« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Crickets Chirp As White House Spams & Sends Out Union Press Releases

Last week, many Americans watched President Obama stand in front of of his teleprompters and Congress and sell—no, demand—a still unwritten bill dubbed the American Jobs Act. While the President certainly gives an entertaining teleprompted speech, his demands were reminiscent of a third-world barter between a goat herder and a villager: In exchange for two goats (temporary tax cuts), you can give your daughter and her dowry (nearly another half a trillion dollars) to the goat herder so he can give them both to his union boss friends.

The very next day, Obama hit the campaign trail to demand that the House pass the unwritten bill even as employers and Wall Street shrugged at the unwritten plan.

You still need to have the business need to hire,” said Jeffery Braverman, owner of Nutsonline, an e-commerce company in Cranford, N.J., that sells nuts and dried fruit. While a $4,000 credit could offset the cost of the company’s lowest-cost health insurance plan, he said, it would not spur him to hire someone. “Business demand is what drives hiring,” he said.

Then, a most peculiar thing happened. The White House spammed reporters’ e-mail boxes (something that was supposedly stopped in 2009) and began issuing union press releases of unions backing the unwritten “jobs bill.” For the moment, try to ignore the fact that the White House press releases are touting Obama campaign donors’ acceptance of the unwritten jobs bill. [That is another, though related, issue.]

For the White House press office to become the ministry of propaganda for the likes of AFL-CIOAFSCME, NEA, SEIU, SteelworkersTeamsters, UAW and UFCW—almost all of whom have their wagons hitched to Obama’s re-election wagon and will gain more dues from Obama’s plan to spend more money—is something that is both entirely new, as well as disturbing.

What is even more disturbing is the lack of questioning from the media. Of course, this silence could be explained by the fact that much of the media is represented by the Communications Workers of America. The CWA, for its part, did send out it’s own press release.

To be sure, there are others, including Left-wing groups like the Blue-Green Alliance and George SorosCenter for American Progress, also backing Obama’s speech (since there’s still no bill). [Heck, even the crony-capitalist, American jobs exporter, GE's CEO Jeffrey Immelt backed Obama's speech.]

Regardless of their support for Obama’s unwritten plan, however, the fact that the White House’s press office is being used as a campaign vehicle on behalf of the President’s donors is uncharted territory that bears closer examination.

It’s too bad the press is unwilling to do its job once again.

Reportedly, Obama will send his jobs bill to Congress Monday night.

________________

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com.

COMMENTS

  • weyland

    …tax breaks don’t create jobs, demand does. My, who would have thunk it — the gaping hole in supply-side economics nailed in a simple statement.

    • Darin_H

      But then again, if I had more money in my pocket instead of going to the govt, I might be in a position to buy things, but I’m not buying anything with a one time check (hint, not all tax cuts are supply side).

      • weyland

        …since the money put back in these folk’s pockets has a far greater impact on raising demand, than do tax breaks for the wealthy?

        • Darin_H

          I don’t do class warfare. Sorry sparky.

          PS. Thanks for completely confirming my prior post

        • Jack_Savage

          I mean, surely you run a business or study economics. Please tell us what would spur you to hire people. Hint – class warfare doesn’t count – your president tried that already.

          • weyland

            …demand makes businesses hire. So, we need to create demand. If tax cuts are going to be used to do this (and I’m not arguing that’s necessarily the way forward), then giving these tax cuts to those at the bottom end of the income spectrum will have a bigger impact on demand than giving the cuts to those at the top end of the income spectrum.

            This isn’t class warfare; it’s simple economics. The wealthy are likely to save or invest the proceeds from those tax cuts, which doesn’t create any demand for tangible goods. The poor are likely to spend the proceeds, thereby stimulating demand.

          • Jack_Savage

            From simpletons. How many trillions do we need to piss away before you realize it doesn’t work?

            This is truly like discussing fine wines with a ferret.

          • weyland

            So you’re equating a tax cut with govt. spending? I’m not quite following you here. Do you have an argument, or are you just going to stick with the ad hominems?

          • powertothepeople

            and even I know that and have made it very clear I am quite ignorant when it comes to economics.

            While giving tax breaks to the lower class and lower middle class will generate some spending, the real growth comes from allowing those with the means to keep their money and invest. It is not the 8 an hour worker who is creating jobs and investing in business, so no tax cut to them will generate long term growth. Giving “tax breaks” to the lower class and middle class is nothing more than political grandstanding. I have no issue with anyone getting some of their tax money back, in fact I would love to see more of it. But to claim that granting a few hundred bucks up to a few thousand to the working stiff will cause steady and long term economical growth is absurd.

            Personally, I would much rather the rich and the business world get more tax breaks than I since it is the rich and the business world who are supplying much of my family with jobs. If those jobs are gone, tax breaks for my family do not matter.

          • Jack_Savage

            And you know it.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            In the first place a Temporary tax cut any any type will do exactly squat. IT is not a matter of theory it is a matter of history, they have never, ever helped at all. Because they are temporary.

            If you go even further, you are incorrect in assuming that a tax cut (let’s say it is permanent) to the lower and middle class will be more effective in stimulating the economy. It will not.

            Also a matter of history. But there is also an economic reason behind it. You see there is an economic term called velocity. Tax cuts at the upper end of the tax code have more velocity than tax cuts at the low end.

            that is because wealthier people have money to invest, while less wealthy people usually only spend their money. The spending does have a somewhat stimulative effect, but it is limited. The investment on the other hand has a multiplier effect, therefore has more velocity.

          • JSobieski

            First, when the wealthy save money, they do so by putting the money to work. Money in a savings account or money market is money available for lending to small business. The fact that the banks are that much further away from a solvency or liquidity problem is an added bonus.

            Second, demand is the one thing you really don’t need to stimulate. Human nature is to demand, but not supply. Given our drithers, we have unlimited consumption with zero supply. Economics is the science of scarcity.

            The biggest bang for the buck in terms of job creation is not unemployment benefits. Nor is it food stamps. Rather the biggest bang for the buck is capital put at risk in the marketplace in the anticipation of making a profit.

            When you make investment decisions, what is your relevant metric? Do your IRA statements come with a jobs created column? Do union pension funds try to make money for their pensions, or do they give the money away to homeless people who they know will spend it?

            Pursuit of profits will get the economy going. You can pursue profits without an increase in aggregate demand.

            The best sector to be in right now is helping large businesses cut costs. There is a lot of profit to be made in that sector.

        • renl57

          An amazing 23% of American homeowners are now upside-down on their mortgages–owing more than the homes are worth. (And since many families today have at least two incomes–mom and dad–23% of households means that more than 23% of Americans are in that boat.)

          Give them some extra money, and any rational financial planner (or the bank they owe money to) will tell them to pay down their debts with the money, not go buy a bunch of new stuff.

          And that is why traditional approaches aren’t working here. It doesn’t matter what Keynes said, AND it doesn’t matter what Laffer said. Nothing can be fixed when one-quarter of the people are facing bankruptcy or foreclosure. If you don’t fix that, nothing else matters.

          • http://applescorneroftheorchard.blogspot.com/ Pomme

            Why don’t politicians ever see that a temporary fix isn’t a fix!?!??

          • afreemaniii

            Let’s look at another luxury item that people buy. Cars. People buy cars every day. Those cars are worth less than they owe on them the moment they leave the lot. I don’t see a rash of news stories about banks taking those cars back a week later because they are worth less than people owe on them. I also don’t see a rash of stories about people stopping payment for their cars and waiting for banks to repossess them.

            Owing more on a house than its worth doesn’t mandate bankruptcy or foreclosure. People need to quit whining about an investment that lost money and pay their damn bills.

            Owning a house is not a right, it is a privilege. If you don’t want to assume the risk, then don’t buy a house. Go rent an apartment or rent a house from someone else who is willing to accept the risk associated with owning property.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            I posted this in an economics blog just today in answer to a question so I will re post it here.

            What underlies all recessions is a bubble. and what underlies all bubbles is an excess in debt. The only real solution is time. It takes time to wash out the bad debt and reduce inventories.

            But time is necessary but not sufficient. It also needs constancy, because recessions are driven by fear. There is not much a government can do except in those instances where perhaps lowering taxes(permanently) or lowering regulations may help. But the most important thing a government can do is offer a climate of certainty.

            Not a climate of rapid change. All that we have seen recently is an almost textbook case of what not to do. Excessive meddling in the money supply, inflation, ever increasing business regulation, temporary tax cuts. overspending, over-borrowing. All of these things contribute to uncertainty, they do not help, at all.

          • davesinsanantonio

            airheads on the left are doubling down on all the things you pointed out do not work.
            Just like in the Middle Ages when the flaggelants did not succeed in stemming the tide of the Black Death they just beat themselves harder. Unfortunately, the self-abuse (if you understand the old use of that term) only serves to give the Left a little buzz and brings them back to do it again and again. The ideas of the Left never really work as advertised. But, their religious zeal for them, especially by those who are on the receiving end of government largesse, will keep them going and going like the Energizer bunny. The fact that they do not work won’t faze them a bit. They will blame everyone but themselves, because ultimately their religion is that they are so special that this time it will work. Self worship is destructive to the worshiper and, of course, to the object of his worship. But, the Left will go to their graves still “believing”.

  • lineholder

    repeatedly over the weekend. If what we were facing was a supply-side crisis only, where business owners simply didn’t have the resources to invest, then perhaps that might be different. But this moved into the category of being a demand-side crisis a few months ago and business owners recognize it as such.

    For specific types of manufacturing companies, they now have a backlog of inventory. They’ve been trying to keep people employed and productive as much as they can, even though the demand hasn’t existed to support it. No one ever seems to mention this particular type of “investment of resources”. All we hear is how corporations are sitting on all this money that could be helping “society as a whole”. Small increases in product demand won’t stimulate many jobs, simply because it is going to take a while to burn through those inventories.

    These Unions are just as bad about acting with an entitlement attitude as certain sectors of population seem to be. They act as if the private sector OWES the Unions new business and new jobs and new opportunities, and that this is the reason for private sector business existence. If “crony-Unionism” isn’t a valid phrase, perhaps it should be.

    Everything they are doing now, from the admin on down, is focused on “the agenda” without any pertinent context grounded in reality.

    • renl57

      Supply-side economics isn’t the answer to everything and it isn’t the answer to our current economic slump.

      Supply-side economics had its beginnings in the 1970s, when the supply shortages were obvious to anyone who tried to buy gasoline for his car or noticed the double-digit inflation rate.

      If anything, we have the opposite problem: Overproduction of real estate caused by unrealistically cheap credit has depressed the housing market.

  • Locked and Loaded

    I’m sure a huge percentage of these hacks are quite thankful for the material. Even the ones who laugh or harp about it will put it to “good” use.

    As far as the press doing their jobs, I’m also sure they they are doing their jobs, as they see them, very well indeed.

    • davesinsanantonio

      people who claim to be journalists. And, it makes their jobs so much easier. What’s not for them to like?

  • http://www.periodictablet.com superamerican

    Well, duh. Democrats like to pass bills before they read them. Now, it’s pass them before they’re written. Oh, that happened with Dodd-Frank.