B.O. - more change

[cj's dad]

Two years ago, Barack Obama was inaugurated as president of the United States. Are you better off today than you were two years ago? Numbers don't lie, and here are the data on the impact he has had on the lives of Americans:








January 2009



TODAY



% chg

Source

Avg. retail price/gallon gas in U.S.



$1.83



$3.104



69.6%

1



Crude oil, European Brent (barrel)



$43.48



$99.02



127.7%

2



Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel)



$38.74



$91.38



135.9%

2



Gold: London (per troy oz.)



$853.25



$1,369.50



60.5%

2



Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL



$3.56



$6.33



78.1%

2



Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL



$9.66



$13.75



42.3%

2



Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. fob



$13.37



$35.39



164.7%

2



Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall



7.6%



9.4%



23.7%

3



Unemployment rate, blacks



12.6%



15.8%



25.4%

3



Number of unemployed



11,616,000



14,485,000



24.7%

3



Number of fed. employees, ex. military (curr = 12/10 prelim)



2,779,000



2,840,000



2.2%

3



Real median household income (2008 v 2009)



$50,112



$49,777



-0.7%

4



Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10)



31,983,716



43,200,878



35.1%

5



Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10)



7,526,598



9,193,838



22.2%

6



Number of long-term unemployed



2,600,000



6,400,000



146.2%

3



Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009)



13.2%



14.3%



8.3%

4



People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009)



39,800,000



43,600,000



9.5%

4



U.S. rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings



5



9



n/a

10



Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10)



29.9



23.5



-21.4%

11



Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date)



140



164



17.1%

12



U.S. dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate



89.76



82.03



-8.6%

2



U.S. money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim)



1,575.1



1,865.7



18.4%

13



U.S. money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim)



8,310.9



8,852.3



6.5%

13



National debt, in trillions



$10.627



$14.052



32.2%

14

[Sugar Ron]

Numbers don't lie...

No they don't ...


S&P 500 ... 805 (close Inaugeration Day 1/20/09)

S&P 500 ... 1332 (close 2/14/09)


65.5% increase :cool:

[cj's dad]

Sorry about the OP - the #s didn't format the way I had hoped.

[cj's dad]

No they don't ...


S&P 500 ... 805 (close Inaugeration Day 1/20/09)

S&P 500 ... 1332 (close 2/14/09)


65.5% increase :cool:

:sleeping:

I cite 25+ cases of a deteriorating economy and bleak overall employment picture and you reference the S&P. I bet all the unemployed folks are impressed.:lol:

[Tom]

No they don't ...


S&P 500 ... 805 (close Inaugeration Day 1/20/09)

S&P 500 ... 1332 (close 2/14/09)


65.5% increase :cool:

Obama himself said you cannot judge the economy by the market and we should not be looking a that for anything.

[FantasticDan]

Yeah everybody, let's not look at the market for "anything". It's totally unimportant. Especially to your investments or retirement accounts. :cool:

[Spiderman]

Did Obama start the economic downturn? Ask, if we are better off now than a decade ago.

[boxcar]

Did Obama start the economic downturn? Ask, if we are better off now than a decade ago.

The better questions would have been: Did he end it or reverse it? The answer is clear to all but relapsing meatheads.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Yeah everybody, let's not look at the market for "anything". It's totally unimportant. Especially to your investments or retirement accounts. :cool:

Hey, your man-child was the one who said the stock market was not an important indicator -- but of course he did say that when the market was down. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Spiderman]

The better questions would have been: Did he end it or reverse it? The answer is clear to all but relapsing meatheads.

Boxcar

Patience. It is a tough dig. The situation is stabilized. Stock market is at higher level than before he took office. General Motors is on the rebound, due to bailout.

Much is needed to be done. Patience.

[wisconsin]

Did Obama start the economic downturn? Ask, if we are better off now than a decade ago.


Gee, I was under the impression that all of his "hope and change" mantra meant that he was going to actually make things better. He has not improved anything since he took office. If things were even the same, I might be willing to cut him some slack, but these are incredulously worse figures than the day he was sworn into office.

Those who wish to point out the stock market should know better. The market has been correcting itself for generations. He cannt possibly take credit for the current correction.

[FantasticDan]

And he hasn't tried to "take credit". But the point is that people's retirement accounts are a lot healthier than they were three years ago, and that makes for happy people.

[Spiderman]

Gee, I was under the impression that all of his "hope and change" mantra meant that he was going to actually make things better. He has not improved anything since he took office. If things were even the same, I might be willing to cut him some slack, but these are incredulously worse figures than the day he was sworn into office.

