart as the first?

An article on Republicans and health care.

There is snow in the forecast next week. Uhhhhhh…..

Matt comes next weekend. Then I may head off to Rome the following week to catch up with another Frankfurt friend. It’s cheap enough and easy enough…but I’ll probably return before or on x-mas as spending time with someone elses family on a family holiday is more worse than spending it alone.

Obama

yeah mate, the election is over…what can I say…those are my people yo!!!
welcome back!!! FFM missed you…

a british colleague had Obama as her desktop wallpaper…really people, are the parties that different…no!!! if you think they are you are european!!!
Euros with their bloody proportional representation and multi party systems…

…OK with a Dem house and senate (being one of the astute observers of politics of course I know what a filibuster is…)…
…knowing what a filibuster is does not make you an astute observer of politics….

I started to expound on my point about an Obama vs. McCain presidency and what legislation would be different, but scrapped it…I don’t have time to edumacate….
OK…maybe health care legislation will be quite different, and environmental legislation will be more comprehensive, but other than that it would end up being the same…taxes, war, immigration, etc…the other important issues would have ended up identically….
I’m much more interested in how the religious right reacts…this could be the end of the religious right in politics…as they fail in 2012 and then move to create a multi-party system….
fun to watch…like 50 y.o. making out at the pub…

my greatest theory idea ever

So it’s pres campaign season in the states – as even the Europeans know (Stop caring who the president of the US is…it shouldn’t affect you).

As is typical we hear about the lies, campaign promises, flip flops, complaints about media treatment etc. The issues change, but the pattern does not…

It’s time for a new method to elect a president. Instead of listening to campaign promises and deciding who to vote for based on whatever words happen to be coming out of the candidates mouths at whatever moment you were paying attention to them why not vote based on psychological profile of a particular candidate?

Do a profile of every candidate to test things  that might be important qualities to have in a president like: lying ability, paranoia, trustworthiness, scepticism, optimism, compassion, hunger, bullying ability, pragmatism, nationalism, empathy, competitiveness, artistic ability, moral ambiguity, persuasiveness, salesmanship, sense of humour, etc
…and certain facts could be taken into account…Grades, birth order, achievements.
Of course someone will have to decide which of those qualities are actually important in a president…(any ideas people what are those qualities? Send me an email…).

it’ll give the pundits something new to talk about….all previous presidents could have this same sort of analysis/profile done and that could be used to compare current candidates with previous presidential qualities…
Pundit: “well Chuck, we haven’t seen a president with a paranoia level this low since Lincoln…if only HE’D been a little more paranoid…”
or
Pundit: : “well Chuck, we haven’t seen a president this hungry since Taft”.

(that line is sort of assuming that “Chuck Russert” reaches his potential)

Question 1: Do you see the hypocrisy of one nation having a weapon, using that weapon and then telling other countries it’s wrong for them to have that type of weapon because they might actually use it?

Let the primaries go on as normal, so the mindless/stupid people could just blindly vote for their parties choice, but after a few election cycles there would be patterns emerging…A republican who has great lying ability, is high in compassion…well you get the idea…
There would even be no need to campaign anymore…the people that wanted to be educated could read their voter pamphlets…and the ones that didn’t want to be educated could just do whatever they’re told…

…OR another option would be the “choose your own adventure” method…give the candidates the same choose your own adventure book and see how each of them would do in a certain scenario…yeah that’s a good one too…

Best result of this test would be that “americas best and brightest” might actually run for president…As it is now the people that run for president are politicians…lying, cheating, diving bastards…

This  might be the greatest idea for a thesis I’ve ever had…or possible I might just call ‘bullshit’ on myself…

Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Esquire by Matthew Buchanan.