More Obama Delusion: Record Unemployment

[Dan_77]

Considering we could double that just from our current military spending, I'd say that's a tall order.

Not at all. Close all foreign bases and keep our troops at home, for starters. It costs about $440,000 per day to run EACH of our active aircraft carriers, for example. Imagine the savings if we simply parked them in various harbors until needed. (Or don't imagine... $1.8 billion).

If you're not fighting wars of foreign intervention a military can be quite cheap.

[Nono]

It costs about $440,000 per day to run EACH of our active aircraft carriers.

Source? I'm certain that's a gross underestimate, as in a few missing zeros.

[Praxius]

I would like to add a little something to this statement here. Although Unemployment is at 9.8% Nationally on the Record, off the record you can assume that its more like 16%. The reasoning behind this is that not everybody who has lost there jobs due to layoff and such has decided to get another job or file for unemployment. People who are in the postion to by layed off and not work (whatever the situation) will not bother trying to find a new job because they do not feel like they can or even should bother looking for a new job or file for unemployment.

Actually allow me to be even more accurate:

Based on reports I have come accross with the US unemployment in past years (while Bush was still in power) many that have lost jobs do apply for unemployment..... but the kicker to why the % is so low is that because once their unemployment runs out, those people, regardless of their employment, are no longer registered as receiving Unemployment and taken off the list to be forgotten about until they get another job.

So in other words, there is a large amount of people who are out of work and no longer getting Unemployment or work who are not part of the overall unemployment equation..... thus the % seems low...... and 9.8% is in my opinion a skewed and unrealisitc number because of this factor.

The same thing occurs here in Canada, where a report not too long ago claimed the amount of people using Employment Insurance dropped by a large amount, thinking that many must be finding work now..... yet another report was quick to point out that right around that time where it dropped a lot would match up to when EI ends for most, a few months after many seeked EI on record amounts.

But in regards to the original topic of Obama and Unemployment..... does anybody here actually think all these people lost their jobs over night once he became President, or that he'd be able to fix 8-9 years + of damage in a few days?

A bit silly if you ask me.

Blame Obama..... it's all Obama's fault.

No, better yet:


Blame Canada!

When things don't go your way, you can always blindly blame someone else.

[Dan_77]

Source? I'm certain that's a gross underestimate, as in a few missing zeros.

Various sources in Google represent that each Nimitz-class carrier costs $160 million a year to run.

[Nono]

I simply can't believe it's that cheap. Think of what it would cost just to paint the thing, let alone feed and pay the crew, maintain the aircraft, and about ten thousand other things.

I bet they said "million" when they meant "billion".

[Century 25]

I find that highly doubtful. Do you have any reference?

Reagan was semi aware of what was going on around him. He was the perfect puppet.. just as the shrub was for 8 years. Except for one thing. W had a vendetta campaign against Saddam. That is why he went to Iraq rather than hunting bin laden down' in Afghanistan.. as he 'promised:

December 14, 2001 - USA Today

Bush pledges to get bin Laden, dead or alive

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush pledged anew Friday that Osama bin Laden will be taken "dead or alive," no matter how long it takes, amid indications that the suspected terrorist may be bottled up in a rugged Afghan canyon. The president, in an Oval Office meeting with Thailand's prime minister, would not predict the timing of bin Laden's capture but said he doesn't care how the suspect is brought to justice. "I don't care, dead or alive — either way," Bush said. "It doesn't matter to me."

The full item is here: USATODAY.com - Bush pledges to get bin Laden, dead or alive

As for Obama.. he has a.. 'learning curve' that he must go through. After all, who could imagine the total depth of the 'problems' we have ? There are some people that know how bad it is. His own people know plenty. Obama needs to get tough.. really tough. It will happen.

[The Black Ghost]

The state of the economy has little to do with the president--whether it be Bush or Obama. Specific projects like the bailout and the "cash for clunkers" are the only things that really have effected the economy.


