Democrats Turn 'where are the jobs'? Chant Back on the Republicans

WASHINGTON — Republicans won sweeping victories last November by taunting Democrats with "Where are the jobs?" Democrats are now throwing those taunts back, saying it's Republicans who will knock thousands of Americans out of work with their demands for deep cuts in federal spending.

The attacks have caught Republicans at an awkward moment, as they shift their chief emphasis from creating jobs to reducing the size of the government and its deficits. They are finding it hard to claim they can do both at the same time.

Republicans say a smaller government eventually will spur private-sector job growth. Many economists challenge that claim, noting that the government helps pays for research, infrastructure, education and other programs that promote both public- and private-sector jobs. GOP leaders already acknowledge that thousands of government workers would lose their jobs in the short run under the $61 billion cost-cutting bill House Republicans are pushing this week.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_824447.html

"Many economists challenge that claim, noting that the government helps pays for research, infrastructure, education and other programs that promote both public- and private-sector jobs."

That's true! Yes, the government does help pay for all those things - with money they don't have!!!! I suppose raising taxes is appropriate for them to keep up the good work. Just ask yourself, "what would Krugman do?"

There is money to help infrastructure, education and other programs that public and private sector jobs.
Its all about where you put your priorities. I have been calling for funding for more infrastructure for the past year.
That support is now favored by the Chamber of Commerce (who has opposed Obama in many areas).

While we are on the subject of Jobs (steve jobs :))

First Posted: 02-18-11 10:46 AM | Updated: 02-18-11 11:59 AM
Mark Zuckerberg Obama, Obama, Steve Jobs, Technology News
Via the White House Flickr photostream come photos of President Obama's buzzed-about dinner with tech leaders Thursday evening.

The guest list (see below) included tech luminaries such as Apple CEO Steve Jobs, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and outgoing Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

One photo of the dinner offers a glimpse into the seating arrangement for the evening, as well as of Jobs, who is currently on medical leave. Notably, Jobs and Zuckerberg were seated directly to Obama's left and right, respectively. Jobs donned his trademark black turtleneck, while others in attendance opted for suits and ties.

A White House official described the meeting as "part of our ongoing dialogue with the business community on how we can work together to win the future, strengthen our economy, support entrepreneurship, increasing our exports, and get the American people back to work," noting prior to the event, "The President and the business leaders will discuss our shared goal of promoting American innovation, and discuss his commitment to new investments in research and development, education and clean energy."

The official guest list (via the LA Times)

John Doerr, partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
Carol Bartz, president and CEO, Yahoo!
John Chambers, CEO and chairman, Cisco Systems
Dick Costolo, CEO, Twitter
Larry Ellison, co-founder and CEO, Oracle
Reed Hastings, CEO, NetFlix
John Hennessy, president, Stanford University
Steve Jobs, chairman and CEO, Apple
Art Levinson, chairman and former CEO, Genentech
Eric Schmidt, chairman and CEO, Google
Steve Westly, managing partner and founder, Westly Group
Mark Zuckerberg, founder, president and CEO, Facebook

"There is money to help infrastructure, education and other programs that (promote?) public and private sector jobs."

There is? That's right, I forgot. The federal government has plenty of money.

Yep there is money. We never had a problem spending Trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan, and continuing to give Billions to the oil companies etc. etc. And if we dont start investing in infrastructure, innovation, etc. today we will rue the day. Again, its a matter of priorities.
EVEN the Chamber of Commerce, no friend of Obama, understands the importance of investing NOW.

Oil companies provide energy all US citizens and jobs for many. Oil is commercially viable. Oil is good. The government is right partner with these job creators who warm our houses durinng these freezing cold winters. All of the solar companies are moving mfg to China. What good does that do for America? We need to drill in the gulf and Alaska.

I agree, we need to invest in infrastructure. The first project should be to rebuild the golden gate bridge, then the bridge to no where.

House Democrats Unveil 4O Billion in Cuts to Wasteful Big Oil Subsidies
Thursday, 10 February 2011 14:44
Today, Reps. Earl Blumenauer, Ed Markey, John Conyers, Jim Moran, Lois Capps, Peter Welch and David Price and others introduced legislation to cut the budget by ending roughly $40 billion over five years in wasteful subsidies to the oil industry. The “Ending Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act” (H.R. 601) eliminates subsidies that have worsened the deficit, weakened our energy security, undermined our ability to drive investment in sources of renewable energy, and damaged the environment. Download the one page fact sheet.

“The oil industry is one of the most profitable industries in the world and does not need help from the government,” said Rep. Earl Blumenauer. “With Congress already discussing painful budget cuts that will require American families to make sacrifices, it is only fair that we also stop the handouts to our richest oil companies. “It makes no sense that we are borrowing money from China to subsidize the most profitable industry in the world and corporations like ExxonMobil that earn billions every year. It’s time for us to have a serious, rational discussion about cutting the budget.”



“The biggest companies no longer need 100 year-old subsidies to sell $100 dollar per barrel oil to make nearly $100 billion a year,” said Rep. Ed Markey. “We shouldn’t be trying to balance the budget on the backs of our seniors and struggling middle-class families while oil company executives continue to line their pockets with tax breaks.”


“If my colleagues across the aisle are serious about seeking out and cutting wasteful government spending, they should leave the American people alone and focus on the nearly $40 billion in wasteful subsidies that will go to Big Oil over the next five years,” said Rep. John Conyers. “An injustice is perpetrated every day the government subsidizes the operation of a wildly profitable industry, while, at the same time, it tells American families that they must do more with less. Each day these tax breaks exist, our system of representative government fails because we place the needs of profitable corporations over the health and security of our constituents.”


“To move forward on a path to clean energy, we need to stop propping up the dirty energy industries of the past. This legislation will end the tax breaks to big oil companies and save nearly $40 billion over the next five years,” said Rep. Jim Moran. “Most of these subsidies and tax benefits were granted during a time when oil was selling for less than $30 per barrel and our domestic producers needed assistance to compete with foreign industries. With oil now selling for three times as much, these subsidies are no longer justified.”


“I can think of few better ways to ‘Win the Future’ than by eliminating these wasteful subsidies to Big Oil and investing the savings in the energy of the 21st century—solar, wave, and wind energy,” said Rep. Lois Capps. “Eliminating subsidies for some of the world’s wealthiest companies should be a “No-Brainer”. We know Big Oil and their friends in Congress will stand in the way of this important legislation, and we’ll hear some of the same false arguments we always hear. But the American people know better. They know it’s time for a 21st century energy policy that creates jobs, gets our economy growing again, and protects our health.”


“In a week when House Republicans are slashing programs ranging from low-income heating assistance to COPS to high-speed rail, it should be a no-brainer to end unnecessary subsidies to the oil industry,” said Rep. Peter Welch. “Taxpayer support for mature, profitable industries makes no sense, particularly when we should be investing in the energy efficiency and clean energy sectors.”


“If the Republican leadership is serious about reducing the deficit, eliminating subsidies for oil companies should be a no-brainer,” said Rep. David Price. “This legislation would barely make a dent in oil company profits, which hit $77 billion last year alone, but it would have a significant impact on the federal bottom line - saving roughly $40 billion over 5 years. Instead of building wealth for shareholders of Exxon, BP, and Chevron, we need to invest in programs that create jobs for the American people and lay the foundation for our long-term global competitiveness.”

"If the Republican leadership is serious about reducing the deficit, eliminating subsidies for oil companies should be a no-brainer,” said Rep. David Price.

But they're not serious - except to try to bust unions, cut social programs, reward the wealthy and remove all regulations on business like environmental regulations.

Our government is fatally broken. Both parties are responsible but not in equal measure.

Exactly Atypical. Its amazing to hear people who actually try to defend the billions in subsidies to the oil and coal companies. Actually its outrageous. These Republicans are simply protecting those industries that supply them with their campaign funds.

"Our government is fatally broken. Both parties are responsible but not in equal measure."

Only the first five words matter, and I agree. That might be a first. There is no compromise any more. The right and left are entrenched, and all of us pay for it, rich, non rich, middle class. Just look at the post above mine. To that guy, the political system is just fine, as long as you're a democrat and sign up to democratic idealogy with no respect for differing opinions.