Obama To Cabinet: “We Cannot Sit Back and Be Satisfied” With Some Progress Amid High Unemployment Rate

26 year high – interesting. So the last time we had unemployment this high it was in 1983, near the end of Reagan’s term. No wonder Obama’s approval ratings are mirroring Reagan so closely (its the economy, stupid).

How many small businessmen know what their tax rates will be when the Bush tax cuts expire in 2011? And to the extent they are uncertain, how does Mr. Obama think that uncertainty affects their hiring decisions? Among his close advisors, who has ever hired a worker with his own money?

Fascist Hyena, Weren’t those Bush tax cuts supposed to help create jobs. How’s that working for you?

Not sure what the media expects the president to do on jobs, etc. The economy is clearly rebounding, and everyone knows jobs are a lagging indicator, the last thing to pull out of the bottom.

Man! That was a profound statement. OK, mister leader . . . now what are you going to do about it?

People wanted hope and change, I hope you got what you asked for. Government run auto, banking, health care and energy next, all at taxpayers’ dime. Unemployment at 10.2% and rising, who will contribute to all this spending? Very few companys are hiring and will probably reduce workers with the addition of this health tax slapped on their backs.

Of course not, they’re radical revolutionaries!!!!!

““I think it’s also a time to remember that this has been a very difficult year, and a lot of people out there are having a very, very tough time”…..
as you sit in the White House with a chef to cook your meal with your family and 100 or so close friends.
You do not know the half if it and the ONLY reason you are talking about it is because China cut off your creditline.
Wonder if he or Michelle will put in some time at a local shelter with her fancy shoes?

jhw: you need to get the facts right. Regan was president from 1981-1989. So how do you get at the end of his presidency? He took over Carter’s mess of high unemployment and high inflation. The fact is he created 21 million jobs under his presidency. Not losing 6 million jobs and counting and didnt even use a 756 billion dollar stimulus. As usual you are wrong once again.

Fascist Hyena, Weren’t those Bush tax cuts supposed to help create jobs. How’s that working for you?
_________________________________
Bottom line of Bush tax cuts and economic approach:
1) doubling of the national debt during Bush’s term,
2) unfortunate coincidental meltdown of the economy, huge numbers of unemployment, stock market crash, record foreclosure and bankruptcies

Wait I’m confused. Isn’t Obama using the excuse that the stimulus did save a bunch of jobs and everything would have been worse if he hadn’t done that?
So I guess Bush can saw everything would have been worse without the Tax cuts and we would be even more in debt and lost even more jobs if he hadn’t done that.

He is as sharp as a marble.

Bottom line of Bush tax cuts and economic approach:
1) doubling of the national debt during Bush’s term,
2) unfortunate coincidental meltdown of the economy, huge numbers of unemployment, stock market crash, record foreclosure and bankruptcies
Posted by: tierra | Nov 23, 2009 6:32:11 PM
Astounding for a man who liberals claim couldn’t even tie his own shoes…

Tierra it is awful when anybody dies however, nobody is ever denied emergency medical attention in this country. We already have a public option in place in every state and it is called Medicaid. Why arent you angry at the mother for bringing a child in this world without being able to properly take care of that child. I am a singl mother of two and have had to work two jobs at times to make sure I provided for my children which included providing health care. Maybe some blame needs to go on the mother as well.

“updates on progress made across several areas,” including national security, the budget, health insurance, and the economy
What progress are they referring to? The budget deficit is higher than at any time in the past, nothing has been accomplished on health insurance, the economy is stagnant with inflation to come, and national security is in doubt due to the dithering on Afghanistan and the rest of the world perceives us to be weak. I know people wanted change, but I bet they are not happy with the direction we have been going.

