Jobs Summit: Real Progress or PR Stunt?

White House Jobs Summit: Real Progress or PR Stunt? - ABC News

President Obama said today that he is not interested in "taking a wait-and-see approach" when it comes to job creation, as his administration faces unemployment numbers at their worst levels since 1983.

"What I'm interested in is taking action right now to help businesses create jobs right now, in the near term," the president said at the opening session of the White House jobs summit.

The summit, announced a week after the Bureau of Labor Statistics said unemployment reached 10.2 percent, is the administration's latest effort to do just that.

However, some critics dismiss it as little more than a publicity stunt.

Obama acknowledged the skepticism that the summit would produce tangible results, but said he was confident there would be some progress from the discussions among the 135 leaders from every sector of the economy -- government, labor, academia, non profits and business of all sizes -- gathered at the White House today.

"I'm confident that people like you -- who built thriving businesses or revolutionized industries or brought cities and communities together and changed the way we look at the world and innovated and created new products -- that you can come up with some additional good ideas on how to create jobs," he said.

"I need everybody here to bring their 'A game' here today," Obama added, challenging the participants to come up with "fresh perspectives" and "new ideas."

The president said he was looking for "specific recommendations" that can be implemented to spur job growth "as quickly as possible."

"I'm going to be asking some tough questions. I will be listening for some good answers. And I don't want to just brainstorm up at 30,000 feet," he said.

Click to expand...

Some observations:

1. Even ABC sees through it.

2. "Real Progress or PR Stunt?"

3. That is, IF obtuse Obama's idiotic summit is indeed a sign of progress---WHAT THE HECK TOOK SO LONG?

4. We're fast approaching our 12th month under this incompetent president, and he only JUST NOW takes notice?

5. Of JOBS?

6. And his answer---today---is: SUMMIT?

7. LOL!

8. He's still TALKING?

9. Trying to BRAINSTORM solutions?

10. He, as prez, is supposed to have ANSWERS.

11. And he's supposed to have found them A YEAR AGO.

12. His SUMMIT is a tacit admission that the STIMULUS didn't work.

13. His priorities his first year have been way off.

14. He's focused all his endless energies on social reforms like health care and cap and trade.

15. He's only now getting around to the single issue that slugs Americans in the gut.

16. And his social reconstructions actually work to kill job creation---cap and trade, payroll taxes in health care, taxes on small biz and targeted industries...

17. This morning he locked out of his ivory tower the Chamber of Commerce and the NFIB, according to MSNBC this morning.

18. Meanwhile, his Fed Chairman Bernanke is besieged in confirmation hearings in the Senate.

19. Independent/Socialist Sanders of Vermont says he will force the Fed's front-man to face down a filibuster or fail.

Sen. Bernie Sanders puts hold on Bernanke's 2nd term - Dec. 2, 2009

20. Bernanke is the bogey blamed for all Obama's bailouts, widely seen to have saved the super rich at the expense of everyone else.

21. SOCIALIZED were the losses of the megacorps thereby while PRIVATIZED were their gains.

22. Rasmussen has Bernanke's reappointment at just 21% support.

Just 21% Favor Bernanke?s Reappointment As Fed Chairman - Rasmussen Reports

23. Obama SUMMITING at this point to try to create jobs is one of the stupidest political images I believe I may ever have seen.

24. He's the most inept politician at the national level America has ever produced.

The Prof

Real Progress or PR Stunt?

Click to expand...

Neither! It was comic relief!

apdst said:

Neither! It was comic relief!

Click to expand...

I would agree with you but there is nothing funny about what Obama is doing to destroy this country.

Here's another joke for you;
Recession is when your neighbor loses their job.
Depression is when you lose your Job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Obama excluded the the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business the two organizations who's members create the most jobs.

This makes this summit another lie to add to the long list. It's all for show. Obama is a great one for saying he'll do XYand Z the whole time he's saying F.U. to us and his for his idiot worshipers believe every lying word he says because they are all brain dead.

