Obama promises more than 600,000 stim...

Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

There are 109491 comments on the Newsday story from Jun 8, 2009, titled Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs. In it, Newsday reports that:

President Barack Obama promised Monday to deliver more than 600,000 jobs through his $787 billion stimulus plan this summer, with federal agencies pumping billions into public works projects, schools and summer youth programs.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

“Go Ahead Liberal, Make My Day”

Since: Dec 07

Florida...home of Trump

#118016 Nov 6, 2012
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Did somebody step on a duck?
and tell the cook this is low-grade dog food

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#118017 Nov 6, 2012
Pittakos wrote:
<quoted text>
Even in the "strong" countries, their standard of living is lower than ours. I've lived in France. I have in-laws over there and I get over often enough to know what socialism has done to their country. There just comes a point when Peter has been robbed too much to so that Paul can be more equal. You've mentioned social security and medicare but the difference there is that the beneficiaries mostly also paid into those systems. However, when we start taking and taking so that we can just give it away to others who contributed nothing, then you start to have a collapse. That is the situation the "strong countries" in Europe are finding themselves. It is the road that liberals are trying to march us down in this country now.
"Who" has a lower standard of living. France has a much larger middle class than the US does. So does Germany and many of the others. I owld say thhat there top has a lower standard of living, but their middle and bottom do not.

What problems do the Germans or French have that are worse than our own? We spend $10 more on defence, they spend $10 more on their people. How does that play differently to their taxation and payout system?

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#118018 Nov 6, 2012
Pittakos wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it is taking place and if left alone without excessive regulations and taxation, it will flourish.
Incomes at the top have gone up over the last 30 years, not those in the middle or bottom. In order to keep up, the bottom and middle borrowed more to take the place of the non-existent pay raises.

Since the collapse, the top has made it back, the bottom and middle have not.

What evidence do you have that sufficient wealth redistribution is taking place? The evidence is ample that it is not.
Celestine Prophets
#118019 Nov 6, 2012
that include payers of child support????

“Forward - over the cliff!!”

Since: Jul 10

Soetoro, Kenya

#118020 Nov 7, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Incomes at the top have gone up over the last 30 years, not those in the middle or bottom. In order to keep up, the bottom and middle borrowed more to take the place of the non-existent pay raises.
Since the collapse, the top has made it back, the bottom and middle have not.
What evidence do you have that sufficient wealth redistribution is taking place? The evidence is ample that it is not.
what evidence do you have that the role of the federal government is to redistribute? where in the constitution do you find that?

How much redistribution do you think is sufficient, btw? Until everyone has exactly the same stuff (except the enlightened rulers like Obama, Cuomo, Schumer, etc.)?

And how, in your analysis, will resdistribution create greater economic growth?

Now that the people have spoken, and President Axelrod's cynical strategy of class- and racial-warfare have again proven effective, we can expect high unemployment to continue, taxes to skyrocket, and the debt to rise to over $20 trillion. Obama will have doubled the national debt in only 8 years. It took over 200 years to take it to $10 billion, and the Stooge will double it in 8. Now that's "change you can believe in."

BTW: How do you think that $20 trillion should be redistributed? Or should the "rich" just pay it?

America is in real trouble. We can just blame it all on Bush.
CrimeaRiver

UK

#118021 Nov 7, 2012
Pfluger the Union Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
what evidence do you have that the role of the federal government is to redistribute? where in the constitution do you find that?
How much redistribution do you think is sufficient, btw? Until everyone has exactly the same stuff (except the enlightened rulers like Obama, Cuomo, Schumer, etc.)?
And how, in your analysis, will resdistribution create greater economic growth?
Now that the people have spoken, and President Axelrod's cynical strategy of class- and racial-warfare have again proven effective, we can expect high unemployment to continue, taxes to skyrocket, and the debt to rise to over $20 trillion. Obama will have doubled the national debt in only 8 years. It took over 200 years to take it to $10 billion, and the Stooge will double it in 8. Now that's "change you can believe in."
BTW: How do you think that $20 trillion should be redistributed? Or should the "rich" just pay it?
America is in real trouble. We can just blame it all on Bush.
The role of the federal govt is surely to look after its people. Its not written in the constitution but democracy is. And democracy means people have their sayÖÖ so the people have spoken and chosen Obama. You do believe in democracy donít you? you fight enough wars to force it on others.
Redistribution stimulates growth in a very simple way, if people have more money to spend then this in turn creates greater demand for goods and services, which in turn creates jobs, which in turn creates growth, more employment means more people with disposable incomes, which means people have more money to spend etc etc etc.
Thatís the capitalist model you have sold to the world so itís a bit rich to now question its merits.
National debt did not rise to such preposterous levels under Obama, it was already well on its way.
For a country that is supposedly a beacon of democratic and political enlightenment, the American people are presenting themselves as increasingly ignorant.