President Obowma just exactly where is the economy growing, in you garden? Please no more lies and fabrications from you administration.

jhw: you need to get the facts right. Regan was president from 1981-1989. So how do you get at the end of his presidency? He took over Carter’s mess of high unemployment and high inflation. The fact is he created 21 million jobs under his presidency. Not losing 6 million jobs and counting and didnt even use a 756 billion dollar stimulus. As usual you are wrong once again.
Jake | Nov 23, 2009 6:22:11 PM
End of his first term – I thought that would be obvious since I was comparing him to Obama and said, “near the end of Reagan’s term.” And Reagan did NOT create jobs in the first 11 months of his term.

I feel much better now that Obama has decided it is important. I’m sure it will all be cleaned up right away. We’ll just throw another trillion at it and all will be better.

Like ink on a dress, Mr. Obama’s inexperience is showing through. It seems like Mr. Obama sees some good trading on the stock market, then he says the economy is improving. Then some time later, the stock market goes down, then he says, “some lag indicator” bs. Then if it continues to be bad, then he said that problem will be long term, hard to fix. Then the stock market goes up again, then he said that his plans are working.

Reagan not only revived America, he also made even liberals feel good about being Americans.

“Reagan not only revived America, he also made even liberals feel good about being Americans.”
ROFLMAO!
Yes Reagan came into office and promptly crashed the economy into the ground forcing him to rescind some of his tax cuts.
He pulled out of Beirut then so as not too look like a total coward we invaded the island of Grenada.
He used the welfare queen stereotype to pit the white working class against African Americans.
Then he began to suffer the debilitating effects of Alzheimer’s disease.
The best that can be said of Reagan is that humanity continued to exist once he left office.

Jenny, I agree completedly the problem is noone realized this guy is a blathering bobble-head doll at voting time.
I guess if movie stars say he’s great, he must be. Why the he** do Americans take advice from people who play “make believe” everyday for a living.

“the Kobe beef did. served not for guests but for their friends.”
ABC jpt himself “Here’s the list of President Obama’s invited guests to the White House cocktail party tonight — essentially the bipartisan bicameral leadership of the House and Senate.
Six House Democrats, six House Republicans, six Senate Democrats, six Senate Republicans. Their spouses are invited as well.
Hors d’œuvres — chicken curry, wagyu steak — will be served in addition to drinks.”

Mr. Obama said “We Cannot Sit Back and Be Satisfied”. That’s why blogs like these exists because we are not satisfied. That’s why people will have one more chance to vote him out of office.

Bush had the unemployment rate at 4.7%. Now it is at 10.2% (some say it is actually at 17%).

Posted by: young_voter | Nov 23, 2009 7:33:19 PM
___________________________________
Heh, the Dow Jones is up about 35% since Obama took office. Smart investors are more than content with that.

“Yes I can see how historical perspective would offend you. ”
The most recent Gallup poll has Reagan listed as the Greatest President, over Kennedy and Lincoln.
Why do you suppose that is true?

Uh, the real unemployment rate is 17.5%, and that is using massaged gov. data.
_____________________________________
Listen, under the Bush administration the entire U.S. economy was driven to the edge of a precipice and over into complete freefall.
Will it EVER recover? That is really hard to say.
While Bush slept at the wheel, and buried the country in debt, the entire fabric began to unravel – the extensive overspending (of Bush and regular Americans). The gross consumer debt society. All of it driven so long and so hard on nothing it was complete freefall off the cliff.
And you have the nerve to blame this on Obama . . .. you should be ashamed.

“Winning 49 states says it all.”
Not really.
There are exit polls available.
According to NYT/CBS interviews about 29% of liberals voted for Reagan in 1984(liberals were about 16% of the electorate).

“The most recent Gallup poll has Reagan listed as the Greatest President, over Kennedy and Lincoln.”
A year before JFK was up by one, now Reagan is up two. I imagine next year it will change again as JFK, Lincoln and Reagan remain popular.
“Why do you suppose that is true?”
Looking at internals its GOPers to blame.

The most recent Gallup poll has Reagan listed as the Greatest President, over Kennedy and Lincoln.
Why do you suppose that is true?
Sigmonde | Nov 23, 2009 8:30:21 PM
Because people don’t know history.

