Jump to content

Republicans Cost Economy $2 Billion, 800,000 Jobs, Increase Defic


Recommended Posts

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/10/08/2749031/government-shutdown-cost-16-billion/

 

 

 

AP928401173053.jpg

The government shutdown that started last Tuesday has already cost $1.6 billion in lost economic output, according to market research firm IHS Inc.

 

Should the shutdown last through October 9, the total will come to $2 billion. That’s equivalent to the cost so far of the “biblical” flooding that has ravaged Colorado. If it lasts three to four weeks, Moody’s has estimated that the total cost to the economy could come to $55 billion. The shutdown could reduce economic output by 1.4 percent.

 

The daily average cost of the shutdown has dropped to $160 million, from $300 million at the start of the crisis.

 

The total cost can be broken down into a variety of factors. Federal spending was expected to be reduced by about $8 billion, which could save 0.8 percent off of GDP. The original furlough of 800,000 government workers was sucking about $1 billion a week from the economy in lost pay, although fewer workers remain furloughed today.

 

The government stands to lose out on billions in tax revenue, and all told the shutdown is expected to increase the deficit. There are many other factors that could impact the economy but haven’t been tallied up, such as government contracts put on hold, loans that aren’t going out from the Small Business Administration, and permits that won’t be granted.

 

Other important programs that support the neediest, like the nutrition program for low-income mothers and infants and the job training programs that are part of food stamps, aren’t getting any federal money in the shutdown.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am pretty sure that you won't give a fuck whatever source is used.

 

cc

 

I'm pretty sure you have no idea what you are talking about. It it stupid to try to blame this solely on the Republicans, it is a bi-partisan problem and anyone who isn't shackled to a political party could easily figure this out. Only a simpleton lets others tell them what to think. Guess what that makes you CC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welp, I guess that 2 $1.6 Billion with 800,000 jobs are non-essential. So says Uncle Sham.

 

Time to turn over those jobs and functions to the private sector. Gubment should not be a jobs program.

 

In other news, what should I be missing now that 13% of the gubment is closed? Please remind me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Republicans Cost Economy $2 Billion, 800,000 Jobs, Increase Deficit

 

 

The deficit is Repubs' fault?

 

Not the fault of the party and president who boosted spending to a record peacetime level and fought to keep it there?

 

I love psychotic moonbat humor. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democrats need to be put into time out.

They fail and or refuse to learn the comprehension of compromise even when it's in their job description.

Americans have noted democrats employment file for this, a black mark which will be reviewed, action

taken when their employment agreement comes up for renewal in late 2014.

 

Definition: Skews
1) To distort; depict unfairly.

 

2) Looper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TLDR. Find me a non-partisan source and people may actually care what you have to say.

You think this article is tl;dr? Sorry pal, these numbers have been confirmed and are being reported all over the news cycles as well as the internet. The Republicans own this crisis, as well as those numbers. You can try to spin it away if you want, but the numbers are accurate, and 74% of the country is against you. Sticking ones head up ones ass isn't going to change that scenario for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think this article is tl;dr? Sorry pal, these numbers have been confirmed and are being reported all over the news cycles as well as the internet. The Republicans own this crisis, as well as those numbers. You can try to spin it away if you want, but the numbers are accurate, and 74% of the country is against you. Sticking ones head up ones ass isn't going to change that scenario for you.

Where do we find QE3 spending in your charts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think this article is tl;dr? Sorry pal, these numbers have been confirmed and are being reported all over the news cycles as well as the internet. The Republicans own this crisis, as well as those numbers. You can try to spin it away if you want, but the numbers are accurate, and 74% of the country is against you. Sticking ones head up ones ass isn't going to change that scenario for you.

You are misunderstanding my use of the reference. I used it to mean to lame, didn't read.

 

Those numbers may be confirmed but its impossible to factually blame either party. Both sides refuse to negotiate, both sides are coming up with stupid solutions. Seems like your Democrats are just as much to blame as (lol) my Republicans as you referred to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cultural Roots of a Fiscal Crisis

Star Parker | Oct 14, 2013

We ought to think about the cultural roots of the budget crisis in Washington.

The political left says the shut down is all about an ideological tantrum of a handful of Republicans.

Certainly Tea Partiers have an ideology and vision about what ground rules would produce a more prosperous, freer, and fairer America.

But let’s be honest. The gentleman in the White House, our president, is as hard-core in his ideological dispositions as any Tea Partier.

Each side believes America would be better off if it were run according to their vision.

What’s the crucial difference?

As a Tea Partier, I’d like my neighbors to agree with me that personal responsibility, traditional values and limited government is the best way to build a healthy and prosperous personal life and nation. But if they don’t agree, they can do what they want.

But the world according to the big government, morally relative left is much different. In this view, yes, nobody is forcing me to agree that personal responsibility and traditional values don’t matter. But in their view it’s also only fair that I pick up the massive costs of their failures.

Take, for instance, poverty.

We all agree that we want to get as many people out of poverty as possible.

The evidence abounds that a lifestyle that reflects personal responsibility and traditional values, like traditional sexual attitudes and marriage and family, reduces dramatically chances that an individual will wind up in poverty.

I hope people live according to these values. But if they don’t want to, that’s their business.

But not so with the left. They want to foster a culture that says do what you want. They think to promote traditional values in schools and popular culture is inappropriate and small-minded and at times even unconstitutional.

But then they say that it is only fair that everyone pay the costs of the mess this culture of moral relativism makes.

According to Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, in 2009 the poverty rate for children in homes with married parents was 11 percent. The poverty rate for children in homes headed by a single mother was 44.3 percent.

The incidence of homes headed by a single mother has gone from 6.3 percent of all households in 1950 to 23.9 percent in 2010.

In a Gallup poll done this year, 71 percent of respondents between 18 and 34 years old said having a baby outside of marriage is morally acceptable.

So we have promoted a culture, a culture fostered by the political left, that sanctions behavior in which poverty is more likely to occur. And then those that promote this culture say it is only fair that everybody pay the costs.

Worse, the evidence is overwhelming that government spending on poverty has little or no impact on the incidence of poverty.

Again according to Haskins of Brookings, from 1980 to 2011, spending in constant (inflation adjusted) dollars on means-tested (poverty) programs increased $500 billion, with a tripling of the amount spent per person in poverty. Over the same period the poverty rate was virtually unchanged.

Also worth noting is that over this same period, the percent of babies born to unwed mothers went from 18 percent in 1980 to over 40 percent in 2011.

In the first three years of the Obama administration, spending on these means-tested programs increased almost $150 billion, or 31 percent.

ObamaCare will add up to 20 million more individuals to the almost 60 million already covered by Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor. Medicaid now pays for 40 percent of all babies born in the country.

Price tag of big government, moral relativism - hundreds of billions. Price tag of limited government, personal responsibility - zero.

Is this an ideological battle? Of course it is.

-------------------------------

 

I like Star Parker. She makes sense here.

There a real and pervasive cost that lingers beyond a single generation. You support it skews. Shame on you and your rotting kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cultural Roots of a Fiscal Crisis

Star Parker | Oct 14, 2013

We ought to think about the cultural roots of the budget crisis in Washington.

The political left says the shut down is all about an ideological tantrum of a handful of Republicans.

Certainly Tea Partiers have an ideology and vision about what ground rules would produce a more prosperous, freer, and fairer America.

But let’s be honest. The gentleman in the White House, our president, is as hard-core in his ideological dispositions as any Tea Partier.

Each side believes America would be better off if it were run according to their vision.

What’s the crucial difference?

As a Tea Partier, I’d like my neighbors to agree with me that personal responsibility, traditional values and limited government is the best way to build a healthy and prosperous personal life and nation. But if they don’t agree, they can do what they want.

But the world according to the big government, morally relative left is much different. In this view, yes, nobody is forcing me to agree that personal responsibility and traditional values don’t matter. But in their view it’s also only fair that I pick up the massive costs of their failures.

Take, for instance, poverty.

We all agree that we want to get as many people out of poverty as possible.

The evidence abounds that a lifestyle that reflects personal responsibility and traditional values, like traditional sexual attitudes and marriage and family, reduces dramatically chances that an individual will wind up in poverty.

I hope people live according to these values. But if they don’t want to, that’s their business.

But not so with the left. They want to foster a culture that says do what you want. They think to promote traditional values in schools and popular culture is inappropriate and small-minded and at times even unconstitutional.

But then they say that it is only fair that everyone pay the costs of the mess this culture of moral relativism makes.

According to Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, in 2009 the poverty rate for children in homes with married parents was 11 percent. The poverty rate for children in homes headed by a single mother was 44.3 percent.

The incidence of homes headed by a single mother has gone from 6.3 percent of all households in 1950 to 23.9 percent in 2010.

In a Gallup poll done this year, 71 percent of respondents between 18 and 34 years old said having a baby outside of marriage is morally acceptable.

So we have promoted a culture, a culture fostered by the political left, that sanctions behavior in which poverty is more likely to occur. And then those that promote this culture say it is only fair that everybody pay the costs.

Worse, the evidence is overwhelming that government spending on poverty has little or no impact on the incidence of poverty.

Again according to Haskins of Brookings, from 1980 to 2011, spending in constant (inflation adjusted) dollars on means-tested (poverty) programs increased $500 billion, with a tripling of the amount spent per person in poverty. Over the same period the poverty rate was virtually unchanged.

Also worth noting is that over this same period, the percent of babies born to unwed mothers went from 18 percent in 1980 to over 40 percent in 2011.

In the first three years of the Obama administration, spending on these means-tested programs increased almost $150 billion, or 31 percent.

ObamaCare will add up to 20 million more individuals to the almost 60 million already covered by Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor. Medicaid now pays for 40 percent of all babies born in the country.

Price tag of big government, moral relativism - hundreds of billions. Price tag of limited government, personal responsibility - zero.

Is this an ideological battle? Of course it is.

-------------------------------

 

I like Star Parker. She makes sense here.

There a real and pervasive cost that lingers beyond a single generation. You support it skews. Shame on you and your rotting kind.

 

So you just to clarify for out friends on the left A Tea Partier may do something like this

"I'M RIGHT AND THIS COUNTRY SHOULD BE RUN WITH LIMITED GOVERNMENT. ALSO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY SHOULD BE MORE IMPORTANT!" (caps used for effect)

after which he may get a response like this

"I disagree with you"

At which point the Tea Party may respond like this

"You do? alright, its your life, do what you want."

 

That pretty much sums it up I think. Politicians aside, why do people hate the Tea Party again?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deficit is Repubs' fault?

Not the fault of the party and president who boosted spending to a record peacetime level and fought to keep it there?

I love psychotic moonbat humor. :D

 

 

As though liberals care about deficits.

Hilarious.

 

They only "care" when they can try to blame Repubs.

 

When Democrats cause them, they claim, hey, that saved the country from a Depression! hooey.

 

You think this article is tl;dr? Sorry pal, these numbers have been confirmed and are being reported all over the news cycles as well as the internet. The Republicans own this crisis, as well as those numbers. You can try to spin it away if you want, but the numbers are accurate, and 74% of the country is against you. Sticking ones head up ones ass isn't going to change that scenario for you.

 

"Accurate."

 

I love psychotic moonbat humor. :D

 

You can't even cite the Liberal MSM, you're such a troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cultural Roots of a Fiscal Crisis

Star Parker | Oct 14, 2013

We ought to think about the cultural roots of the budget crisis in Washington.

The political left says the shut down is all about an ideological tantrum of a handful of Republicans.

Certainly Tea Partiers have an ideology and vision about what ground rules would produce a more prosperous, freer, and fairer America.

But let’s be honest. The gentleman in the White House, our president, is as hard-core in his ideological dispositions as any Tea Partier.

Each side believes America would be better off if it were run according to their vision.

What’s the crucial difference?

As a Tea Partier, I’d like my neighbors to agree with me that personal responsibility, traditional values and limited government is the best way to build a healthy and prosperous personal life and nation. But if they don’t agree, they can do what they want.

But the world according to the big government, morally relative left is much different. In this view, yes, nobody is forcing me to agree that personal responsibility and traditional values don’t matter. But in their view it’s also only fair that I pick up the massive costs of their failures.

Take, for instance, poverty.

We all agree that we want to get as many people out of poverty as possible.

The evidence abounds that a lifestyle that reflects personal responsibility and traditional values, like traditional sexual attitudes and marriage and family, reduces dramatically chances that an individual will wind up in poverty.

I hope people live according to these values. But if they don’t want to, that’s their business.

But not so with the left. They want to foster a culture that says do what you want. They think to promote traditional values in schools and popular culture is inappropriate and small-minded and at times even unconstitutional.

But then they say that it is only fair that everyone pay the costs of the mess this culture of moral relativism makes.

According to Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, in 2009 the poverty rate for children in homes with married parents was 11 percent. The poverty rate for children in homes headed by a single mother was 44.3 percent.

The incidence of homes headed by a single mother has gone from 6.3 percent of all households in 1950 to 23.9 percent in 2010.

In a Gallup poll done this year, 71 percent of respondents between 18 and 34 years old said having a baby outside of marriage is morally acceptable.

So we have promoted a culture, a culture fostered by the political left, that sanctions behavior in which poverty is more likely to occur. And then those that promote this culture say it is only fair that everybody pay the costs.

Worse, the evidence is overwhelming that government spending on poverty has little or no impact on the incidence of poverty.

Again according to Haskins of Brookings, from 1980 to 2011, spending in constant (inflation adjusted) dollars on means-tested (poverty) programs increased $500 billion, with a tripling of the amount spent per person in poverty. Over the same period the poverty rate was virtually unchanged.

Also worth noting is that over this same period, the percent of babies born to unwed mothers went from 18 percent in 1980 to over 40 percent in 2011.

In the first three years of the Obama administration, spending on these means-tested programs increased almost $150 billion, or 31 percent.

ObamaCare will add up to 20 million more individuals to the almost 60 million already covered by Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor. Medicaid now pays for 40 percent of all babies born in the country.

Price tag of big government, moral relativism - hundreds of billions. Price tag of limited government, personal responsibility - zero.

Is this an ideological battle? Of course it is.

-------------------------------

 

I like Star Parker. She makes sense here.

There a real and pervasive cost that lingers beyond a single generation. You support it skews. Shame on you and your rotting kind.

 

 

Ironic that Obie said he would not be a president that kicks the can down the road.

 

Yet, that is all he's done since day one.

 

Raising the debt limit? "Raising the debt limit is a clear sign of failure in leadership". Obies own words, which apparently meant something when he said them but for some reason no longer apply.

 

 

This is what we're faced with. A "president" that is an agject liar, and a bunch of worshipping sheep willing to go off the cliff with him. Scarey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...