Since: Apr 12

Englewood, CO

#118024 Nov 7, 2012
Guinness Drinker wrote:
<quoted text>
and tell the cook this is low-grade dog food
I bet you were somerhing before electricity..

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#118025 Nov 7, 2012
Pfluger the Union Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
what evidence do you have that the role of the federal government is to redistribute? where in the constitution do you find that?
How much redistribution do you think is sufficient, btw? Until everyone has exactly the same stuff (except the enlightened rulers like Obama, Cuomo, Schumer, etc.)?
And how, in your analysis, will resdistribution create greater economic growth?
Now that the people have spoken, and President Axelrod's cynical strategy of class- and racial-warfare have again proven effective, we can expect high unemployment to continue, taxes to skyrocket, and the debt to rise to over $20 trillion. Obama will have doubled the national debt in only 8 years. It took over 200 years to take it to $10 billion, and the Stooge will double it in 8. Now that's "change you can believe in."
BTW: How do you think that $20 trillion should be redistributed? Or should the "rich" just pay it?
America is in real trouble. We can just blame it all on Bush.
It is impossible not to redistribute when you tax. It is inherit in taxation. Your inability to think through things like this is one reason Republicans loat the election.....for the PResidency, the Senate and the House.

Rediostribution should occur until the economy is healthy and vibrant with lots of creativity and the middle class is large and living well again.

Look at my second sentence. An economy based on consumption works best when people spend money. The middle class is largely out of money....those that still have jobs that is. Redistribution, preferably through higher wages and more jobs would put money in the hands of the middle class where it will be spent.

How is it class warfare to talk of the need to redistribute wealth and you think it is not class warfare to support policies which allow wealth to accumulate at the top and not encourage redistribution?

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#118026 Nov 7, 2012
CrimeaRiver wrote:
<quoted text>
.....For a country that is supposedly a beacon of democratic and political enlightenment, the American people are presenting themselves as increasingly ignorant.
Not the American people, just Republicans in general.
CrimeaRiver

UK

#118028 Nov 7, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not the American people, just Republicans in general.
Agreed, sorry to have made such a generalisation.

I'm in the UK but couldn't help being drawn into the whole election because of the incessant coverage by UK media outlets.

I don't know if republicans were made to look ignorant or if most of them really believe the crap they come out with.

Their singular goal of ousting Obama from the White house bordered on treasonous. It was ignorant at best and downright intolerant at worst. They seem to spend so much time and energy berating this man's ability to run a country rather than give him any support.

Looking in from the outside, it was quite an eye opener.

If America is losing its way, its because extreme right-wing republicans have too much say. I think the right man won and i wish him the best of luck.
Say the Truth

Ann Arbor, MI

#118029 Nov 7, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Who" has a lower standard of living. France has a much larger middle class than the US does. So does Germany and many of the others. I owld say thhat there top has a lower standard of living, but their middle and bottom do not.
What problems do the Germans or French have that are worse than our own? We spend $10 more on defence, they spend $10 more on their people. How does that play differently to their taxation and payout system?
Any country under our "protection" should pay. Trump is right about that.

BTW, compare and contrast the population of Germany, France, and the USA. Show all work.
Funny how you spelled "defense", eh?
Say the Truth

Ann Arbor, MI

#118030 Nov 7, 2012
Son of SickNTired wrote:
<quoted text>
I bet you were somerhing before electricity..
Now I know why tigers eat their young.
About Time

New York, NY

#118031 Nov 7, 2012
Where are the Republican posts? Oh, that's right, their candidate lost! Looking forward for the next 4 years of posts where the Republicans posters attempt to say the country is in freefall, redistribution is awful ect, ect, ect.

Here's some free advice for Republicans: FIND A CANDIDATE THAT RESONATES TO THE HISPANICS. They're going to be the X factor in the 2016 race. More so than any other voting block in the country. More than the woman & the youth vote.

This was a winnable election for the Republicans. Obama's approval numbers were trending in the high 30's-low 40's for most of the campaign season along with huge negatives on the economy. Yet they couldn't deliver a candidate that spoke to the concerns of the median income earners. Instead, they nominated a candidate that has an investment portfolio that earns a minimum of $14 million per annum. A huge disconnect along with a weak field operations in VA, FL & PA to get out the vote.