Not a shed of objectivity in this thread. I am not surprised though:lol:

The stimulus was weak; however a $700 billion stimulus is better than no stimulus. Consider the psychological factor associated with both fiscal and monetary policy.

Or are the repubs against quantitative/credit easing?

Goldenboy219 said:

Not a shed of objectivity in this thread. I am not surprised though:lol:

The stimulus was weak; however a $700 billion stimulus is better than no stimulus. Consider the psychological factor associated with both fiscal and monetary policy.

Or are the repubs against quantitative/credit easing?

Click to expand...

Don't sweat it. They're talking about another $300 billion stealfromus package. I wonder how many Liberal wet dreams that will fund.

Goldenboy219 said:

Not a shed of objectivity in this thread

Click to expand...

sure, pure subjectivity and partisanship:

he's responsible for answers

he's only now starting to brainstorm---according to him

bernanke is under siege

obama summits jobs cuz the stimulus worked so well

absolutely, my impartial friend

it's all just opinion

advanced by abc and cnn

The stimlus was weak

Click to expand...

now, THAT's objectivity

Goldenboy219 said:

The stimulus was weak; however a $700 billion stimulus is better than no stimulus.

Click to expand...

The only thing the stealfromus package funded was more government. Since the Government produces nothing the results were nothing. Unless you count world unease with the US monetary policy as something. Now that the world is actively considering other alternatives to the dollar, we have nothing to worry about, right? So Obama is free to devalue our dollar which will lead to massive inflation.

Gee, I think the world has seen this before. Remember Germany's economy when Hitler started nationalizing the industries, utilities, banks, etc. Dejavu all over again.

Maybe he should hire an economist who graduated at least junior high school math classes.

Of course he wants to appear active in fighting unemployment. If he didn't you and I would be complaining about that!

IMHO, government spending during times of economic expansion should be kept within a balanced budget. However, this is not a time of government expansion.

Quick question: if government can build a bridge, and in order to build a bridge you have to hire laborers, constructions firms, and buy resources; does this not create wealth?

govt transfers creating wealth?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig]Big Dig - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


a question more pragmatic: where in the first place does the money come from which the govt spends to build that bridge?

another even less abstract: how many non-summit related jobs are created or saved by brainstorming sessions of bloviation?

and finally, an inquiry with both feet solidly planted on ground earth: why were the chamber of commerce and nfib locked out of the president's jobs summit?

Goldenboy219 said:

Not a shed of objectivity in this thread. I am not surprised though:lol:

The stimulus was weak; however a $700 billion stimulus is better than no stimulus. Consider the psychological factor associated with both fiscal and monetary policy.

Or are the repubs against quantitative/credit easing?

Click to expand...

Kind of a silly statements I think in the face of the fact that credit was eased and extended to tens maybe hundreds of thousands who were clearly not qualified for the loans they received and that lead to some of the problem. Then we have the reports that less than half the stimulus money has been spent so far and going ZERO was used for the small business that create about 70% of the jobs, and I repeat they were left out because they oppose Obama's Socialistic/Communistic idea of the government taking over another 6% of the economy when they couldn't even run Cash for Clunkers because the whole damn bunch Obama put in charge have never done a thing in their lives when it comes to running a business.

So far Obama has stimulated a lot of lost jobs.

The whole Cash for Clunkers was a waste of money the way it was set up and mishandled. This amateur hour stuff needs to stop.

If you look at the money spent and then pretend that the jobs Obama is claiming he created and saved were real he's still about 3 million in the hole on his watch.

If he cared about any of the issues he would by now have done something, anything right, but he is doing everything as poorly as can be done and sure looks like it's all part of his plan.

Goldenboy219 said:

IMHO, government spending during times of economic expansion should be kept within a balanced budget.

Click to expand...

Now that is funny....You are aware of course that the federal government doesn't have to fit projects into a balanced budget like states do right? No, all they need to do is figure out how much will be necessary to appease any particular group at any given time, print the money and give it to them.

Rinse and repeat.

