Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 10:25AM
"When the Obama administration releases a report on the Friday before a long weekend, it’s clearly not trying to draw attention to the report’s contents. Sure enough, the “Seventh Quarterly Report” on the economic impact of the “stimulus,” released on Friday, July 1, provides further evidence that President Obama’s economic “stimulus” did very little, if anything, to stimulate the economy, and a whole lot to stimulate the debt.
The report was written by the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the “stimulus” in adding or saving jobs. The council reports that, using “mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus” (which it describes as a “natural way to estimate the effects of” the legislation), the “stimulus” has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That’s a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.
In other words, the government could simply have cut a $100,000 check to everyone whose employment was allegedly made possible by the “stimulus,” and taxpayers would have come out $427 billion ahead.
Furthermore, the council reports that, as of two quarters ago, the “stimulus” had added or saved just under 2.7 million jobs — or 288,000 more than it has now. In other words, over the past six months, the economy would have added or saved more jobs without the “stimulus” than it has with it. In comparison to how things would otherwise have been, the “stimulus” has been working in reverse over the past six months, causing the economy to shed jobs."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-economists-stimulus-has-cost-278000-job_576014.html
$278,000 per job? I am really not looking forward to hearing the lies about "created or saved", doesn't look like a lot of private sector "creations". just overpaid government jobs like the thousands of TSA idiots the feds have hired.
And all the money thrown to the state and their corrupt/inept employees. No remediation and no reform either.
Hope and change? Fuck this punk already.
The report was written by the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the “stimulus” in adding or saving jobs. The council reports that, using “mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus” (which it describes as a “natural way to estimate the effects of” the legislation), the “stimulus” has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That’s a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.
In other words, the government could simply have cut a $100,000 check to everyone whose employment was allegedly made possible by the “stimulus,” and taxpayers would have come out $427 billion ahead.
Furthermore, the council reports that, as of two quarters ago, the “stimulus” had added or saved just under 2.7 million jobs — or 288,000 more than it has now. In other words, over the past six months, the economy would have added or saved more jobs without the “stimulus” than it has with it. In comparison to how things would otherwise have been, the “stimulus” has been working in reverse over the past six months, causing the economy to shed jobs."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-economists-stimulus-has-cost-278000-job_576014.html
$278,000 per job? I am really not looking forward to hearing the lies about "created or saved", doesn't look like a lot of private sector "creations". just overpaid government jobs like the thousands of TSA idiots the feds have hired.
And all the money thrown to the state and their corrupt/inept employees. No remediation and no reform either.
Hope and change? Fuck this punk already.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Bachmann '12
()
Date: July 05, 2011 10:51AM
Since it is inevitable that the current U.S. President Barack Obama has no chance of being re-elected under what might be called a "democratic election-process," and since President Obama is essentially a puppet of the British monarchy, bought and paid for in his original election as U.S. President, that fact, and relevant other evidence signifies that Obama could be made President again only by the same kind of proceeding which brought Adolf Hitler into the successive steps of his appointment by the order of the combined agency of the Bank of England and the support of Prescott Bush's actions on behalf of the Bank of England's Hjalmar Schacht and and Brown Brothers Harriman.
Given the facts of the crisis about to hit with great force with the first ten days following the close of the U.S. State Governments' accounting year, and in light of the attempt to enforce the continued "bail out," there can be no possibility that the forces controlling British puppet Barack Obama's career do not fully intend to pull off a coup d'etat comparable to that of Adolf Hitler.
There is only one remedy for both the United States and the Trans-Atlantic community of nations: the immediate re-enactment of the 1933 Glass-Steagall law.
Not only is the immediate, forced draft enactment indispensable at this moment; the dumping of the accounts properly attributable to speculative banking, is an immediate precondition for the continued existence of our sovereign nation as a democratic form of sovereign republic modelled upon the intentions of the Preamble expressed in the founding of the U.S. Federal Constitution. Anyone in office who opposes the maintenance of such provisions of our Constitution is as guilty as a traitor acting against the very continued existence of our republic.
The remedies for our republic's present afflictions exist on the condition that all measures which are not consistent with the immediate re-enactment of Glass-Steagall are annulled. This would be the efficient expression of our patriotic devotion to the continued maintenance of our republic against the presently virtual British imperial dictatorship and rape of the American people by the "bail-out" swindle.
God bless Michelle Bachmann. May she reign in peace.
Given the facts of the crisis about to hit with great force with the first ten days following the close of the U.S. State Governments' accounting year, and in light of the attempt to enforce the continued "bail out," there can be no possibility that the forces controlling British puppet Barack Obama's career do not fully intend to pull off a coup d'etat comparable to that of Adolf Hitler.
There is only one remedy for both the United States and the Trans-Atlantic community of nations: the immediate re-enactment of the 1933 Glass-Steagall law.
Not only is the immediate, forced draft enactment indispensable at this moment; the dumping of the accounts properly attributable to speculative banking, is an immediate precondition for the continued existence of our sovereign nation as a democratic form of sovereign republic modelled upon the intentions of the Preamble expressed in the founding of the U.S. Federal Constitution. Anyone in office who opposes the maintenance of such provisions of our Constitution is as guilty as a traitor acting against the very continued existence of our republic.
The remedies for our republic's present afflictions exist on the condition that all measures which are not consistent with the immediate re-enactment of Glass-Steagall are annulled. This would be the efficient expression of our patriotic devotion to the continued maintenance of our republic against the presently virtual British imperial dictatorship and rape of the American people by the "bail-out" swindle.
God bless Michelle Bachmann. May she reign in peace.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Sniffer
()
Date: July 05, 2011 11:18AM
Bachmann '12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Since it is inevitable that the current U.S.
> President Barack Obama has no chance of being
> re-elected under what might be called a
> "democratic election-process," and since President
> Obama is essentially a puppet of the British
> monarchy, bought and paid for in his original
> election as U.S. President, that fact, and
> relevant other evidence signifies that Obama could
> be made President again only by the same kind of
> proceeding which brought Adolf Hitler into the
> successive steps of his appointment by the order
> of the combined agency of the Bank of England and
> the support of Prescott Bush's actions on behalf
> of the Bank of England's Hjalmar Schacht and and
> Brown Brothers Harriman.
