Are Obama's policies responsible for the fact people today cannot find decent jobs?

Davea8 · Jan 10, 2012

Well, he has made a good start on reversing the housing bubble and correcting lending crimes by private lenders in spite of the obstruction of republicans, but if you want more done then you righties need to force your republicans in the House to stop obstructing everything.

James Cessna · Jan 10, 2012

Davea8 said: ↑

Well, he has made a good start on reversing the housing bubble and correcting lending crimes by private lenders in spite of the obstruction of republicans, but if you want more done then you righties need to force your republicans in the House to stop obstructing everything.
Click to expand...

Ha-Ha!

you are funny, Dave!

The reason America is recovering is because the good Republicans in the House and Senate have Obama in a straight jacket! Consequently, he can no longer implement his very foolish policies that only work to harm and eventually destroy our economy!

The people who subscribe to the left-wing philosophy want us to become a society of people who are dependent on government handouts.

Obama Admits His Tax Hikes Would Hurt The Economy

^

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7fSZiZG91o&feature=related"]Obama Admits His Tax Hikes Would Hurt The Economy - YouTube[/ame]

Rexxon · Jan 10, 2012

Are Obama's policies responsible for the fact that people today cannot find decent jobs?

Yes, In part.

However, His policies are not the only factor in regards to this question. And you also have to look at the benefits of the policies he has enacted.

For example, Environmental regulations may be costly, But it's important to remember we only have one planet. And weather or not you agree on global warming (Or climate change), Wouldn't you agree that protecting the environment for future generations is important?

And labor costs are a major factor of outsourcing, But I believe the 'Cure' will be far worse than the disease. Fact is, To make manufacturing and producing goods in the USA a viable alternative, We as a country would have to lower our living standards to be the same, Or even less, Than those other countries that are taking our business (China, India, Etc.). Now, I've read the horror stories of the masses working sixteen hour days, Living in dormitories, Lack of care, Etc.

Do you REALLY believe that USA citizens would put up with that? Really?

In my opinion, We as a country will need to relax our laws on environmental regulations and labor. But I'm hoping only for a small lowering of regulations. We should only cut what we ABSOLUTELY need to. The bare minimum to keep our living standards good while still making us viable.

We also need to be a bit more protectionist. We need to put the USA first on our agenda, And other countries second, As they are doing this to us now. I also would like to see more 'persuasion' to have other countries raise their workers rights and pay to a comparable level to ours.

Simply put, We CANNOT compete with those other countries without a MASSIVE shift downward in our living standards, And I don't see the general American on board with that.

Thank you for your time.

ronmatt · Jan 10, 2012

The Mello Guy said: ↑

"if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself!" Cain said.
Click to expand...

Who cares about what Cain said. He's out of the picture.

James Cessna · Jan 11, 2012

ronmatt said: ↑

Who cares about what Cain said. He's out of the picture.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, ronmatt!

Who will the Democrats blame when Obama loses the national election in November?

Will they blame themselves for choosing him in the first place?

James Cessna · Jan 11, 2012

bacardi said: ↑

the government needs to get out of the way and let the market function. The more the government interferes in the market the more it prevents growth.
Click to expand...

You are correct, bacardi.

Most government actions retard economic growth. These actions always lead to higher unemployment!

James Cessna · Jan 12, 2012

algranny said: ↑

EPA dictating carbon emissions from companies requiring upgrades from all companies that are very costly. Now, not only can they not afford to hire but have to raise prices just to stay in business. Just one is all you requested! There are several, do some homework yourself, there is much info on the internet that reflects that same sentiment.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, algranny.

the reason U.S. companies were forced to move their operations overseas was because the EPA dictated carbon emissions upgrades by all U.S. companies that were very, very costly.

It was cheaper for these companies to build and operate new plants overseas that upgrade the older and less efficient plants in the USA.

Our once productive steel industry and our textile industries are two perfect examples of the destructive force of misguided and heavy-handed EPA regulations!

James Cessna · Jan 12, 2012

Never Left said: ↑

Question: Do you think Obama is the reason manufacturing left the US over the past 20 years? Do you think he is responsible for the dot com bust or the housing bubble.. the poor lending practices?