Those who wish to point out the stock market should know better. The market has been correcting itself for generations. He cannt possibly take credit for the current correction.

With all that ails the economy, especially the trillions in debt that was not begun during this administration; the unemployment situation with corporations having more cash-on-hand than ever in history and not hiring . . . are monumental issues that cannot be resolved overnight. No president was confronted with as many problems when stepping into office.

I don't give him direct credit for stock market correction. But, he is the man in office and has promoted stability.

[boxcar]

And he hasn't tried to "take credit". But the point is that people's retirement accounts are a lot healthier than they were three years ago, and that makes for happy people.

That happiness may be very short-lived. Libs' greedy palms have been itching for quite some time now over people's retirement accounts. The government really wants to takever those accounts -- to "manage" those accounts. Trust me. This will be coming because the state doesn't want all that money just sitting there idle doing nothing for the government.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

the stock market is not the same indicator it once was. The manipulation going on is documented in many places. since they've started the QE it has been on an upward glide path nearly impervious to any kind of normal corrections of the business cycle. It's a phony market and in my view the next big bubble to burst.

[JustRalph]

And he hasn't tried to "take credit". But the point is that people's retirement accounts are a lot healthier than they were three years ago, and that makes for happy people.

aren't you one of those "cheer for the middle class" Dems/Libs?

if so, your hypothesis is invalid. Most of those out of work are middle and lower class. Especially if you are black. They don't give a damn about the SnP 500 because they aren't allowed to play.

It's stupid to refer to the SnP 500 as an economic indicator. It's invalid. It can be gone tomorrow. Or next Thursday. Nobody knows. A good jobs environment can last a decade and provide much more.

[Striker]

Where/When the hell was gas at an average of $1.83/gallon? 2 years ago?Most of the "reports" that I have seen all put it at around $2.35 in 2009. I'm pretty sure you are going to have to go WAY back to find the average having a 1 as the first number.

[Sugar Ron]

Just have to laugh at all the con doomers who missed out on these outstanding market gains over the last couple years.

Remember driving home one day back in '09 after the market rally had begun and listening to Hannity say that he was 'gunna get completely out of the market once the Dow hit 8,000'.

LMAO

The tool let his fears and hatred of Obama influence his decision ... and he did the worst possible thing ... sell most of his shares at a huge loss.


Granted, the gabby tool makes more money than me, but it was still hilarious listening to him spout his foolish opinions about the stock market and economy back then.

[mostpost]

Real median household income (2008 v 2009)



$50,112



$49,777



-0.7%
Since 1981 real median household income has decreased twelve times. Ten of those times were under Republican administrations. The two years there was a democratic administration were 1993 and 2009. Both of which followed closely on a Republican Administration and inherited a Republican recession.


The rise in gas prices now and during the Bush Administration was fueled in large part by speculators. And by the fact that oil companies are not refining the crude oil they have on hand.

[FantasticDan]

aren't you one of those "cheer for the middle class" Dems/Libs?

if so, your hypothesis is invalid. Most of those out of work are middle and lower class. Especially if you are black. They don't give a damn about the SnP 500 because they aren't allowed to play.

It's stupid to refer to the SnP 500 as an economic indicator. It's invalid. It can be gone tomorrow. Or next Thursday. Nobody knows. A good jobs environment can last a decade and provide much more.Damn, I make a simple statement about recovering retirement accounts in response to Tom's comment, and suddenly I have a hypothesis? :D

[boxcar]

Since 1981 real median household income has decreased twelve times. Ten of those times were under Republican administrations. The two years there was a democratic administration were 1993 and 2009. Both of which followed closely on a Republican Administration and inherited a Republican recession.

And pray tell, since '81, how many Congresses have been under Democrat control?

The rise in gas prices now and during the Bush Administration was fueled in large part by speculators. And by the fact that oil companies are not refining the crude oil they have on hand.

Which rise is greater: The one "under the Bush administration" or the one currently? :rolleyes: And how come you boy in the WH isn't doing anything about the sharp increases since he has taken over? Do, the oil companies have him in their hip pocket like you think they had Bush, perhaps?

And do you have anything to document your claim that oil companies are sitting on crude? And if they are, why hasn't BO taken over the oil industry in in the name of "social justice" or the "the public good"?