>
> Given the facts of the crisis about to hit with
> great force with the first ten days following the
> close of the U.S. State Governments' accounting
> year, and in light of the attempt to enforce the
> continued "bail out," there can be no possibility
> that the forces controlling British puppet Barack
> Obama's career do not fully intend to pull off a
> coup d'etat comparable to that of Adolf Hitler.
>
> There is only one remedy for both the United
> States and the Trans-Atlantic community of
> nations: the immediate re-enactment of the 1933
> Glass-Steagall law.
>
> Not only is the immediate, forced draft enactment
> indispensable at this moment; the dumping of the
> accounts properly attributable to speculative
> banking, is an immediate precondition for the
> continued existence of our sovereign nation as a
> democratic form of sovereign republic modelled
> upon the intentions of the Preamble expressed in
> the founding of the U.S. Federal Constitution.
> Anyone in office who opposes the maintenance of
> such provisions of our Constitution is as guilty
> as a traitor acting against the very continued
> existence of our republic.
>
> The remedies for our republic's present
> afflictions exist on the condition that all
> measures which are not consistent with the
> immediate re-enactment of Glass-Steagall are
> annulled. This would be the efficient expression
> of our patriotic devotion to the continued
> maintenance of our republic against the presently
> virtual British imperial dictatorship and rape of
> the American people by the "bail-out" swindle.
>
> God bless Michelle Bachmann. May she reign in
> peace.
I like Michelle Bachmann but what you've posted here is right out of
Lyndon LaRouche's mouth and I wouldn't listen to a word he has to say.
Nothing but a crackpot.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Since it is inevitable that the current U.S.
> President Barack Obama has no chance of being
> re-elected under what might be called a
> "democratic election-process," and since President
> Obama is essentially a puppet of the British
> monarchy, bought and paid for in his original
> election as U.S. President, that fact, and
> relevant other evidence signifies that Obama could
> be made President again only by the same kind of
> proceeding which brought Adolf Hitler into the
> successive steps of his appointment by the order
> of the combined agency of the Bank of England and
> the support of Prescott Bush's actions on behalf
> of the Bank of England's Hjalmar Schacht and and
> Brown Brothers Harriman.
>
> Given the facts of the crisis about to hit with
> great force with the first ten days following the
> close of the U.S. State Governments' accounting
> year, and in light of the attempt to enforce the
> continued "bail out," there can be no possibility
> that the forces controlling British puppet Barack
> Obama's career do not fully intend to pull off a
> coup d'etat comparable to that of Adolf Hitler.
>
> There is only one remedy for both the United
> States and the Trans-Atlantic community of
> nations: the immediate re-enactment of the 1933
> Glass-Steagall law.
>
> Not only is the immediate, forced draft enactment
> indispensable at this moment; the dumping of the
> accounts properly attributable to speculative
> banking, is an immediate precondition for the
> continued existence of our sovereign nation as a
> democratic form of sovereign republic modelled
> upon the intentions of the Preamble expressed in
> the founding of the U.S. Federal Constitution.
> Anyone in office who opposes the maintenance of
> such provisions of our Constitution is as guilty
> as a traitor acting against the very continued
> existence of our republic.
>
> The remedies for our republic's present
> afflictions exist on the condition that all
> measures which are not consistent with the
> immediate re-enactment of Glass-Steagall are
> annulled. This would be the efficient expression
> of our patriotic devotion to the continued
> maintenance of our republic against the presently
> virtual British imperial dictatorship and rape of
> the American people by the "bail-out" swindle.
>
> God bless Michelle Bachmann. May she reign in
> peace.
I like Michelle Bachmann but what you've posted here is right out of
Lyndon LaRouche's mouth and I wouldn't listen to a word he has to say.
Nothing but a crackpot.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
rwrag
()
Date: July 05, 2011 12:13PM
weeklystandard.com...enough said....what newsmax or worlddailynet didn't having anything? Come-on even libtrads know not to link Huffpo articles on here.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
4 more years
()
Date: July 05, 2011 12:21PM
rwrag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> weeklystandard.com...enough said....what newsmax
> or worlddailynet didn't having anything? Come-on
> even libtrads know not to link Huffpo articles on
> here.
When I googled for "$278,000 per job" I got 16,000 hits.
The folks behind the distribution of this know how to get maximum exposure very quickly.
========
Politics of hate - didn't work last time, won't work this time. The People want to hear why something different is something better, not why something the same is bad bad bad.
-------------------------------------------------------
> weeklystandard.com...enough said....what newsmax
> or worlddailynet didn't having anything? Come-on
> even libtrads know not to link Huffpo articles on
> here.
When I googled for "$278,000 per job" I got 16,000 hits.
The folks behind the distribution of this know how to get maximum exposure very quickly.
========
Politics of hate - didn't work last time, won't work this time. The People want to hear why something different is something better, not why something the same is bad bad bad.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
4 more indeed
()
Date: July 05, 2011 12:26PM
Those are just the jobs directly created/saved. With those salaries those people spent money, created more jobs, more tax revenues. We need more stimulus money now. Give some that money millionaires are just socking away and spend it for useful infratstructure improvements. Bypass Republican State Governors and award federal contracts, Civilian Conservation Corps jobs...real jobs, not McDOnalds jobs, not Godfather Pizza jobs!
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
sumguy
()
Date: July 05, 2011 12:55PM
Every one should spend a little time looking at this site.
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/default.aspx
Scroll down the page put in you zip code and see where the money has gone.
Even in Virginia we are looking at $275,000.00 per job created or saved.
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/default.aspx
Scroll down the page put in you zip code and see where the money has gone.
Even in Virginia we are looking at $275,000.00 per job created or saved.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
BushWacked
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:08PM
Wingnut,
Are you suggesting we go back to the Republican Bush years? Where the economy almost completely collapsed?