Response: It was a progressive (not conservative) policy that benefited the IMF and its members for greater profit and the povertization of America and the empowerment of multinational corporations.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, Never Left.

Many "progressive" policies enacted by the Democrats were responsible for driving millions of American jobs overseas!

James Cessna · Jan 12, 2012

TBryant said: ↑

All of this is irrelevant. The economy needs a driver. It needs some work that needs to be done and that all people agree needs to be done. It needs a recipient who is willing to pay for the work to be done. Real-estate is out of the running since 2008. Tech work is great but the high paying jobs within it naturally decline (the greater tech is improved the less human input is necessary). You seem like a smart guy, listen to Reagan, look at the big picture.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct,TBryant!

By the way, do you remember these solemn promises that were made to the American people by Barack Obama? Well, Mr. President, it's been three years ...

FLASHBACK: Obama: My Presidency Will Be 'A One-Term Proposition' If Economy Doesn't Turn In 3 Years

^

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCN5-ovvFL0&feature=player_embedded"]FLASHBACK: Obama: My Presidency Will Be 'A One-Term Proposition' If Economy Doesn't Turn In 3 Years - YouTube[/ame]

James Cessna · Jan 12, 2012

bacardi said: ↑

The government needs to get out of the way and let the market function. The more the government interferes in the market the more it prevents growth.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, bacardi.

Our high unemployment rate is directly related to government policies that retard and smother our economic growth!

Obama: This Is The Most Transparent Government In Modern Era

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCN5-ovvFL0&feature=player_embedded"]FLASHBACK: Obama: My Presidency Will Be 'A One-Term Proposition' If Economy Doesn't Turn In 3 Years - YouTube[/ame]

James Cessna · Jan 12, 2012

Trinnity said: ↑

Massive increases in regulations are the result of his policies and determination to circumvent Congress. Regulations are strangling job creation and the economy.

They are HIDDEN TAXES.
Click to expand...

Great response, as usual, Trinnity!

Here is some more good information on this subject!

Obamas Seven New Regulations Would Cost U.S. Economy Billions

President Obama sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) Tuesday (8-30-11)detailing seven new regulations that would each cost the U.S. economy more than $1 billion annually. With regulatory costs for American businesses of at least $38 billion per year and compliance costs of $100 billion per year, the seven proposed regulations would target transportation and the environment.

Boehner wrote the President last Friday, "The economy cannot withstand the barrage of major new federal regulations planned by the administration." He noted that the Obama Administrations regulatory agenda counters Obamas proclaimed motive to reduce burdens on American businesses. Boehner further noted that during the Presidents tenure 219 rules have been proposed, each projected to cost U.S. consumers at least $100 million.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/econom...onomy-billions
Click to expand...

James Cessna · Jan 12, 2012

algranny said: ↑

The question posed in this Thread is about the current administration, which is Obama's. The info presented showed more regulations choking business growth CURRENTLY! not 20 years ago! Please stay current.

Past is gone, what are we going to do today and in the future to change it? Choking and strangling business with regulations costing billions isn't helping, logical conclusion!
Click to expand...

you are correct, algranny.

The liberals in this group want to divert the discussions and instead discussions regulations that are 20 years old!

Please do not allow then to do this!

James Cessna · Jan 15, 2012

Ironball said: ↑

The fool Obama is not responsible for anything before January '09.

He is absolutely responsible for everything since then. He has had 3 years to correct policies he felt he did not agree with.

We can safely assume 3 years later that the policies we have are what he agrees with.

The continued war on business and driving mfg. overseas, the war on domestic energy and fossil fuel, the continued wars including Libya, the never ending class warfare dividing the nation. Absolutely responsible.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, Ironball.

By conducting his war on small business owners, Obama is feeding the hatred in this country against good people who have the admirable qualities of success and hard work!

A decent and good president would not do this!

James Cessna · Jan 15, 2012

The Mello Guy said: ↑

"if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself!" Cain said.
Click to expand...

If you drop out of school and you don't develop any marketable skills, Herman Cain is indeed correct!

Margot · Jan 15, 2012

James Cessna said: ↑

If you drop out of school and you don't develop any marketable skills, Herman Cain is indeed correct!

Click to expand...

Roger Milliken.. the Textile magnate beat on the doors of Congress for a couple of decades starting in the 1970s.. yet the pinheads blame it on Obama.