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

Digression 1, Feb. 15, 2011

Can we start a pool on...

a) who's fault it will be (negation is an implied societal fact)

b)

c)

...when sheeple have nothing in the forseeable future as they continue to "invest" (aka expect free money simply by handing it over to an "investor"), despite the fact that when they eventually take a breath, it will be time to start railing against Wall Street Crooks and Greedy, Thieving Banks?

If you reeeaaally love your money, don't let it get drunk and screw the entire neighborhood.

[mostpost]

And pray tell, since '81, how many Congresses have been under Democrat control?



Which rise is greater: The one "under the Bush administration" or the one currently? :rolleyes: And how come you boy in the WH isn't doing anything about the sharp increases since he has taken over? Do, the oil companies have him in their hip pocket like you think they had Bush, perhaps?

And do you have anything to document your claim that oil companies are sitting on crude? And if they are, why hasn't BO taken over the oil industry in in the name of "social justice" or the "the public good"?

Boxcar
It's Democratic not democrat. :bang: Anyway, your question is meaningless.
Congresses don't initiate policy. The executive does that. If Congress passes a law the President does not like he can veto it. Not only that but with the rules under which the Senate operates the minority party has an effective veto without involving the President. Also the Executive (President) controls the regulatory agencies. See something illegal or against regulations? look the other way.

I don't know if the oil companies are "sitting on crude". I do know that it is fact that US refineries have been shut down or operating well below capacity for years. This has been discussed here before. Look up those threads and you will find your documentation.

BO does not take over the Oil companies because he does not possess the authority to do so. You are confused. It was Bush that did things without possessing legal authority.

[boxcar]

It's Democratic not democrat. :bang: Anyway, your question is meaningless.
Congresses don't initiate policy. The executive does that. If Congress passes a law the President does not like he can veto it. Not only that but with the rules under which the Senate operates the minority party has an effective veto without involving the President. Also the Executive (President) controls the regulatory agencies. See something illegal or against regulations? look the other way.

And that veto would be useless if Congress has enough votes to out-veto the prez's. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Furthermore, Congress can and very often does initiate public policy because they are the LAWMAKERS, not the president! :bang: :bang: As Makers of Law, Congress wields quite a bit of power.

I don't know if the oil companies are "sitting on crude". I do know that it is fact that US refineries have been shut down or operating well below capacity for years. This has been discussed here before. Look up those threads and you will find your documentation.

BO does not take over the Oil companies because he does not possess the authority to do so. You are confused. It was Bush that did things without possessing legal authority.

:lol: :lol: :lol: When has the Law stopped Obama? He enforces only the laws he wants to. He is in contempt of court on the oil drilling issue. HIS EPA is in contempt of court on many fronts. He's in contempt right now because he's moving ahead on ObaminationCare, despite the Judge Vincent's ruling, etc., etc. And you want to believe that Obama is this great paragon of virtue who worships at the altar of the Rule of Law? :bang: :bang: Obama doesn't give a flip about what authority the law gives him because he thinks he's a law unto himself!

And you're right: You don't know if the oil companies are sitting on crude oil, as you originally said. In fact, in you don't know much of anything. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Sorry to have disturbed you. You can return to reading the CPUSA site to bone up on your liberal (progressive, commie, socialist) talking points. These you do know fairly well and you couldn't find a better source (well, maybe with the exception of a Pelosi, Reid or an Obama). :rolleyes: rolleyes:

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

It's easy to see the libs side of things here....
I mean so what if the cost of food is sky rocketing???
Clothing hell...hey mostie...we will all be shopping at wal mart soon :lol: .
That ten speed is looking better by the day with the cost of gas climbing....
Just wonder where people store their bikes with the rising number of forclosures???
But not to worry...the S&P is doing fine....:faint:

[Sugar Ron]

Siding with Uncle Ben's generally optimistic view on the economy rather than all the con doomers I hear and see in the media

By the way, some of these market historians are now calling this thing a secular bull ... with a lot more gains to come.

So some of you boys losing your shirts at the local track every weekend may want to consider purchasing some shares of an S&P 500 index fund instead.

Jus sayin...

[lsbets]

When will the Obama droids hold him accountable for what happens in the country? 20 years after he leaves office? Like it or not, he is the President (I assume you guys like that, but you don't want him held accountable for what happens while he is President), he is the head guy in charge, and what happens on his watch falls on him, not his predecessor. You know, Truman was the one who said the buck stops here, it sad to see you drones say the buck stops with bush.

I find Obama's new budget interesting. He is seeming more and more like a man with no principles and no ideas, just twisting in the wind and hoping some pretty words can keep him in office.

[Sugar Ron]

Couple more numbers for doomers to chew on ... 3.4% to 3.9%

The Fed's latest estimate of GDP growth this year

Even more bullish than estimates from many economists on The Street

Stocks trading higher all day


Ah ... that sweeeeet smell of money is in the air...

[wisconsin]

Couple more numbers for doomers to chew on ... 3.4% to 3.9% Ah ... that sweeeeet smell of money is in the air...


Meanwhile, food and clothing going up 6-10% in costs this year..........

[Tom]

Ah ... that sweeeeet smell of money is in the air...

Yes, as in up in smoke?
You do realize that we owe more money that exists or ever will exist right?

[JustRalph]

I read today that the HHS is now the first "Trillion dollar agency" in the history of the world. I also saw a headline that HHS is now bigger than the entire U.S. Government under LBJ.

Not sure how that equates after inflation etc....

[ElKabong]

Just have to laugh at all the con doomers who missed out on these outstanding market gains over the last couple years.

.

I seriously doubt the lower and middle classes are laughing with you. And I'm damn sure minorities aren't.

Laugh on & stay classy!

[Sugar Ron]

Manufacturing activity in the Philly area at highest level in years

More gains on The Street today


Every one of you guys should get down on your knees right now and thank your maker for Ben Bernanke and Barack Obama...

[PaceAdvantage]

Every one of you guys should get down on your knees right now and thank your maker for Ben Bernanke and Barack Obama...Thanks for the laugh...I'll be sure to remember this post in about a year or two...

[highnote]

When the patient is hemorraging you don't worry about what you're making for dinner tomorrow night. You try to stop the bleeding.

A lot of time has been spent by this admin keeping the economy alive and making it stable. It seems to be working.

I think there is a need for government spending on R&D and infrastructure. This provides jobs and will lead to more job creation.

What are Republicans doing to create jobs? I'll admit I don't follow the workings of Washington. I get most of my news from TV or internet and only snippets. So I probably missed some news about this.

I hear and read about conservatives trying to repeal health care and abolish women's rights to an abortion and prove that Obama wasn't born in the U.S.A. Those are important issues to conservatives. I get that and those are issues they feel are worth fighting for. But they are not the biggest issue. Jobs and economy should be the priority, in my opinion. So.... what are conservatives doing to create jobs?

[JustRalph]

from John Above:

A lot of time has been spent by this admin keeping the economy alive and making it stable. It seems to be working.

I don't know how you can come to that conclusion? Really?

I think there is a need for government spending on R&D and infrastructure. This provides jobs and will lead to more job creation.

This only provides temp jobs that are being paid for by those who pay taxes. It's a false economy.

What are Republicans doing to create jobs? I'll admit I don't follow the workings of Washington. I get most of my news from TV or internet and only snippets. So I probably missed some news about this.

The Repubs aren't doing anything because they don't own two thirds of the goverment. They cannot get anything passed and they cannot sign anything into law. They can only block legislation. It's gridlock time and we are still under the thumb of the previous Congress and Obammy.

I hear and read about conservatives trying to repeal health care and abolish women's rights to an abortion and prove that Obama wasn't born in the U.S.A. Those are important issues to conservatives. I get that and those are issues they feel are worth fighting for. But they are not the biggest issue. Jobs and economy should be the priority, in my opinion. So.... what are conservatives doing to create jobs?

See above: Rinse and repeat

[highnote]

from John Above:

A lot of time has been spent by this admin keeping the economy alive and making it stable. It seems to be working.

I don't know how you can come to that conclusion? Really?

It certainly doesn't seem as bad as it was. That is an improvement, is it not?

I think there is a need for government spending on R&D and infrastructure. This provides jobs and will lead to more job creation.

This only provides temp jobs that are being paid for by those who pay taxes. It's a false economy.

Not at all. R&D is necessary to help produce the next generation of industries. Spending money on infrastructure -- which is sorely needed in many place -- will mean that new machines will need to be purchased which helps the manufacturing sectors. This capital investment is also used to pay workers. The workers spend a portion of their money on various items. Capital is only useful when it is flowing. If it isn't flowing there is no benefit. This is why when there was a credit crisis the world was on the verge of depression. It was only government stimulus that prevented this. Only goverments can act on such a large scale. The problem is that we got in this mess in the first place -- but that's different topic.