Then you and I, and our children, and grandchildren can pick up the tab.

However, this is not a time of government expansion.

Click to expand...

Arguably, the ONLY jobs that have been "created or saved" have been in government.

Quick question: if government can build a bridge, and in order to build a bridge you have to hire laborers, constructions firms, and buy resources; does this not create wealth?

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. Typically on roads, or government bid jobs, the margins are tighter than that of other contracts. Deadlines are usually slowed, or blown causing possible fines in the contract, and when the government uses a company they usually use a lion share of that company's resource so when the job is done, or dries up, then they company is left with a severe slow down in work and lays off the workers.

Larger companies are usually the ones that are called upon to do these projects because they can put a smaller part of their business into the particular project, and still look for other work at the same time. Smaller businesses don't, or can't afford to do this.

Besides, we have seen how this has worked so far with stimulus funds and projects around the country. Money to do work went to states that backed Obama in the election, and others were told to pound sand. Ohio, NC, MI, and other states like that got funds to start what I like to call billboard projects, and the others were told no can do.

This is not the way to run things.


j-mac

apdst said:

Neither! It was comic relief!

Click to expand...

Rush Limbaugh had his own Jobs Summit on his radio show the same day. He had real businesses and people call in to talk about how to create jobs.

Definately a PR stunt. I've missed the early video on this, but radio reports are saying some of the business experts told the President he needs to drop Healthcare. His response was to look down his nose (as he often does) at them and tell them they need to get used to Healthcare being passed in a few weeks.

Obviously, the Admin already knows what direction it will take. President Obama is not interested in alternative ideas. The question is, does he believe his way can work (create jobs)? Or, like Limbaugh suggests, Obama wants to break the nation so as to rebuild it to his ideal?

The President made a short appearance, gave a thumbs up...and left. Came back later to smile and wave...and left.

This was a dog and pony show, nothing more, nothing less.

It's getting embarrassing in Washington DC, when are the elections again?

Shouldn't a meeting like this take place every day of the week in the oval office? Why a "summit" a year into his term when folks have been hurting for a long, long time?

What a dufus.

Hey, Barry. Cut some taxes on business, give them tax credits for hiring, and kill your healthcare and cap and trade bills. Then watch the job growth skyrocket. Done.

Goldenboy219 said:

Quick question: if government can build a bridge, and in order to build a bridge you have to hire laborers, constructions firms, and buy resources; does this not create wealth?

Click to expand...

No, it does not. It is a ponzi scheme.

Say the government lets a contract to build a bridge. The contractor has to pay government agencies for the all the needed permits, inspections, etc. The contractor buys materials which he pays taxes on. The contractor hires people who he then has to pay taxes for employing. The worker has to pay taxes on the income he earned doing this job. The contractor has to pay tremendous amounts of overhead in regulatory paperwork to prove compliance with every silly government mandate. Oh, let's not forget the local, state and federal tax boards all expect their cut of the contractors profit back in the form of business taxes, licenses, etc.

When it is all said and done, more than 80% of that money the Government "put into the economy" goes directly back to one branch or another of the government.

Since the government only has two ways of generating revenue, printing money or confiscating money, there is really now viable argument that the government spending money directly stimulates the general economy. At best, the government stimulates a small portion while either devaluing the same currency via inflation, or stimulates on sector by taking more money out of general circulation via taxation thereby having a chilling effect on the economy.

Goldenboy219 said:

IMHO, government spending during times of economic expansion should be kept within a balanced budget. However, this is not a time of government expansion.

Quick question: if government can build a bridge, and in order to build a bridge you have to hire laborers, constructions firms, and buy resources; does this not create wealth?

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. Where is the government going to get the money to pay those bridge builders?

I think it should be said that building anything for the government limits just how much profiteering there can be. Of course the contractors and materials suppliers should make some profit. But the actual item built does not produce profit for the government, who financed it. And, once the job is finished, the jobs go away and few vendors continue to make further profit for maintaining it.

