Jobs Report Isn’t Good News as Most Think

This past Friday, the August jobs report was released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. According to the report, total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 96,000 in August, and the unemployment rate edged down to 8.1 percent. Specific employment increases were in food services and drinking places, in professional and technical services, and in health care.

Almost automatically, proponents of the Obama Administration as well as political pundits touted this as good news and as being proof of the effectiveness of the President’s economic policy. Unfortunately, few if any political talking heads discussed this in reference to the general citizenry of America or offer that the aforementioned may not be the case.

If one actually takes the time to read the report and do some basic math, they would clearly see that for the average American, the data does not provide such a rosy picture. First, is the obvious observation of that 119,000 fewer persons were employed in August compared to the month of July and that Manufacturing employment edged down in August (-15,000).

The reality is that around 89 million people in America are unemployed and the value of the dollar has started to retract if one pays any attention to the Forex markets. Moreover, Gold is up 3.1 percent and silver is up 7.1 percent when the administration and the Federal Reserve are thinking about another phase of quantitative easing (QE3).

Job loss will continue to be a problem for whoever is in the Whitehouse. In particular with the strange policies of the Federal reserve. Bernanke knew in 1988 that quantitative easing was ineffective work because bank lending channel typically close if banks have access to external sources of funding (other people money). Yet, Bernanke and the present administration continue to advocate that in order to revive economic growth and avert deflation, QE is a necessity.

The jobs reports show that QE only makes the rich richer. In fact the Fed has increased its balance sheet from $900 billion to $2.9 trillion the difference is $2 trillion (or 13% of GDP) while the job report shows that 58% of Jobs Created Pay Only $8 hour or less.

Now I know many will say I am just bashing Obama, that I am jealous of the President and that I just don't know what I'm talking about because the jobs report shows the President is doing a good job.  They may even say that the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), as the Presidents often states supports his economic policies. Unfortunately, on the CBO's track record, I trust them as much as I do a white man with a sheet to have lighter fluid and a match at a BBQ. Let the CBO tell it, from their unrealistic view of this economy, America never goes into a recession. 

Currently, the CBO is assuming a deficit of $3.5 trillion from 2012-2021 and if past history is any indication, they are at least likely off by 60% meaning it is really close to $10 trillion. Recall that just ten years ago, the CBO predicted that the US deficit would be at $7.6 trillion currently, but the actual number as of this week is above the $16 trillion mark. Between 2002 and 2010 all of their real GDP projections were between 2.6% and 2.9%. By overestimating growth, you overestimate revenues, which underestimate the deficit and gives politicians the impression they have more of our money to spend before they get into trouble.

Last week at the DNC, Obama suggested that he would cut the deficit but strongly asserted he would use money saved from the wars to reduce the deficit, which is strange since that money doesn’t exist since the war is being paid for by borrowed money mainly from China. All of this seems to be ignored when discussing the economy and the jobs picture, but what can one expect, for only by American math can you have 119,000 Fewer Employed in August than July and unemployment rate go down.

Ten Ways Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are more alike than Different

There are just a few months left before the November Presidential elections. The choice has been mad for many in the simple terms of Democrat or Republican and Obama versus Romney. However, what is not known to most is that these two individuals actually are more alike than different.  We know about the basics: that the both like Star Trek, attended Harvard Law School and the Television situational comedy Modern Family, but they are just as alike from a policy perspective.  The following are ten examples in which they are more alike than different.

1. The signature legislative accomplishment of Obama which Romney has said he will repeal and replace “ObamaCare” was “RomneyCare,” which was the model for The Affordable Care Act.

2. Both wants to expand federal spending on Medicaid to help each state cover residents who cannot afford health insurance.

3. The big Wall Street Banks who received TARP bailout money that were top Obama donors in 2008 are top Romney donors in 2012.

4. The Obama Administration has yet to prosecute a single Wall Street executive for malfeasance related to the 2007 – 2008 financial crash. Wall Street’s aforementioned donation patterns make for a compelling conclusion: A Romney Administration would be no different.

5. Both oppose a full, annual, transparent, audit of the Federal Reserve’s finances and activities, suggesting the need for “Fed independence” from Congress.

6. Both would like a Value Added Tax as a potential fiscal policy solution and support international cap and trade policies via global carbon regulatory treaty and are both supporters of strict gun control measures.

7. Both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney prioritize “reducing our dependence on foreign oil,” pursuing alternative energy sources, and setting regulatory efficiency standards as part of federal energy policy.

8. Mitt Romney also supports the continued raids and prosecution of medical marijuana dispensaries (and even patients) that have characterized Obama Administration as well as Bush-era policy on medical marijuana.

9. Neither Obama nor Romney has military experience and both support the Bush era doctrine of preemptive war.

10. Neither Romney, nor Obama have offered a plan of detailed, substantive spending cuts to the out-of-control federal budget.

