Obama: More jobs in jobless benefits than Keystone

[red states rule]

Of course the liberal media will not call Obama on this insane statement, and his re-election staff in the liberal media will play the race card if anyone does

No wonder the US economy stinks with this idiot setting economic policy




President Obama said that he will delay his vacation and keep Congress in session until the passage of his desired payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits extension -- two proposals that Obama said would create more jobs than the Keystone XL pipeline that his administration recently delayed.

"I would not ask anyone to do something I'm not willing to do myself," Obama said (http://www.c-span.org/Events/Jay-Carney-Holds-White-House-Briefing/10737426145/) when asked if he would go on vacation while keeping Congress in Washington D.C. "We are going to stay here as long as it takes [to get unemployment extended and pass the payroll tax cut]."

As Obama called for passage of those bills, he also responded to a recent Republican push to require him to approve the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada. "However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline," he said, "they're going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance."


http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-more-jobs-jobless-benefits-keystone/244871

[CSM]

Seems to me (if you can believe the snake oil salesman) that passing both would be a good thing. I dunno but where I come from, the math tells me that adding the number of jobs created by one and the number of jobs created by the other equals more jobs and that sum (if math still holds true) will be greater than either alone. I suppose that kind of logic is not appropriate in this bizzaro world though.

[ConHog]

Seems to me (if you can believe the snake oil salesman) that passing both would be a good thing. I dunno but where I come from, the math tells me that adding the number of jobs created by one and the number of jobs created by the other equals more jobs and that sum (if math still holds true) will be greater than either alone. I suppose that kind of logic is not appropriate in this bizzaro world though.

I was thinking the same thing. I didn't realize this was an either/or situation. If A is good AND B is good, wouldn't A+B be even better?


Stupid Army for teaching me common sense and stuff.

[CSM]

I was thinking the same thing. I didn't realize this was an either/or situation. If A is good AND B is good, wouldn't A+B be even better?


Stupid Army for teaching me common sense and stuff.

It's that whole problem solving stuff they teach us military robots; you know those of us who have been brainwashed to mindlessly follow orders.

[ConHog]

It's that whole problem solving stuff they teach us military robots; you know those of us who have been brainwashed to mindlessly follow orders.

To hear some (revfarts) tell it, that is exactly what we all were/are/will ever be. That's for certain.

[CSM]

To hear some (revfarts) tell it, that is exactly what we all were/are/will ever be. That's for certain.

To be fair, I haven't noticed too many posters expressing such thoughts; there have been a few but I don't think that particular poster was one of them.

Not to hijack this thread so back on topic. I think there are a lot of situations like this are presented as "either-or" to the public should be BOTH. The nature of politics I guess. All too often we see "Well, that idea came from (insert most hated political party here), so we can't have that!"

[ConHog]

To be fair, I haven't noticed too many posters expressing such thoughts; there have been a few but I don't think that particular poster was one of them.

Not to hijack this thread so back on topic. I think there are a lot of situations like this are presented as "either-or" to the public should be BOTH. The nature of politics I guess. All too often we see "Well, that idea came from (insert most hated political party here), so we can't have that!"

Yes , we see too much of that in Washington, hell you see it on the message board as well. I guess that's where my military training fucked me again. They taught me in OCS to listen to ALL ideas and not let where a good idea came from influence whether you implement it or not. Even the lowliest private might have a great solution to a problem.

[CSM]

Yes , we see too much of that in Washington, hell you see it on the message board as well. I guess that's where my military training fucked me again. They taught me in OCS to listen to ALL ideas and not let where a good idea came from influence whether you implement it or not. Even the lowliest private might have a great solution to a problem.

Stuff like the original post just convinces me that most (if not all) politiicans are only concerned with retaining power and getting re-elected. they dont give a rat's ass about what's good for this nation or its citizens.

[Dilloduck]

Stuff like the original post just convinces me that most (if not all) politiicans are only concerned with retaining power and getting re-elected. they dont give a rat's ass about what's good for this nation or its citizens.

The sooner the masses all come to realize this, the better.

[ConHog]

The sooner the masses all come to realize this, the better.

The masses are stupid, just the way selfish politicians like them.

[red states rule]

The only problem with doing both is that Obama's idead will NOT create any private sector jobs. Paying people not to work will not put them to work

In fact can anyone here please tell me ONE economic policy of Obama that was successful?

And I do not mean successful in running up the debt and contributing to the nations credit down grade

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sbr121111dAPR20111210024519.jpg

[PostmodernProphet]

I was thinking the same thing. I didn't realize this was an either/or situation. If A is good AND B is good, wouldn't A+B be even better?


Stupid Army for teaching me common sense and stuff.

especially since they don't plan on coming up with money for either project, either by reducing spending or raising taxes.....

[fj1200]

^I'm guessing the Keystone project would be private money. The government just needs to approve it.

[ConHog]

^I'm guessing the Keystone project would be private money. The government just needs to approve it.

Private money, government money, isn't it all the same thing now?

[red states rule]

Dems have never let facts get int he way of appeasing the enviro wackos and the private secotr haters





First off, sincere thanks to U.S. Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts for the set of questions (http://democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/pr@id=0169.html) sent this way recently, concerning the oil and natural gas industry's job-creating ability and other issues. Though the congressman doesn't care much for our industry and might be motivated more by politics than a quest for knowledge, it's still a great opportunity to talk about the role oil and gas can play in America's economic and energy future.

API President and CEO Jack Gerard responded to Congressman Markey in a detailed letter Wednesday. Gerard also discussed the letter's key points in a conference call with reporters:
"Some people still don't get it. And some have resorted to various antics to distort the facts about our industry's ability to create jobs, to provide an economic stimulus to our economy, and increase revenues to the federal government. We're here today to clear up any confusion that was raised recently in a letter to API by Congressman Edward Markey. ...

His letter illustrates the typical misunderstandings about important industry facts and how that misunderstanding can lead to public policies that hinder, rather than help, job creation and economic growth."

Main discussion points:

Job creation - Markey dismisses projections (http://www.scribd.com/doc/63727337/U-S-Supply-Forecast-and-Potential-Jobs-and-Economic-Impacts-2012-%E2%80%93-2030?access_key=key-1fvm6u4lgsz0ibozrto8) in this fall's Wood Mackenzie study, that the oil and natural gas industry could create 1.4 million new jobs in America by 2030, with 1 million of them generated over the next seven years. Gerard said Wood Mackenzie's estimates actually are conservative compared to other job-creation models. He explained Wood Mackenzie's use of multipliers - that is, the number of indirect jobs supported by direct industry jobs - is widely accepted by other economic modelers (http://w3.epi-data.org/temp2011/EPI_PolicyMemorandum_185%20%282%29.pdf), including the White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Job-Years_Revised5-8.pdf). That's because whether the jobs are direct or induced (http://energytomorrow.org/blog/fuzzy-journalism-on-jobs/), every one of them is very real to the job holder. Gerard:
"Congressman Markey and other critics now appear to be calling into question the very use of multipliers to project job impacts. Not only is this concept accepted by almost all mainstream economists, but Dr. Wassily Leontief won a Nobel Prize for developing the input/output methodology that includes this effect. In fact, most recent estimates of jobs impacts, including estimates of the administration's recent jobs proposal, include direct, indirect and induced effects in their calculations. The critical point is that indirect and induced jobs created by the oil and natural gas sector are real jobs that will employ real Americans."

Taxes - The industry doesn't get subsidies - direct payments - from government. Gerard:
"There are provisions in the tax code that allow U.S. companies, including oil and natural gas companies, to recover business expenses. Nevertheless, at over 41 percent, in 2010 the oil and natural gas industry paid one of the highest effective tax rates in the U.S. Other S&P Industrials paid an effective tax rate of 26.5 percent. It is difficult to reconcile the notion of our industry receiving tax 'preferences' when we pay an effective tax rate 50 percent greater than other sectors."

Access - Key to the industry's job-creating ability is access to more of America's untapped energy resources (http://energytomorrow.org/blog/getting-to-92-percent/). Specifically, Markey asked about unused offshore leases. Gerard's response:
"While companies do purchase some leases in the hopes that they will prove to be productive, not all leases that are bought turn out to be good economic prospects after further investigation. That said, companies are not eager to return leases ... (because) technology advances could make the lease economic in the near future, so they often hold on to existing leases (and pay rent to the federal government) through the end of the lease term."


http://energytomorrow.org/blog/yes-we-can-create-jobs-thanks-for-asking#/type/all