All the way around it is a far less profitable way to run an economy.

Councilman said:

Kind of a silly statements I think in the face of the fact that credit was eased and extended to tens maybe hundreds of thousands who were clearly not qualified for the loans they received and that lead to some of the problem.

Click to expand...

Awww, bless your heart but when i was referring to quantitative/credit easing, i am describing theoretical negative federal funds target rate. AKA, an aspect of monetary policy. :rofl

Then we have the reports that less than half the stimulus money has been spent so far and going ZERO was used for the small business that create about 70% of the jobs, and I repeat they were left out because they oppose Obama's Socialistic/Communistic idea of the government taking over another 6% of the economy when they couldn't even run Cash for Clunkers because the whole damn bunch Obama put in charge have never done a thing in their lives when it comes to running a business.

Click to expand...

Partisan rant is noted.

So far Obama has stimulated a lot of lost jobs.

The whole Cash for Clunkers was a waste of money the way it was set up and mishandled. This amateur hour stuff needs to stop.

If you look at the money spent and then pretend that the jobs Obama is claiming he created and saved were real he's still about 3 million in the hole on his watch.

If he cared about any of the issues he would by now have done something, anything right, but he is doing everything as poorly as can be done and sure looks like it's all part of his plan.

Click to expand...

Again, your partisan rant is noted.

I would throw this into the PR category, the same as the vast majority of Obama's Presidency thus far.

apdst said:

No, it doesn't. Where is the government going to get the money to pay those bridge builders?

Click to expand...

Hmmmm. Taxes and the sovereign debt market.

Are you familiar with multiplier effects? I assure you they are quite real (if fiscal policy is implemented accordingly).

Goldenboy219 said:

Hmmmm. Taxes and the sovereign debt market.

Are you familiar with multiplier effects? I assure you they are quite real (if fiscal policy is implemented accordingly).

Click to expand...

The only multiplying effect I see out of the Obama administration is on unemployment rising as fast as ever, and the value of the dollar being destroyed by his policies.....Some say by design.


j-mac

Goldenboy219 said:

Hmmmm. Taxes and the sovereign debt market.

Are you familiar with multiplier effects? I assure you they are quite real (if fiscal policy is implemented accordingly).

Click to expand...

And, the taxes come from, where...? The people! Yes! Very good!

So, who creates wealth??

j-mac said:

Now that is funny....You are aware of course that the federal government doesn't have to fit projects into a balanced budget like states do right? No, all they need to do is figure out how much will be necessary to appease any particular group at any given time, print the money and give it to them.

Click to expand...

Of course i am. However, fiscal conservativeness should push toward a balanced budget during times of economic expansion. Since this is not, all you can really do is speculate about what Obama will do when we are in full recovery.

Then you and I, and our children, and grandchildren can pick up the tab.

Click to expand...

I love hearing these statements! Tell me, who holds roughly 75% of the total debt? Hint: not China....

Arguably, the ONLY jobs that have been "created or saved" have been in government.

Click to expand...

Funny you say that.... I see a **** ton of construction projects focused on infrastructure popping up all over the city i live. I expect it to increase dramitaclly during 2010.

No, it doesn't. Typically on roads, or government bid jobs, the margins are tighter than that of other contracts. Deadlines are usually slowed, or blown causing possible fines in the contract, and when the government uses a company they usually use a lion share of that company's resource so when the job is done, or dries up, then they company is left with a severe slow down in work and lays off the workers.

Click to expand...

Really? Ever heard of Walsh Construction? You are only speculating, and cannot back up the comment with any bit of evidence.

Larger companies are usually the ones that are called upon to do these projects because they can put a smaller part of their business into the particular project, and still look for other work at the same time. Smaller businesses don't, or can't afford to do this.

Click to expand...

Your economies of scale comment has been noted. However, do you believe that this is not something that naturally occurs in the real world? Also, do big businesses depend on small businesses for their service orientated needs? Like when the alternator or starter of a 75 ton P&H goes haywire.

Your partisan rant is noted.