Posted by: Beholden | Nov 23, 2009 8:38:22 PM
The Republican’s favorite fall-back when unable to answer the simplest of challenges . .. . revert to insult and name calling.
And you’re PROUD of it . .. very sad indeed.

“Because people don’t know history. ”
But you do, huh?

They’re making progress on the unemployment rate? Last I checked they said it wouldn’t go over 8% but now it’s 25% higher than their prediction.

“Because people don’t know history.
Posted by: jhw539 | Nov 23, 2009 8:42:31 PM”
That was funny.

“Zero. How much do you think he was paid, and what is your evidence?”
I’m not sure how much he was paid.
I was hoping you would know.
Do you think its ethical for a pollster to put a link to where one can buy a book when they are doing a poll to gauge interest on said book?
Again…silly me asking you about ethics.

“How much do you think Qunnipiac was paid to find Obama’s voter approval under 50%? how much was Gallup paid to find adult approval in the same place?”
Nothing as they are reputable and honest polling firms.
So why would a polling firm put a link to buy a book on their website when they polled about the same book?
Anyone find that ethically problematic?

“The need to call large groups of people “liars” is well known as a psychological disorder.”
ROFLMAO!
So tell me is right wing ideology inherently dishonest (iow you have to lie to yourself to believe it) or is it the people that are attracted to right wing ideology that are dishonest?

stop wasting the working class money on hand outs that are not earned….

“We cannot sit back and be satisfied … until the debt is 20T, unemployment is 25%, and all our political allies are billionaires!”

Obama and his crony payouts are causing most of the problem.
_______________________________
Under the Bush administration the entire U.S. economy was driven to the edge of a precipice and over into complete freefall. . .
Will it EVER recover? That is really hard to say.
While Bush slept at the wheel, and buried the country in debt, the entire fabric began to unravel – the extensive overspending (of Bush and regular Americans). The gross consumer debt society. All of it driven so long and so hard on nothing it was in complete freefall off a cliff.
And you have the nerve to blame this on Obama . . .. you should be ashamed.

“Nothing as they are reputable and honest polling firms.”
Do you find any material difference between their current findings on approval of Obama and those of Rasmussen?
Please explain.

We Cannot Sit Back and Be Satisfied” With Some Progress Amid High Unemployment Rate”
So let’s have a jobs summit that has nothing to do with creating jobs!
“BEIJING — President Barack Obama says creating jobs isn’t the goal of a coming White House forum on jobs and economic growth.”
It’s pure brilliance!
It’s because Barack Obama is to jobs what bicycles are to ducks.

How are you doing?
__________________________________
It’s unfortunate the Bush administration was asleep at the wheel while the entire economy collapsed and millions were laid off, bankruptcies and foreclosures skyrocked. Free-fall collapse in full momentum when Obama took over.
Not an easy thing to turn around.
However, the Dow Jones is up about 26% since Obama took office. GDP grew for the first time in a long time. Unemployment if not expected to begin turning around into positive numbers until about March.

An idealistic president takes office promising an era of American moral renewal at home and abroad. The effort includes a focus on diplomacy and peace-making, an aversion to the use of force, the selling out of old allies. The result is that within a couple of years the U.S. is more suspected, detested and enfeebled than ever.
No, we’re not talking about Barack Obama. But since the current administration took office offering roughly the same prescriptions as Jimmy Carter did, it’s worth recalling how that worked out.

He never did get the unemployment rate back down to the levels he inherited in 2001.
Posted by: tierra | Nov 23, 2009 10:40:21 PM
According to the Bureau of Labor, The (not seasonally adjusted) unemployment rate in 2001 was 4.7. The rate was 4.6 in both 2006 and 2007.
2000 4.0
2001 4.7
2002 5.8
2003 6.0
2004 5.5
2005 5.1
2006 4.6
2007 4.6
2008 5.8

Everybody get excited, and follow the bouncing ball: next week Obama is going to TALK about jobs.
Never mind that just last month he TALKed about eliminating nuclear weapons for the entire planet! For all time!
I mention it because two days after this Jobs-apalooza quickie, our real-life 18-year-old nuclear arms treaty with Russia expires. Obama dropped the ball on this crucial diplomatic initiative even as he delivered all his TALK. That real-life treaty has held Russia and the US responsible to each other since 1991, but as of Dec. 5, thanks to ineptitude and inattention, it is gone.
Like our jobs.

“‘Just a rough patch’ indeed. He can tell the millions of Americans it was just a rough patch now that the economy has been in freefall ever since.”
The economy is hardly in freefall. That’s still to come.

“‘Just a rough patch’ indeed. He can tell the millions of Americans it was just a rough patch now that the economy has been in freefall ever since.”
The economy is hardly in freefall. That’s still to come.
______________________________________
I hope you’re wrong. The economies of the western world (the consumer based economies) has been struggling and attempting to hold things together after a fairly major collapse. Whether consumer based economies are sustainable at all is an important question.
I think we’re going to have to learn to live with less and learn how to do that elegantly and creatively.
Posted by: tierra | Nov 24, 2009 4:20:31 AM
__________________________________
I know we usually never agree, tierra, but I’m with you on this one (to a point)LOL. Consumer based economies have no firm ground to stand on without the businesses that PRODUCE something to balance it out. The problem, in my humble opinion, is the labor union. We all know we need to be making and developing new products and technologies, but we need to be responsible while we do it. Wages, benefits, etc. ALL go in to the cost of any given product. Unfortunately, the unions (who were once a good backing for the working man), have now become not much more than a Wall Street honcho with a big bonus check. And I would venture to say they are actually keeping people who desperately need a job (and would be willing to work for a less but decent wage) out of the job market.
When the cost of putting out a product is more than people are willing to spend for the price tag that will be attached, instead going for the cheaper (and foreign made) product, we are in trouble. But in this economy, alot of folks have no choice but the cheaper option. It’s really just a trickle down theory. CEO’s making too much money, union workers demanding more money and benefits, price of product is high to cover these overheads, consumers don’t buy it, product sits on shelf or lot, and… economy stays right where it is OR gets worse.
There has to be some give and take, but from what I’ve seen, the union has a seat at the head of the WH table. That cannot be good.

From CNN/Money (11/24/09):
“Economic growth was weaker in the third quarter than originally reported, according to government data released Tuesday.
The gross domestic product, the broadest measure of the nation’s economic activity, rose at an annual rate of 2.8% in the three months ending in September, according to the Commerce Department’s first revision in the reading. The initial reading of the report a month ago came in with a 3.5% growth rate.”

If our Babbler In Chief creates jobs, you can bet that most of them will be in the public sector (government jobs). A.K.A. non-productive jobs.

Consumer based economies have no firm ground to stand on without the businesses that PRODUCE something to balance it out. The problem, in my humble opinion, is the labor union.
__________________________________
Shoe, I get the point you like to bash unions, but my original comments were way beyond that power play level of multi-national corporations vs. unions.
ALL of the economies of the western world (the consumer based economies) have been struggling and attempting to hold things together after the major collapse that began in 2008.
For a long time we’ve based our ‘wealth’ on the production and consumption of zillions of tons of consumer crap – a lot of it crap – that ‘satisfies’ peoples lives. A lot of it has been put on credit. A lot of it has been based on ‘cheap’ oil, massive shipping, cheap labor and massive pollution.
I question whether this entire ‘fill up your lives with consumer trash’ culture is sustainable at all. We’ve been sucking at that teat more than ever before – have we gone too far? I’m almost sure we have.
I think we’re going to have to learn to live with less and learn how to do that elegantly and creatively.

Obama = Good President.
Hillary = Great Sec. of State
Sarah = Pathetic, dimwitted, trashy, joke