The Five Biggest Sacrifices Obama Wants Us To Make ‘Right Away’
Other than the affected, urgent tone, and the repeated refrain, “You should pass this jobs plan right away,” there wasn’t much that was new about Obama’s much anticipated “jobs speech.” He blamed a “political crisis” for making the economy worse. He used “poignant” examples of suffering and need, in order to appeal to his audience’s emotions. He made several appeals to authority, including:
- “Everything in here is the kind of proposal that’s been supported by both Democrats and Republicans — including many who sit here tonight.”
- “And now we’re going to sit back and watch China build newer airports and faster railroads?”
- “This idea came from a bill written by a Texas Republican and a Massachusetts Democrat.”
- “[L]eaders of both parties have followed the example [Abraham Lincoln] set.”
He also tried to make legislators feel guilty:
- “The people of this country work hard to meet their responsibilities. The question tonight is whether we’ll meet ours.”
- “[W]e are bigger than our politics have been.”
He took a swipe at “corporate profits,” which he said “have come roaring back.” And he derided ideology, characterizing principled opposition to the welfare state as “some rigid idea about what government could or could not do.” Most importantly, he laid out what amounts to a $450-billion stimulus package, which he calls “the American Jobs Act,” but which we may as well call the “Sacrifice Some Americans to Others Act,” because it is, as we might have anticipated, replete with calls for more sacrifice as a way to “provide a jolt to an economy that has stalled.” (At least he admits that it has stalled.)
“Sacrifice” means “the surrender of a greater value for the sake of a lesser one or of a nonvalue.” It does not mean, e.g., choosing to work longer hours now for the sake of increased wealth and more leisure later; it does not mean choosing to give some of your extra money, for which you had no preferred use, to your friend, relative, or charity of your choice. So, with that in mind, here are five sacrifices that Obama wants to implement, right away.
Amy, you beat me to it. I can’t add another word to your critique of the Obama “jobs” speech.
Thanks, Ed, very much appreciated.
I want O’Hopey to sacrifice his teleprompter and his golfing.
I want the big Mooch to sacrifice her multimillion dollar vacations, spending on clothes and accessories and her huge entourage of personal attendants.
I want O’Hokey to sacrifice his multitudinous, secretive executive orders which amounts to taxing us behind our backs and shutting down businesses.
I want O’Transparency to fire every Czar who was not confirmed by Congress and who answers to no one.
I want Obungler to make history by being the first halfrican to scarifice his job. Now.
I couldn’t have said it any better. I have always thought the first thing to be sacrificed should be travel on Air Force One except for international travel to official meetings. Second should be the White House entertainment fund. This may just save a little money but it is indicative of EVERYONE making some sacrifices. Obama’s golf should be added to the list and any personal spending of federal funds by rhwe first family. If michelle wants to travel anywhere other than coach class she should upgrade with her own money. They should have to pay for all the escorting of their two kids.
“Donna”;
Let’s see now;
He rode on a train to retrace Lincoln’s route to Washington;
His helicopter awaits his need to go to Congress or Camp David;
He rides AF 1 all over the world;
He’s accommodated by the “Beast” automobile at most destinations;
He’s campaigned in busses for re-election;
The only thing left is an armored up paddle wheel ferry to take his campaign through the Great Lakes and down the mighty Mississippi.
And he’s doing all this on MY DIME!
I’m so proud!
Gotta disagree with you on this one. Obama does far less damage to the country when he’s playing golf than when he’s playing president. He can and should golf more!
Now that is the true face of Obama.
If one were to need an example of PETULANT that would be it.
The Webster’s dictionary should rather than a written description of the word just use the artist rendering here.
I see Bosch’s rendition of Obama as sacrificial – as the harsh, dour soul that calls for sacrifice and pays for it by giving up his love for life.
Yeah… like John F Kennedy had a zest for life and lived off the public trough to accommodate those necessities that fund such (truth is his wealth was the venue through which his ventures were funded… before he became President he already had all the money he needed and it has been said that he somehow divested his Presidential salary … never took a dime of it). This is the man whose family (the Kennedys) supported OBanker throughout his campaign by lending their name to his Democratic ticket…. the antithesis of a Kennedy is (or was) an Obama [who has significantly boosted his bank account at our expense ... how could he ever afford even one home let alone two or more (one a multimillion dollar mansion) seeing as he came into the country penniless and seeking foreign student loans for his college education]. My point is, when will he ever think to sacrifice anything for a people he despises?
Why is no one sacrificing the nig-nog? What a shame on America, 360 million (of these 300 million legal actual Americans) and not one of them has the baxlls to finish off their torturers.
Gannett
Sydney, Australia
Whatsa matta mate; Not enough to keep you busy in your own back yard? Outa beer? No love life?
New York Times Online, Politico, Huffington Post, and Media Matters have some real hotties!
You Aussies have some great porn sites. They must be your neighbors. Get yourself a set of binoculars.
You been banned from posting comments in Australia?
That’s uncalled for. You should be more worried about forcing out of office your own politicians, who are raping you blind with their global warming taxes. Any taxpayer that falls for that scam is an idiot, and it sounds like Australia is full of idiots.
“…it sounds like Australia is full of idiots.”
Now common, Jarmo, how do you get from one troll to the entire country.
For allowing themselves to be snookered on AGW. But, you’re right, I did get a little carried away. They’re good swimmers, anyway. I guess that’s because many believe their Island-continent is sinking as a result of AGW ocean level rise, and want to be able to swim to Japan or Indonesia when Australia floods.
Such as Julia Gillard. What a disgrace.
It’s because Obama’s a dictator. We don’t get to sacrifice him. He gets to sacrifice us.
You might as well be asking why the denizens of the Gulag didn’t sacrifice Joe Stalin. No, it isn’t that bad – yet. But we’re on the same road.
Yes, Obama has wrought death and destruction abroad (by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and AQ in the “Arab Spring”) and poverty and misery at home. If we’re lucky, some of us may live long enough to see him out of office and hanged for treason, by due process of law, for selling out the US to our Muslim enemies.
Amy;
You size up Jug Ears very well.
He reminds me of a drunken landlord that only lets you pay your rent in cash. And he comes to your door to collect every week.
IT WILL BE SUCH A RELIEF NOT TO HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT JUG EARS IN THE NEWS EVERY DAY AFTER NOVEMBER 2012.
“IT WILL BE SUCH A RELIEF NOT TO HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT JUG EARS IN THE NEWS EVERY DAY AFTER NOVEMBER 2012.”
Unless, of course it’s to update us on how his prosecution is going.
Hah!
From your lips to the General Prosecutors ears.
Wouldn’t that be sweet?
perry1949;
That was a gaffe; General Prosecutor is Russian. Special Prosecutor is American.
Either would be fine.
Would make a nice circus the MSM could live off of for years.
“Would make a nice circus the MSM could live off of for years.” Did you mean “MSN”? Cute thought on that… but not if they were named in the prosecution as co-conspirators along with OBungler and wife, Eric Holder, and a few of those left-handed Supreme Court justices who flout the law (Obama & wife in chief as the main defendants who continually violate laws, Erick Holder and his in-justice department for not charging him for violating laws of the land, and the justices for refusal to hear a thing that appertains to Obama on no conscionable grounds at all – a three (no 4, I forgot MOB) – ringed circus indeed…. but a highly organized team that only plays ball with other criminals.
Just wanted to leave a quick note before Shabbat arrives-
Obama is an imbecile.
NOTHING IS MARKED MADE IN AMERICA.
It is either ” Made in the USA ” or ” Made in The United States of America “.
It would be funny if the consequences of his failures were no so severe.
I was looking for stock photos to accompany the piece and, you’re right, I found only labels saying “Made in USA”
Yeah, well, America actually is quite a bit larger than the USA. It does, though, make you, once again, realize what a total idiot POTUS is.
We know three things about him, which noone will dispute: he’s clean; he’s articulate (especially reading a teleprompter, otherwise, not so much); his pants crease is perfect. All said by rabid Dems.
Does anyone besides me think that Democrats are still the party of the KKK? Would these attributes ever, in any way at all, be applied to Perry, or Romney, or even Michelle Bachman? Would any real Republican, the party of Lincoln, say such a thing, and be totally unaware how racist it is?
I didn’t think so.
Get your facts straight. In at least seven of the 57 states their products are stamped just like Obama says they are.
La da da….Look for the UNION label. That would be jobs for his union voter base…..not those other S.O.B.’s.
LOLZZZZ! It took me a couple of seconds, but I did finally get that!
“In at least seven of the 57 states…”
Do you think that might have been a Freudian slip? You are aware of Obama’s alleged complicity in the scheme to dissolve the northern and southern borders and making one union, aren’t you. Supposing this is a thing that was embedded in his mind and when speaking of that number he was thinking, like Hitler, one country now and the rest of the world later on.. but one has to ponder where does the extra 7 “states” come in… perhaps China, Iran, Libya, Egypt (who can speculate without factual evidences or a far greater scheme to incorporate the entire world)….. Oh yeah, I was just wondering (as I do every time that infamous “57″ is mentioned).
That’s because the first two letters stand for ‘United States’, not to be confused with a federalized republic in which those units of government are treated as just another subordinate administrative level. Has anything the man done indicates that he believes in anything other than a fully centralized view of government?
It’s ironic. His administration is doing everything it can to impose stumbling blocks on American businesses competing both overseas and domestically, then he makes a silly statement like that. All those new regulations from the EPA, Obamacare, promotion of unionism and constant call for higher “fair-share” taxes, “balanced” with spending cuts, aren’t exactly business friendly. What a stupid person. He has no idea of the contradictions in his economic and political philosophies.
I caught that too, when he said it. I thought, shouldn’t he have said “Made in the USA”? Then each time I read his quote, something bothered me. Thanks for clarifying. The teleprompter blew it.
You’re right, the labels don’t say “Made in America.” Is he talking about North America (US, Canada and Mexico), Central America or South America. Since the Democrats and bureaucrats (redundant) are doing so much to cripple business in the US, I have to believe he’s more for jobs elsewhere than here. Kind of like how his “Cash for Clunkers” boondoggle provided stimulus to the Japanese and Korean car makers in large part because of the mileage requirements, or how he’s crippled US drilling for oil in domestic waters but supports Brazile drilling for oil, etc. Perhaps his remark was more telling than he realized.
Ms. Peikoff;
Thanks for the great article.
PJM is the place to come to for reading the serious news with a bit of levity. ( How can anyone take Obama seriously? )
I consider this invaluable, and crucial in today’s humorless “news”.
The ability to comment is an aperitif.
Skoal!
“Cybergeezer” (isn’t that an oxymoron?)
Thanks for reading!
Actually, I’m only one in a billion, spawned by the information age.
“( How can anyone take Obama seriously? )” WE MUST ALL TAKE WHAT HE DOES SERIOUSLY BECAUSE HE POSES THE MOST SERIOUS THREAT TO out security, our freedom, and our very lives BY HIS EVERY ACTION, EVERY WORD SPOKEN.
I agree with your spirit in that this is one fine place to experience differing views, seeing many other sides of the equation, and getting to voice our own initiatives… this is THE premier place that I have visited. So far it has ranked number ONE because of one feature I fully appreciate – my comments are posted immediately and not discarded because I am not aligned with Facebook; and, very importantly, my comments thus far have all been placed in near proximity to the person to which I am replying… not far down the page beneath some moronic diatribe that has nothing at all to do with my comment.
Hold up there, Verus;
You’re giving Jug Ears way too much credit.
He’s not the invincible dictator he wishes to be yet.
First of all, he’s not got the brains for it, and secondly, our government hasn’t been completely overthrown yet.
We’re still functioning, albeit at a very handicapped level.
SMB’s in construction will not benefit from infrastructure program since they are not unionized and fed contracts req high unionization per ex order.
The unions and the Democrat Party here are beginning to take on the same role as did the “trade unions” and the Communist Party in the former Soviet Union. Both were organs for the establishment and perpetuation of government tyranny.
Welcome to Obozo’s Five-Year Plan…he is deluded enough to think that he can hang on until 2016…we can only hope that the votes of the Deceased-American community will not suffice this time around to keep the Demonrats in power.
Our President is very confused about how economics works. He needs to read some Hazlitt or Smith.
His “address” managed to bore both his party and the opposition as he troted out the same old same old, the crap that didn’t work in the 1930′s or in 2009. He needs to read Amity Schlaes too.
When you return to the same stuff and expect a different result you aren’t that bright. This President’s abilities have been way oversold by a media possessed with the same education and intellectual skills as Obama.
Obama is getting smaller and smaller. He is a liability to his party. The more the media sells him, the smaller it gets as well. Each lacks credibility due exclusively to their own repeated fraud.
Rhetorical devices attempting to cross party chasms are not going to work 2 1/2 years into this failed administration, not after all the stillborn policy already foisted upon us.
Only 14 months until we get our say.
In many ways, I seem reminded of Charlie X. It was one of the first Star Trek episodes where Charlie, Robert Walker Jr. was found by aliens as a boy and in order to help him survive, gave him superhuman powers. He tormented his rescuers, Kirk, Spock, et al, until his “parents”, the aliens who originally helped him, came back to claim him and straighten him out. He went into ful -panic mode and was begging his rescuers to let him stay. They stood calmly by as the aliens took him, and seemed to care not.
That’s what I see in O. Panic. He’s losing (lost?) his base, never had the conservatives, has deeply ticked off the libertarians and other “independents” and, like a bad Vaudeville act, the hook is going to come out and drag him offstage any minute. Not a minute too soon for me.
It’s obvious that he only has a one-string banjo and can play no other tune but “spend, spend, spend”. As has been mentioned on other blogs by very astute writers, he’s a big believer in government largesse because that is how he came to be. That’s how his world functions. That’s how things are done.
With no other ruler to measure other things, he is blinded by his own ignorance and truly baffled as to why “stimu-loss” doesn’t work. Partly, the very education system that produced him, without requiring critical thinking, has resulted in “the backfire heard round the world”. When I wrote reports and such in both high school and college, my teachers demanded I provide evidence for my arguments; Not to make spurious arguments based on assumptions. But the national socialists are all about assumptions. And we all know what happens when one ASSUMEs. And Drop-Back-Barrack did just that last night.
“In general, I’ve never met a tax break I didn’t like.”
I disagree with this. Pretty much *every* tax break creates economic distortion and inefficiency, because it favors some economic activity which by itself would not be undertaken (or would be undertaken less). More insidiously, though, each tax break creates a class of citizens (or companies) who benefit from it, which inevitably is at the expense of taxpayers as a whole. This works in a perverse way to maintain these tax breaks, as those who benefit typically have a strong incentive to lobby for their continuation, while the majority of taxpayers individually have a lesser incentive for termination. The result is that the number of tax breaks has tended to increase over time, which while providing demand for accountants, only hinders the economy.
Howard,
Very true especially when the “breaks” also come in the form of “credits” for virtual consumer level activity. Like “energy efficiency” investments like caulk, water heaters, attic fans.
People who dont PAY taxes get these things done (or fudge the paperwork with enterprising ghetto friends), and get a check in the form of a “credit” for the whole amount.
Many times “tax credit” is just code word for welfare, or reparations, or just plain stupidity.
Cash for clunkers comes to mind…purchasing perfectly good cars to what? GIVE to the needy, so than can look for work outside the ghetto?
No. To destroy them.
The equivalent of saying “dude, I’ll give you five bucks of THAT guys money, to dump out the SODA youre drinking…not good for ya man, ya should drink WATER instead”
I agree with both of you. All tax “breaks” should be discontinued as they only favor specific companies or industries. Tax relief that favors specific companies only gives them an unfair, government-subsidized advantage over competition, and is politically motivated. Tax “breaks” for industries, such as the tax incentives to the oil industry to stimulate exploration should be eliminated, although slightly higher gas prices may result. Also, all government subsidies should be eliminated, such as the subsidies on ethanol, wind and solar powers. I don’t have a problem with subsidizing such industries for a short time, say 5 years, in order to keep them competitive until a “breakthrough” in technology occurs, but continuous subsidization without any improvements in technologies is ridiculous, becoming politicized crony capitalism.
Amy,
Thank you.
This article is very good and paints an accurate picture of Obama and his thinking. Has anyone other than me noticed that most of Obama’s reasoning is straight out of “Atlas Shrugged?” I expect him to announce a giant sound weapon made out of Rearden Metal any day now. His next announcement will be to appoint Wesley Mouch to the NLRB.
I wonder when someone is gonna cut through the BS.
Everybody knows how rotten this is. We all know that government spending doesn’t “create jobs”.
When will the conservative talking heads and republican politicians just say it like it is – That government spending might create jobs directly from the money the government spends, but that the net result (private + public) will be less jobs.
Whenever the government spends more, they use resources that then no longer are available for the private sector. And since the government use the resources less wisely than the private sector, the net result private plus public is less productivity and therefore fewer resources overall to finance the economic expansion, the idiots are trying to stimulate. And WTF is the point in creating government jobs, if they destroy more private jobs, than they create public jobs? AND if that wasn’t bad enough, they also in the process create a gigantic debt that it will take decades to pay back?
Whenever I see those imbecile democrats on the screen, I just wanna blow up the TV. Nobody challenges their ridiculous claims despite that we have seen their ideas being played out as giant failures again and again and again and again and again.
Looks similar to the rise of the Third Reich to me.
Unfortunately “JL” I am afraid the reason that no one on the Right points out the silliness of most Government spending is that despite what the Establishment Republicans claim they have no intention of changing their ways. They like the Democrats exist not to serve the People but to serve themselves by delivering on whatever their paymasters want them to.
Our biggest mistake is in not realizing who we are fighting. It isn’t just Maxine Waters and Barney Frank.
My Dear Amy, and I mean that to the fullest extent possible,
There is no Obama “plan”. There is BS; in fact, mountains of it. There is ego. There is deception. I will not even say it’s demagoguery, because it doesn’t even pass the laugh test.
Obama: We must do something good. Right away. If you don’t, you’re bad.
Us: What the hell are you talking about? Don’t you have a plan?
Obama: Sure, I do. You should see it. It’s great. And you must enact it, immediately.
Us: What is it?
Obama: I think I’ve made it clear. And if you don’t do it right away, you’re all bastards.
Us: Do what, exactly?
Obama: That thing I said would be good.
Us: That’s what we thought.
Rope-a-dope ain’t in it. My heart rejoices that Boehner is beginning to make him show his cards. Good will needs to be earned, and as a former mook who let people lead him down the primrose path far too often, Obama’s got nuthin’, save his totally unreal intransigence. He is depending on our credulous simplicity to save his day.
If we can’t all see right through this totally stupid, dog-chasing-the-tail, endeavor, we are truly doomed. Don’t blame the stupid people, who can’t help it. When we, the right thinking gentlepeople of the world, actually stoop to argue ridiculous concepts, we only hurt ourselves. Johnson said there was nothing to be gained by arguing the precedence of a louse and a flea, yet that is what conservatives do. No matter how stupid the Dems’ proposals are, we feel we must address them. We know better. Why are we so squeamish? Would you rather don guns than strong words? That, in fact, is the next step, as history proves ad nauseum.
The time to question their motives is long past. They are wrong. They have been utterly proven such. They will never admit it, so don’t waste your breath on them. They hate you, because you know this. Comport yourself accordingly.
Remember that George Washington, the perfect Virginia gentleman, won the Revolution, but Patrick Henry and John Paul Jones, set much of it in motion, too. They were, by nature, not conciliatory men, even considered crazy. Could George have won without them, and others of their ilk? I doubt it.
@john j, I assume you saw this: http://reut.rs/pUlq1k
Boehner saying Obama’s “plan merits consideration”
How much of that is calling his bluff, and how much of it is buying into what Romney has said lies at the heart of the GOP, remains to be seen.
john j, that is just brilliant.
10/10
My fellow Americans and Patriots,
If you really want to make a difference instead of trading barbs with professional “Liberal” detractors,
Then you may want to go to this site and fill out the petition to halt this latest affront on the economy.
http://act.theteaparty.net/4897/open-letter-to-congress/
You need not join us, you CAN make your voice heard.
Use your keyboards for something worthwhile, defeating O’s agenda.
Can we really afford to give another half trillion bucks to the unions, and other “Liberal” interests?
You know the answer to that…
It will only take a couple of minutes and then you can come back and annoy these liberals with what you’ve accomplished just by typing a few lines!
Stand up! Be counted, Be one voice!
VOTE in ’12 !
The problem with quoting Ayn Rand is that she didn’t know the difference between love and manipulation.
And that is relevant to Obama and economics how?
It’s not, but it’s relevant to the article. The article assumes Rand’s worldview, so it’s worth noting that her worldview is compromised by the inability to distinguish between sacrifice as a virtue and love as a virtue.
Hallelujah! All praise the virtue of sacrifice! Rand’s worldview is wrong. Our souls yearn presence in that glorious world of which our minds cannot fully comprehend… Allah Akbar!
Ah, words of wisdom, myth, words of wisdom. I do have one little question for you though: Can sacrifice be a virtue if it is completely involuntary and forcibly demanded of you by a gun-carrying T=man?
Of course not, that is not my point. My point is that the highest virtue is love, not sacrifice, and love cannot exist under compulsion. However, Rand’s scattershot condemnation attacks both genuine love and its counterfeit. She rightly condemns the counterfeit, but curses the genuine without cause.
Let me try again. You wrote this: “The problem with quoting Ayn Rand is that she didn’t know the difference between love and manipulation.”
I don’t accept Rand’s definition of sacrifice either. But then you wrote this: “The article assumes Rand’s worldview, so it’s worth noting that her worldview is compromised by the inability to distinguish between sacrifice as a virtue and love as a virtue.”
Finally you added this: “My point is that the highest virtue is love, not sacrifice, and love cannot exist under compulsion. However, Rand’s scattershot condemnation attacks both genuine love and its counterfeit. She rightly condemns the counterfeit, but curses the genuine without cause.
I am tried to make some syllogisms out of your statement, but I had to give up. Can you help me out?
Here is one of my failures:
Quoting people who don’t know the difference between love and manipulation creates a problem.
Ayn Rand doesn’t know the difference.
The author quotes Ayn Rand, thus causing a problem.
It’s a shame the article starts with such an idiosyncratic definition of sacrifice, since the individual points are generally correct. Why muddy the issue this way?
Speaking of scattershot, myth, what is your point? You started by claiming Rand didn’t know the difference between manipulation and love. Then you tried to support that by claiming sacrifice has virtue. I jumped in with some blatant sarcasm suggesting that sacrifice is virtuous only if you believe in some kind of eternal existence in another world.
I would like to know what it is about her worldview that you claim is wrong. Each time I think I find something wrong with her ideology, it turns out that I misunderstood her explanations. So please explain what you have found to be incorrect. But if you’re going to support your reply by involving another world that you go to after you die, then don’t bother. Many of us are tired of being enslaved by that unsupported claim on our existence.
Among all his other problems, I wonder what Obama will do about his illegal alien Uncle Omar who was arrested for DUI a few days ago? Are they going to give the famous uncle a pass just like the Feds did with Obama’s illegal alien aunt who has been on the government dole for years? Is Obama and his family above the law? The good thing about this weird, secretive family is that we finally see 2 of his relatives. At his 2008 Democratic National Convention when he was nominated to run on his party ticket and on his inauguration day in January 2009, and since, nowhere did we see his sister from Hawaii nor any other Obama relative on either his father’s or mother’s side. All you saw was Michelle’s family members. What in the world is this president hiding? It is so very, very strange.
Why would anyone hire some preselected person who has been off work for 6 months for $4000? It is a risk at anytime to hire these days. It may take that $4000 to train a deadbeat.
If the businessman has a need, wouldn’t he want to bring back the ones he laid off? What business is it that foresees increase in their business in the present never ending slump in every product except hamburgers and fries?
Isn’t there anybody in the Nut house, er I mean Whitehouse that can tell him this is just a plain stupid proposal?
Why do you judge those who could not find a job for more than 6 months as deadbeats? How do you know why a person can not find a job? I am employed full time right now. My job is what I do because I need cash for living. I have a bachelor degree in Information Systems that I earned while working full time plus many weeks having overtime. I can not find any employer willing to hire me for an entry level job. Employers are calling “entry level” jobs on paper when the hiring requirements are almost always for someone with at least 2 years experience. Many other times, the job requires not expects 5 to 10 years experience yet the title says “Entry Level” on it.
I am more than willing to work my way up from near the bottom. I just want the chance to prove myself. I know many people in this organization I belong to. They are not slackers nor will they tolerate slackers. The chief problems for many people being unemployed are these…
A) The actual true unemployment numbers are much, much worse that what the local paper or website states. Competition is extremely fierce for any worthwhile job.
B) Employers can and will for now get away with demanding violet elephants with blue and orange dots; If you do not meet their exact specifications literally for a job, they can and may turn you down. Your resume may be blackholed as it appear it fell into a job blackhole.
C) One can apply for a job that one is suited for. The applicant has something the hiring manager or supervisor finds distasteful and rejects the applicant.
I too resent this implication… my husband lost his job the week before Christmas and only just now found a job, he WAS a Satellite Communications Help desk person… making a good salary, now he’s driving a truck for LESS than what he was getting for unemployment. Why? Because every single job he has applied for he was one of 100′s, and in some cases thousands applying for the job… overqualified… and in some cases obvious AGE discrimination… he is 58, not 25… the young with no experience and the older worker fired before they qualified for retirement benefits are NOT dead beats, or unskilled dolts. They are real people who want to work and are willing to do just about anything.
The GOP is being very cagy right now. If they were to come out blasting this newest rehash of bad policies, they would be playing right into Nobama’s hands. It is his plan to run against the Republican party. Far better to go to the media and look all bipartisan and conciliatory and then when (if) a plan is finally given to the House, shred it then and there, but politely.
Sacrifice = something left/liberals will never do for themselves (that’s for other people).
Shared sacrifice Obama style is when the producers of this country must give even more to those who see the government as the guarantors of their chosen way of life. We have raised two generations of people who have been told that high self esteem amoung the worthiest of life’s goals. Our prisons are filled with those with high self esteem. Self esteem without accomplishment is a pox on our nation.
Unfortunately our current president is exhibit A when it comes to high self esteem. His only real success is being able to read a teleprompter in a coherent manner and convince many that his nebulous hope and change had real meaning.
At the same time those who are successful are demonized as selfish millionaires and billionaires. They deserve only scorn as greedy and self serving, worthy only of contempt. When you reward sloth and tax success do not be suprised when you get a populace which refuses to work or produce. Even the pilgrims starved when their fields were all tended as common areas. They had a surplus when each was given their own land. Being rewarded directly for ones labor is the only sure recipe for a successful and just society.
Thinking that government can somehow devise plans that will put people to work is a complete fantasy. What government agent will make sure that the $4,000 bonus for hiring a six month out of work laborer is legit? What federal planner will decide which “green” company gets loan guarantees?
Get government out of the way! The government that governs least governs best!
“What government agent will make sure that the $4,000 bonus for hiring a six month out of work laborer is legit?
Excellent question, but no problem. Just create a new government bureaucracy to ensure the new hires have the proper documentation to prove it. Hopefully, only a few will slip under the Obama radar.
My objection was a different sort- perverse incentives. If the law says you get a tax credit for hiring someone who has been out of work for six months or more, then if you find a suitable employee who has been unemployed for four months, you have motivation to drag your feet for two months before hiring him, knowing that all your competitors have the same incentive.
Unintended consequences. Since when has that ever stopped the leftists.
Amy Peikoff concluded with: “If Mitt Romney’s remarks during Wednesday’s debate are representative, then the GOP, in spite of its calls for reducing the size and scope of government, continues to subscribe to the altruist morality: “We have always had, at the heart of our party, a recognition that we want to care for those in need….” If so, how can they possibly resist Obama’s call for sacrifice?”
How true. That and this whole article validate a handy rule of thumb I concocted for myself years ago after observing the behavior of the two parties in terms of expanding federal powers because they share the same moral premises: “What the Democrats propose, the Republicans impose.”
I don’t know a soul who watched or listened to his speech, we’ve all tuned him out, waiting for 2012. Wave bye-bye to the bad man.
There was no electricity in San Diego County during the speech. Thus pretty much NOBODY in the county saw the speech. I think I’ll send San Diego Gas and Electric a Thank You note.
Tax incentives for hiring various segments of the population have been around since the 1980s. They didn’t much affect hiring decisions then or in the following years and do not help in any significant way.
Currently corporations are sitting on large cash reserves. In many cases hiring is down in businesses regardless of size because of fear and uncertainty about what the future holds regarding the hidden costs of employing people.
That said, our son was unemployed during his mid 20s for 18 months in the 00s while figuring out some things about his life (he’d been frugal and saved enough to live on during that time). Once he got his head around things, he had no problem finding employment. The small business he works for now is currently hiring people. There are exceptions out there.
The cash reserves that anyone has stashed away is being eaten away in worth by the declining value. Faith in the ability of a business to generate enough revenue to justify the risk of investment, at this time, is low to non-existent. And this is world wide. Just watch “Fast Money” on CNBC to see for yourself.
It’s getting so there are no safe havens. Bubbles can’t be maintained.
We’re witnessing a slow motion demolition.
Amy, dear,
The greatest sacrifice Obama wants us to make is clarity of thought. Why else does he say, “Pass this bill right away”? There is no bill. There are no cost estimates. He does not want Congress to even read, much less think, about this plan. Just “Pass this bill right away”. Herman Cain thinks. He expresses himself clearly. Alas, as Kinky Friedman once said about Ron Paul, “He’s telling the truth, but no-one wants to listen.” Over the years, the voters have been indoctrinated to vote before thinking. To paraphrase Nancy Pelosi, “We have to elect this person in order to find out if he can actually do the job.” Well, we elected Obama and the Dems; they can’t do the job.
Do we really want to help the unemployed AND create jobs? Why not create an entrepreneur training program that essentially gives anyone out of work for 99 weeks the ability to get assistance in starting a company. Drop the red tape for these people and give them support and let’s see what happens. Most people are not risk takers or so goes the argument about starting a business, but it would be interesting to see what risks people are willing to take to put food on their tables. Its a crazy idea, but no more crazy than everything else the president wants to do.
I think the real problem is what the kids are being taught in school: rely on the government to take care of you, don’t be independent. How about focusing on how to make money, start a business — how economics really works — instead of corporation/CEO/capitalism bashing? I do think it’s time we took back our schools and kicked the Lefties out. They’re poison. Defund the Department of Education.
The problem is more pervasive. Our youth are constantly bombarded with the message that the future is damned because of the past. Whether it’s crime, the environment, the government, the economy, the culture… The clear, consistent message is that it’s all coming apart at the seams. As a result, they are neither motivated nor committed. We don’t have youths preparing themselves in a serious way for the future. They muddle along in a half-hearted effort (at best) and an entrenched attitude of entitlement with a dash of anger at the previous generation(s) who screwed everything up.
Political Correctness trumps all. And we pat little Billy on the head for hating his war mongering, climate destroying, terrorist teabagging grandpa (who, BTW, is leaving little Billy a healthy trust fund because Billy’s parents are living far above their means, underwater on their mortgage, up to their neck in credit bills, and expecting that someday the Government will bail them out).
Billy will never say, “Thank you”.
““[W]e’ll set up an independent fund”
The Chicago term for that is “slush fund”.
So the premise here is that If I’ve been unemployed for 6 months or more I’m not qualified to work, or maybe there’s something fundamentally wrong with me to make me unemployable. Maybe it’s the BA I spent several years getting, or that I’m over 50 or that I have a strong work ethic and refuse to act like I don’t have a brain in my head. Of course it could be that I’m not cute, pert and irreverent.
Truth be told last week in my area one new job posted. I wasn’t qualified for because they wanted 3-5 years experience doing the exact same job somewhere else.
Paint with a broader brush next time. Those of us who have been laid off aren’t depressed enough already, thank you. I don’t think you’ve driven anybody to suicide yet, but keep trying. Eventually you’ll succeed.
(I’m no Obamite. I would work if I could. It’s hard to compete with the thousands of other BA’s, MA’s and PhD’s out of work. I could get more education but then I’d be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and still out of work. And because I have a degree I’m overqualified to work in a lot of places. They won’t even look at the rest of my resume)
Sean my heart goes out to you. I have friends in your situation as well in their late 30′s!
I can’t give you any advice for I truly don’t know your AoE but hope you leave no rock unturned.
Good luck Sean and keep your head up.
A case like yours is why I said, “Other things being equal….” They often aren’t. I wish you the best; Obama has made things much worse for all of us since he took office.
It’s a miracle our business still has work [construction, building & carpentry].
Don’t give up, Sean!
You have lots of company and I know that’s no consolation. I don’t know who popularized the myth that the longer term unemployed are unfit or unwilling. I think it was started by human resource dorks who were too lazy or unmotivated to bother checking qualifications and took the easy way out.
I spent 18 months out of work and have always considered myself highly qualified and highly motivated. There are industries, occupations, specialized fields that can remain stagnant for a long time when the economy is even slightly weak. And all things being even semi-equal, you’re disqualified by age if you’re over 50 or so.
In the computer software game, it’s becoming more and more common for folks to spend over a year looking for the position they can compete for. Lots of specialized systems and architectures and no one can afford to keep up with all of them.
Blanket judgments pretty well suck, especially when the person making them has no experience being in the position he’s judging people for being in.
As you know governments at every level are going broke because they cannot pay
the costs of pensions and health plans for government workers. The plans pay far, far more than social security and Medicare and allow retirement at much younger ages.
So we all pay higher income taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes and property taxes to pay for these platinum pension and health care plans. And many government employees, such as thePresident, his cabinet, and members of Congress and all their aides and department heads and university presidents and their aides are all millionaires and billionaires.
As President Obama says “people who benefit most should help those not so fortunate”. Therefore, we can save enormous amounts of money by canceling all government pensions including the President’s, and letting them collect social security and Medicare just like the ordinary citizens (no special status or privilege). If necessary, we can amend the constitution to prevent this from ever happening again.
Absolutely. All those hefty retirement and medical packages for government employees are at the expense of taxpayers’ largesse. Government employees are no less a special interest group than the oil industry, finance industry, welfare industry, big labor or the green industry. The so altruistic Democrats keep that a secret. All of the latter contribute heavily to the Democratic Party, including government employees.
Dear Ms. Peikoff:
You have written an excellent and bold article! Our dolt POTUS is so bereft of any real-life experience in ‘work’ it’s laughable that this doofus made it all the way to the white house.
What I find deplorable about this partier-in-chief, is that this moron thinks that making more government and public sector union ‘jobs’ is going to ‘help’ the economy. Is there ANYONE in this damned administration that ‘gets’ that putting more people on the government dole actually shrinks the economy? It makes my head hurt to think people so high up can be so low-down ST00PID!
You know what I think DOH!bama really wants us to ‘sacrifice’? I think he wants us to sacrifice our logic, our sanity and our loyalty to America.
/sigh off
Thanks, Delia! I love the “/sigh off” — just how I feel. At the end of discussing a story like this on my podcast, you will often hear me sigh
You’re adorable, Amy.
I think [personally] blogggers who interact with their readers are the coolest bloggers of them all.
Admittedly, I ‘sigh’ a lot in print. Is that a strictly feminine form of writing and expression? I have no idea. All I do know for certain is that that when I sigh both textually and intellectually and sometimes emotionally…my words have meaning.
And, since I’ve gone off the rails of your subject, I might as well tell you that I think you are a gifted writer and super sexy too [my criteria for 'sexy' being super smart brainiac].
/giggles off [I promise...oops..eeks out another giggle]
Commiserating with each other won’t change the path of the storm.
How many of us are in it for the long haul?
It’s true that Americans are altruistic in nature, it’s also true that our altruism is only as big as we can afford. Until now, we were willing to take care of even those who could possibly take care of themselves, because we could afford to do so. The Obama regime has so mucked up things now, Americans are becoming less and less willing to do that. It isn’t every man for himself yet, but if we gave Obama another four years, it would come to that.
RebeccaH, I blame the policies of Obama, and George W. Bush before him (who initiated the first “bail outs”), and many more before him, for making our economy such a pathetic mess. It is because of the poor state of our economy that it is a *sacrifice* for us to help out those who are in need. Imagine the wealth that would have been created if government had just gotten out of our way for the past 100 years or so? Not only would fewer people be in need, but there would be an abundance of wealth to share via private charity. No altruism required.
The biggest question is, assuming everyone is convinced that we really want to roll back the welfare and regulatory state: How do we get from where we are back to a place where government performs only its proper functions? A good place to start would be with a plan to repeal the programs and controls in reverse chronological order: “Last In, First Out.” First big item on the agenda for repeal: Obamacare!
Former Pres.Bush had no choice but to make that particular bailout. The real culprits that aided and abetted the disastrous mortgages given out to lower-income people: Carter and Clinton. The lenders knew full well that the lower-income people could not make the escalated payments that would come due several years hence. The question no one has answered: Why did the mortgage industry do this when they knew that mega numbers of foreclosures would ensure a domino effect of drops in housing values over all, jobs lost, housing starts halted, furniture and plumbing and heating and related stores would lose business or actually close, etc.?
There was much more to that situation than we’ve been told. It is akin to putting a puzzle together, but some of the pieces still are missing. One can assume that the Obama puppeteers had a large hand in it: G.Soros, H.Kissinger and others of their ilk.
Interesting references to the third reich. I say this because I fear that the worst of the bigoted comments here belong to those who will only be happy when Hitler himself is resurrected and installed in the oval office. Have you no shame?
I call Godwin’s Law on comment 31!
Sorry! Couldn’t care less about Godwin or his law. The shoe fits. You folks are seriously toxic! Won’t wander into this strange land again of folks projecting their own shortcomings onto a decent man. Very sad to witness.
Dr. Peikoff,
While I agree with what you have to say about Obama and his disingenuous and manipulative posturing about jobs, I strongly disagree with your/Rand’s cynical definition of ‘sacrifice’. Just because the word is manipulated by leftists does not mean that we should abandon the word to them. Do we really want to trash the word, sacrifice, because it is being misused by our political adversaries? Why are you implicitly ceding the word to them? That makes no sense at all, and I would be troubled by a society that cannot see any sacrifice as noble.
If nothing else you are doing violence to the language. When we honor those who made the ‘ultimate sacrifice’ do you consider them the ‘ultimate chumps?’ By your definition you should, but of course you do not (I hope).
Keep punching holes through the disingenuous **rhetoric** of Obama and the leftists, but please put more care into how you construct your arguments.
Respectfully yours,
M. Book
When Patrick Henry said, “Give me Liberty or Give Me Death,” he was saying that liberty was worth the risk of death to him. I would assume that he did not consider it a sacrifice. We should definitely honor and thank those who risk and lose their lives for our country, but I am assuming that they don’t literally think it’s a sacrifice when they sign up. We should not be (although with our ROE today we often are) putting them at undue risk, we should equip and pay them well, etc. And we should be fighting wars and putting our soldiers in harm’s way only when necessary.
What word would you use instead, to denote the concept of relinquishing something of higher value for something of lesser value or of no value? It’s a concept we need to be able to use in our thinking and communication, because it’s the type of action we (or at least I) want to avoid. Maybe we’ll have to agree to disagree on this.
I would call it wasteful. Of course, value is in the eye of the beholder. Jesus felt that redeeming humanity was worth suffering the wrath of God even unto death.
Yes, Moth, there are interesting references to the Third Reich, ones you won’t find in the Mainstream Media. And what was the Third Reich? In terms of history, it was the direct and necessary consequence of Otto von Bismarck’s establishment of the welfare state in the German states in the 1870’s. In terms of philosophy, it was the ultimate expression of Immanuel Kant’s various Critiques from the 18th century, man of which were published during the American Revolution. Kant was an enemy of reason, of the Enlightenment, of freedom. And if you, Moth, knew what you were talking about, and could make a valid point, instead of insinuating the incredible and the impossible, you would know that Ayn Rand’s philosophy of reason is the penultimate antithesis and antidote to Kant’s philosophy of anti-reason. And if you understood that, you’d know that neither the author of this fine article, nor most of its readers, would want to occupy the Oval Office in the capacity you suggest. If you equate freedom with the initiated force necessary to totalitarianism and authoritarian rule, then your mind was short-circuited long ago and nothing will ever make sense to you. Which is how Kant would want it.
Oh please. Do you even HAVE a life?
“…you would know that Ayn Rand’s philosophy of reason is the penultimate antithesis and antidote to Kant’s philosophy of anti-reason.”
Not just the penultimate, but the ultimate philosophy for living! (But I suspect that’s what you meant.)
Thanks for the excellent analysis and commentary, Miss Peikoff and Mr. Cline.
Now I’m not here to endorse Kant, because frankly Kant’s morality is a shadow of the real thing, because it governs only actions, not thoughts, which any complete moral system MUST cover (thoughts are between you and God, but to pretend they have no moral implications is incomplete at best). Kant does, however, logically draw morality from the Golden Rule. That is, he asks, “What would happen if everybody did this act?” If the result is absurd, then the act is immoral. Hence, murder is condemned because if everyone killed, everyone would be dead. Theft is immoral because theft can only be defined in terms of private property, which cannot exist if everyone steals. Lying is immoral because it undermines truth, which is necessary to define a lie. Adultery is immoral because it undermines the entire concept of marriage, which is necessary to define adultery.
In truth, however, Kant isn’t all that different from Rand. Both teach a morality that is only external. Indeed, I dare say that Kant has a more developed morality than Rand because Kant’s morality condemns adultery. What you will not hear from either of them, however, is “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love is an internal virtue that manifests itself in external actions; it is undefined in a system of purely external morality. The most you will get from external morality is reciprocity and non-aggression.
Thus, Rand rightly condemns the entitlement mentality that is present in so many of the poor, and fostered by poverty pimps who derive political benefits from promising them largess from the public treasury. Those who refuse to work don’t deserve to be fed. Neither does one automatically have a claim on another’s goods simply because of need. However, we feed the poor, clothe the naked and care for the sick because we love them, and we ask the rich to freely give not only for the sake of those who will benefit from their charity, but also for their own sake, so that their wealth does not destroy them. Wealth ought to serve the owner; the owner ought not to serve his wealth. Giving away a tenth of your increase or more keeps everything in perspective- wealth must be your servant, never your master, for those who are mastered by wealth turn to evil: gaining dishonestly, growing paranoid, seeking the destruction of those who threaten their wealth even by honest means (such as competition and innovation, and I am speaking of destruction not in the business sense, but in terms of personal calamity), hating the poor and downtrodden (eugenics is an example), and regarding others lives as mere pawns (plotting wars for personal profit, partaking of bloodshed for personal amusement, etc.). The just fruits of labor and thrift are a great blessing, but woe to the man who worships money, and thereby is ensnared by evil.
Yet, greed is an internal vice. Rand encourages it and Kant cannot condemn it. Hatred, too, is an internal vice, and neither Rand nor Kant can condemn it. So my point is that contrasting Rand with Kant is of little meaning unless you first admit how alike they are.
Thought you all might enjoy this video:
http://bcove.me/8hlvri6g
Pass this jobs bill RIGHT AWAY!
For the record, U.S. exports are labeled “Made in USA” or “Product of USA,” not “Made in America.” If Barry knew anything about the manufacturing business he would know that. Had he studied history in the United States and not Indonesia, he might also know that Abraham Lincoln was most certainly NOT the “founder of the Republican Party.” (Lincoln was a Whig who did not switch to the Republican Party until at least one year after its founding.)
Read The Obama Timeline (updated daily) to keep up to date on the antics of the thug-in-chief.
Ron Paul, too, is thick w/ altruism. He rejects the Federal Gov’s role in welfare, but said something to the effect of – of course the state and local governments should care for the [exampled] poor. And he’s considered the extremist on cutting welfare. This mess is never going to be fixed at the political level; the culture is so screwed up. *** Peter Schiff’s last video blog had a little different take on the hiring incentives. Basically, it’d cause employers to keep turning over low-paid workers.
Sure, if they get a new $4K credit for each worker hired that satisfies the criteria, why not just turn them over if you can get away with it. Of course we don’t know all the strings that come attached to this $4K, but I’m sure many would find a way to abuse it. Just like “cash for clunkers.” I lost track of what a mess that program turned out to be…
“Distribution shall undo excess and each shall have enough”
-Barack “King Lear” Obama
I’m so sick of Obama saying we all have to sacrafice. Haven’t we done that his entire 2 1/2 years already? Hey, I have an idea. How about we sacrafice our President and his arrogant wife????
I suppose what I find so discombobulating is that when Obama and the left try to make the case that there has been any kind of recovery at all, they point to the rise in corporate profits that, otherwise, they view as something that government needs to step in and correct.
maybe he should sacrifice his SS coverage so we can do a retroactive choice on him.
How does someone with an invalid SSN draw an SS check?
PULEEEASE!!!!
Stop the juvenile quibbling about the term “sacrifice”.
America has been founded on “sacrifice”; America has been, historically, the most altruistic nation on the planet Earth. That just happens to be the basis for the activity of “sacrifice”.
The United States has been engaged in philanthropy from it’s inception.
Even the nations America has gone to war with, are now allies because of America’s “sacrifice” and altruism.
No amount of New Age, misguided emotional prose can eradicate that fact.
Best way to reduce unemployment is to get rid of many regulations that cost businesses money and get rid of the minimum wage.
Side note: a very talented couple I know were thinking about going into business. I tried to get them to study up on what they needed to know, independently, but they were going to wait for the State of Alaska to send them course material. On being independent businessmen. (ahem?) Concept failure?
They were both politically liberal.
Be wary when Obama says he wants jobs for “Americans.” When he uses that term he certainly seems to be including the illegal aliens swarming across our borders. He should have used the term “U.S. citizens,” only because of the times in which we live, i.e., the millions of illegals who have taken jobs from our citizens.
It should take not one cent to get jobs going again. Obama has been asked to do and refuses to do: remove the backbreaking regulations and threats of even greater taxation on businesses, including small businesses. Businesses, large and small, have been attempting to get those points across to him, that they want to grow and expand right here in the U.S.; however, they are turned away every single time.
Ann C, Phillep Harding: What’s amazing is that he mentioned this approach during this jobs speech and rejected it. Too many entrenched bureaucrats are at the heart of his voting base, apparently.
Oh, and did you notice how he says he plans to bring his message (“Pass this jobs plan right away!”) to all corners of America. This gives him a pretense for using our tax dollars to pay for his campaign tour.
On the one hand, I’m counting the days before we can get him out of office. On the other, I don’t see the Republicans who are running, and who are leading in the polls, being much better.
As a community organizer, Barack Obama agitated his neighborhood constituents to take action using Saul Alinsky’s tactics. His intent was to galvanize uneducated folks with his inspiring rhetoric to get involved, telling them they had more power then their legislators when they bonded together—Rule #1. Rule #2—Barack did not go out of his experience, which is why he successfully agitated in Chicago. When Barack ran for President, his rhetoric caused voters to retreat from John McCain in fear—Rule #3, and in Rule #4 he caused John McCain to campaign to higher standards than Barack’s campaign. Rule #5 and 6—Barack enjoyed ridicule, he was good at it and his campaign had millions of dollars at their disposal to keep up the pressure to the election.
Now President Obama still behaves as if he is inspiring neighborhood constituents to agitate their elected representatives.
HIS TACTICS AND BEHAVIOR ARE THE SAME, BUT THE AUDIENCE IS DIFFERENT. HE IS THE ONLY ONE WHO DOESN’T GET IT.
In all vibrant relationships, trust and respect must be earned by all parties concerned. There is respect for the Office of the President; however, the President in the Office cannot demand action and respect when he tramples on the trust that had been granted to him by the AMERICAN people.
Agreed. Here’s the latest, outrageous example:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/09/presidential-proclamation-national-grandparents-day
I thought it was a joke when I heard about it. Apparently not.
Replying to my own comment: Yes, Grandparents day is on the Sunday after Labor day each year, but if I were President (and no, I don’t want to be, Sparrowhawk is right), I would either reschedule for the 10th anniversary of 9/11, or I would at least say something during the remarks (which I link to, above). As it is, Obama said nothing, even though he did manage to get in a plug for Medicare and Social Security (of course).
While I agree with your argument, and I don’t want government to interfere with hiring practices one way or the other, I have a clarifying comment regarding Sacrifice Number 3.
President Obama proposed tax credits for those hiring people whose job search exceeded six months. You write, “Other things being equal, those who have been looking for a job longer, without success, are those who are less qualified or who otherwise seem less likely to generate net income for a prospective employer.”
While your premise is essentially correct, the six month limit is not valid today. Currently, “other things” are simply not equal. Extremely productive workers can be searching for a job for over a year, where they would have been hired within two weeks even in the mixed economy that existed before 2008.
Due to the fear of known and unknown future regulations and expenses coming with Obamacare, as well as inflation and numerous other factors, there have been virtually no jobs created for years. More precisely, while some jobs are created, others are lost, so the total number of jobs–already low after massive lay-offs in 2008-2009–is static.
As an example of the reluctance to hire: At the large firm where I work, several highly skilled people employed regularly as on-call “temps”, due to their productivity, were offered full-time staff jobs in 2010, but the economic uncertainty led the executive office to interrupt the process until futher notice. The workers remain “Perm-a-Temps” who work full time but never receive any benefits like paid sick days, holiday pay or health insurance, and who never know for certain whether they will be called in to work the following week.
For many jobs of all types where temping is not an option, hiring is simply frozen.
So it’s true that Obama’s proposal may well reward the less competent since “over six months” could also include “over five years.” However, with the impact of union rules, Affirmative Action and other regulations, in many cases the people laid off first and hired again last may well be the most qualified and productive workers. I think Tea Party rallies are full of the productive unemployed.
You may be right that things are so bad right now, that you can’t even use the phrase “other things being equal” because they are so incredibly far from being so.
We had better change course in a big way, and soon.
Thanks for reading.
Obozo, our clown in chief. and I use this because by his own words he doesn’t deserve the respect of the office because he is unpatriotic. Running up a debt and leaving it to our children, by his own words makes a person unpatriotic.
But once again his big joke is to pass a bill that isn’t written, that nobody knows what is in it and isn’t scored. Nancy Pelosi pulled this off once, but not again. The same bad joke gets no laughs or attention the next time it is tried.
But I have been trying to get someone to tell me how many times he played golf prior to being president, and if it is a lot more, then it is amazing that in a much more intensive job he has more time to play, or it is because he is spreading other people’s wealth to cover his green fees.
What is the carbon footprint everytime he goes for a game.
Mark Steyn was excellent on the jobs speech. Started calling him “President Pass This Bill,” and made some good cracks about the fact that the bill had no set content and no funding to pay for it. Very cathartic to laugh at Steyn’s humorous take on it.
The part that I really loved was when he piously declared that “all of this will be paid for” and then punted all the details for that the the deficit committee. So basic he can give us details on the candy he is handing out, but nothing on how he will pay the bill. Typical for him, all promisses, no substance.
I’d recommend caution about labeling long-term unemployed as less desirable.
(RE: 3. Tax credits for hiring less desirable employees: “Pass this jobs bill, and companies will get a $4,000 tax credit if they hire anyone who has spent more than six months looking for a job.”
Other things being equal, those who have been looking for a job longer, without success, are those who are less qualified or who otherwise seem less likely to generate net income for a prospective employer.)
Depending on regional circumstances and available options, finding suitable employment can be extremely difficult. I’m a former Air Force officer with 26 years of service and two masters degrees. I’ve been searching for two years and am unable to locate suitable employment that would enable me to support my family and pay for three kids to attend college. Without assessing each person’s situation, such blanket statements actually detract from the valid criticisms leveled against the America Jobs Act proffered by President Obama and hurt credibility.
Jobs were Priority One in 2009, BO’s jobs plan is already 2 1/2 years late.
Let’s celebrate Labor Day again in America with real jobs in our future.
1. Encourage, support and grandfather all domestic energy souces here in America.
2. Pass a Balance Budget Amendment.
3. Repeal Obamcare.
4. Stop benefits to all illegals.
5. Stop all corporate welfare.
6. America first, stop all Foreign Aid, execpt in national disasters.
7. Pass term limits on all federal assistance programs for food, housing,
phones, medical, and free money.
8. Empower Americans, workfare not welfare, stop the growing dependency.
9. Congress shall make no laws for the people that does not apply to Congress.
Congress shall not make any laws, rules and benefits for Congress that does not apply to the people.
10. Reform government first, stop the waste, fraud and abuse in all programs ASAP.
11. The government exists for 2 reasons only,
to protect the homeland and in force our laws.
12. Do away with minimum wage, let the free market determine prices.
13. Replace the federal income tax with a national sales tax.
14. Anchor babies are not legal Americans.
15. Stop voter fraud and increase voter accountability.
he [Obama] derided ideology, characterizing principled opposition to the welfare state as “some rigid idea about what government could or could not do.”
“Yeah! What is this nonsense about having to follow the Constitution of the United States of America? Don’t bother me with these trivial details! Nevermind I took an oath as President of the United States to UPHOLD the Constitution and protect it from enemies, both foreign and domestic. After all, I AM one of those domestic enemies the founders warned about. I have no intent on upholding this dated and overly restrictive piece of paper which is keeping me from realizing my true potential as the Messiah reincarnate! Get out of my way peons!”
(Celebrity voice impersonated)
Gaffes and Gripes: Obama’s “Jobs Speech” Part Two
BULLETIN: Bloomberg.com reported on Wednesday that Americans have not only given a rousing thumbs-down to Obama’s “Job Act” but thumbed their noses at the president because of it.
As if President Barack Hussein Obama were foretelling the future at the same time he was serving up an object lesson on how he believes Americans should solemnify the memory of September 11th, 2001 by a “day of service,” he slapped up vittles in a soup kitchen on 9/11.
Most Americans disregarded, if they didn’t ridicule, his asinine idea of substituting public service in lieu of solemnity on 9/11 but they will be hard pressed to dismiss the image of soup kitchens in our future, especially in view of reports of spreading poverty and in light of the president’s lackluster performance in so-called “jobs speech” last Thursday.
Obama’s screwing up history, as in saying Lincoln “founded” the Republican Party and his gaffe-ing his way through his presidency have been more than adequately covered up by his mainstream media. (http://bit.ly/qKFXDP)
It will be far more challenging for Obama’s MSM to provide cover for an entire speech which was essentially an hour-long whine indirectly bitching at Republicans for their intransigence in favor of preserving the Republic and avoiding national bankruptcy instead of burdening the taxpayers, their children, and grandkids with another boondoggle.
With his trillion dollar 2009 unstimulating stimulus an abject failure in putting Americans back to work, Obama’s economic wizards devised another sure-fire scheme, the piddling Son of Stimulus, a $447 billion plan incorporating many of the unpalatable elements of the original failure, features previously rejected even by Obama’s own Democrats.
This time around, the Anointed One left his ointments home and didn’t emulate Bartles and James by politely thanking Congress in advance for its support. Instead, almost churlishly, he repeatedly demanded the Congress pass the new waste now, at once, two weeks ago, if possible.
In various forms, he reiterated his demand at least 17 times, apparently fearing that if congresspeople read it before passing it, they may not like it and forgetting that he isn’t an emperor and that the legislative branch is co-equal with the executive.
All but stamping his foot, whining of the consequences of non-passage and touting the improbable benefits, Obama resembled more an petulent child than a president. My four year old grandson would be sent to time-out or, preferably, to his bed, for such infantile conduct.
To his credit, the president didn’t repeat his “shovel-ready” lie; many of his brand new shovels won’t be shovelling until 2013, coincidentally after Election Day 2012.
Early on in his unprecedented second address to a joint session of Congress and the American people within less than 32 months–this president obviously craves attention as much as my grandson–Obama declared his “Jobs Act” would be fully “paid for,” as opposed to Obamacare, for instance. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5439.)
Fantastic web site. Lots of helpful info here. I am sending it to a few buddies ans also sharing in delicious. And certainly, thank you for your sweat!