The biggest benefactor from last night? Hilary
Rodham Clinton. She just received a very soft landing for the 2016 Democratic nomination with a huge assist from her husband. You think he made that speech at the convention to help Obama? PLEASE. A clear succession was orchestrated last night.

It was there for the taking Republicans. You have 4 years to cultivate a candidate. Your work starts today.

Since: Apr 12

Englewood, CO

#118032 Nov 7, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is impossible not to redistribute when you tax. It is inherit in taxation. Your inability to think through things like this is one reason Republicans loat the election.....for the PResidency, the Senate and the House.
Rediostribution should occur until the economy is healthy and vibrant with lots of creativity and the middle class is large and living well again.
Look at my second sentence. An economy based on consumption works best when people spend money. The middle class is largely out of money....those that still have jobs that is. Redistribution, preferably through higher wages and more jobs would put money in the hands of the middle class where it will be spent.
How is it class warfare to talk of the need to redistribute wealth and you think it is not class warfare to support policies which allow wealth to accumulate at the top and not encourage redistribution?
Damn dude. You make way too much sense. Most of these sheep have no idea what you are saying, but Rush and Sean say that you are a bad person for thinking this way. But it doesn't take a lot of high level thought to see the complete logic.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#118033 Nov 7, 2012
thats ok we still run the house and ur buddie wont get crap passed so suffer
John Brown

De Forest, WI

#118034 Nov 7, 2012
I told you all along but you didnt listen... I had proof he was going to win and that they already knew it...

Since: Apr 12

Englewood, CO

#118036 Nov 7, 2012
olddogs1964 wrote:
thats ok we still run the house and ur buddie wont get crap passed so suffer
Yeah we all will.. Traitor. In 2 years we'll have the house too, so its all good... Then we'll see some real progress for a change. This country will be great again..
CrimeaRiver

UK

#118037 Nov 7, 2012
olddogs1964 wrote:
thats ok we still run the house and ur buddie wont get crap passed so suffer
I fear this will be the case, regardless of whether the policies are good or not!

“Forward - over the cliff!!”

Since: Jul 10

Soetoro, Kenya

#118038 Nov 7, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is impossible not to redistribute when you tax. It is inherit in taxation. Your inability to think through things like this is one reason Republicans loat the election.....for the PResidency, the Senate and the House.
Rediostribution should occur until the economy is healthy and vibrant with lots of creativity and the middle class is large and living well again.
Look at my second sentence. An economy based on consumption works best when people spend money. The middle class is largely out of money....those that still have jobs that is. R would put money in the hands of the middle class where it will be spent.
How is it class warfare to talk of the need to redistribute wealth and you think it is not class warfare to support policies which allow wealth to accumulate at the top and not encourage redistribution?
"Redistribution, preferably through higher wages and more jobs..." you say.
And you think a politician can create this how???? Maybe more stimulus?

“Forward - over the cliff!!”

Since: Jul 10

Soetoro, Kenya

#118039 Nov 7, 2012
CrimeaRiver wrote:
<quoted text>
The role of the federal govt is surely to look after its people. Its not written in the constitution but democracy is. And democracy means people have their sayÖÖ so the people have spoken and chosen Obama. You do believe in democracy donít you? you fight enough wars to force it on others.
Redistribution stimulates growth in a very simple way, if people have more money to spend then this in turn creates greater demand for goods and services, which in turn creates jobs, which in turn creates growth, more employment means more people with disposable incomes, which means people have more money to spend etc etc etc.
Thatís the capitalist model you have sold to the world so itís a bit rich to now question its merits.
National debt did not rise to such preposterous levels under Obama, it was already well on its way.
For a country that is supposedly a beacon of democratic and political enlightenment, the American people are presenting themselves as increasingly ignorant.
Federal debt was NOT "on its way." You fool. It rose PRECISELY because of federal spending under Obama.$1 trillion plus deficits for four years didn't simply occur, like a hurricane. Obama and Pelosi/Reid built that.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min No Surprize 1,536,728
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 42 min RACE 10,719
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 44 min RACE 3,649
Word (Dec '08) 46 min RACE 6,931
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 47 min RACE 1,004
Vets phony PTSd 1 hr geralimo 3
Kushner mixed business with pleasure 1 hr Swaggeras Ivanka 1

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages