Jobs Council Has Not Met in 6 Months: The President Has a Lot on His Plate

[ROMAD1]

Carney On Why Jobs Council Hasn't Met In Six Months: Obama Has "A Lot On His Plate" | RealClearPolitics



Recommendations from Obama jobs council have a conservative tilt - Los Angeles Times

Obama's jobs council is calling for an overhaul of the corporate tax structure, expansion of domestic petroleum drilling and a raft of reforms to federal regulation.

Why doesn't he give this group's recommendations play? Because the people who know how to create jobs are recommending policies that the President can't abide because of his constituencies. So, really...apparently... the President cares more for votes than Jobs.

[pfife]

Precisely the opposite, he cares about jobs so he implements job creating policies, not GOP boilerplate fail

[ROMAD1]

Precisely the opposite, he cares about jobs so he implements job creating policies, not GOP boilerplate fail

Yes, you have pinpointed the issue...he is failing.

[pfife]

Yes, you have pinpointed the issue...he is failing.

yes, failing to enact GOP policies that put the economy in the crapper

[Deleterious]

In before the stupid job graph.

[pfife]

In before the stupid job graph.

Job graph has been in dozens of times before an actual retort to it. And the streak continues

[ROMAD1]

yes, failing to enact GOP policies that put the economy in the crapper

Which of the panels recommendations failed? What did our bipartisan President carefully weigh during the past 6 months?

[pfife]

he supports both expanded domestic drilling (and has actually done so) and corporate tax reform, and has said numerous times that he wants to revamp federal regulations

I'm shocked the rw hack sites you frequent don't mention these facts

[Deleterious]

Job graph has been in dozens of times before an actual retort to it. And the streak continues

It's just a goofy chart Pfife.

Yes he is creating jobs. No he is not doing a good job of it. He isn't even creating enough jobs to keep up with population growth. More people are going on disability than getting jobs, etc.

[pfife]

It's just a goofy chart Pfife.

Yes he is creating jobs. No he is not doing a good job of it. He isn't even creating enough jobs to keep up with population growth. More people are going on disability than getting jobs, etc.

Empirical evidence for Obama's policies is much better than the "updated Bush" (TM: Romney Camp Pain) polcies Mitt is supporting.

[ROMAD1]

he supports both expanded domestic drilling (and has actually done so) and corporate tax reform, and has said numerous times that he wants to revamp federal regulations

I'm shocked the rw hack sites you frequent don't mention these facts

I'm shocked the President's talking points that you use don't mention that things are not going swimmingly.

[pfife]

I'm shocked the President's talking points that you use don't mention that things are not going swimmingly.

I didn't use President's talking points - I listed the exact things you listed in the OP.

smh

[Deleterious]

Empirical evidence for Obama's policies is much better than the "updated Bush" (TM: Romney Camp Pain) polcies Mitt is supporting.

Doesn't change the fact that Obama has been terrible at creating jobs.

For the record, I don't think presidents create/lose jobs. But every single one of them will get up there and tell us how they are going to create jobs and the other guy lost jobs, blah blah blah. Because of that I think its ok to be critical of them when they don't deliver.

[ROMAD1]

I didn't use President's talking points - I listed the exact things you listed in the OP.

smh

So Jay Carney isn't the President's spokesman?

[pfife]

So Jay Carney isn't the President's spokesman?

Sorry, you lost me.

You said he needs to do X,Y,Z. I looked at list X,Y,Z, and said he supports X,Y,Z. I'm not sure wth Carney or talking points have to do with any of it.

[pfife]

Doesn't change the fact that Obama has been terrible at creating jobs.

For the record, I don't think presidents create/lose jobs. But every single one of them will get up there and tell us how they are going to create jobs and the other guy lost jobs, blah blah blah. Because of that I think its ok to be critical of them when they don't deliver.

Right, but in an election, you chose between A or B (or C I suppose). All you need to do is be better than the challenger

I take no issue w/ your second paragraph at all

[TheCouga]

Empirical evidence for Obama's policies is much better than the "updated Bush" (TM: Romney Camp Pain) polcies Mitt is supporting.

Emperical evidence? Who needs that when you have your daily "two minutes hate" looped consecutively for 24 hours on AM radio and Fox.

[Deleterious]

Right, but in an election, you chose between A or B (or C I suppose). All you need to do is be better than the challenger

I take no issue w/ your second paragraph at all

But you are being a bit short sighted to blame the Bush policies for what happened. This crash has been building up since the 70's. Don't take this as an endorsement of Bush in any way though.

Plus, unless you think Romney will be 100% like Bush (He wont), your argument really isn't valid. I do applaud the attempt to drag Bush into this election though. If my guy had the dismal record O does, I would do it too.

[TheCouga]

Honestly, I've looked at the policy papers on Romney's campaign website, and I can't discern any difference between those and the policies of Bush. They benefit the exact same special interests, make the same mistakes, etc. The only real differences is that Romney is harsher on immigration.

It's totally legitimate to run against Bush if this is the case, and I wish Obama would do it. Republicans are still running against Carter. And really, lets not blame the mistakes of the Bush era on the "last 30 years." Bush's foreign policy disasters, his financial regulation disasters, and his budget disasters are quite unlike any of his predecessors...and it's not even close.

[pfife]

But you are being a bit short sighted to blame the Bush policies for what happened. This crash has been building up since the 70's. Don't take this as an endorsement of Bush in any way though.

Plus, unless you think Romney will be 100% like Bush (He wont), your argument really isn't valid. I do applaud the attempt to drag Bush into this election though. If my guy had the dismal record O does, I would do it too.

I didn't drag Bush in - The RNC called Romney "updated Bush".
RNC Spokeswoman: Republican Economic Platform Will Be The Bush Program, 'Just Updated' | ThinkProgress

(sorry I did say the Romney Campaign earlier, my mistake)

[Deleterious]

I didn't drag Bush in - The RNC called Romney "updated Bush".
RNC Spokeswoman: Republican Economic Platform Will Be The Bush Program, 'Just Updated' | ThinkProgress

(sorry I did say the Romney Campaign earlier, my mistake)

So you agree they wont be the same policies? Fantastic.

[pfife]

So you agree they wont be the same policies? Fantastic.

Depends on the updates.

[ballmich]

yes, failing to enact GOP policies that put the economy in the crapper

A crappy economy? The GOP didn't build that. Somewhere along the way, there were crappy public teachers that failed to teach anyone anything. And those crappy pothole filled roads that take the GOP to work, some government slappy who takes excessive breaks and get paid for overtime contributed to that.

Seems like you can take 'didn't build that' and apply it to anything, good or bad.

[pfife]

At least you admit you're just applying it arbitrarily, which is exactly what we're saying.

[ballmich]

At least you admit you're just applying it arbitrarily, which is exactly what we're saying.

Which makes saying it to begin with all the more stupid.

[pfife]

Which makes saying it to begin with all the more stupid.

No, its not stupid, its true

[JayVee]

Same thing he did with Simpson-Bowles

[Deleterious]

[pfife]

But you are being a bit short sighted to blame the Bush policies for what happened. This crash has been building up since the 70's. Don't take this as an endorsement of Bush in any way though.

WHat was happening in the 70s that caused this crash?

[sinister porpoise]

Obama's jobs council is calling for an overhaul of the corporate tax structure, expansion of domestic petroleum drilling and a raft of reforms to federal regulation.

Why doesn't he give this group's recommendations play? Because the people who know how to create jobs are recommending policies that the President can't abide because of his constituencies. So, really...apparently... the President cares more for votes than Jobs.

Obama wants to lower the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28%.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...4YJ_story.html

The Obama administration released final plans Tuesday to streamline the federal bu*reaucracy by eliminating hundreds of regulatory requirements across two dozen agencies, an overhaul that officials said could save $10 billion over five years. [...] As if to underscore the density of the federal bureaucracy, the plans were outlined in a report spanning 800 pages, detailing the elimination or revision of more than 500 regulations.

[pfife]

exatly SP. YOu'd think these guys would know what Obama stands for before bashing what he stands for.

[TheCouga]

exatly SP. YOu'd think these guys would know what Obama stands for before bashing what he stands for.

Well, they did bash their own Heritage Foundation healthcare plan for being "socialist" and having "death panels," so I'm guessing a firm grasp of reality isn't these people's forte.

[pfife]

Well, they did bash their own Heritage Foundation healthcare plan for being "socialist" and having "death panels," so I'm guessing a firm grasp of reality isn't these people's forte.

And indirectly bashed their social security privatization plan

[sinister porpoise]

Senate Kills Anti – Outsourcing Bill; Democrats Point to Romney - ABC News

Under existing law, employers may take tax deductions for the costs associated with moving jobs out of the country. The proposed legislation would have eliminated that, and used the resulting new revenue to fund a 20 percent tax credit for the costs companies run up “insourcing” labor back into the U.S.

The bill failed by a 56-42. A count of 60 was required to end discussion and move to a final vote. [Three Republicans voted in favor of the bill: Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Scott Brown.]

To further push the issue, Democrats held a conference call with employees from Sensata Technologies, an electronics hardware manufacturer that plans to close its Freeport, Ill., plant at the end of the year and move those operations to China.
Democrats say 150 people will be laid off in the process.

Sensata, formerly known as the Sensors and Controls division of Texas Instruments, was spun off to Bain in 2006 for a reported $3 billion.

The call was held after the vote.

“There is no reason in the world this would not have passed except for so many of the Republican senators have other interests,” said Tom Gaulrupp, a 33-year veteran of the company.

Gaulrupp says there was never a year the company did not draw a profit. Another employee, Lin Feller, was more frank:
“They do not care about us. The average guy on the street, they just do not care about us.”

[ROMAD1]

Senate Kills Anti – Outsourcing Bill; Democrats Point to Romney - ABC News

Are dems going to make economic nationalism policy? It made the great depression so much greater