Are you suggesting we go back to the Republican Bush years? Where the economy almost completely collapsed?
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
name one
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:09PM
BushWacked Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wingnut,
>
> Are you suggesting we go back to the Republican
> Bush years? Where the economy almost completely
> collapsed?
Why did it almost completely collapse under Bush?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wingnut,
>
> Are you suggesting we go back to the Republican
> Bush years? Where the economy almost completely
> collapsed?
Why did it almost completely collapse under Bush?
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
SoylentGreen
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:15PM
4 more years Wrote:
> When I googled for "$278,000 per job" I got 16,000
> hits.
>
> The folks behind the distribution of this know how
> to get maximum exposure very quickly.
>
Hold on to your hat, it's about to hit second gear. 29,300 hits less than 30 minutes later. Good news travels fast, bad news travels faster.
> ========
>
> Politics of hate - didn't work last time, won't
> work this time. The People want to hear why
> something different is something better, not why
> something the same is bad bad bad.
Politics of spin - O ran against the hated W who wasn't even running. So I'd say you are on your normal line of being full of shit.
The people wanted to hear those things last time too. They got "hope" and "change" instead. Only there was no hope of change. All systems normal. It's not my fault...he did or didn't do it.
When the South Fork Dam gave way, no one had a better idea for fixing the problem EXCEPT not building the dam again.
> When I googled for "$278,000 per job" I got 16,000
> hits.
>
> The folks behind the distribution of this know how
> to get maximum exposure very quickly.
>
Hold on to your hat, it's about to hit second gear. 29,300 hits less than 30 minutes later. Good news travels fast, bad news travels faster.
> ========
>
> Politics of hate - didn't work last time, won't
> work this time. The People want to hear why
> something different is something better, not why
> something the same is bad bad bad.
Politics of spin - O ran against the hated W who wasn't even running. So I'd say you are on your normal line of being full of shit.
The people wanted to hear those things last time too. They got "hope" and "change" instead. Only there was no hope of change. All systems normal. It's not my fault...he did or didn't do it.
When the South Fork Dam gave way, no one had a better idea for fixing the problem EXCEPT not building the dam again.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
bythislogic
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:21PM
Hourly labor rates are calculated as follows: Base pay + Overhead + GA + Fringe + profit= Total Cost. For example:100 guys build a bridge, normal accounting methods will count Base pay + Overhead + GA + Fring + profit= Total Cost, while the weekly standard would calculate Base pay + Overhead + GA + Fringe + profit + Material to build the bridge= total cost. These Stats are lying straight to your face wingnut.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
LMAOZ
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:32PM
Your wasting time trying to explain logic to Wingnut.
Anytime Wingnut see's an article that portrays Obama in a bad light he immediately believes it's fact.
Wingnut is easily fooled and very gullible.
Anytime Wingnut see's an article that portrays Obama in a bad light he immediately believes it's fact.
Wingnut is easily fooled and very gullible.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Registered Voter
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:47PM
bythislogic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hourly labor rates are calculated as follows: Base
> pay + Overhead + GA + Fringe + profit= Total Cost.
> For example:100 guys build a bridge, normal
> accounting methods will count Base pay + Overhead
> + GA + Fring + profit= Total Cost, while the
> weekly standard would calculate Base pay +
> Overhead + GA + Fringe + profit + Material to
> build the bridge= total cost. These Stats are
> lying straight to your face wingnut.
And what is the ROI on the bridge? ZERO.
Those numbers are great when it is a project that actually has a return. Building a bridge, while possibly beneficial, is by no means the kind of job that actually creates sustainable growth. Most of the "shovel ready" crap was just that - and most of the other pet liberal projects that got money were all along the same lines - liberal art crap that held no economic value whatsoever except to the few people that received the money.
That is why the government stimulus failed - it failed in large part because it didn't fund anything that could contribute value to the free market process. They would have almost been better off investing all the money in NASA and pushing a moon base with a manufacturing center - at least then they could have started researching materials that could be produced on the moon, and it would have jump started some other groups that would want to invest there.
The only gullible folks here are the ones who continue to think that hope and change means that one day Obama will turn out to be something other than he turned out to be.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hourly labor rates are calculated as follows: Base
> pay + Overhead + GA + Fringe + profit= Total Cost.
> For example:100 guys build a bridge, normal
> accounting methods will count Base pay + Overhead
> + GA + Fring + profit= Total Cost, while the
> weekly standard would calculate Base pay +
> Overhead + GA + Fringe + profit + Material to
> build the bridge= total cost. These Stats are
> lying straight to your face wingnut.
And what is the ROI on the bridge? ZERO.
Those numbers are great when it is a project that actually has a return. Building a bridge, while possibly beneficial, is by no means the kind of job that actually creates sustainable growth. Most of the "shovel ready" crap was just that - and most of the other pet liberal projects that got money were all along the same lines - liberal art crap that held no economic value whatsoever except to the few people that received the money.
That is why the government stimulus failed - it failed in large part because it didn't fund anything that could contribute value to the free market process. They would have almost been better off investing all the money in NASA and pushing a moon base with a manufacturing center - at least then they could have started researching materials that could be produced on the moon, and it would have jump started some other groups that would want to invest there.
The only gullible folks here are the ones who continue to think that hope and change means that one day Obama will turn out to be something other than he turned out to be.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
proffoffailure
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:51PM
> And what is the ROI on the bridge? ZERO.
>
> Those numbers are great when it is a project that
> actually has a return. Building a bridge, while
> possibly beneficial, is by no means the kind of
> job that actually creates sustainable growth. Most
> of the "shovel ready" crap was just that - and
> most of the other pet liberal projects that got
> money were all along the same lines - liberal art
> crap that held no economic value whatsoever except
> to the few people that received the money.
