Pelosi: Extending jobless benefits will “make a difference of 600,000 jobs”

posted at 1:40 pm on December 16, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Via CNS News and our friend and Townhall colleague Greg Hengler, Nancy Pelosi lectured America on macroeconomics yesterday by insisting that an extension of unemployment benefits would “make a difference of 600,000 jobs to our economy.”  Greg recalled a similar claim from Pelosi about ObamaCare, and adds it to the end of Pelosi’s claim from yesterday:

“Christmas is 10 days away,” said Pelosi at a press briefing on Capitol Hill today. “The president and Democrats in Congress have been very clear. We’re not going home without enacting a payroll tax cut for America’s working families and extending unemployment insurance for millions of Americans.”

“The payroll tax cut that the president proposed would put $1,500 in the pockets of 160 million Americans,” she said. “The unemployment insurance extension is not only good for individuals. It has a macroeconomic impact. As macroeconomic advisers have stated, it would make a difference of 600,000 jobs to our economy.”

Pelosi did not name those “macroeconomic advisers.” She continued: “Again this is important because this is about the safety net not just for these individuals, but for our economic system that, in times of unemployment, we have a safety net and that is important.”

“Again, [not only] a safety net for individuals, but a safety net for the economy,” she said, “and again this money when received is immediately spent, it’s urgently needed, and injects demand into the economy, creating jobs.”

This is a fairly testable hypothesis.  The last time Congress extended the jobless benefits was a year ago, in another crunch-time compromise between Republicans and Democrats on Pennsylvania Avenue.  Since then, the economy has added about 1.5 million jobs — an average of 125,000 a month, which is only enough to keep up with population growth.  Assuming that Pelosi’s correct and we subtract 600,000 from the 2011 numbers, the Obama adminstration’s economic policies would account for growth that falls well below that of population maintenance — at only 75,000 per month.

The number and the claim is absurd.  Whatever short-term economic benefit arises from giving benefits to the unemployed is not enough to generate enough marketplace demand to create 600,000 jobs, nor would its absence be enough to eliminate 600,000 jobs, either.  Its absence would probably force the long-term unemployed into part-time and low-paying jobs to maintain themselves, which would not only service much of that same demand, it would also not take capital from the future — where its absence will cost jobs.  There are social and humanitarian reasons for providing unemployment benefits, but job creation and economic growth are not among them.

At least, though, we can say that the deal Pelosi makes here is much better than ObamaCare.  That will cost $2 trillion in its first ten years, according to the CBO, which works out to five million dollars a job.  Sheesh!  Even Obama’s green-tech boondoggles have a better price-per-job than that.  With the proposed extension of jobless benefits expected to add $44 billion, that works out to $110,000 per job … which is still a ridiculous figure, and shows why capital is used more efficiently when left in the marketplace.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Princess Nancy needs to look to Denmark, where they found that people fairly quickly found jobs once their unemployment benefits were terminated. If you keep giving people fish, they will never learn to fish on their own — there’s simply very little motivation when you just keep receiving handouts. (I know that a lot of people are hurting. But we cannot carry them indefinitely. Something needs to change and we cannot keep robbing Peter to pay Paul’s unemployment benefits.)

clayj on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Love that woman. She’s always got a pithy comment or two.

a capella on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Tell me something, Botox Brain: how does paying people not to work create jobs?

Steve Z on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Unemployment benefits, of course, come up for renewal right around Christmas. It’s as if this was planned somehow…

fiatboomer on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

The Dems have finally found a tax cut they love and it’s stupid. Go figure.

29Victor on December 16, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Support for Obamacare and Witchscare hits an all time low.

Schadenfreude on December 16, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Maybe Obama will take the witch to Hawaii.

For her hammer-march, in that light blue suit she should suffer direly, here on Earth.

Schadenfreude on December 16, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Don’t lowball it, Nance. 1,000,000. When you’re lying, think big.

vityas on December 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Sorry, I was thinking of the payroll tax cut. Still rubbing the night out of my eyes.

