POLL: Will Obama’s plan bring unemployment below 9% by the end of his term?

[Mornac]

• Tweet

Carney: Obama's New Jobs Plan Would Put Unemployment Below 9%

QUESTION: If Congress were to pass the package that the President's going to announce, unemployment would be under 9%?
 
JAY CARNEY: Based on, when you're talking about economic predictions, yes. Economic analysts, economists will be able to look at this series of proposals and say that 'based on history, based on what we know, based on their collective expertise, that it would add to economic growth and cause an increase to job creation.
 
In 2009, the White House said President Obama's stimulus plan would bring unemployment to below 8%.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/01/carney_obamas_new_jobs_plan_would_put_unemployment_below_9.html

[Mornac]

Let me be the first to go on record with an unequivical 'no'.

[IM2]

If I am not wrong, I do believe it's below 9 percent now.

[American_Outlaw]

He could bring the unemployment rate below 9% by the end of his term, but with this plan he won't even scratch the surface. With one swift action he could not only fix the employment issues in this country, He could start correcting the economy. All he needs to do is eliminate free trade. Tariffs on imports would force companies to reopen the thousands of mills that were shut down by the free trade agreements and start chipping away at the huge debt the last four presidents have laid at our doorsteps.

[IM2]

If he actually invested the 2.2 trillion it woudl take to rebuild our nations infrastructure that would reduce unemoployment way further than eliminating free trade agreements. We had free trade agreements for most of the Clinton years and the economy worked fine.

[American_Outlaw]

If he actually invested the 2.2 trillion it woudl take to rebuild our nations infrastructure that would reduce unemoployment way further than eliminating free trade agreements. We had free trade agreements for most of the Clinton years and the economy worked fine.

You think he wants to rebuild roads and bridges across the US? LOL Yep, From the Southern border to the Northern border. It's called the Nasco Corridor. It looks a little like this:



http://www.nascocorridor.com/

He's following in Bush's footsteps.

Eliminating free trade is the only step that's going to achieve real results. That's guaranteed.


BTW, 2004 is when the crap really hit the fan, but the US was headed down hill from moment Clinton signed onto the free trade. Mills couldn't compete with foreign companies and their dirt cheap labor. They eventually ran out of capitol. The best lasted until the early 2000s.

[dustup]

If I am not wrong, I do believe it's below 9 percent now.

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION – JULY 2011

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (9.0 percent), adult women
(7.9 percent), teenagers (25.0 percent), whites (8.1 percent), blacks (15.9 percent), and Hispanics (11.3
percent) showed little or no change in July. The jobless rate for Asians was 7.7 percent, not seasonally
adjusted.

[American_Outlaw]

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION – JULY 2011

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (9.0 percent), adult women
(7.9 percent), teenagers (25.0 percent), whites (8.1 percent), blacks (15.9 percent), and Hispanics (11.3
percent) showed little or no change in July. The jobless rate for Asians was 7.7 percent, not seasonally
adjusted.

And that's just the number of people currently getting assistance. Anyone who has lost their job and has ran out their unemployment are no longer counted in the overall unemployment rate totals.

[dustup]

If he actually invested the 2.2 trillion it woudl take to rebuild our nations infrastructure that would reduce unemoployment way further than eliminating free trade agreements. We had free trade agreements for most of the Clinton years and the economy worked fine.

If Obama were to borrow $2.2 TRILLION dollars it better put everyone back to work so we can pay down the debt!   Creating Government jobs is not the answer to our ailing economy.....it would be devastating financially to the US.

[American_Outlaw]

If Obama were to borrow $2.2 TRILLION dollars it better put everyone back to work so we can pay down the debt!   Creating Government jobs is not the answer to our ailing economy.....it would be devastating financially to the US.

Yep, The 2.2 trillion would run out very quickly and what would we do then.... borrow more? Maybe we should just sell Puerto Rico to China already. LMAO

[dustup]

If he actually invested the 2.2 trillion it woudl take to rebuild our nations infrastructure that would reduce unemoployment way further than eliminating free trade agreements. We had free trade agreements for most of the Clinton years and the economy worked fine.

The reason NAFTA and GATT seemed to work was due to it taking time for manufactures to close their facilities in America and open them in other countries. The results started to kick in between 2000 and 2001.......

   YEAR.............LABOR FORCE.......EMPLOYED......UNEMPLOYED......UNEMP RATE
2011 YTD Average 153,412,857      139,265,143   14,147,714         9.2%
2010 10BM        153,889,000      139,064,000   14,825,000         9.6%
2009 10BM        154,142,000      139,877,000   14,265,000         9.3%
2008 08BM        154,287,000      145,362,000    8,924,000         5.8%
2007 08BM        153,124,000      146,047,000    7,078,000         4.6%
2006 08BM        151,428,000      144,427,000    7,001,000         4.6%
2005 08BM        149,320,000      141,730,000    7,591,000         5.1%
2004             147,401,000      139,252,000    8,149,000         5.5%
2003             146,510,000      137,736,000    8,774,000         6.0%
2002             144,863,000      136,485,000    8,378,000         5.8%
2001             143,734,000      136,933,000    6,801,000         4.7%
2000             142,583,000      136,891,000    5,692,000         4.0%

[IM2]

The 2.2 trillion dollars is less than it cost to invade iraq.

Secondly most of the 2.2 would go to private construction/engineering/ architectural firms who won bids to do the job. Then that 2.2 trillion would circulate through the economy via purchases  of construction materials, eqiupment parts, equipment and employees paychecks. The spin off effect of that is that people formerly not employed would have money to spend and it would be spent in America.

Look, I get real tired of conservatives of all stripes bitching about a debt. It was a debt created by conservative support of the invasion of Iraq. No amount of predicted debt stopped you guys from telling us how unamerican we were for predicting the huge debt we were incurring for those wars. So now that we are there, maybe conservatives need to begin shutting up and letting people who may know how to erase the mess they made work instead of obstructing any potential progress just so your side can regain power to finish the job of fucking up the american economy.

Look, conservatives have been incorrect about every assumption they made. We were not welcomed into Iraq as liberators. We have not received oil money as payment for our work in Iraq. There were no WMDS. Tax cuts for the very wealthy did not create jobs. Deregulation of the financial industry did not grow the markets.

Just to name a few.

Investing 2.2 trillion dollars in the people of the USA is the wisest investment we can make. It would not just end up in government jobs. You guys really have no clue, you just mindless argue against anything the government does just because its government.  No rhyme or reason, no evidence required.

[dustup]

The 2.2 trillion dollars is less than it cost to invade iraq.

Secondly most of the 2.2 would go to private construction/engineering/ architectural firms who won bids to do the job. Then that 2.2 trillion would circulate through the economy via purchases  of construction materials, eqiupment parts, equipment and employees paychecks. The spin off effect of that is that people formerly not employed would have money to spend and it would be spent in America.

Look, I get real tired of conservatives of all stripes bitching about a debt. It was a debt created by conservative support of the invasion of Iraq. No amount of predicted debt stopped you guys from telling us how unamerican we were for predicting the huge debt we were incurring for those wars. So now that we are there, maybe conservatives need to begin shutting up and letting people who may know how to erase the mess they made work instead of obstructing any potential progress just so your side can regain power to finish the job of fucking up the american economy.

Look, conservatives have been incorrect about every assumption they made. We were not welcomed into Iraq as liberators. We have not received oil money as payment for our work in Iraq. There were no WMDS. Tax cuts for the very wealthy did not create jobs. Deregulation of the financial industry did not grow the markets.

Just to name a few.

Investing 2.2 trillion dollars in the people of the USA is the wisest investment we can make. It would not just end up in government jobs. You guys really have no clue, you just mindless argue against anything the government does just because its government.  No rhyme or reason, no evidence required.

I was against the Congressional Unapproved war......remember I am a Ron Paul supporter....he voted NO!

John Kerry, the Democratic nominee for President in 2004, voted to authorize the invasion, and said during his campaign that he stood by his vote. He also argued during the campaign that "the way he (President Bush) went to war was a mistake."[42]

In the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, candidates Representative Ron Paul, then-Senator Barack Obama (Now President of the United States), Senator Chris Dodd, Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel were some of the most outspoken critics of the Iraq War. Ron Paul has said that "The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information.

[American_Outlaw]

The 2.2 trillion dollars is less than it cost to invade iraq.

Secondly most of the 2.2 would go to private construction/engineering/ architectural firms who won bids to do the job. Then that 2.2 trillion would circulate through the economy via purchases  of construction materials, eqiupment parts, equipment and employees paychecks. The spin off effect of that is that people formerly not employed would have money to spend and it would be spent in America.

Look, I get real tired of conservatives of all stripes bitching about a debt. It was a debt created by conservative support of the invasion of Iraq. No amount of predicted debt stopped you guys from telling us how unamerican we were for predicting the huge debt we were incurring for those wars. So now that we are there, maybe conservatives need to begin shutting up and letting people who may know how to erase the mess they made work instead of obstructing any potential progress just so your side can regain power to finish the job of fucking up the american economy.

Look, conservatives have been incorrect about every assumption they made. We were not welcomed into Iraq as liberators. We have not received oil money as payment for our work in Iraq. There were no WMDS. Tax cuts for the very wealthy did not create jobs. Deregulation of the financial industry did not grow the markets.

Just to name a few.

Investing 2.2 trillion dollars in the people of the USA is the wisest investment we can make. It would not just end up in government jobs. You guys really have no clue, you just mindless argue against anything the government does just because its government.  No rhyme or reason, no evidence required.

You really do have a lot to say about nothing don't you,

[makesenseplease]

The reason NAFTA and GATT seemed to work was due to it taking time for manufactures to close their facilities in America and open them in other countries. The results started to kick in between 2000 and 2001.......

   YEAR.............LABOR FORCE.......EMPLOYED......UNEMPLOYED......UNEMP RATE
2011 YTD Average 153,412,857      139,265,143   14,147,714         9.2%
2010 10BM        153,889,000      139,064,000   14,825,000         9.6%
2009 10BM        154,142,000      139,877,000   14,265,000         9.3%
2008 08BM        154,287,000      145,362,000    8,924,000         5.8%
2007 08BM        153,124,000      146,047,000    7,078,000         4.6%
2006 08BM        151,428,000      144,427,000    7,001,000         4.6%
2005 08BM        149,320,000      141,730,000    7,591,000         5.1%
2004             147,401,000      139,252,000    8,149,000         5.5%
2003             146,510,000      137,736,000    8,774,000         6.0%
2002             144,863,000      136,485,000    8,378,000         5.8%
2001             143,734,000      136,933,000    6,801,000         4.7%
2000             142,583,000      136,891,000    5,692,000         4.0%

 

http://www.newser.com/story/127448/labor-boss-hilda-solis-proudly-buys-chevy-equinox-made-in-canada.html