Galt

Not mine, but it certainly covers the subject adequately.


Abbott and Costello Discuss Unemployment

COSTELLO: I want to ask you about the unemployment rate in America.
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible times. It's 9%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that's 16%.

COSTELLO: You just said 9%.
ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that's 16%.

COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 16% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that's 9%...

COSTELLO: Wait a minute. Is it 9% or 16%?
ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.

COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.

COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work, can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.

COSTELLO: To whom?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.

COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment rolls, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don't look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don't want to read about 16% unemployment do ya?

COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.

COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means they're two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.
OSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: There you have it! Now you're thinking like a liberal - the President and his comrades would be proud of you!

COSTELLO: Why? I don't even know what the fuck I just said!


And now you understand the President's implementation of Keynesian economics. Tomorrow we'll revisit the word "inflation" so you can learn why we don't have it... even though we really do. Confused yet? Well that's not surprising. Shit like that happens when you try to make sense out of what they are saying. The same thing often happens to them.

Why just the other day, the President's men were touting unemployment benefit extensions and welfare as a great stimulus for the economy. All we have to do to enjoy the rest of this recovery is have every body else quit their jobs and go on welfare, and we'll be right as rain.

__________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
_________________

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)

Jewish Pork

I'd like to start by posting to show how fucked up our entitelment programs are at the moment.

Moving past the video, I'd like to pose the question how you'd deal with the current situation that we have such a high unemployment rate and employment positions that need to be filled (specialized labor); but not enough qualified workers to fill those positions. How do we qualify these people? Do we subsidize technical school education loans or what?

kamikazi89

U could cut the guest worker program and have the privavte sector train people themselves

__________________
katie west is the best

tedkennedy

people who think social welfare programs are bad make me frustrated.

using welfare as a scapegoat to distract people from what is actually wrong with the united states : bloated military budget, never ending war, wealthy elite/corporate favoritism in politics, etc.

as long as republicans are adept at fooling the stupid lower-middle class into thinking "socialism" is evil, no progress will be made

__________________
matthew munari

John F. Kerry

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/wo...ewanted=1&_r=1

good and pertinent article.

__________________
Nasa under Obama

John F. Kerry

"Like many tent shelters, Jean’s is quasi-permanent. With his neighbors, he shares a rickety table and a shelf stocked with sugar, salt and an old teapot. Strips of meat hung frozen on a clothesline.

“I never dreamed I would be here,” Jean said. “But my contracts ran out, and at my age, it’s getting harder to find new ones.”

Matthieu, 31, a construction worker living on fixed-term jobs, wonders why European leaders seem focused more on protecting financial institutions than on helping people like him.

France enjoys a beautiful image, he said one recent evening in the Château de Vincennes parking lot. “But it’s not like Anglo-Saxon countries,” he said. “There, you arrive, you know how to do something — you can climb. That’s the American dream.

“Never anywhere in the world do you hear anyone talking about the French dream,” he added, pausing to look at the row of campers. “There is no such dream in France.”
"

this is what happens when a wellfare society runs out of cash....they get the same results as a laissez faire society, but have about 1/10th the people with the wherewithal to actually survive if not being coddled from cradle to grave.

__________________
Nasa under Obama

tedkennedy

^ you can have social welfare and prosperity, actually i would argue that if the quality of life is good for the majority of people, then society would be more prosperous. clearly free market and low taxation for the wealthy has already failed because america is it is rapidly fading as a leader in opportunity and innovation.

if you want to talk about cutting welfare, i dont know of a larger employer of incompetent fuckwits than the military (im talking about the fucking idiots who cant get any job except to join the military). how about cutting spending for the military? how about putting some of that money into education, infrastructure and research?

seriously when is the "free market will solve everything" argument going to die already? clearly free market does not increase competition and lower price (point and case: HEALTHCARE). and anyway, its not a free market because its not a level playing field, its a market that favors the extremely wealthy and powerful. if it was up to free market, then everyone would be slaves to walmart corporate executives, we would work for minimum wage with no benefits (well below the poverty line despite working full time, thus requiring welfare anyway). free market is the reason why everything is made in china [/B]and our country has gone down the shithole

__________________
matthew munari

Terry

J when we are spending as much on welfare as we are on war then I might start thinking about agreeing with you.

__________________
I don't know but I've been told,
If you never die you'll never grow old

Jewish Pork

I agree that all of those "real issues" that you listed need to be corrected ALONG with serious entitlement reform. If you add in Obamacare, we're sitting at ~$90T in unfunded liabilities over the next 50 years. How do you not see that as a problem that needs to be corrected?

It's nice to see someone unabashedly illustrating the stereotype of "liberal elitist." So you mean to tell me that the people who are the most intelligent, self-sufficient and successful, actually lobby for socialism? If only there were some medium for these noble souls to give their hard earned money to indigents... Oh wait, that's why we have charities.

Jewish Pork

This the % of money that we spend on entitlements. If you only count medicare/medicate/SSI, that accounts for ~43% of government expenditures in FY 11. Defense spending is sitting at ~19%.

I think we could cut the defense budget by 25% (at least) if we closed all of our OCONUS bases (we could probably make a sizable dent if we just closed the ones in Europe); and I don't think we'd experience much of a drop off in national security.

Assuming that we cut half of the defect through cuts in defense spending (effectively cutting defense spending by ~78.5%). How would you come up with the additional ~$500B a year in entitlement cuts?

Terry

Your graph is based on the Laffer Curve, which is at best controversial, at worst used as an excuse to discredit social welfare.

Hey look, I can post graphs too!

Attached Images

 

__________________
I don't know but I've been told,
If you never die you'll never grow old

Jewish Pork

We'll use your graph then...


Defense spending is 19% while entitlement spending is 39% (only counting for medicare/medicaid/SSI). Even using your graph, we're at 2:1 in favor of entitlement spending. I've hypothetically cut 70% of the defense budget and we've only solved < 1/2 of the deficit.

What are you going to cut from entitlement spending? Specifically propose your solution, please.

stoneric

The defense budget doesn't include a ton of shit that is defense related like our bloated intelligence agencies and such.

Jewish Pork

Didn't really look THAT hard; but this is the best source of info I could find on it.

In FY2010, we spent ~$80B, total, on NIP and MIP.

Also, entitlement spending accounts for more than just medicare, medicaid, and SSI. Welfare, WIC, unemployment, ect ect... falls into its own section of the budget.


I've hypothetically cut the defense budget by 72%, eliminating $500B (half) of the deficit. I'd like to know how anyone comes up with the remaining $500B in cuts (we'd still be running ~$200B deficit).

Terry

How do you hyperlink light that? I've never learned how to do it but would like to.

__________________
I don't know but I've been told,
If you never die you'll never grow old

Jewish Pork

Press the hyperlink button and paste your link into the prompt then hit 'ok.' Look at your text box and you will notice that one of the web addresses in the hyperlink code is highlighted. Just type (over the highlighted web address) what you want the hyperlink to say.

Terry

wew I'm a master! Thanks m8

__________________
I don't know but I've been told,
If you never die you'll never grow old

stoneric

Right, and the defense related shit doesn't end with our intelligence agencies.

I don't argue that entitlements are unsustainable, only that we change our priorities and whack our empire building first.

tedkennedy

1) fairly tax business and the wealthy
2) cut military spend
3) end wars

i dont claim to be a huge proponent of obamacare, to be honest i really dont know all that much about it. in my opinion the best course of action would be to nationalize universal healthcare and get rid of the insurance companies that make money screwing people over and jack up prices, once healthcare is made public only then can it be streamlines and costs be cut. but this will never happen because of republicans and the propaganda machine, i feel like the shortcomings of obamacare is due to the fact that republicans are fighting it do the death and thus "obamacare" is the result of a clumsy compromise.

it just strikes me as very foolish when people would complain about the government spending tax money trying to help people as opposed to all the other bullshit they could complain about. how many billions of tax payer money has gone into military drones that have killed civilians overseas? get angry about that?

if it hadnt been for obama changing the age of healthcare coverage for dependants to 26, i know i prolly would have been fucked and already in heaps of debt. how many kids directly out of college do you think can afford their own healthcare insurance? i have insurance and i still am hesitant to go to the doctor... its a fucking joke, the system is fucked.

__________________
matthew munari

Kompressor

I wanna hug you, Ted.

Telling people private healthcare is affordable is like telling people minimum wage is livable.

Even 9% unemployment is not as bad as the rest of the world, if you consider places like Africa [aka almost lawless true capitalism] where unemployment is more than the majority, where the 1 employed persons tax dollars have to somehow improve the 2 others that are out of work.

__________________
Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought. -H. Bergson