What are Republicans doing to create jobs? I'll admit I don't follow the workings of Washington. I get most of my news from TV or internet and only snippets. So I probably missed some news about this.

The Repubs aren't doing anything because they don't own two thirds of the goverment. They cannot get anything passed and they cannot sign anything into law. They can only block legislation. It's gridlock time and we are still under the thumb of the previous Congress and Obammy.

Surely, the Repubs must have some ideas on how to get the economy rolling.

[newtothegame]

It certainly doesn't seem as bad as it was. That is an improvement, is it not?



Not at all. R&D is necessary to help produce the next generation of industries. Spending money on infrastructure -- which is sorely needed in many place -- will mean that new machines will need to be purchased which helps the manufacturing sectors. This capital investment is also used to pay workers. The workers spend a portion of their money on various items. Capital is only useful when it is flowing. If it isn't flowing there is no benefit. This is why when there was a credit crisis the world was on the verge of depression. It was only government stimulus that prevented this. Only goverments can act on such a large scale. The problem is that we got in this mess in the first place -- but that's different topic.



Surely, the Repubs must have some ideas on how to get the economy rolling.

Your whole terrible arguement with words such as "seems" is blown away by your own last sentence which I have bolded.....

If the economy doesnt "seem" as bad as it was (under republican president as you imply)...why would the republicans need to get the economy rolling?

[highnote]

Your whole terrible arguement with words such as "seems" is blown away by your own last sentence which I have bolded.....

If the economy doesnt "seem" as bad as it was (under republican president as you imply)...why would the republicans need to get the economy rolling?


Good point. Everything is fine!

[JustRalph]

It certainly doesn't seem as bad as it was. That is an improvement, is it not?

Take a look for yourself. This is the most important factor in the economy.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/Economics/Unemployment-Rate.aspx?Symbol=USD

I see stagnation and little movement.

Check out the misery index:
2000 7.35
2001 7.59 Bush, G.W.
2002 7.37
2003 8.26
2004 8.21
2005 8.48
2006 7.87
2007 7.46
2008 9.61
2009 8.92 Obama
2010 11.29



Not at all. R&D is necessary to help produce the next generation of industries.

* There is very little money left for RnD because we are headed into the 3rd year of a cratering economy and the only good news is that inventories that have been sitting for two or more years are now just about depleted. This means some manufacturing will pick up but won't start to boom in any sense of the word. If it weren't for the tech sector (phones and Computers) it would be worse.

Spending money on infrastructure -- which is sorely needed in many place -- will mean that new machines will need to be purchased which helps the manufacturing sectors.

I don't deny that we need infrastructure work. There just isn't any money to pay for it. Tax collections are down due to the economy and printing money to pay for it (which has been done for the last 2 years) is starting to catch up with us. Inflation is starting to show up in lots of areas. This was predicted two years ago by many.

This capital investment is also used to pay workers. The workers spend a portion of their money on various items. Capital is only useful when it is flowing. If it isn't flowing there is no benefit. This is why when there was a credit crisis the world was on the verge of depression. It was only government stimulus that prevented this. Only goverments can act on such a large scale. The problem is that we got in this mess in the first place -- but that's different topic.

A false economy once again. The government produces nothing, prints money that weakens the dollar and can only take money from the same people that it is providing these "stimulated" jobs to. This economic circle jerk does nothing but kick the can down the road. It doesn't help in the long run and it makes it harder for the economy to recover.

Surely, the Repubs must have some ideas on how to get the economy rolling.

Sure they do.
1. Fair Tax
2. Lower Taxes on Capitol gains (even more)
3. Reduce Entitlements
4. Eliminate Several Cabinet departments and wasteful overlap
5. Privatize Education
6. Eliminate Amtrak and similar handouts. Including Farm Subs.
Many more .......but you get the point. The problem is they cannot pass anything with only having the house.

They had some really good ideas to avoid the hell we are going through now, in the last 8 years. Like investigating and overhauling Freddie and Fannie. George Bush called for this 17 times over two terms as Prez. The Dems kept it from happening. Enter the housing crisis and start the recession rolling.

Repubs were complicit in wasteful war spending. Stupid shit. They should be blamed for that. But the Obama team is continuing on with the dumbest parts of that meme. At a time when we cannot afford it.

that's enough........

[JustRalph]

Hey John,

Things are so fine, that this came out today

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/banks-told-to-test-for-11-unemployment-report-2011-02-17

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_1ymIDLuhsqs/TSWvB82v2nI/AAAAAAAAAng/CLjejc7Xpuo/s320/frog-boiling.jpg

[highnote]

Take a look for yourself. This is the most important factor in the economy.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/Economics/Unemployment-Rate.aspx?Symbol=USD

No question we are not in the Roaring 90s.


I don't deny that we need infrastructure work. There just isn't any money to pay for it. Tax collections are down due to the economy and printing money to pay for it (which has been done for the last 2 years) is starting to catch up with us. Inflation is starting to show up in lots of areas. This was predicted two years ago by many.

No question in my mind that there will eventually be inflation. That's why I bought silver mining stocks two years ago. The question is going to be to what degree are we going to have inflation. Some inflation is desirable. What we don't want is deflation. So until inflation gets out of hand we can use quantitative easing -- print money. It is better than the alternative. Better to have some risk of inflation and jobs than deflation and another depression. As you said, there is going to be some kicking the can down the road. That's not all that bad if it buys us time. The one benefit that politicians don't like to talk about is that it makes our debt easier to pay off. Debt holders, like sovereign wealth funds don't like it, but there are some upsides for us.


Surely, the Repubs must have some ideas on how to get the economy rolling.

Sure they do.
1. Fair Tax
2. Lower Taxes on Capitol gains (even more)
3. Reduce Entitlements
4. Eliminate Several Cabinet departments and wasteful overlap
5. Privatize Education
6. Eliminate Amtrak and similar handouts. Including Farm Subs.
Many more .......but you get the point. The problem is they cannot pass anything with only having the house.

They had some really good ideas to avoid the hell we are going through now, in the last 8 years. Like investigating and overhauling Freddie and Fannie. George Bush called for this 17 times over two terms as Prez. The Dems kept it from happening. Enter the housing crisis and start the recession rolling.

Repubs were complicit in wasteful war spending. Stupid shit. They should be blamed for that. But the Obama team is continuing on with the dumbest parts of that meme. At a time when we cannot afford it.

that's enough........

i actually agree with a lot of this stuff. I've always been financially conservative, but liberal socially. I believe you have to invest in Americans. A social safety net is necessary. You have to help people get on their feet. So some entitlements are necessary. Certainly, there are abuses, but it general most of these agencies do more good than harm.

I can see that privitizing education can work in some instances. However, there are many families who couldn't afford private education. This is where government plays an important role. Our public education system has played a huge role in making this country great. The system can always be improved. The problem is, sometimes when the federal government roles out programs on a national level there is more harm than good. I believe schools need to be run more strongly at the local level. I have no problem with state and national guidelines, but Superintendents, principals, teachers, staff, citizens and perhaps most importantly parents should have more influence than the people at the state capital or in D.C.

So I don't think we're that far apart on some of these issues. Others, maybe so.

[highnote]

Hey John,

Things are so fine, that this came out today

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/banks-told-to-test-for-11-unemployment-report-2011-02-17


Makes sense. It's good to be prepared for a worst case scenario.

[boxcar]

from John Above:

A lot of time has been spent by this admin keeping the economy alive and making it stable. It seems to be working.

I don't know how you can come to that conclusion? Really?

I think there is a need for government spending on R&D and infrastructure. This provides jobs and will lead to more job creation.

This only provides temp jobs that are being paid for by those who pay taxes. It's a false economy.

What are Republicans doing to create jobs? I'll admit I don't follow the workings of Washington. I get most of my news from TV or internet and only snippets. So I probably missed some news about this.

The Repubs aren't doing anything because they don't own two thirds of the goverment. They cannot get anything passed and they cannot sign anything into law. They can only block legislation. It's gridlock time and we are still under the thumb of the previous Congress and Obammy.

I hear and read about conservatives trying to repeal health care and abolish women's rights to an abortion and prove that Obama wasn't born in the U.S.A. Those are important issues to conservatives. I get that and those are issues they feel are worth fighting for. But they are not the biggest issue. Jobs and economy should be the priority, in my opinion. So.... what are conservatives doing to create jobs?

See above: Rinse and repeat

Didn't you answer your own question earlier? Who owns 2/3 of the government? Gridlock is the best we can hope for at this point. We have to be realistic. If the Repugs can succeed in pointing to BO and his Dems in the senate as the Party of No, they will have succeeded. I think there's a good chance that government will shut down soon, and as far as I'm concerned that would be a good thing for the country at this point in time! Maybe we can stop the spread of the Marxist cancer until 2012. After that, who knows?

Boxcar