These are just ten ways.  I could go on and speak of how they both support executive line item vetoes, support continuing drug prohibition and the forty-year-old, Nixon-era War on Drugs, the legitimate power of the president to execute American citizens by “targeted killing” done in secret without charges or trial, support the controversial practice of extraordinary rendition, and their mutual support for support the warrantless wiretapping of the Bush-era USA Patriot Act. The truth is outside of ethnicity, religious faith and party, they are the same

Newt’s Campaign Comes Down To Earth As Iowan Calls Him ‘F—king A—hole’ To His Face

RON PAUL 70% on CNBC's poll, yanked after 15 min

No Uncle Tom, But Paul over Obama Any Day

I like Obama. He is smart, promotes the values of family and what it means to be a father and a husband, but his policies leave a lot to be questioned. I am not fond of the republicans, or the Democratic Party, especially the true GOP candidates trying to become the next President of the United States. But I do like and respect Dr. Ron Paul – libertarian like me, who has been reduced to run under the Republican banner when the Republican Party hates him with avarice and conviction. So if it came down to it, I would select Dr. Paul over Barack Obama, Esquire anyway and let me tell you why.

To start off, more than five years ago, before any of the current slate of GOP hopefuls or prior democratic contenders, he saw and said what would happen if government continued on its fatuous ways. Even before Obama, he described the current state of America’s Federal government as a philosophical danger that only represents the status quo. He described it as immoral because both republicans and democrats in the executive and legislative branches of government were destroying our personal and economic liberties. Five years ago he stated that they believe in internationalism over the constitution and that banking, the military industrial complex, the prison industrial complex, medical industry, the insurance industry and pharmaceutical industry interest are placed before the interest of the American people in the name of profits.

Many of us, as ill-informed as we are, forget that the austerity measures via stimulus as pronounced by Bush and Obama, and countries in Europe, are not what is needed to deal with the problems resulting from the financial crisis of 2007 but instead aid the speculators who brought the crisis in the first place. Paul is the only person who addresses this.

He speaks openly how the UN uses America to act against its own interest and how they took us to war after WW II in Korea and that we have been there ever since. He points out how our major trade agreements including NAFTA and our involvement with the IMF, WTO and World Bank drain US economic resources for other nations and not ours. He is against internationalism and believes most government should be local as well as speaks openly how democrats and republicans alike are weak on immigration and do not care about the nation’s borders based on past inaction.

To bring our budget under control he notes we needs to stop spending. Unlike Republicans, he will not cut domestic programs to do this but rather stop all foreign aid abroad, close all of our military bases abroad, and bring home all of our troops. If we don’t take such measure, not only will our sovereignty be questionable, but we will have an even bigger financial crisis and a collapse of the dollar is his view.

His observations are well supported as both democrats and republican administrations amass massive deficits that continue to grow annually. He attacks republicans for when Bush was elected, he doubled the size of the Department of Education, increased entitlements and implemented a prescription drug program, none of which were paid for.

He says that the federal government spends too much, tax too much, borrow too much and print too much. This has resulted in a currency and sovereign debt crisis. He would end the IRS and not replace it with anything using history as a framework saying that the nation lived without an IRS until 1913 when it was established (16th amendment). He would prefer tariffs and similar fees.

What makes him different from the Republican candidates and Obama is his understanding and approach to foreign policy. A common example of his is showing how Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein used to be our allies and then became our enemies. Our aid t these nations and our presence in Saudi Arabia for example fuel their hate. We give billions to Israel annually and three times as much to Arab states because of our global policeman stance and desire to want in roads to Middle Eastern oil. Cutting foreign aid alone would save hundreds of billions annually and would be sensible foreign policy if taking care of America was more important than policing the world putting military lives at risk. For as Paul ask, who do US troops in Germany and Japan help America’s defense and protect our national interest? As it stands, the US military is in 130 countries and have more than 700 bases around the world at a staggering annual cost.

He believes we should become energy dependent, drill at home and develop alternative fuels here in our own backyard. Government from his perspective should not give any global multi-national corporation loan guarantees because it fosters malinvestment and obviates free-market. Why because from his perspective, welfarism and corporatism create more and more poor and hungry people.

Last but not least, unlike Obama or the GOP, Paul believes in legalizing freedom of choice to the extent of legalizing marijuana. His position is that it should be obviated from the jurisdiction of the federal government and that states should be left to decide to regulate it as was the case before 1937. This is both a 10^th amendment and free market issue from his perspective.

Now I could speak more on his desire to get citizens to understand the importance of monetary policy to how the Federal Reserve is responsible for job destruction in the nation through fixing interest rates and expanding money, and not liquidating debt to let prices fall subsequently propping up bad debt, but I doubt if most folks take their politics to the same level as I do prior to selecting a candidate. Another reason why I like Paul over Obama, he is the only candidate talking about a return of the Gold standard since history shows us all great nations who went off the Gold standard eventually failed.

Bottom line is based on policy and position alone, Dr. Paul is what I desire in a President more so than any of the GOP fanatics and President Obama. I do not select a person because he looks like me or is the same color or race. The way I see it a rapist, black or white is still a rapist. Unlike many black folks in America, I study the issues and do not vote based on trivial pursuits or because someone tells me I should. I am no Uncle Tom but for me it is Dr. Paul over Obama any day. Im just saying - so call in tonight and let us know what u think.

"2012 BARACK OBAMA vs RON PAUL" hosted by @RDBRadio LIVE Sept 8th 10 PM EDT #BlogTalkRadio call-in (347)324-5722

Perry Compares Civil Rights Movement to Tax Cuts for Billionaires

First Presidential Anti-Obama Campaign Attack Ad For 2012 Hits New Hampshire