<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>rjjrdq&#039;s America II &#187; Money</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rjjrdq.com/category/finance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rjjrdq.com</link>
	<description>Still good, still bad, and still absurd...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 04:22:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Jobs Numbers A Lie</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2012/02/06/obama-jobs-numbers-a-lie/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2012/02/06/obama-jobs-numbers-a-lie/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 04:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bureau of Labor Statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=5074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>So far, none of our stellar candidates have said a word about this, and it&#8217;s reflected in the polls. If you believe Rasmussen (and I do), Obama would kick the crap out of the likely Republican nominee, Mitt Romney if the election were held today. That&#8217;s a huge swing from just a few weeks [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So far, none of our stellar candidates have said a word about this, and it&#8217;s reflected in the polls. If you believe Rasmussen (and I do), Obama would kick the crap out of the likely Republican nominee, Mitt Romney if the election were held today. That&#8217;s a huge swing from just a few weeks ago, when some polls had Romney ahead by double digits. How could this be? Is it the <i>independents</i>, those dolts that can&#8217;t decide between Obama and <i>anybody else?</i> Or is it the illusion that Obama&#8217;s policies are actually creating jobs? I&#8217;m willing to bet it&#8217;s a little bit of both.<span id="more-5074"></span></p>
<p>When the January job numbers came out Friday, the White House boasted that 243,000 jobs were created last month. Not saved-created. The unemployment rate continued to fall, now officially at 8.3 percent. Could it be? Were we all wrong? Did the Obama stimulus do it&#8217;s job? Hardly.</p>
<p>Exactly a year ago <a href="/2010/02/06/new-job-numbers-just-dont-add-up/" target="_blank"> I wrote</a> that the Obama regime was playing with employment numbers then. Even economists were puzzled by the apparent drop in unemployment. <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/5/curl-obamas-made-up-jobless-numbers/?page=all#pagebreak" target="_blank">Here we are again</a>, and can use the Hilda Solis run Labor Department&#8217;s own numbers to expose the strengthening economy myth.</p>
<blockquote><p>It appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that’s not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non-institutional population increased to 242.3 million, meaning those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30-year low of 63.7 percent as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation.”</p></blockquote>
<p>That&#8217;s right. 1.2 million people suddenly disappeared from the labor force, and now we have to go back to the days when Ronald (happy birthday) Reagan was mopping up the mess left behind by Peanut-brain Carter. Do the math. If indeed 243,000 jobs were created, but 1.2 million are no longer being counted&#8230;that&#8217;s a minus on my calculator. But Obama can brag that the economy is coming around, mainly because he&#8217;s not being challenged.</p>
<p>I said before that Republicans were using a risky strategy of focusing solely on the economy, given the plethora of issues they could be using to attack Obama. Right now, Barry is <i>BSing</i> the public and he&#8217;s getting away with it. I could find this information over the weekend. Are we to believe that four presidential candidates have no clue what&#8217;s going on? <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-06/labor-force-loss-prompts-search-of-u-s-churches-economy.html" target="_blank">They can ask Bloomberg</a>, they crunched the numbers with a real calculator. Or any number of financial analysts. We aren&#8217;t any better off than we were last year. The propaganda says different though, and if the polls are any indicator, it&#8217;s working like a charm.   </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2012/02/06/obama-jobs-numbers-a-lie/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Jobs Bill Would Let Jobless Sue Employers</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/09/28/obama-jobs-bill-would-let-jobless-sue-employers/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/09/28/obama-jobs-bill-would-let-jobless-sue-employers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 04:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4805</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>When Barack Obama chided Congress to pass his tax exploding jobs bill, everyone, including Obama knew that thing was dead on arrival. Had hell actually frozen over and the bill was passed though, there were a few surprises that went beyond insane tax hikes in the middle of a recession. The bill would have [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Barack Obama chided Congress to pass his tax exploding <i>jobs bill</i>, everyone, including Obama knew that thing was dead on arrival. Had hell actually frozen over and the bill was passed though, there were a few surprises that went beyond insane tax hikes in the middle of a recession. The bill would have also dictated who a company could hire.<span id="more-4805"></span></p>
<p>No wonder Barry was so adamant about getting that bill passed before anyone actually read it. No danger though. Even Harry Reid won&#8217;t bring it up for a vote. How bad is that? If he did though, this is what we could expect to see. And make no mistake; if Obama can&#8217;t get this kind of thing through here, he will certainly try it <i>there.</i></p>
<blockquote><p>The job creation bill that President Obama sent to Congress earlier this month includes a provision that would <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obama-proposes-letting-jobless-sue-discrimination-191042168.html" target="_blank">allow unsuccessful job applicants to sue</a> if they think a company of 15 more employees denied them a job because they were unemployed.</p></blockquote>
<p>That is correct. It doesn&#8217;t actually have to be true. If an unemployed individual <i>thinks</i> they didn&#8217;t get the job because they were unemployed, the money train will roll. Just about anyone can make that claim. Does an employer usually tell you why they decided not to hire you? <i>Never</i> in my case. But with this bill, millions of unemployed workers-qualified or not, would have been able to sue just about any company they applied to. All they have to do is <i>think</i> the company discriminated.</p>
<p>I know how tough it is to be unemployed. I&#8217;m sure we&#8217;ve all been there at some point, but at the same time, I never expected a company to hire me. I tried to present myself and my skills in the best light possible and show the company how I could benefit them. I never thought about suing anybody.</p>
<p>The only reason a company would not hire an unemployed individual is either they were unqualified, or they have been out of work so long, their skills have eroded. Would you hire a pilot that hadn&#8217;t been in a cockpit for 99 weeks? Either would I.</p>
<p>But under Obama&#8217;s plan that pilot could sue you. Luckily, this thing is DOA, but as I said, Obama will try and get it through some other way. We saw him try it with the Obamacare death counseling. He couldn&#8217;t get it in the bill, so he tried to impose it as a regulation. He failed, but he tried.</p>
<p>I feel for the unemployed. I could be one of them in the near future. We all could. Jobs aren&#8217;t being created in this country, and existing jobs are being shipped out. The job market is hell. But you can&#8217;t sue because a company decided not to hire you. Hopefully, the next election will bring in a hands on Republican. That&#8217;s what we&#8217;ll need to untangle the maze of regulations and edicts that Obama has smeared across the federal landscape. This would have been yet one more. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/09/28/obama-jobs-bill-would-let-jobless-sue-employers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thousands of Americans Attend Job Fair</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/08/21/thousands-of-black-americans-attend-job-fair/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/08/21/thousands-of-black-americans-attend-job-fair/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Aug 2011 07:13:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal aliens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>So what did Barry get in 2008? About 99 percent of the black vote in America? Something close to that number. To all my fellow Americans and black friends in this country I ask, Hows that working out for you?</p> <p>The very same day that the Obama regime announced that they will indefinitely delay [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So what did Barry get in 2008? About 99 percent of the black vote in America? Something close to that number. To all my fellow Americans and black friends in this country I ask, <i>Hows that working out for you?</i></p>
<p>The very same day that the Obama regime announced that they will indefinitely delay deporting many illegal immigrants who don’t have criminal records and will offer them a chance to apply for a work permit, a <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/thousands-show-job-fair-jobless-rate-rises/story?id=14336519" target="_blank">job fair commenced in Atlanta</a> that drew thousands of would-be applicants. The event was sponsored by the <i>Congressional Black Caucus.</i> Yes, blacks only. You are correct, there&#8217;s no way whitey would ever pull a stunt like this, but that isn&#8217;t the focus of this post. The focus is jobs, and the fact that the unemployment rate for blacks in Georgia is much higher than the national average.<span id="more-4707"></span></p>
<p>Job hopefuls stood in long lines for hours just for the chance that they might be considered for some kind of job. We all know times are tough, but for blacks, who are having an even tougher time than the rest of the general population, the going just got tougher.</p>
<p>The very people that helped propel Barack Obama into the White House are now being blindsided by him. Halting the deportation of 300,000 illegal aliens, and granting work permits to boot only makes finding a job tougher for those that pledged <i>rock solid</i> support for Obama. Many of these illegals that will benefit from the defacto amnesty already have jobs-jobs that could be filled by those folks at that job fair. Illegals also partake in social services to the tune of billions of dollars every year. Those are benefits that could also at least temporarily bolster the fortunes of the unemployed.</p>
<p>But 2012 is coming up fast, and unfortunately, most of those folks that braved sweltering temperatures and stood in the <i>line of humiliation</i> for chance at <i>any kind</i> of job will no doubt once again support the man who just stabbed them in the back. Obama knows that, so he&#8217;s turned his attention to the Latino vote-be it fraudulent or not. Here we can see the damage that illegal immigration does. Jobs Americans won&#8217;t do? Don&#8217;t tell that to the folks who attended a job fair by the thousands.</p>
<p>My African-American friends, Obama is taking you for a pack of fools. He&#8217;s giving away your jobs, he&#8217;s flooding your neighborhoods with those that shouldn&#8217;t be in this country, he&#8217;s allowing benefits paid for by your tax dollars to be used by those very same people that took the jobs that could-and should be yours. And if anybody has visions of the migrant picking corn in the field, keep in mind that those folks amount to maybe three percent of the illegal alien population in the United States, and even the country of Mexico concedes that most of them leave the fields and head to the cities in search of work within a year. Yes, he&#8217;s doing those things to all of us, but according to the referenced article, blacks are being particularly hard hit by the economic downturn. The last thing anybody needs is an illegal alien being gifted with a work permit.</p>
<p>I hope nobody believes that 30 million illegal aliens are out in the field picking tomatoes. They work construction, they landscape, they do maintenance, they work in hospitality, they cook, they clean-all the jobs that Americans will do. If you don&#8217;t believe that, just ask the thousands of Americans in Atlanta who are scrapping for anything they can find. Yet when next November rolls around, these same folks will dutifully cast their vote for the man that is actively destroying their lives.</p>
<p>I would say to black America to just dump the Obama&#8217;s, and the Sharpton&#8217;s, and the Jackson&#8217;s, and the Elijah Cummings who proclaim themselves as your leaders, and find more positive role models, like a Thomas Sowell, or Bill Cosby, or Ted Hayes, or the late great Terry Anderson. What about a Herman Cain, or an Allan West? There&#8217;s your leaders right there, not the goons that pull your strings now. Of course, being a white guy, I don&#8217;t expect anybody to listen to me. That&#8217;s okay. If you want to dehydrate in some unemployment line, you just keep doing what you&#8217;re doing. Let the politicians divide you into weaker demographic groups instead of a united America and see how far you get. If you want something better though, the alternatives are out there.    </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/08/21/thousands-of-black-americans-attend-job-fair/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>China Lectures the United States</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/08/06/china-lectures-the-united-states/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/08/06/china-lectures-the-united-states/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Aug 2011 05:11:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Standard & Poor's]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4673</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Anyone that has perused this blog for any amount of time knows what I think of the rise of communist China. Millions of American jobs and even more money has flooded that country, virtually guaranteeing that it will be the world&#8217;s top economy in a few decades-or sooner. So to hear me say that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone that has perused this blog for any amount of time knows what I think of the rise of communist China. Millions of American jobs and even more money has flooded that country, virtually guaranteeing that it will be the world&#8217;s top economy in a few decades-or sooner. So to hear me say that China is <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fiw-china-response-20110807,0,3901161.story" target="_blank">making some sense</a> means that something extraordinary has occurred. How about a credit downgrade for the United States?</p>
<p>On Friday, Standard &#038; Poors lowered the credit rating of the U.S. from AAA to AA+. That translates into higher interest rates for everybody. When the government has to pay more to borrow money, they pass that on to banks that borrow money from the fed that they in turn loan to you and I. Everybody gets hit with a downgrade, and incredibly, if we&#8217;d only listened to communist China, this could have been avoided.<span id="more-4673"></span></p>
<p>China has been warning the U.S. for a few years that spending was out of control, and they had to stop borrowing the insane amounts of money it was borrowing. At the same time, China continued to buy up U.S. treasuries, mainly because at the time, we were <i>AAA</i>; it was the safest investment in town. It still is, but now it just isn&#8217;t as safe as it was.</p>
<p>The bribes no doubt helped. Shipping millions of jobs over to China is causing their economy to explode with double digit increases annually made them happy to buy treasuries initially. China in turn is shipping garbage products back to the United States, which are then sold to the very people that lost their jobs to the communist juggernaut. It was the best of both worlds. A safe place to put their money and being handed an economy that used to exist in the United States.  You have to ask yourself though, what country <i>wouldn&#8217;t</i> take advantage of such generosity? After all, they&#8217;re basically lending us our own money. Those jobs used to be here, and we send what money is left in America back to China in the form of profit from the manufactured products shipped to the U.S.</p>
<p>Now all that could potentially be in jeopardy. As a result, China is dictating what the U.S. should do about it. The propagandory New China News Agency said it all.</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;If no substantial cuts were made to the U.S. gigantic military expenditure and bloated social welfare costs, the downgrade would prove to be only a prelude to more devastating credit rating cuts, which will further roil the global financial markets all along the way,&#8221; it continued.</p></blockquote>
<p>Sure, cut the fat-and dump that military while you&#8217;re at it. Of course, if we weren&#8217;t embroiled in three wars, that might actually be possible. Not only that, the legendary waste the government is famous for are actually hidden, painless cuts.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t expect Obama to listen though. In fact, don&#8217;t expect many in Washington to listen. If the disastrous debt deal is any indicator, that crowd won&#8217;t be able to navigate the U.S. economy out of a paper bag. That&#8217;s bad news for the rest of us.</p>
<p>China is looking for a place to invest their capital. They aren&#8217;t happy with the U.S., but at this time, there really is nowhere else to put their money. You could say that&#8217;s very unfortunate, because it gives the big spenders in Washington a line of credit they shouldn&#8217;t have. This country rakes in plenty of revenue every month. We don&#8217;t need to borrow. If even China can see that, then we have politicians with blinders on in Washington. That is of course, unless this is the plan. Francis Piven will tell you it is the plan. Why else would Obama take a teetering economy and push it off the cliff. If he&#8217;s following the <i>plan</i>, it&#8217;s a necessary step. Yes, I can see how devastating a failure it will be as well. But we&#8217;re talking ideologues that just can&#8217;t be convinced their philosophy has never, and will never work. If they don&#8217;t believe that, they can just ask booming China. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/08/06/china-lectures-the-united-states/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Obama Default Rhetoric A Lie?</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/07/31/is-obama-default-rhetoric-a-lie/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/07/31/is-obama-default-rhetoric-a-lie/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Default]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tim Geithner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4659</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Not just a bungled misstatement, a flat out lie. As you may have noticed, I haven&#8217;t really been covering the debt crisis, mainly because there isn&#8217;t one over and above the obvious. Yes, this country is $14 trillion dollars in debt, and yes, trillions more in unfunded obligations are looming, but that has little [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not just a bungled <i>misstatement,</i> a flat out lie. As you may have noticed, I haven&#8217;t really been covering the <i>debt crisis</i>, mainly because there isn&#8217;t one over and above the obvious. Yes, this country is $14 trillion dollars in debt, and yes, trillions more in unfunded obligations are looming, but that has little to do with the theatrics we&#8217;re seeing in Washington right now. I said before that the only way we can default on the debt is if Barack Obama unilaterally decided not to pay. Apparently, he isn&#8217;t going to do that.<span id="more-4659"></span></p>
<p>According to this <a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/07/25/obama-to-banks-were-not-defaulting/" target="_blank">report from FOX</a> (and I&#8217;ve heard the same story elsewhere), the Obama regime has assured banks that there absolutely will not be a default, even if a debt agreement is not reached by August 2nd.</p>
<blockquote><p>In a series of phone calls, administration officials have told bankers that the administration will not allow a default to happen even if the debt cap isn&#8217;t raised by the August 2 date.</p></blockquote>
<p>Quite different from what we&#8217;re hearing from Obama and his tax cheat goon <i>Turbo Tim</i> Geithner. The Goldman Sachs alum is wailing about an <i>imminent</i> default, even as banks are being assured that no such thing will happen. Of course, Obama could be lying to the banks, pulling a Cloward-Piven moment on steroids, but as much as Obama would love to do that, even he realizes the difference between dismantling a system and destroying something beyond repair.</p>
<p>This is a straight out lie for public consumption. Most people you ask on the street-if they have any knowledge of this issue at all, will tell you that we need to raise the debt limit or risk default. Or so the polls indicate. It&#8217;s all based on a lie though. What will happen though, is Obama will be able to decide what gets funded after debt interest is paid. So it is absolutely possible that granny may not get her Social Security check, while <i>Acornian</i> type groups, La Raza beneficiaries, and Muslim outreach programs will be spared the axe.</p>
<p>I thought before that Republicans should just let August 2 come and go, since they have a plan on the table. But with the specter of Obama doling out federal money, maybe that isn&#8217;t such a good idea. At the same time, the incredible amount of government waste, that will absorb much of that debt ceiling increase isn&#8217;t a much better alternative.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think we need to borrow any more money. I think there&#8217;s enough waste to go around. Sure other cuts have to be made and there will be pain. There will be pain because the government has handed out freebies for so many years that now there are those that have become dependent on those freebies. That could take a generation or more to fix, assuming the <i>fix</i> started <i>right now.</i> But we know that isn&#8217;t going to happen, and as a result we&#8217;ll end with some crap bill that raises the cap and more than likely doesn&#8217;t cut anything. Nobody in Washington wants to make the hard choices. They have their careers to think about. For the leftists, they have shown that anything that shrinks government is not an option. It philosophically goes against all their tenets.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s where we are. The good news is that tea party favorites came to Washington in November, and they&#8217;ve already made their presence felt. We need more in 2012. Remember, in the end, the rank and file will do whatever it takes to remain in power. If that means making real progress in reducing the deficit-and the national debt, then they will, if grudgingly, have to comply with the voters that can throw them out of office in the next election cycle. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/07/31/is-obama-default-rhetoric-a-lie/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Economists Botch Job Outlook</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/07/08/economists-botch-job-outlook/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/07/08/economists-botch-job-outlook/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 22:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve suggested before that stories are planted in the media in order to confuse the public so they won&#8217;t know what to think. I stand by that assertion, but here we have a case of bungling experts that are so bad, that any one of us would be among the unemployed with such a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="/2011/06/18/news-stories-designed-to-confuse-the-public/" target="_blank">I&#8217;ve suggested before</a> that stories are planted in the media in order to confuse the public so they won&#8217;t know what to think. I stand by that assertion, but here we have a case of bungling experts that are so bad, that any one of us would be among the unemployed with such a job performance.</p>
<p>Yesterday we had the <a href="http://www.dailynews.com/business/ci_18435134" target="_blank">happy, fluffy reports</a>. Economic think tanks that apparently this newspaper concluded were competent released reports suggesting that June would be a banner month for job creation in the United States. Various economic geniuses predicted between 100-200,000 jobs created for June. Not nearly enough for a struggling economy, but still, a few hundred thousand folks back on payrolls is a good thing. Well, <i>it would have been a good thing.</i><span id="more-4555"></span></p>
<p>Today the <a href="http://www.dailynews.com/business/ci_18439711" target="_blank">government released their numbers</a>, and they didn&#8217;t come anywhere near what these <i>experts</i> predicted. 18,000. A far cry from 200,000, or even 100,000. Unemployment ticked up to 9.2 percent. Many of those were government jobs. Local government that is.</p>
<p>Remember the stimulus bill? That was supposed to create <i>or save</i> X number of jobs. Well, these were some of the jobs. That temporary money is now gone, and those folks are unemployed. Of course they are. Nobody addressed the core issue of job creation. Stimulus money was thrown at existing jobs, propping up bankrupted governments across America. Everyone knew these days were coming, and now they&#8217;re here. The response of the Obama regime is to raise taxes, possibly come up with yet another stimulus scheme, raise the debt ceiling, and maybe even QE3. All the worse things you can do when you&#8217;re broke. Spend more, borrow more, pay more taxes, and devalue the dollar. Only someone that is trying to collapse the econony would push such an agenda. That brings us back to Obama.</p>
<p>What has this guy done to better the economy? Not only has he pushed the above debacles, but he has left the border unattended, allowing millions of existing jobs to go to illegal aliens. Then he piles on an Obamacare scheme that will punish all businesses-except the pals he gave waivers to. What is the logic in torching companies that have the propensity to ship jobs out of the country already?</p>
<p>We go back to the confused public that doesn&#8217;t know what to think. Anyone in their right mind would not give Obama another four years. But with the number of people that just don&#8217;t pay attention, or agree with the slauhgtering of the economy, or those that vote based on something other than content of character, or those that shouldn&#8217;t be voting at all, or those that are flat out clueless, Obama still has a chance 2012. That&#8217;s bad news for all of us, including his followers. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/07/08/economists-botch-job-outlook/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Stumps for Chinese Jobs</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/06/14/obama-stumps-for-chinese-jobs/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/06/14/obama-stumps-for-chinese-jobs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cree]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[green jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inc.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4477</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Barack Obama is on a whirlwind tour of sorts, trying to pep up the unemployed by feeding them a line of crap that will propel him past 2012. His way of doing that was to visit a company that exists because of taxpayer stimulus funds. They can&#8217;t compete with cheap Chinese labor, and as [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barack Obama is on a whirlwind tour of sorts, trying to pep up the unemployed by feeding them a line of crap that will propel him past 2012. His way of doing that was to visit a company that exists because of taxpayer stimulus funds. They can&#8217;t compete with cheap Chinese labor, and as they say, <i>if you can&#8217;t beat &#8216;em, join &#8216;em.</i></p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/06/13/obama-visit-puts-spotlight-on-crees-sales/" target="_blank">Obama slithered into North Carolina</a> today, a state that boasts an unemployment rate under 10 percent only because the government no longer counts those whose jobless benefits have dried up. He didn&#8217;t come to visit those folks though. He stopped in at a company called <i>Cree, Inc.</i>, an LED light manufacturer. Oh yes, they are a green company. That&#8217;s Obama green though, not <i>greenbacks</i>, unless you count the stimulus tax credits this company has received.<span id="more-4477"></span></p>
<p>Cree has received $39 million in tax credits, compliments you and I. What did they do with that money? Well, they have created 375 jobs in the last year and plan on creating 300 more. As long as we keep filling the pot. Those jobs are just temporary though, and if you believe the CEO of Cree, Chuck Swoboda, the <a href="http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/cree_chip_china_heart/" target="_blank">jobs will eventually end up in China</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>More Than 50% Of Cree’s Employees Are Now Working In China And Cree CEO Chuck Swoboda Says They “Will Continue To Expand Our Operation In Huizhou.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Remember, $39 million in stimulus money. Swoboda doesn&#8217;t think he can compete with cheap Chinese labor though, and on some level he is correct. That doesn&#8217;t stop him from taking out money though. After all, Cree is a NASDAQ listed company, and stockholders come first. That means cutting the overhead.</p>
<blockquote><p>“Though Cree is a US-based, Nasdaq-listed company, Swoboda said that ‘Cree management never runs this company as a US company. We consider Cree to be a global company with local wisdoms.’”</p></blockquote>
<p>No, he never intended Cree to be a boon to the North Carolina economy. He&#8217;s thinking outsourcing, and he expects you to pay for it. This is where Obama stumped with his stay the course rhetoric, and a continuing death spiral to a <i>green economy.</i> Green for China maybe.</p>
<p>How would you feel being an employee at Cree? The CEO is saying he can&#8217;t compete with you on the payroll. Talk about days being numbered. But Cree <a href="/2010/12/13/democrats-sending-stimulus-money-to-china/" target="_blank">isn&#8217;t the first company</a> that took stimulus funds and handed them over to China, and they won&#8217;t be the last. But Obama wants us to believe that the stimulus is actually working. Well, I guess it is; for China, and CEO&#8217;s who ship American jobs there.</p>
<p>Obama folded when <a href="/2011/02/06/obama-regime-declares-china-innocent/" target="_blank">he had a chance</a> to call China on their currency manipulation. How can you compete with a country that is keeping their currency intentionally undervalued?</p>
<p>He&#8217;s not competing, he&#8217;s fattening up a communist regime and funding their historic military buildup. That&#8217;s going to be somebody else&#8217;s problem though, not his. And companies like Cree, and goons like his economics czar Jeffery Immelt from GE and his schemes to make it even easier to insource as well as outsource will all be somebody else&#8217;s problem. Well, we could blame George Bush for <i>all those things</i> as well. I think Obama and Bush traveled the same road, but for different reasons. Either way, America gets the short end of the stick.</p>
<p>So there was a Republican presidential debate tonight. I hear Romney did very well. Great. Super. What do you do when nobody is on the horizon? That usually translates into reelection.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/06/14/obama-stumps-for-chinese-jobs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Boehner/Obama Attack Oil Companies</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/04/27/boehnerobama-attack-oil-companies/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/04/27/boehnerobama-attack-oil-companies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:03:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Boehner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oil]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4348</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Somebody fire this guy already. He&#8217;s talking out of both sides of his mouth, but at the same time, actions speak louder than words. If the CBR fiasco that he brokered is any indicator of how he&#8217;ll handle the unnecessary energy crisis, stand by for five dollar gas.</p> <p>Speaker of the House John Boehner [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Somebody fire this guy already. He&#8217;s talking out of both sides of his mouth, but at the same time, actions speak louder than words. If the CBR fiasco that he brokered is any indicator of how he&#8217;ll handle the unnecessary energy crisis, stand by for five dollar gas.</p>
<p>Speaker of the House John Boehner is taking action again, and once again, it plays right into the hands of Barack Obama. As if the energy industry wasn&#8217;t dodging enough landmines with the Obama regime, now they&#8217;ll have to deal with the GOP. Boehner knocked over every teacup in Washington when he stated that subsidies to oil companies would <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-urges-congress-eliminate-oil-company-subsidies/story?id=13462559" target="_blank">potentially be on the chopping block</a>.<span id="more-4348"></span></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;We are in a time when the federal government&#8217;s short on revenues. We need to control spending, but we need to have revenues to get the government moving,&#8221; Boehner said. &#8220;They ought to be paying their fair share.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>This is a guy that just brokered a budget deal that would actually increase spending for the rest of the year. He bragged that is was a cut. Now he wants to go after oil companies, who are already in the <i>crosshairs</i> of the Obama regime. Compare Boehner&#8217;s statement with that of Obama.</p>
<blockquote><p>The president said Congress should &#8220;take immediate action to eliminate unwarranted tax breaks for the oil and gas industry and use the dollars to invest in clean energy.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Sure, why not? Oil companies are already being blocked from further drilling in the United States, so what good are those subsidies? Apparently, Boehner feels the same way. Don&#8217;t get me wrong. I have no love for oil companies. Like any other for profit industry, they look to suck as much money out of the consumer as humanly possible. But that&#8217;s not unique to oil companies. <i>They all do it.</i> At the same time, they understand <i>equilibrium</i>, and that lower prices ultimately means more sales-and more revenue.</p>
<p>My understanding is that those subsidies amount to $4 billion. Somebody correct me if I&#8217;m wrong, but that&#8217;s what the article suggested. Yes, a drop in the bucket. Boehner&#8217;s mouth will cost America far more than $4 billion. Does Boehner think oil companies will take shareholder profits and invest in drilling? Someone needs to introduce him to a balance sheet.</p>
<p>The bi-polar side of Boehner emerged just as quickly though. He lauded a bill the would ostensibly encourage more drilling, while stifling the EPA from onerous regulations. Let&#8217;s see. A plan that has a snowball&#8217;s chance in hell of getting through the Senate, and no more subsidies for the oil companies. Great idea, John. Yes, he was for it before he was against it.</p>
<p>I say leave the subsidies alone and drill. Obama wants neither though. Unless of course it&#8217;s outside of America. He&#8217;s on board with drilling in Brazil. No coincidence that Brazil&#8217;s state run <i>Petrobras</i> Oil has none other than <a href="/2009/08/23/obama-lining-the-pocket-of-george-soros/" target="_blank">George Soros as a major stock holder</a>. No coincidence.</p>
<p>Boehner is right about one thing though. Just the idea that America will start to explore and exploit domestic resources will have an impact on gas prices. After all, speculators are betting on what happens in the future. Right now they&#8217;re betting that the Obama regime will continue to block drilling permits and push his windmills and batteries plan on the country. And the price will rise. No one in their right mind would believe that those things are a viable alternative to current energy sources. You can be sure not even Obama believes it. What he believes is that America needs to come down several notches. Well, mission accomplished Barry.</p>
<p>You&#8217;re stumbling John. I don&#8217;t know how you got the job, but if you want to keep it, you better stop nickel and diming your way through life and actually get something done. I give you a <i>D</i> so far. That&#8217;s a fail anywhere you go John. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/04/27/boehnerobama-attack-oil-companies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Private Enterprise Outshines Bloated Government</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/02/23/private-enterprise-outshines-bloated-government/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/02/23/private-enterprise-outshines-bloated-government/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:08:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frontier Oil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Holly Oil]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4157</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>As Democrats in Wisconsin and Indiana see their potential kickback money train in jeopardy, some are fleeing their states in a vain attempt to stave off the inevitable. While unscrupulous unions and bloated government bureacracies strangle economies and bleed taxpayers dry, private enterprise is showing how it&#8217;s done when left alone.</p> <p>Dallas based Holly [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Democrats in Wisconsin and Indiana see their potential kickback money train in jeopardy, some are fleeing their states in a vain attempt to stave off the inevitable. While unscrupulous unions and bloated government bureacracies strangle economies and bleed taxpayers dry, private enterprise is showing how it&#8217;s done when left alone.</p>
<p>Dallas based <i>Holly Corp.</I> <a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20110222-dallas-refiner-holly-offers-2.8-billion-in-shares-for-frontier-oil.ece" target="_blank">is buying out</a> Houston based <i>Frontier Oil</i> for 2.8 billion in shares. The company will now be known as <i>HollyFrontier</i> and operate five refineries in the United States. The key is that those refineries will be here, and the cost will be significantly cheaper than getting oil from abroad. They will have a 440,000 barrel a day capacity. Not that they will be <i>allowed</i> to produce that much, but they would have the means.</p>
<p>The company gets its oil from local sources and from Canada. That fact softens the impact of the kind of events we see in Libya right now. Ghadaffi is ordering pipelines to be blown up there. What do you think happens to the price of oil? It&#8217;s already jumped, just on the <i>rumor</i>. HollyFrontier won&#8217;t have to worry about that.<span id="more-4157"></span></p>
<p>The good news is that domestic and Canadian oil hasn&#8217;t kept pace with the price of global oil.</p>
<blockquote><p>West Texas Intermediate crude futures closed Tuesday at $93.57 a barrel; that’s an important domestic benchmark price. Brent futures closed at $106.25, reflecting a higher global market.</p></blockquote>
<p>Drill, baby, drill. Although Barack Obama will have none of that, oil companies have managed to actually increase domestic production. They&#8217;re using new technologies to tap into reserves in old fields. Imagine if they could expand that capacity? Just giving them the go ahead would bring the price of oil down. Until Barack Obama is deposed though, companies like HollyFrontier will have to make due with their new technology. No doubt technology funded with the very same tax breaks Obama wants to eliminate.</p>
<p>Here is a perfect example of government stifling private enterprise. There is no shortage of oil. <a href="/2011/02/20/gas-prices-skyrocketing/" target="_blank">I talked just the other day</a> about the glut in the United States. But with draconian regulations and a threat to the tax breaks these companies have enjoyed, it&#8217;s hard to make to case to these companies that they should roll the dice and continue to invest in new technologies. Speculators feel the same way, and until <i>they</i> can be convinced, expect the price of oil to remain artificially high. Remember, <i>we have a glut.</i></p>
<p>Dems in Wisconsin and Indiana need to come back and take their whipping like adults, and Barack Obama needs to stuff a sock in the EPA. Neither is likely to happen, and so we will continue to have bloated governments on all levels and a dark cloud hanging over free enterprise. That doesn&#8217;t mean it will remain that way. What it means is that it will be a slow process, and those that would preserve the unsustainable status quo will throw roadblocks all along the way. We see that with the Dems playing hide &#8216;n&#8217; seek, and Obama being hit with a contempt charge by a judge for his illegal drilling moratorium.</p>
<p>Solvent state governments may lead to lower taxes ultimately. That would translate into more jobs as more capital would be freed for companies to hire. Domestic oil production would help drive down the price of oil-potentially creating more jobs as company costs declined. Budget busting union contracts and onerous regulations will have just the opposite effect. A tale of two philosophies. The good news is that it looks like the tide is turning. But like a giant ship, the turn is painfully slow. HollyFrontier may have positioned themselves for a post 2012 change in the White House. If indeed that happens, they will be a great position to take advantage if Obama&#8217;s self imposed energy suicide pact is lifted. Private enterprise thinking ahead.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/02/23/private-enterprise-outshines-bloated-government/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gas Prices Skyrocketing</title>
		<link>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/02/20/gas-prices-skyrocketing/</link>
		<comments>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/02/20/gas-prices-skyrocketing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rjjrdq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oil]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjjrdq.com/?p=4148</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Most analysts predict gas to go to $4 per gallon this year (guaranteed in California). So what is the cause? Middle East unrest? Decreased oil production? Shortages? How about Fear and uncertainty fueled by the Obama agenda.</p> <p>Speculators are like scared lambs. With millions of dollars on the line daily, any kind of potentially [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Most analysts predict gas to go to $4 per gallon this year (guaranteed in California). So what is the cause? Middle East unrest? Decreased oil production? Shortages? How about Fear and uncertainty fueled by the Obama agenda.</p>
<p>Speculators are like scared lambs. With millions of dollars on the line daily, any kind of potentially disruptive world event can affect oil prices. We saw that with the Egyptian situation. Prices spiked on fears that the Suez Canal could be compromised. We saw it with the BP oil spill last year. We saw it once again with the illegal moratorium imposed on drilling in the gulf. At least the libs are happy with Egyptian events for the time being. Life is starting to return to normal along the gulf coast. A judge has ruled that Obama had better get his hands off those rigs in the gulf. Yet prices are rising.<span id="more-4148"></span></p>
<p>I paid $3.43 today for the cheapest off-brand crap I could find. That&#8217;s up from $3.35 a few days ago. At one point last week, the price rose almost 10 cents in a day. This, despite the fact that oil prices are dropping-in fact, crude prices on NYMEX are at its lowest point in three weeks. Not only that, there is a <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/02/retail-gas-rises-in-spite-of-supply-glut-and-reduced-mideast-tensions.html" target="_blank">gasoline glut</a> in the country.You saw that right, <i>a glut</i>. The Energy Department is reporting gasoline supplies are at more than 236 million barrels, the biggest glut since 1993. In other words, there <i>is no shortage</i> of fuel. Yet the price rises.</p>
<p>We can speculate with the speculators at what is driving the price spike. Unrest in the Middle East has spread, but even with that, it wouldn&#8217;t justify such a price hike. Besides, even though we get way too much oil from the Middle East, the majority of it comes from Canada and Mexico. Keep in mind, analysts have been predicting these kinds of prices for months. That brings us to Barack Obama. The illegal drilling moratorium has no doubt cost oil companies millions of dollars in potential revenues, and like <i>any company</i>, they will look to recoup those losses anywhere they can. Speculators see that, and it drives the price of gas up. Keep in mind that most of these oil giants are also in the gas selling business. Then we have Obama&#8217;s budget proposal. He wants to eliminate tax incentives for the oil companies. Like I said, any company will look to recoup those losses, and oil companies are no exception. Oil companies are no angels, but they aren&#8217;t idiots either.</p>
<p>Then we have the production side. Limited refining capacity will in and of itself drive up fuel prices. We also have a glut in raw crude. It&#8217;s being shipped down from Canada, but the companies don&#8217;t have the logistics or the facilities in place to do anything with it. They probably have no plans to do so either. After all, they can only speculate themselves what Obama will do next. It makes no sense for them to invest millions in refining capabilities, only to have Barack Obama tell them they can&#8217;t use those facilities.</p>
<p>Domestic drilling and expanded refining capacity will bring down the price at the pump. Obama doesn&#8217;t want either one of those things though. As long as this guy is in office, the only way gas will come down is if people stop driving. And isn&#8217;t that the plan? Unfortunately for America, these high prices will cost jobs. Companies will have to factor rising prices into their expenses, and if that means paring off jobs in order to stay relevant, then that&#8217;s what will happen.</p>
<p>Gas prices are artificially high. We have plenty, and we have the opportunity to produce more. There are plenty of factors that go into the price of oil, but what we are currently experiencing are high <i>gas prices</i>. It doesn&#8217;t reflect the current oil prices. Who can we blame for that? I just gave you my theory.   </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rjjrdq.com/2011/02/20/gas-prices-skyrocketing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