James Cessna · Jan 22, 2012

GeddonM3 said: ↑

No, I think a lot of idiots actually believed Obama was gonna pay off their house and buy them a car.
Click to expand...

Ha-Ha!

Great response, GeddonM3.

You get 5 stars for this one!

JamesDF · Jan 22, 2012

James Cessna said: ↑

Ha-Ha!

Great response, GeddonM3.

You get 5 stars for this one!
Click to expand...

anyone else notice that James Cessna never says anything intelligent and just spams?

TheGreatSatan · Jan 22, 2012

The Obama could be in power for a hundred years, unemployment could be 40% and the national debt could be a zillion billion dollars and the drones will still blame Bush and sing The Obama's praises. To a drone, The Obama can do no wrong. They are programmed to believe this and nothing you say or do will convince them otherwise.

James Cessna · Jan 22, 2012

TheGreatSatan said: ↑

The Obama could be in power for a hundred years, unemployment could be 40% and the national debt could be a zillion billion dollars and the drones will still blame Bush and sing The Obama's praises. To a drone, The Obama can do no wrong. They are programmed to believe this and nothing you say or do will convince them otherwise.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, TheGreatSatan.

Especially when you say, "To a drone, The Obama can do no wrong. They are programmed to believe this and nothing you say or do will convince them otherwise."

James Cessna · Jan 22, 2012

algranny said: ↑

And they wonder where the jobs have gone under this President. The primary workers that have expanded work for the Federal government. Many states are too strapped to add to their employees, but the feds have made sure to increase their employment. Some would consider that an increase in employment figures but not when you're the employer having to pay them!
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, algranny.

The Federal Government is like a monster that must be fed every minute with taxpayer dollars!

James Cessna · Jan 22, 2012

algranny said: ↑

The question posed in this Thread is about the current administration, which is Obama's. The info presented showed more regulations choking business growth CURRENTLY! not 20 years ago! Please stay current.

Past is gone, what are we going to do today and in the future to change it? Choking and strangling business with regulations costing billions isn't helping, logical conclusion!
Click to expand...

You are correct in your astute observations, algranny.

Are you aware Obama and his administration are attempting to kill our U.S. cement production industry? If Obama is successful, his "wrong-headed" policies will kill thousands and thousands of U.S. jobs and cause our cement plants to move, of all places, to Mexico!

Sad. ... Obama's policies are killing our economic recovery efforts!

"Meeting the EPA’s deadline would cost $3.4 billion and may lead to shutting down 18 of about 100 U.S. cement plants, according to the Portland Cement Association, a trade group."

Cement Plant to Meet EPA Rule Industry Says Can’t Be Met

Lehigh Hanson Inc. wants to head off U.S. pollution rules it says industry can’t meet. At a plant in Union Bridge, Maryland, the cement maker has pledged to achieve required mercury standards a year ahead of a 2013 deadline.

Lehigh, the U.S. unit of HeidelbergCement AG (HEI), is among companies lobbying for legislation scheduled to be debated today in the Republican-led House that would require the Environmental Protection Agency to scrap and rewrite regulations on cement plants, one of the biggest sources of toxic mercury emissions.

Meeting the EPA’s deadline would cost $3.4 billion and may lead to shutting down 18 of about 100 U.S. cement plants, according to the Portland Cement Association, a trade group. The EPA says the cost would be no more than $950 million, and environmental organizations say the industry’s claims are belied by actions such as Lehigh’s plans in Maryland.

“Cement plants can reduce their emissions when they want to,” James Pew, a staff attorney at EarthJustice in Washington, who filed lawsuits pushing for the regulation, said in an interview. “The argument that they can’t is purely for political consumption.”

In addition to the cement rules to be considered today, the House has on its agenda this week a measure to put off for 15 months EPA regulations for industrial boilers, used at paper plants, hospitals and schools. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce today urged lawmakers in a letter to back both measures, while President Barack Obama’s administration issued veto threats on Oct. 3.

Cement plants melt limestone and other minerals to go into concrete, used in roads, bridges and buildings, at temperatures that can exceed 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit (1,649 degrees Celsius), generating mercury pollution that ranks second behind that from coal-fired power plants, according to the EPA. Mercury, typically ingested by eating contaminated fish, poses the biggest risk to fetuses and children, in whom it can cause long-term damage to thinking, memory and the nervous system, according to the agency.

The EPA rules also mandate cuts in acid gases, sulfur dioxide and particulate matter, which may require different control technology.

Lehigh pledged in 2009 to cut mercury emissions from its plant in Union Bridge to 86 pounds a year from 400 pounds a year. The agreement with state regulators calls for the facility, located about 40 miles (64 kilometers) from Baltimore, to meet the EPA’s standards a year in advance of the federal deadline.

The company is still figuring out how it will deliver on that pledge, and the solution can’t simply be replicated from plant to plant, according to Tom Chizmadia, senior vice president for government affairs for the division of HeidelbergCement of Heidelberg, Germany. The company employs 12,000 people in North America.

“Mercury ties back to the composition of the limestone,” which is usually drawn from a quarry nearby, Chizmadia said in an interview. “And not all the plants have mercury as their biggest issue. There is no single technology” to meet all the pollution standards, he said.

As it lobbies to get the EPA rules rolled back, the company is working to meet the pollution standards at each of its 11 U.S. plants, he said.

For its cement plant in Cupertino, California, the company installed a carbon-injection system this year, which it said in a letter to local officials would reduce mercury emissions by 30 percent.

Lehigh isn’t alone in acting to meet standards it wants Congress to invalidate.

Ash Grove Cement Co. (ASHG)’s plant in Durkee, Oregon, was the nation’s largest emitter of mercury from cement plants, with 879 pounds sent up its smokestack last year, according to EPA data.

The company, which supports the House legislation, spent $20 million on activated-carbon injection equipment that would remove 90 percent of the mercury from its emissions, according to Jacqueline Clark, a spokeswoman.

“We did it proactively, voluntarily ahead of the EPA rule- making,” Clark said in an e-mail.

Those Lehigh and Ash Grove plants are among the top six mercury polluters among cement plants nationwide, according to EPA data.

The Portland Cement Association, based in Skokie, Illinois, is lobbying to block the EPA rules on behalf of companies such as Cemex SAB, the largest producer of cement in the U.S., and Holcim Ltd. (HOLN)

“We’re not averse to being regulated, but the rules need to be achievable and we need time to comply,” Jason Morin, the U.S.-based vice president for environmental and government affairs for Holcim of Jona, Switzerland, said in an interview. “And it’s coming at a time that is difficult for us as an industry.”

House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, invited Spencer Weitman, president of National Cement Co. of Alabama, to be his guest when Obama addressed Congress on Sept. 8. The company blamed the EPA rules for its decision to suspend a $350 million expansion project.

Contractors, road builders and unions, such as the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, also support the House legislation, saying the EPA rules will raise their concrete costs as they struggle to recover from the housing collapse and recession.

“Cement is the lifeblood of our industry,” Sean Thurman, senior manager for policy at the Associated Builders and Contractors Inc. in Arlington, Virginia, said in an interview. The rules “would reduce domestic production and create gaps in supply.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...meet-epa-rule-industry-says-can-t-be-met.html
Click to expand...

James Cessna · Jan 22, 2012

Ironball said: ↑

Absolutely.......... Check out the Federal Register that holds all of the thousands of our federal regulations..............from our bloated, over-staffed Big Government bureaucracies..........

Ignorance of the laws, rules, and regulations is no excuse ... LOL
Click to expand...

Excellent discussions!

You are correct in your astute observations, Ironball.

James Cessna · Jan 23, 2012

algranny said: ↑

The question posed in this Thread is about the current administration, which is Obama's. The info presented showed more regulations choking business growth CURRENTLY! not 20 years ago! Please stay current.

Past is gone, what are we going to do today and in the future to change it? Choking and strangling business with regulations costing billions isn't helping, logical conclusion!
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, algranny.

These discussions about the present state of our national economy were very good

When he had the job, he made a comfortable income. Now his income is sporadic, from the occasional construction job he lands. He used to buy clothing from Macy's or other department stores. Now he goes to Goodwill or Salvation Army stores. He has even cut back on taking the city subways, instead riding his bicycle. Separated from his wife and his 15-year-old daughter, he says, "Try making child support payments when you don't have a regular income. I'm constantly catching up."

Even recently some Americans could tap the equity in their homes or their stock market accounts to make up for any shortfalls in income. Not anymore. Since 2007, Americans' collective net worth has fallen about $5.5 trillion, or more than 8.6 percent, according to the Federal Reserve.

The bulk of that decline is in real estate, which has lost $4.7 trillion in value, or 22 percent, since 2007. In Arizona, for example, more than half of homeowners live in houses that are worth less than their purchase prices, according to some reports.

Stock investments aren't any better. Since 1999, the Standard & Poor's index, on a price basis, is off 17 percent. It's up 3.2 percent when dividends are included, but that's a small return for that length of time.

"This is really a lost decade of affluence," says Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor's in New York.

Among those who have watched their finances deteriorate are senior citizens.

"Given the stock market, they are very nervous," says Nancy LeaMond, executive vice president at AARP, the seniors' lobbying group. "They want to keep their savings."

But Ms. LeaMond also notes that about 2 in every 3 seniors are dependent not on Wall Street but on Social Security. The average annual income for those over 65 is $18,500 a year – almost all of it from Social Security, she says. "This is not a part of America that is rich," she says.

At the same time, seniors are getting pinched in their pocketbooks.

"Our members are watching all the things they have to buy, especially health-care products, go up in price," says LeaMond.

In Pompano, Fla., some stretched seniors end up at the Blessings Food Pantry, which is associated with Christ Church United Methodist.

"We have quite a few grandparents who are raising their grandchildren on a fixed income, feeding them and buying clothes for them when they can't afford to do [that for] themselves," says Yvonne Womack, the team leader.

Others, she says, are forgoing food to pay for their medical prescriptions. "And then there is your ordinary senior whose Social Security check has not gone up in the last several years, but food and gasoline [prices] have skyrocketed," she says. (However, Social Security checks will go up 3.6 percent in January.) The Blessings, she notes, is the Blessings Food Pantry is now feeding 42 percent more people than last year. "We also provide food you can eat out of a can," she says. "We do have seniors who are living on the streets."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/44962589/page/3/
Click to expand...

snakestretcher · Jan 23, 2012

JamesDF said: ↑

anyone else notice that James Cessna never says anything intelligent and just spams?
Click to expand...

Yep. Here's the procedure; cut and paste, wait for the usual suspects to agree with the cut and paste, compliment those who agree with the cut and paste, repeat...

Empty vessels make the most noise...and you'll note that he makes absolutely no attempt at debate. Because he cannot.

'You are indeed correct...'

James Cessna · Jan 23, 2012

Marine1 said: ↑

Are Obama's policies responsible for the fact people today cannot find decent jobs?

Let me put it this way. Obama's policies sure hasn't helped any, but the plain fact is, this has been coming on for years. It started with NAFTA, Free Trade with China and ended up with the housing, auto and banking crises. Of course the attitude of many Americans don't help either. We could create millions of jobs if we only cared enough to support American made products. If we only looked at the label before we bought. It would also bring some sense to companies that have gone abroad. If they saw Americans wanting American made products, I believe some would move back. It's getting more expensive every year to make it over there and send it back here. If they saw a big swell of people demanding American made goods, it could have an effect. But I have brought this up many times and always got a cool reception from people on this board. Many of you are going to buy the cheapest stuff you can get, or are convinced all foreign products are better and won't consider American made. Unless of course, you lose your job. We are our own worst enemy.
Click to expand...

Great response, Marine1!

The progressives in this group love the flavor of their Obama Kool-Aid, don't they?

Log in or Sign up

Are Obama's policies responsible for the fact people today cannot find decent jobs?

Davea8 New Member

James Cessna New Member

Rexxon Well-Known Member

ronmatt New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

Margot Account closed, not banned

James Cessna New Member

JamesDF Banned

TheGreatSatan Banned

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

snakestretcher Banned

James Cessna New Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Are Obama's policies responsible for the fact people today cannot find decent jobs?

Davea8 New Member

James Cessna New Member

Rexxon Well-Known Member

ronmatt New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

Margot Account closed, not banned

James Cessna New Member

JamesDF Banned

TheGreatSatan Banned

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

James Cessna New Member

snakestretcher Banned

James Cessna New Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches