Tag Archives: unemployment

MSNBC’s Chuck Todd Continues to Distort Tax Deal’s ‘Astronomical’ Cost

MSNBC's Chuck Todd on the December 7 “Daily Rundown” was uncharacteristically heated in his opposition to the compromise between President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans on extending the Bush tax rates. Interviewing a Treasury Department official, Todd used flawed statistics to malign the proposed two-year extension of tax breaks for all families as unacceptably expensive. “The cost of this is astronomical though,” proclaimed the NBC Political Director. “The payroll tax cut means essentially borrowing from the Social Security trust fund to do this temporary payroll tax. I mean, it's 120 billion, that's a lot of money!” [Video embedded after the page break.] read more

Read more from the original source:
MSNBC’s Chuck Todd Continues to Distort Tax Deal’s ‘Astronomical’ Cost

On Today: Matt Lauer Fails to Convince Republican to Go Obama’s Way and Raise Taxes

NBC's Matt Lauer, on Tuesday's Today show, invited on soon to be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor on to discuss today's meeting of Republican congressional leaders with Barack Obama, and in the process tried to force Cantor to move in the President's direction on raising taxes. The Today co-anchor opened the conversation by wondering if Cantor was going into the meeting in the mood for “compromise or confrontation” and then quickly brought up the issue of extending the Bush era tax cuts as he pressed: “Could you not see possibly raising taxes just a little bit?” on those making over $250,000 a year. Cantor responded that job growth and tax cuts were intertwined as he educated Lauer: “We want to make sure that we're doing everything to get people back to work right now and that means we've got to ensure that taxes don't go up on anybody, especially on the small businesses that we're expecting to create jobs so we can finally bring the unemployment down.” read more

Go here to see the original:
On Today: Matt Lauer Fails to Convince Republican to Go Obama’s Way and Raise Taxes

Within 3 Days of Each Other, AP’s Reported Unemployment Estimates Significantly Differ–for the Worse

In separate reports for the Associated Press during the past week, Christopher Rugaber and Jeannine Aversa, economics writers for the wire service, each dealt with estimates for next year's average unemployment rate. They came back with significantly different estimates for 2011 without recognizing how widely their reported estimates vary. On Tuesday , Rugaber dealt with the Federal Reserve's latest economic growth projections, in the process telling readers that the Fed expects that the unemployment rate “will be 8.9 percent to 9.1 percent in 2011.” On Friday , Aversa looked at three alternative proposals for handling next year's federal income tax rates, which will increase substantially for everyone unless Congress acts. The projected unemployment rates for next year under the three proposals are all either 9.9% or 10.0%. So the Fed thinks that unemployment will come down next year, while Aversa's consulted experts think it will go up slightly regardless of what Congress does or doesn't do about taxes. The one-point difference between the two sets of estimates represents about 1.5 million workers . That's not a small number. Did things suddenly get worse while the turkeys were cooking on Thursday? read more

See the original post:
Within 3 Days of Each Other, AP’s Reported Unemployment Estimates Significantly Differ–for the Worse

Ed Schultz Accuses Fox Biz Analyst of Recommending Cannibalism for Unemployed People

Ed Schultz on Tuesday falsely accused Fox Business Network contributor Charles Payne of recommending people on unemployment lines eat each other to survive. Such ironically occurred on the “Psycho Talk” segment of the “Ed Show” (videos follow with partial transcripts and commentary): read more

Read the original post:
Ed Schultz Accuses Fox Biz Analyst of Recommending Cannibalism for Unemployed People

Olbermann: FNC & Conservatives ‘Close to Playing w/ Its Own Poop,’ ‘Better Off’ if GOP Reps ‘Didn’t Live in This Country’

You Asked For It, You Got It (No Unemployment Extension)

Why are they complaining, they voted against the Dems and they expect the Republicans to extends their unemployment. And you still wonder why I think they will vote in Palin in 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/unemployment-extension added by: tverdell

Question for Paul Krugman: Are Things Better Today Than In January 2007?

A recurring theme from liberal media members as we approach the midterm elections is that Americans have to vote for Democrats in November so the nation doesn’t go back to the way things were when Republicans ran everything. A perfect example is New York Times columnist Paul Krugman who on Friday penned a piece called “Downhill With the G.O.P.”: Never mind the war on terror, the party’s main concern seems to be the war on arithmetic. And this party has a better than even chance of retaking at least one house of Congress this November. Banana republic, here we come. In the midst of all this ” Do you really want to go back to those days ” talk is a staggering ignorance concerning how ” those days ” compare to now: In January 2007 before the Democrats took over Congress, unemployment was 4.6 percent; now it’s 9.6 percent. In January 2007 there were 7.1 million unemployed people in America; now there are 14.9 million. In January 2007 the median home price was $210,600; today it’s $179,300. In January 2007 the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 12,500; today it’s at 10,840. In January 2007 the gross federal debt was $9 trillion; today it’s $13.5 trillion. The poverty rate in 2006 was 12.3 percent; now it’s 14.3 percent In the final budget created by a GOP-controlled Congress, the deficit was $160 billion; now it’s $1.6 trillion. Add it all up and: there were half as many people out of work then; houses were worth 17 percent more; stocks were 16 percent higher; the federal debt was 33 percent lower; poverty was 14 percent lower, and; the deficit was 90 percent lower!  As such, I ask Mr. Krugman and all liberal media members stumping for Democrats: is America really better off today than it was in January 2007? If so, how ?

Excerpt from:
Question for Paul Krugman: Are Things Better Today Than In January 2007?

AP-GfK Poll Report Concentrates on Voters’ Emotions, Avoids Dem-Unfriendly Findings

So what’s more important: The fact that independents are as “upset” as Republicans, or that Americans’ disapproval of how President Obama is handling the economy is at an all-time high? Here’s another priority-related question: Is it more important that “independents and Republicans were half as likely as Democrats to be inspired and less prone to be hopeful, excited and proud,” or that Republicans are now more trusted than Democrats in handling the economy, representing a 10-point swing (from -5% to +5%) in just three months? If you’re the Associated Press’s Alan Fram and Jennifer Agiesta reporting on your own poll — an AP-GfK poll found in full at this link (click on “September 8th – September 13th 2010 – AP-GfK Poll Topline” when you get there) — you would apparently say that the first alternatives in each question are more important, even though terms like “upset,” hopeful,” excited,” and “proud” are subjective, and the items that trigger these emotions will vary widely among survey respondents. Why, if I didn’t know better (I think I do), I’d say that Agiesta and Fram filtered out the worst of the bad news for Democrats in favor of the touchy-feely stuff. Here are several paragraphs from the AP pair’s report : AP-GfK Poll: Independents as upset as Republicans More bad news for Democrats clinging to control of Congress: Independent voters are nearly as grumpy as Republicans about politics this year. In an Associated Press-GfK Poll this month, 58 percent of independents and 60 percent of Republicans said politics is making them angry, compared with 31 percent of Democrats who said so. About 7 in 10 independents and Republicans were disgusted, compared with 4 in 10 Democrats, and independents and Republicans were likelier than Democrats to be disappointed, depressed and frustrated. As for positive emotions, independents and Republicans were half as likely as Democrats to be inspired and less prone to be hopeful, excited and proud. The figures are the latest cautionary note for Democrats, who face a Nov. 2 Election Day in which the sluggish economy and President Barack Obama’s tepid popularity give Republicans a strong chance to capture control of the House and perhaps the Senate. They also help explain why independents, who can be pivotal in many congressional races, prefer their GOP candidate over the Democrat by 52 percent to 36 percent – which grows to 62 percent to 29 percent among independents considered likeliest to vote. Well, I guess we should give the two reporters credit for finally getting to something substantive at the end of the fourth paragraph — by which time a number of readers will have tired of the focus on emotions. Now let’s look at some of the meat Fram and Agiesta chose to ignore. By a margin of 58-42, respondents disapproved of how President Obama is handling the economy: As you can see, that’s up from a virtual tie just six months ago. By that same 58-42 margin, respondents disapproved of the president’s handling of unemployment, an 18-point swing from six months ago: Perhaps most damning, the majority of those polled who say that Obama “understands the problems of ordinary Americans” is the narrowest ever, and miles lower than it was at the beginning of the year: My guess, based on the timing presented as to when the question has been asked, is that AP-GfK was hoping for a better September result than they got. After inexplicably narrowing in August, respondents’ net unfavorable impression of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is 23 points: This would seem to explain why congressional candidates are running away from her . Voters should remember that ” Dems Deserve No Distance ” from Pelosi, Obama, or Harry Reid if they are up for reelection and voted for one of the following: the failed stimulus plan, cap and trade, or ObamaCare. Finally, Republicans have gained the upper hand in respondents’ trust on handling the economy for the first time since Obama has been president: Each one of the five findings I presented is far more important than the deep dive the poll took into nebulous emotions. Readers will surely find several others that would also qualify as more important if they go to the complete poll. Tellingly in my view, the poll presents no prior information on respondents’ emotions other than for “happy.” I believe that the September poll was the first time most emotion-related questions were asked — which is further evidence that the AP and GfK were looking for any kind of polling “news” that would give them an excuse for not delivering the data readers have a right to expect. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

See the rest here:
AP-GfK Poll Report Concentrates on Voters’ Emotions, Avoids Dem-Unfriendly Findings

The View’s Hasselbeck Pummels Valerie Jarrett on Economy; Liberal Co-hosts Repeatedly Change Subject

Interviewing White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett yesterday, The View’s liberal co-hosts repelled Elisabeth Hasslebeck’s tough questions on President Obama’s failed economic agenda by changing the subject and ignoring their conservative colleague’s criticism. Refuting the claim that the economy is “certainly moving in the right direction” despite dismal unemployment numbers, Hasselbeck asked Jarrett if Obama’s $50 billion infrastructure bill represents an “admittance of failure on the $800 billion stimulus bill that didn’t seem to work.” To sidestep Hasselbeck’s question, Jarrett invoked incredulity, flawed statistics, and historical revisionism: Didn’t seem to work? My goodness, to the three million people who have jobs today – to their families – I’d say it did work. Now it turned out that the economy was in far worse shape than anyone could have predicted, and so we’re not out of the hole yet, but those three million families are certainly better off. The millions of families whose jobs were saved as a result of our investment in the automotive industry, all of the small businesses. “If [the stimulus package] worked so well you wouldn’t need the $50 billion,” retorted Hasselbeck, pressing Jarrett to answer her original question. But instead of waiting for Jarrett to respond, co-host Joy Behar changed the subject to the auto bailout: “I don’t hear enough from the Democrats tooting their own horn on that one.” Delighted to be bailed out of answering a tough question, Jarrett gushed, “Help us tout it, you’re absolutely right. Not just GM, but Chrysler and Ford – all three of them are now having profits for the first time in a decade, they’re all doing well. And that’s a result of the steps [Obama] took.” And before Hasselbeck could repeat her question, co-host Sherri Shepherd changed topics again:  “I want to move it around a little bit and ask about you.” A few minutes later, after Jarrett and her liberal allies exchanged playful banter about family trips to Chuck E. Cheese and her longtime friendship with the Obamas, Hasselbeck made one last attempt to hold the Obama confidant accountable: “I think there’s trouble now that’s to be had or else we wouldn’t need to spend another $50 billion if the plan had worked.” This time, co-hosts Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters jumped to Jarrett’s defense. “We could go on and on,” contended Goldberg. “We could go on and on,” echoed Walters, who proceeded to end the interview. A transcript of the relevant portions of the September 13 “The View” can be found below: ABC The View September 13, 2010 11:38 A.M. E.S.T. JOY BEHAR: He’s criticized a lot for not focusing on jobs. He focused on health insurance. Does he regret that he didn’t do it the other way around? VALERIE JARRETT, White House senior adviser: Well, let me say this: don’t you think it’s important to have a president who can multi-task? BEHAR: Yes. JARRETT: And so he did focus on the economy from day one and if you think about it, Joy, when he took office we were losing over 750,000 jobs every single month, four million jobs in the last six months of the Bush administration. And half of the last eight months we’ve seen private sector growth. Unemployment rate is still too high – you’re right, Elisabeth, it’s not nearly where we would want it to be – we won’t be happy until every single American who wants to work is working. But we are certainly moving in the right direction and it was a terrible condition that he inherited. I mean, think about. ELISABETH HASSELBECK: If I could, on that note, Valerie, because I think it’s important. With the new $50 billion infrastructure bill that the president outlined Friday, correct? JARRETT: Last week, yes. HASSELBECK: Some people are calling that an admittance of failure on the $800 billion stimulus bill that didn’t seem to work. JARRETT: Didn’t seem to work? My goodness, to the three million people who have jobs today – to their families – I’d say it did work. Now it turned out that the economy was in far worse shape than anyone could have predicted, and so we’re not out of the hole yet, but those three million families are certainly better off. The millions of families whose jobs were saved as a result of our investment in the automotive industry. All of the small businesses. HASSELBECK: If it worked so well you wouldn’t need the $50 billion. BEHAR: I don’t hear enough from the Democrats tooting their own horn on that one. JARRETT: Help us tout it, you’re absolutely right. BARBARA WALTERS: The president has talked about it. JARRETT: Not just GM, but Chrysler and Ford – all three of them are now having profits for the first time in a decade, they’re all doing well. And that’s a result of the steps he took. SHERRI SHEPHERD: I want to move it around a little bit and ask about you. You had a really interesting background. You were born in Iran, you lived in Iran for five years, then you lived in London for one year, then you came back. You said while you were out there you had no awareness of race until you came back during the 60s, during the civil rights movement. So when you were back here, what kinds of things did you experience in terms of race? 11:43 A.M. E.S.T. WALTERS: What do you call him? SHEPHERD: When you’re at Chuck E. Cheese? JARRETT: I’ve had my share of Chuck E. Cheese. It’s wonderful when you’ve got a five year old. No but when I’m out of the office and I’m just being his friend I call him Barack, but when I’m in the office I call him Mr. President. BEHAR: You’ve known him a long time and I understand he’s never gotten angry with you – you’ve never seen him get angry. A lot of people would like to see that now. We want to see it. HASSELBECK: We’d just like to see jobs. Not anger, results. JARRETT: Well I think it’s important that we have a president with a solid, steady temper. BEHAR: Absolutely true. JARRETT: Particularly during these difficult times. Don’t you think that’s important? It’s important and, you know, I don’t want a president just being, you know, emotional and sounding off. He has too much responsibility and too much power for that, but I also think last week as we’re going into this election season you’re seeing him make some contrasts between kind of the party that wants to go back to the Bush days that got us into all of this trouble – sorry Elisabeth – that we’re in now. HASSELBECK: I think there’s trouble now that’s to be had or else we wouldn’t need to spend another $50 billion if the plan had worked. WHOOPI GOLDBERG: We could go on and on. WALTERS: We could go on and on. And we’ll ask you to come back with us and we can go on and on. I’m sure the president’s very happy that you’re going to remain in your present position. JARRETT: Thank you very much. Thank you. WALTERS: And we want to thank Valerie Jarrett so much. It’s an honor for us to have you on with us, great pleasure.

More:
The View’s Hasselbeck Pummels Valerie Jarrett on Economy; Liberal Co-hosts Repeatedly Change Subject

Mark Shields: Obama Created More Jobs In 2010 Than Bush Did In Eight Years

Mark Shields on Friday demonstrated just how far a liberal media member is willing to go to support President Obama and the Democrat Party. Appearing on PBS’s “Inside Washington,” Shields actually made the case that despite a 9.6 percent unemployment rate, and growing fears of a double dip recession, Americans should be uplifted by the fact that more private sector jobs have been created this year than during the entire Bush administration. Showing just how adept he is at repeating Democrat talking points, Shields even said this with a straight face (video follows with transcript and commentary):  MARK SHIELDS: I think the President’s task right now is compared to the situation the nation is comparable to a subway train that has stopped suddenly between two scheduled stops and the lights go out. And what the American people are looking for just as the passengers on that train are looking for is a voice that comes on and says, “This is what happened, this is what’s being done about it, and this when we are going to get out.” And, I mean, just the simple fact that more jobs in the private sector have been created in this year, 2010, this terrible year, then were created in the eight years of George W. Bush’s administration is something to think about and to mention. To paraphrase Hillary Clinton, any American buying this nonsense would have to have a willing suspension of disbelief. After all, when Obama took over the White House, the unemployment rate was 7.7 percent. There are now almost three million more Americans out of work than when the 44th President was sworn in. As for the private sector, it has shed over 3 million workers since January 2009. Does Shields really believe the 763,000 employees added to such payrolls in the past eight months is something to brag about given that with population and labor force growth, the economy has to produce at least 150,000 jobs a month just to keep the unemployment rate from rising? Or is it necessary for the most highly-skilled liberal shills to ignore such facts when they’re inconvenient? 

Read more:
Mark Shields: Obama Created More Jobs In 2010 Than Bush Did In Eight Years