Month: December 2010

Re: Several of The Big Lies

dont-bs-me-bro:

Sorry, you are free to believe what you like, but this graph proves none of that, because it only goes back to Jan. 2010. It ignores the first 11 months of Obama’s adminstration, and seasonal changes in employment from quarter to quarter, year over year. It simply is not possible to examine just the most recent 11 months of data and draw any kind of big picture conclusions about the economy.

People choose cutoff points in graphs for a reason, to amplify the message they are trying to send. Let’s see some graphs that go back to 2007, or even earlier, for some context, and then we can debate facts about the economy.

So that takes care of (A) and (B). 

Or, not. Does this graph go back far enough for you? Total non-farm jobs under Bush and Obama:

Same conclusion: The United States under Obama is creating jobs. Period. Fewer than desirable, but job creation nonetheless.

You continue:

As for ©, of course government-funded jobs are not real jobs, because we have to fund them. This distinction causes confusion among those who don’t understand the difference between “real” jobs and government, taxpayer-funded jobs.

A real job is created when a private citizen or business dips into its own assets, or takes out a loan, to hire a person.

This is unadulterated horse-shit. A job is a job. A person is hired to perform a task in exchange for money. Period. They are jobs every bit as real as any other. They transfer money, also just as real, directly into the broader economy. That money spurs a larger overall economy. More people are hired. Lather, rinse, repeat: the Federal Government gradually reduces support as the private markets recover and can employ more people. I’m not sure why this is remarkably hard to understand other than the fact that it demonstrably works (see original three-part graph) and yet is incompatible with a worldview that states that no action of government, large or small, can be for the betterment of society. Ever.
All that aside, though, it is indisputably true that federal/state/local government employment has been distinctly reduced under Obama. Perhaps this graph has a sufficient time scale to pass your ever-so-sensitive BS detector?

That’s government employment relative to population. While the government did indeed get a lot bigger under such noted socialists as DD Eisenhower, it has since shown no trend at all relative to population. There at the very end, under Obama, you’ll note both the census spike and a distinct downward slide.

But, feel free to believe whatever nonsense you are being peddled. These are just the rather inconvenient facts.

Me Talk Presidential

Great inside tale from Matt Latimer, a former Bush speechwriter, set in and around the time what ultimately became TARP took shape:

When White House press secretary Dana Perino was told that 77 percent of the country thought we were on the wrong track, she said what I was thinking: “Who on earth is in the other 23 percent?” I knew who they were—the same people supporting the John McCain campaign.

Me Talk Presidential

Several of The Big Lies put to, er, lie in one graph.

A) “No jobs have been created in the Obama administration, stimulus or otherwise,” unless, that is, you count all those jobs that have been created. Fewer than necessary to be sure, but indisputably there are jobs being created and tasks done in exchange for money.

B) “Government has exploded in the Obama administration” unless, of course, you exclude temporary census workers or set utterly arbitrary start/end dates to capture peak census-hiring (but not their subsequent and prompt return to zero). In fact, line 3 clearly shows government has indeed gotten smaller (as measured by employment) under Obama. This also holds as a percent of GDP, but that’s another graph.

C) “Government-funded jobs aren’t ‘jobs’ at all,” until you start to think about that line being parallel to the private jobs line, and where that, collectively, would put the overall employment line relative to population growth.
I mean, if you’re going to do crazy things like employ people by funding and then building infrastructure projects until the economy recovers, and then count those people as actually employed, well, then I think we know you’re a dirty fucking hippy who needs to shut the fuck up and worry a lot more about the bond vigilantes who are going to show up any day now to get 10-year bond interest rates up way, way above 2%, you can be sure. So there. Any. Day. Now.

…nobody, and I mean nobody, in a position of influence within the GOP cares about deficits when tax cuts for the affluent are on the line. Deficit hawkery is just a stick with which to beat down social programs.

Paul Krugman, reacting to the shocking news that the rising GOP House Majority will be moving to change the rules in ways “clearly designed to pave the way for more deficit-increasing tax cuts in the next two years. These rules stand in sharp contrast to the strong anti-deficit rhetoric that many Republicans used on the campaign trail this fall […] these new rules […] could have a substantial impact and risk making the nation’s fiscal problems significantly worse.”
As Krugman says: these guys don’t care about the deficit, now or ever. They simply use concern to whip up anger against then-as-now non-existent “Cadillac Queens of Welfare” and whatnot such that ever more wealth can be transferred to the richest of the rich. And rest assured: they won’t be satisfied until they have it all. It’s what is going on in corporate America, and it’s what is going in political America. Well, such as the two spheres are even distinguishable anymore it’s what’s going on…

Behold: Totally Awesome Criticism

Excellent analysis from Dave von Ebers of the Obama administration’s continuation of the wrongheaded indefinite detention policies that concludes thusly:

Obama is wrong to continue the Bush policy of indefinite detention of Guantánamo detainees, and the Executive Order we’re about to see will exacerbate, not solve, that problem. I disagree – vehemently, even – with what the President’s doing here.

Behold: Totally Awesome Criticism

Net Neutrality

Can’t wait for this exciting future to become a reality:

The idea? Make it possible for your wireless provider to monitor everything you do online and charge you extra for using Facebook, Skype or Netflix. For instance, in the seventh slide of the above PowerPoint, a Vodafone user would be charged two cents per MB for using Facebook, three euros a month to use Skype and $0.50 monthly for a speed-limited version of YouTube. But traffic to Vodafone’s services would be free, allowing the mobile carrier to create video services that could undercut NetFlix on price.

So, we’ll have carrier-installed apps that you can’t delete and that you can’t bypass via web or other applications. Neat.
If you think for one second Comcast/Xfinity and the rest aren’t also looking to do exactly this, then you haven’t been paying much attention.

Please do let your members of Congress know just how awful you think this outcome would be; maybe also mention that our high speed internet infrastructure is now falling behind such stalwarts as Romania. They might want to look into that before handing over the keys to the kingdom to the very same buffoons.
And, of course, be sure to wish him or her all the best in the upcoming Rigors of Festivus or other patriotic year end celebratory spectations.

Net Neutrality

There’s much for them to be angst-ridden about. If they think it’s bad now, wait ‘til next year.

Mitch McConnell, never one to beat around the bush, describing the prospects for bipartisan comity in the Senate in the next Congress.
I’m sure we’ll all be very sick of the media pushback against what is clearly pure partisan politics, precisely what the 93% of the public says it is sick of. I imagine the firestorm will ultimately force McConnell to give a tearful retraction somewhere around 5pm EST today. So clear your calendars.
But, by all means Democrats, keep handing over hostages.

Respectable Buisinessmen’s Club

Haley Barbour (R. Gov MS): You heard of the Citizens Councils? Up north they think it was like the KKK. Where I come from it was an organization of town leaders.
Citizens Council: The Citizens’ Council is the South’s answer to the mongrelizers. We will not be integrated. We are proud of our white blood and our white heritage of sixty centuries.