Which Candidate Will Kill the Fewer Number of Jobs?
If you listen to the way the presidential choices talk about each other, they’re both really awful and are both going to destroy the few jobs this country has left. And what if they’re both telling the truth?
President Obama is currently pointing out that Bain Capital bankrupted a steel company, and I guess he is implying that Mitt Romney may do the same to our country. That perhaps Romney as president will gut America, sell off its assets, and then take all that money and flee to Mexico — it’s certainly what I’d do if I were in his position. Also, Romney doesn’t care if there are jobs, because he doesn’t need one. He’s got enough money to live off for the rest of his life while he just sits around and rides his car elevator all day.
Of course, Mitt Romney is responding to this by pointing out Obama’s record on jobs while he’s been president. Obama always talks about the jobs he’s saved or created, but not the millions more jobs he’s annihilated or prevented. The only reason unemployment isn’t in double digits is that the economy is so bad that people have given up even looking for work. Under Obama’s leadership, we might eventually get to 100% employment, but there will be only five people working to support the rest of us as we sit around all depressed, watching daytime TV and gorging on Cheetos.
But as I watch Obama and Romney attack each other, I realize that they’ve actually stumbled onto a very useful way to view this election: Both Romney and Obama are going to destroy jobs, and it’s up to us to pick the one who will destroy the fewest.
In previous elections, we tried to choose the presidential candidate that would help us create and preserve jobs, but that’s like putting cats in charge of making sure no one pees on the sofa. As history has shown, politicians tend to be arrogant idiots, most of whom have no business experience and only think they know everything because they once read an article about job creation in The Economist. But the private sector is where jobs actually come from. So, really, it’s up to us to create the jobs and get the economy going and invent cute photo-sharing apps we can sell to Facebook for a billion dollars. And while we’re working as hard as we can, it’s up to the politicians to try to destroy all that hard work by blundering around with taxes and regulations, smothering us in their heavy-handed attempts to help. So to achieve economic success, we need to be be able to create more jobs than the moron politicians we elect can destroy.
So that’s the best way to look at the current candidates: We’re not picking the savior of our economy; we’re picking our opponent. So between Obama and Romney, we have to decide who we are most likely to succeed against in making jobs. It’s as if Batman gets to choose whether to deal with a crime spree from the Catwoman or the Joker. Both will be up to no good, but he also knows he’ll have a less miserable time dealing with the morally gray cat burglar versus fighting the homicidal maniac.
Actually, I’d be happiest with the candidate that killed the greatest number of the most obnoxious jobs. Excess white house staff, FLOTUS fluffers, czars of every stripe and description….regulators who do not regulate, because they believe they have a mandate to destroy; unaccountable bureaucrats pursuing unconstitutional ends; how about a “gimme” — anyone who can’t respond to an FOIA in 60 days — *poof!* gone.
Moving out in waves, how about those bankers whose business acumen consists solely in attracting bailouts or federal sinecures; firms unnecessarily dependent on “no-bid” contracts; spinmeisters and PR flacks that tout the bureaucracy’s favored memes.
I’d like to see more of the unemployed in useless industries, like solar — and the best minds and hearts among them devoted to extracting the great wealth of coal, oil, natural gas, and rare earths that lie underground, or reaping the benefits of the land’s natural fertility when water and other resources are suitably developed.
I don’t care if 1/10 of the crushing overburden of stupid, backward, counterproductive people ever get rehired doing anything. Their loss would be America’s gain from day one.
This precious contribution is admirably konsequent.
Anybooby who sets out to be a SEVERE whight-winger must of course consider that our holy Homeland™ *still* suffers from a bad case of JSS, Job Surplus Syndrome, despite a certain amount of progress made since George XLIII (nominally) and Field Marshall Paulson von Hindenburg and (especially) General Bernanke von Ludendorff ran the Housin’ Boom off the tracks in the fall of ’08.
To have considered well is one thing, though, and to be such a fool as to talk about it out loud is quite another. Hence we find a mere peanut-gallery peanut like ‘Cthulhu’ willin’ to be frank, more or less, whilst a Frank Freelord Flemin’ with (one presumes) some sort of career to lose must pull his neopunches. Lots and lots of volks must be disemployed, no doubt about it, but they must be chosen carefully. Above all, ¡’twould help nobooby to wind up disemployed oneself!
The whightist señoritoes (d.b.a. ‘conservative’ ‘intellectuals’) who infest the Tanks of Thought are in a bit of a pickle about JSS, as I conjecture. To see what needs to be done but also see that one dare not talk about it anywhere one might be overheard, especially overheard by the non-backwater media–that is bound to wear down one’s moral fibre eventually. Ensconced in a Tank, one ought to be a bold Rommel or Guderian, but when circumstances compel one to try to look more like Governor Dukakis of Massachusetts for years an’ years, with no obvious exit strategy visible before the next bend in the tunnel, . . . . well, let’s just say there are limits to what flesh an’ blood can endure.
Another cross to bear is that the Venerable Funders of the Tanks of Thought don’t want to hear about JSS much more that your average, and casually disemployable, Joe the Wurzelbacher does. The hired-hand señoritoes have painted their employin’ freelordships an’ Corporate Citizennesses into a really bizarre corner, at the peak of a (still continuin’) barrage of hype to make out jobcreatin’ the greatest invention or discovery since nightbread an’ sliced baseball, it turns out that jobs are about the *last* thing TopPercenters ought to want more of. If they know what is good for ’em, that is. And remember, it is precisely the Tank Thinkers who are supposed to teach their Betters what their (the Betters’) interests are.
This agitprop dissonace is (maybe) OK as long as we still have the fiend O’Bama to kick around, but once Governor Romney takes over, ’twill quickly become intolerable. It will hardly do for Massa Tom Donnelly of the CCUSA an’ all the lesser Chambermaids of Commerce to keep bitchin’ an’ moanin’ even after 20 January 2013 ’bout how they *would* be jobcreatin’ like crazy, of course, if only the evil Fedguv would please get out of their way.
It will not, to be sure, be Willard Mitt XLV’s fault that there is no jobboom as soon as the Tee Putty have taken ‘their’ country back. Jobcreatin’ in central North America is (and will remain for the foreseeable future) not very attractive ROI-wise mostly for reasons that have little to do with the Caligula of Cook County.[*] It is easy (and sorta fun) to imagine a delegation of CCUSA neocomrades conferrin’ behind locked doors with Willard Mitt XLV in, say, August 2014, and learnin’ from His Excellency’s own lips, an’ based on that immense track record of successful baincappin’, that He thinks so too, thinks that they would be damnfools to do their jobcreatin’ in South Succotash TX rather than ‘offshore’.
At which point POTUS Himself is painted into what I have called “a bizarre corner.” Obviously neither mainstream nor backwater media will be revealing that that is what Himself thinks, not if He can help it. And He will probably be able to help it. Indeed, WM45 might even fail to come clean with his own Classmates when they come callin’. though it makes a better pscenario to feign that He would.
And then the moral fibre of the Master of Seamus will start unravelin’ too, for only præternatural Assistance can get a human being around the fact that impotence corrupts.
Happy days.
___
[*] What it comes down to, basically, is that your denizen of the holy Homeland™ costs far more per hour than does the heathen Chinee or the cow-crazed Hindoo. One might even say, “Outlandishly far more.”
Dream on, Mr literarian illiterarian(sic). You have a Communist in your Whight(sic) House. As long as this be the case, there will be no improvement in our economy. Contrast that with your whight(sic) winger nonsensifictation!(sic)
This was obviously a very intelligent and literate post, since it made absolutely no sense at all. Kind of reminded me of the label on a bottle of Castile Soap. I think I’ll take a look at the latest “Marmaduke” now.
Nice word salad. Are you fondly hearkening back to the Expressionist roots of nascent Third Reich art, literature and theatre, or are you just jerking off?
How did you get access to the internet your incoherence is absurd, I must be tired to have even read part of you stupidity!
I like the way your drop your gees. Is that a tribute to the Bringer of Light? Being the Smartest Man in Amerikkka, I can only assume that the Corpse-Man in Chief knows about these important economikkk factoids which you have so kindly divulged; clearly, the only solution to unemployment involves standing about holding signs and growing beards, AnotherWorldIsPossibling.
First, its not nice to plagiarize from the Huffington Post!
Second, Anonymous, your plaintive plea for homosexual fellatio falls on deaf ears. You’ll get better results in the Mens Room, according to the vice squad.
Third,your not very cleverly concealed pro-Oscumbag stance consists of rhetorical innuendo and bears to relation to the hard facts. Your offering brings to mind the phrase, “Baffle ‘em with bullshit”.And raises the question, “How can one write so much and say so little?”
Remember this:
Obama:
“Government reorganization for two of the Big Three American auto manufacturers to save them from oblivion.”
A day after Chrysler said it was cutting 800 dealerships,
General Motors Corp. told 1100 of its U.S. dealers they were being shut down.
Now tell me again how many jobs Romney and Bain Capital lost.
Obama also fired all the workers at Pontiac and Saturn.
Will no one call him on it?
There were many Saturn only dealers.
Remember this:
Obama:
“Government reorganization for two of the Big Three American auto manufacturers to save them from oblivion.”
A day after Chrysler said it was cutting 800 dealerships,
General Motors Corp. told 1100 of its U.S. dealers they were being shut down.
Now tell me again how many jobs Romney and Bain Capital lost.
It’s a bit more complicated than this. When Bain took a stake in a company they also brought in their own management gurus and made sure they paid themselves well for their expertise up front. So flailing company has to take on more debt to pay off these new investments which sinks it further.
US of A isn’t able to recoup its investment in the same way. To my understanding, there is oversight, but GM etc. aren’t being billed for services to “turn around” a company.
Can’t say if what Bain was doing was more or less ethical than anyone else out there. Why Dems want to bring it up is because it pisses people off. Some of the job killing that Baine and others do is necessary, but it’s indifferent to the actual worker.
The “business elites” like Mitt find ways to make money if the company succeeds or fails. It’s good business, but not so good for a politician who needs in some ways to be someone you want to have a beer with.
GM and Chrysler were going to go bankrupt anyway. The bailout did not prevent bankruptcy, so why spend tens of billions of dollars on it?
Technically it was Chapter 11. One of the arguments given for bailing out the big three was simply to avoid a full on liquidation which was the alternative. It would have been ugly and produced a string of supplier bankruptcies taking out the automotive industry probably for good.
Detroit’s like Mom and Apple Pie, (without the billions in bailout money) neither Bush, nor Obama, Clinton. Heck if McCain had won he’d have bailed too. It would have dumped a landslide of employees onto the unemployment rolls while also cutting tax revenues in an already disastrous economy.
Lots of other reasons, but one to think about is the military. In WWII we were able to retool civilian industry to military purpose. I’m not sure in the future we can or should outsource tank and hummer production to China. Just sayin.
Bastiat eviscerated the Broken Window fallacy in 1850….but now we’re getting the flip-side: the government can have paid window-breakers on its payroll, but we can’t fire them because that’d raise unemployment. Once you realize that the some government jobs are literally worse than useless — that is to say, if you invest $1 in such a job, the GDP goes *DOWN* by some bit — it’s easy to see that sacking the current occupant of the position would increase overall prosperity.
Who will kill the most GOVERNMENT jobs? That is the question.
Well holy smokes! Where was this column back when it would have made a difference – like maybe in January????? This has the been argument against Obomney for over a year now. Maybe I missed it, but I don’t remember a single PJM columnist stepping up and expressing anything like this level of doubt for the golden boy, back when it would have mattered. Thanks for nothing.
Mitt, the consummate RINO, only proposes that we drink our poison with a mixer instead of straight as our current Prez is feeding us now. Dubya must be proud of him, as I’m sure are H.W., John McCain and all of his other brethern in the “Republican establishment,” which is only a combination of socialism lite, globalism lite, and unlawfulness.
We are continuing with our preparations to emigrate, and we don’t give a rat’s patoot who thinks we’re being “disloyal” for getting ready to leave.
Both Romney and Obama are going to destroy jobs, and it’s up to us to pick the one who will destroy the fewest.
The only jobs Romney will kill are public sector idlers. The economy will take off when President Romney removes the regulatory burden. Replacing the socialist with a free enterprise capitalist will work wonders.
A voice of reason among the Romney bashers who need to get over themselves & welcome a President Romney prospect over four more years of the worse POTUS in US history. Perspective, people.
…
worseworst…..“… spending a trillion dollars in “stimulus” money that has so little effect you’d swear he just put the money in a warehouse and burned it.”
Not burned. Just shoveled by the truckload into the pockets of friends, cronies & donors.
“Not burned. Just shoveled by the truckload into the pockets of friends, cronies & donors”
Who then burned it for him, but took it off-shore first,
on account a da pollution, caabon foodprint, global faihrness,
ya know. Didn’t ya know it?
It worked, too, so well that we’re now ready for round two.
That’s how hope and change works, right? They really should a
called it “hopping change”. Change hopping straight from our
pockets to theirs. As Ayn Rand was fond of calling them: “LOOTERS”.
Remember on Nov. 6th: ” Vote early, vote often”, don’t be shy and be
sure to start the day by forgetting your gov. ID. What? None needed?
Like I said, man,…
The premise of this article is deeply disturbing. Romney and Obama can, by their words and actions, destroy both public and private sector jobs instantly. But, Romney and Obama can only create public sector jobs. Unless we’re going to admit that both candidates are Communists then we need to understand that job creation is the purview of the private sector. Governments can destroy an economy almost overnight but it takes years for a recovery because those factors that led to the decline must first be erased, a welcoming business environment must be established, and the private sector must trust that the new welcoming conditions won’t again turn adversarial. Sadly, that takes time and I gather from the article that neither Romney or Obama intend to “fundamentally re-transform” the country. It’s going to be more of the same or a slightly different more of the same.
History tells us big government solutions don’t work. History tells us centralized control doesn’t work. Which candidate is repeating Reagan’s line “government isn’t the solution, government is the problem”? Yeah, but Newt and Ron aren’t candidates…
The premise of your face is deeply disturbing.
Well, you sure get extra credit points for maturity and grace.
Not.
Remind me not to bother reading any more of your columns.
Nevermind, I won’t need any reminders.
How can you not find that funny? Humorless people need to stay out of politics.
How? It has something to do with no longer being 14.
I’m with you Frank, go forth and make funny.
I’m confused. Where are you actually disagreeing with the article? You say the premise is flawed, but then say that the government can’t create jobs, which is basically his point. I can’t even tell if I want to agree with you or argue with you.
I don’t think he’s disagreeing with the article. He didn’t say the premise was flawed, only disturbing. I think he’s basically saying that it’s disturbing that we’re in this situation, not that Frank’s opinion is disturbing.
FrankJ’s opinions are always disturbing. This guy wants us to NUKE THE MOON!!
Actually far ahead of jobs I would pick the candidate who does what is needed for Iran not getting the bomb and not killing, either through Chavez or through terrorists, Americans by the hundreds of thousands.
I am going with the first guy to say “government does not create jobs, you do that”
Wait, not going to happen.
Oh and thanks for ruining my Catwoman fantasy Frank.
Then you’d better wake up and support Romney – as he said precisely that months ago.
Well, I say we give Romney a chance. Why? Even though he has that creepy unsed-car salesman smile, he at least came from private business, made a lot of money at it, and also served as a governor of a state. When was the last time we had a successful businessman or CEO as president of the United States? Last time we even came close was when Ross Perot ran for president. He would have won, too, if he didn’t go insane at the end of the election. Anyway, I’d rather bet on somebody who actually DOES read the Wall Street Journal and The Economist on a regular basis than a guy like Obama, who only seems to read the teachings of Karl Marx.
Well, yes. He did.
That’s the problem. His track record in public office is HARD LEFTIST.
Romney the RINO, just say NO! See ya would not want to be ya! A vote for Romney is voting for Obama! They are one in the same when it comes to everything!
Founding Fathers’ Rap
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZ0Nkdi-GpE&feature=related
Is this the best case you can make for Obama’s re-election? Go away, Mr Anonymous Obama Campaign Worker Troll.
BITE ME!
Answer my question if you are going to stay, Obama troll.
Allow me to help here! Are Romney and Obama the same on most issues? Try, ALL ISSUES.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljzKR9mePiY
How about thinking, and voting, outside the box then? I’m voting for past two- term Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson. He has a proven record as a jobs creator and left his state with a budget surplus after his two terms: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com
I like Gary on all the issues as well. He has a great record as governor! Thank you for your recommendation!
Of all my YT viewing, that of your link here, is perhaps the most impressive, . . .
I resent your disparaging remark about Cheetos. Cheetos are the food of the gods. But just the crunchy ones. The puffy ones are stupid.
Oh, and you’re right about our non-choice for POTUS. And try thinking of Romney instead as the Penguin. He certainly was more evil, but the image of Romney as a fat guy in a tux may not be so disturbing.
I’m still sticking with my original ticket: Patton/Batman 2012.
the history of the two men includes one significant difference that the author either missed or ignored: Romney, like other investors, has killed jobs that added no value to the enterprise; Obama has killed jobs based on the political benefit to him. But sure, pretend they’re the same.
Just stop. There is no great son-of-Reagan national moralist riding to the rescue. There is, however, a clearly malevolent force in the Oval Office. Romney sees money as something to be earned; Obama sees it as something to be taken from those who earn it.
Frank,
From you post I conclude you flunked US Government / Constitution. The president does not have the authority to enact anything, that is the province of Congress. The current occupant of the country’s highest office criminally abuses laws by executive order. He gets away with it because the treasonous troll Democrats control the Senate. Romney will have no such pillow. There will be more TEA Party types in the legislative branch. Life will be interesting for the next president!
You are under the flawed assumption that I’d want to have a beer with Obama since Mormons reportedly don’t drink. I have no desire to drink with ANY federal employee outside the military.
Understand this: a healthy economy is one in which jobs are constantly being destroyed while others are constantly being created. This phenomenon is known as “churning”. Specifically, it refers to the process in which resources used inefficiently are “freed up” (so to speak) and thereafter flow to a location where they can be used more efficiently. These “resources” include labor. An economy where the destruction of a job is rare is a sick economy.
Sidebar: the greatest destroyer of jobs in the last 20 years was Steve Jobs. Think of how Apple’s products killed the Sony Walkman industry, and are starting to wear away at the desktop PC industry. This is not a bad thing…it’s a good thing! Every job destroyed because of technological advancement will liberate resources which will be used to create new jobs (and products) elsewhere. In the meantime, the standard of living of everybody goes up!
—Tom Nally, New Orleans
With the possible exception of God him(or her)self or his/her earthly rep, no politician, businessman or intellectual is going to deftly glide through tens of thousands of pages of government rules and regulations and thousands of devious, self serving bureaucracies, like the EPA for example and accomplish a miracle over the next four years, assuming the inept Obama gets dumped by an increasingly dumber, naive, inattentive populace engrossed in MTV, Rap, American idol and Duck Dynasty.
What this and all elections are about is the attempt to divine who is the least likely to wreck the American dream before it turns into the nightmare currently staring us in the face. Romney may be the best available chance to change course and we, i.e. all American patriots of every political, religious, racial or cultural stripe, need to pray to their God of choice that he doesn’t screw up and cause these American hate groups to retake the White House in 2016 to continue their socialist/communist/dictatorial/tyrannical transformation of our beloved country.
I disagree.
We don’t HAVE to pick the lesser of two evils.
Be unique. Vote for who’s BEST for America.
Vote for REAL change.
Ron Paul 2012
Right on! I can waste my vote and help re-elect the Communist! Sheesh, wake up.
You will not be able to vote for him, unless you do so as a write in candidate, he will not be nominated as the Republican Candidate in the 2012 Presidential election, why bother to even post!
You can not be a patriot of the United States if you vote for Ron Paul under any circumstances,stay home,get drunk,smoke post or go out and protest if you want but do not vote at all.
The election will be a choice between a Democrat and a republican namely Obama the worst president ever or Romney someone who could prove many others to be one of our greatest~
Buy guns and ammo now!!!
We can agree or disagree on the general premise, but this is choice:
“And while we’re working as hard as we can, it’s up to the politicians to try to destroy all that hard work by blundering around with taxes and regulations, smothering us in their heavy-handed attempts to help. So to achieve economic success, we need to be be able to create more jobs than the moron politicians we elect can destroy.”
I wish I had written that.
“fewer jobs,” not “fewer number of jobs.” At least get the headline right.
Yeah, what you said.
Vote Romney cuz he’s not Obambus.
(of course, let’s wait to see if Romney blows himself up with a really stupid VP choice like David Petraeus, in which case – I just dunno)
I think we’d at least believe that Romney *means* well, in a 1% sort of way, while with Obambus even his intentions are far from clear.
I say Obama’s intentions are very clear. He i s a devout Communist.