>
> That is why the government stimulus failed - it
> failed in large part because it didn't fund
> anything that could contribute value to the free
> market process. They would have almost been better
> off investing all the money in NASA and pushing a
> moon base with a manufacturing center - at least
> then they could have started researching materials
> that could be produced on the moon, and it would
> have jump started some other groups that would
> want to invest there.
>
> The only gullible folks here are the ones who
> continue to think that hope and change means that
> one day Obama will turn out to be something other
> than he turned out to be.
Now your are just spouting off Obama hate. The lie was exposed so you reverted back to "OBAMA is HITLER", LIBTRADS SUCK AND WAAAAA!!!!!!
>
> Those numbers are great when it is a project that
> actually has a return. Building a bridge, while
> possibly beneficial, is by no means the kind of
> job that actually creates sustainable growth. Most
> of the "shovel ready" crap was just that - and
> most of the other pet liberal projects that got
> money were all along the same lines - liberal art
> crap that held no economic value whatsoever except
> to the few people that received the money.
>
> That is why the government stimulus failed - it
> failed in large part because it didn't fund
> anything that could contribute value to the free
> market process. They would have almost been better
> off investing all the money in NASA and pushing a
> moon base with a manufacturing center - at least
> then they could have started researching materials
> that could be produced on the moon, and it would
> have jump started some other groups that would
> want to invest there.
>
> The only gullible folks here are the ones who
> continue to think that hope and change means that
> one day Obama will turn out to be something other
> than he turned out to be.
Now your are just spouting off Obama hate. The lie was exposed so you reverted back to "OBAMA is HITLER", LIBTRADS SUCK AND WAAAAA!!!!!!
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Registered Voter
()
Date: July 05, 2011 01:56PM
proffoffailure Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now your are just spouting off Obama hate. The
> lie was exposed so you reverted back to "OBAMA is
> HITLER", LIBTRADS SUCK AND WAAAAA!!!!!!
You have nothing. Please, expose the lie. You sound more and more eesh-like with the instant reversion to "...you just hate Obama..." or "...must be a racist..." when we actually point out his flaws and his failures.
Too bad for you, I hope your belief gives you all the hope you need.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now your are just spouting off Obama hate. The
> lie was exposed so you reverted back to "OBAMA is
> HITLER", LIBTRADS SUCK AND WAAAAA!!!!!!
You have nothing. Please, expose the lie. You sound more and more eesh-like with the instant reversion to "...you just hate Obama..." or "...must be a racist..." when we actually point out his flaws and his failures.
Too bad for you, I hope your belief gives you all the hope you need.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
rv = fail
()
Date: July 05, 2011 02:05PM
Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> and more eesh-like with the instant
> reversion to "...you just hate Obama..." or
> "...must be a racist..." when we actually point
> out his flaws and his failures.
>
> Too bad for you, I hope your belief gives you all
> the hope you need.
You're a racist jackass.
-------------------------------------------------------
> and more eesh-like with the instant
> reversion to "...you just hate Obama..." or
> "...must be a racist..." when we actually point
> out his flaws and his failures.
>
> Too bad for you, I hope your belief gives you all
> the hope you need.
You're a racist jackass.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
pawnedrepublican
()
Date: July 05, 2011 02:07PM
Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "...must be a racist..." when we actually point
> out his flaws and his failures.
>
You point them out, then facts destroyed your argument.
-------------------------------------------------------
> "...must be a racist..." when we actually point
> out his flaws and his failures.
>
You point them out, then facts destroyed your argument.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 02:07PM
Yeah, this may not be accurate. I just heard on the radio it was ONLY $238K spent for each "job saved".
Obama really sucks fucking shit, plain and simple.
Obama really sucks fucking shit, plain and simple.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
name one
()
Date: July 05, 2011 02:12PM
pawnedrepublican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "...must be a racist..." when we actually point
> > out his flaws and his failures.
> >
>
> You point them out, then facts destroyed your
> argument.
Still waiting for that one thing Bush did to destroy the economy.......
You are a smart guy, there must be at least one thing you can point to that Bush did to make the economy implode.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "...must be a racist..." when we actually point
> > out his flaws and his failures.
> >
>
> You point them out, then facts destroyed your
> argument.
Still waiting for that one thing Bush did to destroy the economy.......
You are a smart guy, there must be at least one thing you can point to that Bush did to make the economy implode.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 02:22PM
Bush was responsible for everything that went on between 2001 and 2008.
Obama has no responsibility for what's gone on since then.
Obama was very active while in Congress trying to prevent the recession...No wait maybe he didn't do shit.
Obama has no responsibility for what's gone on since then.
Obama was very active while in Congress trying to prevent the recession...No wait maybe he didn't do shit.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Registered Voter
()
Date: July 05, 2011 02:28PM
name one Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pawnedrepublican Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Registered Voter Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > "...must be a racist..." when we actually
> point
> > > out his flaws and his failures.
> > >
> >
> > You point them out, then facts destroyed your
> > argument.
>
> Still waiting for that one thing Bush did to
> destroy the economy.......
>
> You are a smart guy, there must be at least one
> thing you can point to that Bush did to make the
> economy implode.
I am guessing it was the fact that he allowed Barney Frank and Chris Dodd to run the banking committee that refused to push for changes to the law that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to go nuts backing all the loan papers with non-existent money and shoddy oversight rule requirements.
At this point a lot of it has been largely and squarely laid at the feet of the Federal Reserve monetary policies and the lax lending rules encouraged by Fannie and Freddie to push home loans. The banks certainly took advantage of the situation - but let's see... they make sure to get their folks placed at the Fed and Fannie and Freddie, so is there really any surprise.
For all of you ObamaNuts, please, keep blaming Bush if it makes you happy.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 02:29PM by Registered Voter.
-------------------------------------------------------
> pawnedrepublican Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Registered Voter Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > "...must be a racist..." when we actually
> point
> > > out his flaws and his failures.
> > >
> >
> > You point them out, then facts destroyed your
> > argument.
>
> Still waiting for that one thing Bush did to
> destroy the economy.......
>
> You are a smart guy, there must be at least one
> thing you can point to that Bush did to make the
> economy implode.