To be honest, this is a recession. It isnt going to magically get better no matter who handles it. It is too soon to say if Obama's push towards the government intervention has helped or made things worse. Either way, the unemployment rate was going to rise no matter what Obama has done this year. What happens afterwards is up in the air.

[Century 25]

The state of the economy has little to do with the president--whether it be Bush or Obama. Specific projects like the bailout and the "cash for clunkers" are the only things that really have effected the economy.

The first president that discovered and very publicly acknowledged that he wasn't running the show was Eisenhower. And Kennedy aimed to rectify that.. after Ike told him that it was the military-industry monster that evolved during WWII.. and the cia were essentially 'fire starters' that would instigate 'conflicts' (notice - no more war-speak) that were guaranteed to generate plenty of work (and profit) for all concerned. JFK was just a man. He was bumped as easily as the mafia did their hits. Likewise, his bro RFK got hit.

To be honest, this is a recession. It isnt going to magically get better no matter who handles it. It is too soon to say if Obama's push towards the government intervention has helped or made things worse. Either way, the unemployment rate was going to rise no matter what Obama has done this year. What happens afterwards is up in the air.

This is a depression for many people. Consider Detroit. Almost 1 out of 3 are unemployed. It will get worse. This was bound to happen.. as the capitalists.. slobbering and drooling for ever more $$$ began outsourcing jobs.. about 41 years ago.. now.. not much is left.

[Georgia]

Specific projects like the bailout and the "cash for clunkers" are the only things that really have effected the economy..

Agreed.
But since government can not continue spending the money required to sustain such projects, it is only a very temporary fix. I would like to know of even one car dealership which is able to keep its doors open for business becuase of it.
Sales are again at pre-clunker levels yet we are what?
3,000,000 USD further in debt?

Either way, the unemployment rate was going to rise no matter what Obama has done this year. What happens afterwards is up in the air.

Agreed again.
However BHO made a great push to get the stimulus passed, greased on a rail regardless if hardly anyone was able to read it - just trust him and pass the thing to keep the unemployment rate below 8%.

a large economic-aid package would boost the economy and keep the unemployment rate below 8%.

TIME.com

Where exactly is the 3,000,000,000,000 USD stimulous going?
Is it going to create more government jobs or actual private businesses where capitol is created, or are they still going to increase private business taxes?

Where has it been spent already?

The study found that 90 percent of the stimulus funds spent so far have gone toward bailouts for fiscally irresponsible state governments.

National Review

[lifevicarious]

I simply can't believe it's that cheap. Think of what it would cost just to paint the thing, let alone feed and pay the crew, maintain the aircraft, and about ten thousand other things.

I bet they said "million" when they meant "billion".

You don't seem to have a great concept of costs. How can you possibly think it costs 160 BILLION dollars a year to operate an aircraft carrier?? Do you realize there are only 5 companies in the US that had revenues of over 160 BILLION last year?

Fortune 500 2009: Fortune 1000 Companies 1-100 - FORTUNE on CNNMoney.com

[Nono]

You don't seem to have a great concept of costs.

Perhaps, but I simply can't believe the 160 million figure (160 billion is a bit of rhetorical licence, v, so calm down).

As I pointed out in my post above, the idea that the US taxpayer gets a deal like $440,000 a day for a vessel of such size and complexity** makes me laugh. There's no way that figure covers the true running costs.

Just consider this: The same source that gives the 440 thousand figure says that the ship's "complement" totals 5,680 personnel. If you divide the former by the latter, you end up with a little over $77 per day per person. Would that even cover their pay? Huh?

** Switzerland paid upwards of $40 million for each of its bloody useless F-18s. These are extremely costly items, and maintaining aircraft that get catapulted off a deck in salt spray and then slam down again at the end of a cable raises that cost by an order of magnitude.

[soothsayer]

Labor Department finally admits to using false numbers in jobs reports