This just in... Private Sector workers doing FINE!

[SmarterthanYou]

Is the unemployment rate above 9% still? Yes.

A point you seem desperate to avoid. I know your masters want you to continue to try and deflect from this... but bottom line, all that government spending did little. It was a stop gap measure. Which is why Stimulus 2.0 is now on the table to once again 'please help our public sector workers again... you know, the same ones we bailed out before, but now have to bail out again'

logical thinking people would realize that having to continue to bail out public sector employees with EXTRA taxpayer money means you have to start gutting the public sector or destroy your tax base economically.

 

[Bonestorm]

Is the unemployment rate above 9% still? Yes.

A point you seem desperate to avoid. I know your masters want you to continue to try and deflect from this... but bottom line, all that government spending did little. It was a stop gap measure. Which is why Stimulus 2.0 is now on the table to once again 'please help our public sector workers again... you know, the same ones we bailed out before, but now have to bail out again'

Whatever you say, SF. We've been over this before a number of times. I'm not interested in explaining things to you again.

 

[Bonestorm]

logical thinking people would realize that having to continue to bail out public sector employees with EXTRA taxpayer money means you have to start gutting the public sector or destroy your tax base economically.

Good Lord. That's fucking stupid.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Good Lord. That's fucking stupid.

how do you figure that? the budgets are already made to cover the initial costs of all these public sector jobs. Having to set aside billions of extra dollars just for a temporary bailout costs the lower class extra tax money, meaning the government will be forced, FORCED, to increase taxes on the majority population in order to cover the next budget. These public sector bailouts will only serve to increase the number of people on welfare.

 

[Bonestorm]

how do you figure that? the budgets are already made to cover the initial costs of all these public sector jobs. Having to set aside billions of extra dollars just for a temporary bailout costs the lower class extra tax money, meaning the government will be forced, FORCED, to increase taxes on the majority population in order to cover the next budget. These public sector bailouts will only serve to increase the number of people on welfare.

The bill is paid for by a 0.5% tax on earning in excess of $1,000,000.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

The bill is paid for by a 0.5% tax on earning in excess of $1,000,000.

and in 2 or 3 months when the same public sector employees need to be bailed out again with a higher unemployment rate? and in 2 or 3 months after that? and after that?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Whatever you say, SF. We've been over this before a number of times. I'm not interested in explaining things to you again.

That is good, I don't need to hear you apologize for Obama's failure yet again.

 

[NOVA]

But there are plenty of government powers that can be exercised that create jobs. Lots of them, even. And the government should use those powers.

Growing public sector jobs, that is, growing the size of government, is adding to the drag on the economy....government jobs do not add to nations wealth at all.....government jobs are an expense....they only thing they grow is the debt.

 

[Bonestorm]

Growing public sector jobs, that is, growing the size of government, is adding to the drag on the economy....government jobs do not add to nations wealth at all.....government jobs are an expense....they only thing they grow is the debt.

Public sector jobs aren't growing at all. They're shrinking. I posted a chart demonstrating this above. If your premise were true, then the economy should be growing rapidly right now with public sector employment not dragging the economy down. But that's not what is happening. Maybe your premise isn't true.

 

[The Dude]

A few hundred thousand more public sector jobs lost and the economy will boom. Via less drag bravo points out above.

 

[Bonestorm]

A few hundred thousand more public sector jobs lost and the economy will boom. Via less drag bravo points out above.

That's just plain asinine.

 

[NOVA]

That's a list of bills. Where is the Republican jobs bill?

Thats quite absurd.....you vote for, elect and support a Democrat for president and then demand that Republicans lead the country......

You're definitely confused aren't you ?

 

[NOVA]

A few hundred thousand more public sector jobs lost and the economy will boom. Via less drag bravo points out above.

Thats not exactly what I said is it......less government won't cause the economy to boom or falter....what it will do is lessen the growth of the debt.....

At least a step in the right direction....

 

[Bonestorm]

Thats quite absurd.....you vote for, elect and support a Democrat for president and then demand that Republicans lead the country......

You're definitely confused aren't you ?

The Republicans disagree with the President's approach to job creation. In my view, they have two options. They can argue that job creation isn't necessary or present an alternative proposal for job creation.

 

[NOVA]

The Republicans disagree with the President's approach to job creation. In my view, they have two options. They can argue that job creation isn't necessary or present an alternative proposal for job creation.

Preventing the president from doing any more harm to the economy then he already has is the option they have chosen by not passing his useless ideas....
and their 'alternate' proposals can't get past the Democrat Senate....

 

[Bonestorm]

Preventing the president from doing any more harm to the economy then he already has is the option they have chosen by not passing his useless ideas....
and their 'alternate' proposals can't get past the Democrat Senate....

Their "alternate proposals" can't get past the Senate because they don't have one.

 

[The Dude]

That's just plain asinine.

Really closing hundreds of foreign military bases turns you off?

 

[The Dude]

Thats not exactly what I said is it......less government won't cause the economy to boom or falter....what it will do is lessen the growth of the debt.....

At least a step in the right direction....

Less of a drag would have economic resources going to productive uses

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Private sector employment is growing. Public sector employment is shrinking. The shrinking public sector employment is a drag on economic growth and the private sector.

that would make a compelling argument if any of it were true.....except it isn't.....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

And, while I don't agree with Reid and think he's a dumbass for saying that private sector employment is doing fine, for those interested, here is total employment in the private sector since 2009:

And here is total employment in the public sector since 2009:

So what you end up with is the private sector doing OK, not great, and the public sector tanking, which is a drag on the economy and on growth. Now, the Republicans used to pretend to have this theory that less government would spur tremendous job growth in the private sector. But that's just not happening. Instead, the loss of public sector jobs is dragging the economy down. And that's how the Republicans like it.

interesting manipulation.....did you notice the difference in scale between the two charts.......the entire chart of public employment ranges over a 1,000 scale....the same as only one tick on the private employment chart......thus the "drop" in public employment shown for the entire period is only one third of the drop demonstrated in the first six month period on the private employment chart......this make me wonder which liberal think tank prepared your charts......