I am guessing it was the fact that he allowed Barney Frank and Chris Dodd to run the banking committee that refused to push for changes to the law that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to go nuts backing all the loan papers with non-existent money and shoddy oversight rule requirements.
At this point a lot of it has been largely and squarely laid at the feet of the Federal Reserve monetary policies and the lax lending rules encouraged by Fannie and Freddie to push home loans. The banks certainly took advantage of the situation - but let's see... they make sure to get their folks placed at the Fed and Fannie and Freddie, so is there really any surprise.
For all of you ObamaNuts, please, keep blaming Bush if it makes you happy.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 02:29PM by Registered Voter.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Hatemotor
()
Date: July 05, 2011 03:19PM
The real problem is both administrations take all their financial advice from Goldman Sachs,,,
Congress ought to pass a resolution banning any more Goldman employees from the treasury dept,,,
It's absolutely ludicrous how many ex-Goldman employees are holding key positions in our gov't,,,this should be a wy bigger story,,,
Congress ought to pass a resolution banning any more Goldman employees from the treasury dept,,,
It's absolutely ludicrous how many ex-Goldman employees are holding key positions in our gov't,,,this should be a wy bigger story,,,
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Hatemotor
()
Date: July 05, 2011 03:19PM
,,,,,,
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 03:22PM by Hatemotor.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 03:22PM by Hatemotor.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Hatemotor
()
Date: July 05, 2011 03:19PM
,,,,
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 03:21PM by Hatemotor.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 03:21PM by Hatemotor.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Yupper
()
Date: July 05, 2011 04:08PM
WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush was responsible for everything that went on
> between 2001 and 2008.
>
> Obama has no responsibility for what's gone on
> since then.
>
>
> Obama was very active while in Congress trying to
> prevent the recession...No wait maybe he didn't do
> shit.
Yup,
Banking industry recovered... check
American car companies back... check
Bin Laden dead... check
Housing industry recovering... check
Stock market up 6000... check
Troops on their way home... check
Gas prices declining... check
the list goes on... check
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush was responsible for everything that went on
> between 2001 and 2008.
>
> Obama has no responsibility for what's gone on
> since then.
>
>
> Obama was very active while in Congress trying to
> prevent the recession...No wait maybe he didn't do
> shit.
Yup,
Banking industry recovered... check
American car companies back... check
Bin Laden dead... check
Housing industry recovering... check
Stock market up 6000... check
Troops on their way home... check
Gas prices declining... check
the list goes on... check
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 04:16PM
Yupper Wrote:
> Banking industry recovered... check
Wall Street bailed out with taxpayer money
> American car companies back... check
Chrysler and GM bailed out with taxpayer money. GM is still a mess, the Volt a FAILURE
> Bin Laden dead... check
Thanks to the CIA and enhanced interrogations
> Housing industry recovering... check
Where? In DC? A lot of foreclsures are still waiting to hit. The banks are staggering their release
> Stock market up 6000... check
More taxpayer money pumped and saved some lenders and industries that didn't deserve saving.
> Troops on their way home... check
strong maybe there at best
> Gas prices declining... check
Reached a higher sustained level than under Bush, and will return after Obumasses political pander of releasing strategic reserves is over. Nice short term, nothing long term
>
> the list goes on... check
Attachments:
> Banking industry recovered... check
Wall Street bailed out with taxpayer money
> American car companies back... check
Chrysler and GM bailed out with taxpayer money. GM is still a mess, the Volt a FAILURE
> Bin Laden dead... check
Thanks to the CIA and enhanced interrogations
> Housing industry recovering... check
Where? In DC? A lot of foreclsures are still waiting to hit. The banks are staggering their release
> Stock market up 6000... check
More taxpayer money pumped and saved some lenders and industries that didn't deserve saving.
> Troops on their way home... check
strong maybe there at best
> Gas prices declining... check
Reached a higher sustained level than under Bush, and will return after Obumasses political pander of releasing strategic reserves is over. Nice short term, nothing long term
>
> the list goes on... check
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Attachments:
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
BSMonitor
()
Date: July 05, 2011 04:35PM
What color is the sky in Wingnut's world?
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 04:39PM
BSMonitor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What color is the sky in Wingnut's world?
What's the unemployment rate?
How are gas prices?
Why hasn't housing recovered?
Why do you support a douchebag failure of a president?
-------------------------------------------------------
> What color is the sky in Wingnut's world?
What's the unemployment rate?
How are gas prices?
Why hasn't housing recovered?
Why do you support a douchebag failure of a president?
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Volt
()
Date: July 05, 2011 04:55PM
Wingnut,
By "The Volt is a failure" do mean because there's a waiting list for the car that can't be filled? Or all 2011 models are sold already?
By "The Volt is a failure" do mean because there's a waiting list for the car that can't be filled? Or all 2011 models are sold already?
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:04PM
How many Volts have you seen on the road?
Less than 400 sold in Jan 2011 and Feb 2011, even with the ADDITIONAL $7,500 taxpayer funded tax break.
Less than 400 sold in Jan 2011 and Feb 2011, even with the ADDITIONAL $7,500 taxpayer funded tax break.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Hatemotor
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:09PM
Sold out is sold out,,,doesn't seem like a failure to me,,,they had to "re-tool" factories and add jobs to be able to produce more,,,
Like I've said before, not a fan of bailouts, but I'd rather bail out GM than Goldman and AIG,,,GM didn't destroy the economy and create the situation we're in now,,,
Like I've said before, not a fan of bailouts, but I'd rather bail out GM than Goldman and AIG,,,GM didn't destroy the economy and create the situation we're in now,,,
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Shadow
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:15PM
Evidently 608 were sold in March alone. Of course, the Prius still makes it look like a garage-made car with its 18K+ sales for March. personally, I like the idea of more manufacturers giving choices to consumers. Even if they are a little slow about it. But then, the Chevy dealers had no clue how to capitalize on the whole Transformers marketing thing when the original film came out so it's no surprise Chevy is slow in figuring out the hybrid market.
Teaching an old dog new tricks is a slow and arduous process.
Teaching an old dog new tricks is a slow and arduous process.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:21PM
Shadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evidently 608 were sold in March alone. Of course,
> the Prius still makes it look like a garage-made
> car with its 18K+ sales for March. personally, I
> like the idea of more manufacturers giving choices
> to consumers. Even if they are a little slow
> about it. But then, the Chevy dealers had no clue
> how to capitalize on the whole Transformers
> marketing thing when the original film came out so
> it's no surprise Chevy is slow in figuring out the
> hybrid market.
>
> Teaching an old dog new tricks is a slow and
> arduous process.
600 in a month is chicken feed.
It's not the governments or the taxpayers job to "retrain" the auto industry, especially lead by a dummy like Obuma who has never run a lemonade stand.
There is a double bailout in place with the Volt-
First, the billions thrown at GM of taxpayer money.
Second, the $7,500 taxpayer subsidy buyers receive.
With the car costing roughly $40K new, it is clear that only higher income people will benefit from the tax incentive.
Great economics, Barry, you're hustling backwards, fool.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evidently 608 were sold in March alone. Of course,
> the Prius still makes it look like a garage-made
> car with its 18K+ sales for March. personally, I
> like the idea of more manufacturers giving choices
> to consumers. Even if they are a little slow
> about it. But then, the Chevy dealers had no clue
> how to capitalize on the whole Transformers
> marketing thing when the original film came out so
> it's no surprise Chevy is slow in figuring out the
> hybrid market.
>
> Teaching an old dog new tricks is a slow and
> arduous process.
600 in a month is chicken feed.
It's not the governments or the taxpayers job to "retrain" the auto industry, especially lead by a dummy like Obuma who has never run a lemonade stand.
There is a double bailout in place with the Volt-
First, the billions thrown at GM of taxpayer money.
Second, the $7,500 taxpayer subsidy buyers receive.
With the car costing roughly $40K new, it is clear that only higher income people will benefit from the tax incentive.
Great economics, Barry, you're hustling backwards, fool.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Shadow
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:32PM
DId you miss the part where George W Bush started this Auto industry bailout? It isn't just Obama, though he's certainly had a hand, but Bush began this mess and, face it, big business likes to protect itself with big government subsidies and bailouts. And there are plenty of guilty politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle that help that along. Many where the moniker of Senator or Congressman to get their selfish little way.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't recall hearing you bitch about the previous administration's tax subsidy that was given to buyers of the huge Hummers and such for "business" purposes.
ANd yeah, 600 cars is nothing, thus my comment about Prius's sales.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 05:33PM by Shadow.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't recall hearing you bitch about the previous administration's tax subsidy that was given to buyers of the huge Hummers and such for "business" purposes.
ANd yeah, 600 cars is nothing, thus my comment about Prius's sales.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2011 05:33PM by Shadow.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:37PM
Bush sucked too,, yes.
ANd he is no longer president or running for president.
ANd he is no longer president or running for president.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 05:40PM
I'm not sure if this is rolled in to the billions of dollars in the bailout pricetag, but GM also gets massive tax breaks for the next few years- so they will be one of the same corporations libs complain about not paying their fair share of taxes.
Like GE, GM will pay little or no taxes.
Like GE, GM will pay little or no taxes.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
SoylentGreen
()
Date: July 05, 2011 06:48PM
Shadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evidently 608 were sold in March alone.
And Fisher-Price has been selling a million Power Wheels a year since 1990.
My point being that people evidently WANT to buy the Power Wheels.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evidently 608 were sold in March alone.
And Fisher-Price has been selling a million Power Wheels a year since 1990.
My point being that people evidently WANT to buy the Power Wheels.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
SoylentGreen
()
Date: July 05, 2011 06:50PM
WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush sucked too,, yes.
>
> ANd he is no longer president or running for
> president.
Yeah...he did.
However he didn't buy GM. He pumped money into it..but he didn't buy it. Nor did he fire the CEO.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush sucked too,, yes.
>
> ANd he is no longer president or running for
> president.
Yeah...he did.
However he didn't buy GM. He pumped money into it..but he didn't buy it. Nor did he fire the CEO.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
SoylentGreen
()
Date: July 05, 2011 06:52PM
WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not sure if this is rolled in to the billions
> of dollars in the bailout pricetag, but GM also
> gets massive tax breaks for the next few years- so
> they will be one of the same corporations libs
> complain about not paying their fair share of
> taxes.
>
>
> Like GE, GM will pay little or no taxes.
GE sells parts to make the Volt to GM. GE orders up 25,000 Volts. No body pays taxes.
Is it me or is there a trend here?
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not sure if this is rolled in to the billions
> of dollars in the bailout pricetag, but GM also
> gets massive tax breaks for the next few years- so
> they will be one of the same corporations libs
> complain about not paying their fair share of
> taxes.
>
>
> Like GE, GM will pay little or no taxes.
GE sells parts to make the Volt to GM. GE orders up 25,000 Volts. No body pays taxes.
Is it me or is there a trend here?
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Hatemotor
()
Date: July 05, 2011 08:38PM
I wonder how long it will be before we send our taxes directly to Goldman Sachs?
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Liq
()
Date: July 05, 2011 10:00PM
This is the crazy type of shit Wingnut believes.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 05, 2011 10:05PM
Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was being mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
What more proof of failure do you need?
What more proof of failure do you need?
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
.
Posted by:
Alias
()
Date: July 06, 2011 01:25AM
.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 11:06PM by Alias.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 11:06PM by Alias.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Awe
()
Date: July 06, 2011 09:45AM
Awe Wingnut you're such a kidder.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
huhhnotmakesense
()
Date: July 06, 2011 10:38AM
WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was being
> mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
>
>
> What more proof of failure do you need?
That’s kind like saying the when the life boats where launched the Titanic was still 75% above the water still thousands died. PROOF launching the life boats was a failure.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was being
> mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
>
>
> What more proof of failure do you need?
That’s kind like saying the when the life boats where launched the Titanic was still 75% above the water still thousands died. PROOF launching the life boats was a failure.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Leaf
()
Date: July 06, 2011 11:22AM
DETROIT — In the ongoing sales battle between high-profile plug-in cars, the Nissan Leaf sprinted past the Chevrolet Volt in the first half, with the Japanese nameplate outselling its American rival, 3,875 units to 2,745.
The Leaf tally in the U.S. included 1,708 sales in June. In comparison, Chevy dealers sold 561 Volts in June. Through May, Volt had led Leaf in year-to-date sales, but fell back in June.
Before tax breaks and other incentives, the manufacturer's suggested retail price on the Leaf is $33,630, including an $850 shipping charge, compared with $41,000 for the Volt, including a $720 shipping charge.
The two marquee competitors are not identical, from a hardware standpoint. While the Leaf is a pure electric vehicle, with a range between charges of around 75 miles, the Volt is a so-called extended-range electric vehicle — in other words, a hybrid, with an electric motors and a gasoline engine that acts as a generator and occasionally a secondary power source when the battery charge is depleted.
Both Nissan and General Motors have billions of dollars riding on the success of their plug-in vehicles. But they will also be joined soon in the U.S. by a raft of competitors, including new plug-in models from Toyota, Honda, Mitsubishi, Ford and Daimler, among others.
Inside Line says: Chevy has shaved the Volt's standard equipment list and reduced the MSRP by $1,000 for model year 2012. Let's see if it makes a difference in the sales race with Leaf.
The Leaf tally in the U.S. included 1,708 sales in June. In comparison, Chevy dealers sold 561 Volts in June. Through May, Volt had led Leaf in year-to-date sales, but fell back in June.
Before tax breaks and other incentives, the manufacturer's suggested retail price on the Leaf is $33,630, including an $850 shipping charge, compared with $41,000 for the Volt, including a $720 shipping charge.
The two marquee competitors are not identical, from a hardware standpoint. While the Leaf is a pure electric vehicle, with a range between charges of around 75 miles, the Volt is a so-called extended-range electric vehicle — in other words, a hybrid, with an electric motors and a gasoline engine that acts as a generator and occasionally a secondary power source when the battery charge is depleted.
Both Nissan and General Motors have billions of dollars riding on the success of their plug-in vehicles. But they will also be joined soon in the U.S. by a raft of competitors, including new plug-in models from Toyota, Honda, Mitsubishi, Ford and Daimler, among others.
Inside Line says: Chevy has shaved the Volt's standard equipment list and reduced the MSRP by $1,000 for model year 2012. Let's see if it makes a difference in the sales race with Leaf.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
duh hur
()
Date: July 06, 2011 11:25AM
huhhnotmakesense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was
> being
> > mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
> >
> >
> > What more proof of failure do you need?
>
>
> That’s kind like saying the when the life boats
> where launched the Titanic was still 75% above the
> water still thousands died. PROOF launching the
> life boats was a failure.
If MORE people had died as a result of launching the lifeboats, then your analogy would be correct. As it stands now, you are just stoopid.
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was
> being
> > mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
> >
> >
> > What more proof of failure do you need?
>
>
> That’s kind like saying the when the life boats
> where launched the Titanic was still 75% above the
> water still thousands died. PROOF launching the
> life boats was a failure.
If MORE people had died as a result of launching the lifeboats, then your analogy would be correct. As it stands now, you are just stoopid.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
SoylentGreen
()
Date: July 06, 2011 12:14PM
huhhnotmakesense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was
> being
> > mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
> >
> >
> > What more proof of failure do you need?
>
>
> That’s kind like saying the when the life boats
> where launched the Titanic was still 75% above the
> water still thousands died. PROOF launching the
> life boats was a failure.
I like your analogy but not for the reasons you posted it.
On the one side, you had a ship that didn't have enough lifeboats to handle everyone to begin with.......so half the people were dead when they left the dock. On the other side you had unlimited lifeboats but the crew used so many of them that by the time the ship was underwater, only 2.1 out of 14 million survived.
Yeah...2.1 million people lived..........but 11.2 million died. Sorta.
And each person that lived had $230+ thousand dollars which was spent on each of them.
Consider this, those "shovel ready jobs" are done. They weren't exactly reoccuring and accounted for in some future budget. Just like the lifeboats on the Titanic, one time use.
To further abuse your analogy, the Titanic was unsinkable. The Obama stimulas plan could not fail. And both did exactly what it was said they could not.
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Unemployment was 7.2% when the stimulus was
> being
> > mulled over. It is 9.1% now.
> >
> >
> > What more proof of failure do you need?
>
>
> That’s kind like saying the when the life boats
> where launched the Titanic was still 75% above the
> water still thousands died. PROOF launching the
> life boats was a failure.
I like your analogy but not for the reasons you posted it.
On the one side, you had a ship that didn't have enough lifeboats to handle everyone to begin with.......so half the people were dead when they left the dock. On the other side you had unlimited lifeboats but the crew used so many of them that by the time the ship was underwater, only 2.1 out of 14 million survived.
Yeah...2.1 million people lived..........but 11.2 million died. Sorta.
And each person that lived had $230+ thousand dollars which was spent on each of them.
Consider this, those "shovel ready jobs" are done. They weren't exactly reoccuring and accounted for in some future budget. Just like the lifeboats on the Titanic, one time use.
To further abuse your analogy, the Titanic was unsinkable. The Obama stimulas plan could not fail. And both did exactly what it was said they could not.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
Epic
()
Date: July 06, 2011 03:05PM
How do you figure the stimulus failed? It got business going again helped the US economy out the Bush devastation years.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
bring it.
()
Date: July 06, 2011 03:09PM
Epic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How do you figure the stimulus failed? It got
> business going again helped the US economy out the
> Bush devastation years.
1. Define what "business going again" means.
2. Point to one thing Bush did to cause "devestation."
No meaningless talking points. Point to something concrete (if you can).
-------------------------------------------------------
> How do you figure the stimulus failed? It got
> business going again helped the US economy out the
> Bush devastation years.
1. Define what "business going again" means.
2. Point to one thing Bush did to cause "devestation."
No meaningless talking points. Point to something concrete (if you can).
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
OhLordy
()
Date: July 06, 2011 03:17PM
bring it. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Epic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How do you figure the stimulus failed? It got
> > business going again helped the US economy out
> the
> > Bush devastation years.
>
> 1. Define what "business going again" means.
>
> 2. Point to one thing Bush did to cause
> "devestation."
>
>
> No meaningless talking points. Point to something
> concrete (if you can).
DEREGULATION you fuck tard!
-------------------------------------------------------
> Epic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How do you figure the stimulus failed? It got
> > business going again helped the US economy out
> the
> > Bush devastation years.
>
> 1. Define what "business going again" means.
>
> 2. Point to one thing Bush did to cause
> "devestation."
>
>
> No meaningless talking points. Point to something
> concrete (if you can).
DEREGULATION you fuck tard!
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
bring it.
()
Date: July 06, 2011 03:20PM
OhLordy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bring it. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Epic Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > How do you figure the stimulus failed? It
> got
> > > business going again helped the US economy
> out
> > the
> > > Bush devastation years.
> >
> > 1. Define what "business going again" means.
> >
> > 2. Point to one thing Bush did to cause
> > "devestation."
> >
> >
> > No meaningless talking points. Point to
> something
> > concrete (if you can).
>
> DEREGULATION you fuck tard!
What did he deregulate? Name one thing. I realize that is a popular and oft repeated talking point. Point to one thing that Bush deregulated that lead to the collapse.
-------------------------------------------------------
> bring it. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Epic Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > How do you figure the stimulus failed? It
> got
> > > business going again helped the US economy
> out
> > the
> > > Bush devastation years.
> >
> > 1. Define what "business going again" means.
> >
> > 2. Point to one thing Bush did to cause
> > "devestation."
> >
> >
> > No meaningless talking points. Point to
> something
> > concrete (if you can).
>
> DEREGULATION you fuck tard!
What did he deregulate? Name one thing. I realize that is a popular and oft repeated talking point. Point to one thing that Bush deregulated that lead to the collapse.
.
Posted by:
Alias
()
Date: July 06, 2011 08:02PM
.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 10:41PM by Alias.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 10:41PM by Alias.
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 07, 2011 08:47AM
You can blame Bush for the economy as far as not having the foresight to see it would go bust, but it stops about there. There were modest attempts by Bush to rein in Freddie and Fannie, but they were all resisted by Democrats like Barney Frank. Democrats ALWAYS "protect the little guy", you know...
I'm a partisan motherfucker, but I honestly can't blame any one party for the housing bust. I blame the lenders to a degree, but at the end of the day there were a shitload of absolutely retarded borrowers of all political stripes and economic status who bit off way more than they could chew because of the dollar signs in their eyes. Wall Street was bad, Fannie and Freddie bad, the CRA bad- but as bad as these things were, there would have been no implosion had people borrowed sensibly.
When Obumass blames Bush for the economy he "inherited", ask yourself what Obama was doing in the Senate as the economy collapse and what kind of fiscal or financial bills he was backing.
The answer we all know is- NONE. He's just continuing to deflect from the clear fact that today he is in way, way over his head.
I'm a partisan motherfucker, but I honestly can't blame any one party for the housing bust. I blame the lenders to a degree, but at the end of the day there were a shitload of absolutely retarded borrowers of all political stripes and economic status who bit off way more than they could chew because of the dollar signs in their eyes. Wall Street was bad, Fannie and Freddie bad, the CRA bad- but as bad as these things were, there would have been no implosion had people borrowed sensibly.
When Obumass blames Bush for the economy he "inherited", ask yourself what Obama was doing in the Senate as the economy collapse and what kind of fiscal or financial bills he was backing.
The answer we all know is- NONE. He's just continuing to deflect from the clear fact that today he is in way, way over his head.
idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam
Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.
Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM
Re: Obama Economists: "Stimulus Cost $278K Per Job"
Posted by:
slubdawg
()
Date: July 07, 2011 09:53AM
4 more indeed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those are just the jobs directly created/saved.
> With those salaries those people spent money,
> created more jobs, more tax revenues. We need
> more stimulus money now. Give some that money
> millionaires are just socking away and spend it
> for useful infratstructure improvements. Bypass
> Republican State Governors and award federal
> contracts, Civilian Conservation Corps jobs...real
> jobs, not McDOnalds jobs, not Godfather Pizza
> jobs!
I'm not nearly as smart as nearly everyone else on here. So, can someone please tell me how to determine/calculate "jobs saved"? I mean, couldn't you say that if I buy a hamburger at McDonalds I've helped save a job? But then again, who knows. Maybe the manager decides his store can function without another fry cook, or something so my purchase at McDonalds might not have any bearing at all.
the use of the pharse "jobs created or saved" is entirely new, the first time I recall hearing it was from something Joe Biden said.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those are just the jobs directly created/saved.
> With those salaries those people spent money,
> created more jobs, more tax revenues. We need
> more stimulus money now. Give some that money
> millionaires are just socking away and spend it
> for useful infratstructure improvements. Bypass
> Republican State Governors and award federal
> contracts, Civilian Conservation Corps jobs...real
> jobs, not McDOnalds jobs, not Godfather Pizza
> jobs!
I'm not nearly as smart as nearly everyone else on here. So, can someone please tell me how to determine/calculate "jobs saved"? I mean, couldn't you say that if I buy a hamburger at McDonalds I've helped save a job? But then again, who knows. Maybe the manager decides his store can function without another fry cook, or something so my purchase at McDonalds might not have any bearing at all.
the use of the pharse "jobs created or saved" is entirely new, the first time I recall hearing it was from something Joe Biden said.