Why do Dems insist that pumping money into the economy like this grows the economy but can’t wrap their head around the idea that letting companies & people keep more of their money would help the economy?

29Victor on December 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Love that woman. She’s always got a pithy comment or two.

a capella on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

I ‘love’ her too. She makes witches decent and indignant.

Schadenfreude on December 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Does this old hag know where the hell the money for these people-who-now-never-have-to-get-a-job-ever-again comes from???? The few of us left with jobs!!!!!!!!!

search4truth on December 16, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Archeologists 1,000 years from now will prove she’s right or something.

cartooner on December 16, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Is it the plastic surgery that makes her sound like …she…can’t…quite get that mouth all the way open or…do you imagine that she actually has had a stroke?

Scoreboard44 on December 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Absurd is the perfect word Ed

cmsinaz on December 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Only 600,000 jobs? That’s peanuts. What about the remaining 499,400,000 jobs lost each month?

Pelosi – 500 million jobs lost each month

Christien on December 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Nancy is practicing being a comedian. Obviously, she is better at that than politics.

nitram on December 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM

The people of her district are educated/credentialed, for the most part. They have brains and are capable of thought. Yes, they know lots of things that are not so, but they aren’t stupid or mentally slow. How are they not mortified by this woman?

myrenovations on December 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM

But the internet and ATM’s destroy jobs! Everyone got it?

Golden Boy on December 16, 2011 at 1:51 PM

She’s a genius! Action Plan:

1. Raise the minimum wage to $1.5M/year.
2. Raise unemployment benefits to $1.5M/year.

Everybody is rich whether they have a job or not!

(Hidden benefit: we get to tax everybody to the max because they’re rich!)

peski on December 16, 2011 at 1:51 PM

the only thing missing is that after saying 600,000 jobs she needs to put her pinky up to her mouth like Dr. Evil…..

kjvlv on December 16, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Tell me something, Botox Brain: how does paying people not to work create jobs?

Steve Z on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

The same way that cutting the payroll tax, which funds Social Security, is a good idea.

Paul-Cincy on December 16, 2011 at 1:52 PM

I’ll never understand where her political power come from. What the hell does she have on the dems?

50sGuy on December 16, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Lets see….Receiving umemployment….Nothing is produced…..No benefit to the economy……Does this dingbat even know how to think?

logicman_1998 on December 16, 2011 at 1:53 PM

I always like to give the benefit of the doubt, because it’s important to understand other peoples’ perspectives. But it’s now official: this woman is nuts.

Let’s see this through to its logical conclusion. If we extend unemployment benefits forever, to 100% of the people, how many jobs will THAT create?

MassVictim on December 16, 2011 at 1:53 PM

I like the way she had to catch herself – she almost demanded a payroll tax increase be passed. She’s so used to demanding tax increases, it’s a habit.

zmdavid on December 16, 2011 at 1:54 PM

I absolutely loathe and despise this lying, cheating, thieving harridan.

sage0925 on December 16, 2011 at 1:55 PM

This is how we got where we are.

Idiots representing us.
Idiots re-electing them.

Where are all the smart people? Who is John Galt?

fogw on December 16, 2011 at 1:55 PM

” I know I’m lying but hear me out.”

rjoco1 on December 16, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Archeologists 1,000 years from now will prove she’s right or something.

cartooner on December 16, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Archeologists 1,000 years ago will wonder why we botoxed & mummified our leaders while they were still alive.

29Victor on December 16, 2011 at 1:56 PM

MassVictim,

so long as we do not allow the internet to continue and can undo the advent of the horseless carriage their plan with create eleventy!!111!! billion jobs…..

Barack Smith and Nancy Maynard Keynes ride again

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Does that include the 8,100 that will be saved from death per Babs Boxer?

DanMan on December 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Pelosi: Extending jobless benefits will “make a difference of 600,000 jobs votes.”

I think this is what she meant.

BR549 on December 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Tie a yellow ribbon ’round the old oak tree.

Tie a yellow ribbon on lying Pelosi.

SouthernGent on December 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Does anyone listen to this political trollop anymore?

exliberal on December 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Nancy Pelosi knows so much about creating jobs that unemployment decreased by more than 50% under her leadership. (/sarc)

No, wait… unemployment increased by more than 100% (more than doubled) under her “leadership”.

ITguy on December 16, 2011 at 1:59 PM

I don’t understand why the men in the white coats haven’t taken
her away already.

VBMax on December 16, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Damn, her face is TIGHT!

Pork-Chop on December 16, 2011 at 2:00 PM

When Republicans last held the House, Senate, and White House, (December 2006) unemployment was at 4.4%.

By the end of Pelosi’s reign (December 2010), unemployment was at 9.4%.

ITguy on December 16, 2011 at 2:00 PM

The question of whether government spending, independent of high tax rates, injures the economy is of great concern, because lunatic-left d-cRAT socialists always deflect the harmful effects of taxation by insisting that either faceless rich people can be taxed to provide the money, or that it’s worth borrowing mountains of money to pay for their “vital” Big Government nanny state programs. Neither of these things are even remotely true, as confirmed in a December 2011 European Central Bank study (hat tip to Veronique de Rugy of National Review and Ace of Spades) that used data from 108 national economies to demonstrate that “government consumption is consistently detrimental to growth.” This is true “irrespective of the country sample considered.” De Rugy ties this to domestic studies that have found “federal spending in states caused local businesses to cut back rather than grow,” which flies in the face of the almost unquestioned myth of d-cRAT socialists that such spending promotes business growth by creating opportunities and providing infrastructure.

TeaPartyNation on December 16, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Now now exliberal I am sure some brave Tron like liberal poster will explain to us that paying the unemployed to breathe and not having them market their skills and productivity at a competitive price is a wonderful elixir for the economy any moment now…..

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 2:01 PM

How many jobs are saved if I inflate my tires properly?

MassVictim on December 16, 2011 at 2:01 PM

The best part is at 0:09 seconds where she says “We will not be going home until we enact a payroll tax inc – cut”. She just can’t say the word “tax” without the word “increase” being the next word coming out of her mouth.

Ted Torgerson on December 16, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Actually, unemployment checks will create more jobs than the payroll tax cut. In fact, the payroll tax cut is so small on a paycheck to paycheck scale it’s meaningless to job creation.

But the thing liberals just cannot grasp is that the money given to the unemployed was taken from someone that is employed. If the money is allowed to stay in the hands of wealth creators, instead of consumers, the wealth creator (in the long run) would undoubtedly create more jobs than consumer spending would.

ButterflyDragon on December 16, 2011 at 2:03 PM

For some odd reason, she considers this benefit as disposable income. I would wager that a good amount of it goes to service household debt. Funny that her efforts will be helping banks.
Someone should tell her so we can be through with her insanity.

Jabberwock on December 16, 2011 at 2:03 PM

TeaPartyNation,

of particular note is the fact that the Weimar Republic patented printing press economics being used to prop up the western kleptocracies means that the Federal Reserves and US govt are in the business of disincentivizing personal savings and low risk wealth growth by making funny money artifically cheap….

when I was 20 the APR on a 12 month CD was 6.35% plugging in the law of 72 you doubled the initial saving amount every 12 years outpacing inflation now a 48month CD is being generous if you get 1.1% meaning it takes 72 years….

“through the looking glass”

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Will someone please bury that thing already. I’ve screened better looking turds out of my cat’s litter.

swinia sutki on December 16, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Archeologists 1,000 years ago will wonder why we botoxed & mummified our leaders while they were still alive.

29Victor on December 16, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Threadwinner. LOL!

totherightofthem on December 16, 2011 at 2:05 PM

…it would make a difference of 600,000 jobs to our economy.”

You have to take into consideration who it was that uttered this.
You have to parse it. She didn’t actually say it would add 600,000 jobs. Just that it would make a difference of that many.

Dexter_Alarius on December 16, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Butterfly Dragon,

you are correct on a micro scale but on a macro scale I am not so sure…..

to be certain the Obama Friedman like whopping 40 bucks a month on average “savings” are miniscule, BUT paying unemployment for 2 and more years disincentivizes allowing the market through creative destruction to properly reallocate the wage level of industry thus sapping US competitiveness…..

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM

The best part is at 0:09 seconds where she says “We will not be going home until we enact a payroll tax inc – cut”. She just can’t say the word “tax” without the word “increase” being the next word coming out of her mouth.

Ted Torgerson on December 16, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Its genetic. Soon to covered under ADA.

Jabberwock on December 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Why not double UI benefits? We’ll create 1.2M jobs. And then double it again. Bam. 2.4 million new jobs. Why stop there, double it again, 4.8 million new jobs.

angryed on December 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM

angryed,

they don’t like being called on the minimum wage that way either….

it makes their heads hurt I fear.

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 2:08 PM

This loon is out of her mind. Remember, this is what leads the democrat party in congress.

lonestar1 on December 16, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Why isn’t that woman the brunt of every comedian joke, laughter from every news person, and residing in some nut house – on a daily basis?

KOOLAID2 on December 16, 2011 at 2:09 PM

I didn’t they’d had an accident during her last Botox treatment and paralyzed her brain.

michaelo on December 16, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Why should I, if I’m receiving unemployment benefits, should I look for work?

unrealizedviewpoint on December 16, 2011 at 2:10 PM

HHHHMMM Let’s do the math

1st ext 99 weeks
2nd ext 93 weeks

Jobs Lost approx 2 million
Avg 400K a week applying for UI

Can someone show me where I ahve been missing all this job creation?

xler8bmw on December 16, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Why should I, if I’m receiving unemployment benefits, should I accept a job that pays somewhat less than I’m accustomed?

unrealizedviewpoint on December 16, 2011 at 2:11 PM

I came across this story on Wednesday. Excuse me if it has already been posted on HA.

Class Warfare Erupts in Dem Caucus, as Member Throws Pelosi’s Fortune in Her Face

Flora Duh on December 16, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Koolaid2,

“we can’t find anything to mock”

//Hollyweird

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Pelosi/Paul 2012!

Portia46 on December 16, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Why should I, if I’m receiving unemployment benefits, should I look for work?

unrealizedviewpoint on December 16, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Why should I, if I’ve received public money for so long even consider the idea of working. I kinda like watching TV all day.

unrealizedviewpoint on December 16, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Everything out of a Democrat politicians stupid mouth is either a lie or complete idiocy.

There’s a little bit of both on display by this corrupt, incompetent partisan hack. So what’s the story? SSDD.

NoDonkey on December 16, 2011 at 2:13 PM

In some of the more liberal states, UI payments can be as high as $40K a year. You pay income tax on it, but no FICA tax. So getting UI is the equivalent of a $43,000 job in the private sector. Plus you have no expenses like gas, dry cleaning, etc which is another $2, 3K a year in savings. Sitting on your ass for $45K vs, going to work every day….

And you say that we have high unemployment in this country with millions of people not even bothering to look for a job anymore?

SHOCKA!

angryed on December 16, 2011 at 2:14 PM

In the past when benefits ran out people somehow found work. Eating is somewhat important.

unrealizedviewpoint on December 16, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Does anyone listen to this political trollop anymore?

exliberal on December 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM

During the early Bush years when the Dems were in the minority…

… all you saw on TV was her ugly puss.

During the time when the Dems were in the majority…

… all you saw on TV was her ugly puss.

Now she is back in the minority…

… and all we see on TV is her ugly puss.

Why anyone listens to or gives the time of day to this puss filled anal polyp is beyond me…

Seven Percent Solution on December 16, 2011 at 2:15 PM

she is out of her ever loving mind…

Dino V on December 16, 2011 at 2:16 PM

The funny thing is that the Dems always say that when they lose it is because they are having trouble getting their message out. The problem is that with Talk Radio and the internet, their message is getting out. The only reason Obama won was because his message did not get out, but his lies got out.

jeffn21 on December 16, 2011 at 2:16 PM

While it’s true that money from unemployment checks will be spent immediately, it will only be spent on the necessities of survival. That is, on a mortgage or rent, and food. The economy will improve only when most people have money they can spend on more frivoulous things. Disposable money is what’s needed, not unemployment checks that do not replace the income received while working. And disposable money is obtained from working productively at a good job.

Taking money from working people and giving it to people that aren’t working is merely robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I’ll never understand what passes for logic on the Left.

Marmo on December 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

angryed on December 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Well, if we just tax up some millionaires some more, we can offer the U to everyone pre-emptively when they turn 18, unless they are a full time student, then they can receive benefits when they graduate or if they feel like taking some time off, or flunk out…

No one will ever, ever be unemployed.

Of course, UI will only cover your walking around money, we can just tax some millionaires some more so Uncle Sammy can pay for your food (and feed your kids at skool), help with rent and pay for your trip to the ER for sniffles.

It’s not Unemployment Insurance, it’s Utopian Insurance.

reaganaut on December 16, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Love that woman. She’s always got a pithy comment or two.

a capella on December 16, 2011 at 1:45 PM

I ‘love’ her too. She makes witches decent and indignant.

Schadenfreude on December 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM

I don’t believe it’s made Hillary any more decent at all.

listens2glenn on December 16, 2011 at 2:19 PM

huh?

mkenorthshore on December 16, 2011 at 2:19 PM

To all of you out there that truly give a damn about any of this I wish to remind anyone that will listen that NONE of this has anything whats so ever to do with all the Small business people, self employed tradesman, out there that are dying on the vine. They get ZERO “0″ benefit from any of this but are losing there home to the tax man so that those other lazy bastes can sit on their but and collect free government handouts for doing nothing. Could it just be what it appears to be , an election time ploy. Every study ever done any where has shown the exact same thing. Extend the time of benefits and you extend the time of unemployment. Shorten the time of unemployment benefits and you shorten the time of unemployment. Maybe the proof of this is in my complaint. The self employed are not covered because they go out and work for that new or extra job instead of siting it out. In case anyone wants to say that I’m lucky that I can do that. If 68Years old, spent a total of 39 years (active,reserves,National guard,inactive reserves) in the Army, partially deaf from excessive gun fire, partially blind, left shoulder is destroyed in a little hand to hand, been shot three times and still work two jobs to make ends meet and take care of my bed ridden wife that the social security admin said is fit to work and not disabled. No longer do I want to here any jackwagons like Pelosi telling me that my money needs to go to some one sitting on their but doing nothing. Thank you all for listening. Merry Christmas.

jpcpt03 on December 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Keep in mind she is the Democrats elected leader – which means they think she is the best they have. Please do not retire.

BigOil on December 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Anyone else notice that she started to say “tax increase” before she caught herself? It’s like raising taxes is so natural to her that she has to override her but instinct to lie about it.

Browncoatone on December 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Can anyone really be this stupid? Even more important, has the “Nobel” winning Krugman showed his brilliance by backing her up yet?

tyketto on December 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Why not double UI benefits? We’ll create 1.2M jobs. And then double it again. Bam. 2.4 million new jobs. Why stop there, double it again, 4.8 million new jobs.

angryed

Good job! You’re thinking just as she does.
/

unrealizedviewpoint on December 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

There are times I’m convinced even they don’t believe the shite that comes out of their mouths.

Hard Right on December 16, 2011 at 2:21 PM

The extension of unemployment serves a couple of missions for the Democrats, it keeps all those unemployed people from getting their pitchforks out and marching on Obama, so they can get a job. Secondly, it gives them the opportunity to tell the world Republicans are against giving people permanent unemployment so they won’t get their pitchforks and march on Obama.

Of course it’s lame, and if we had a free press in this country, they’d be asking Pelosi how it makes sense to borrow money from China, to continue extending unemployment benefits, when the Republicans say that tax cuts, which will be cheaper in the long run, would do a better job.

Can 2012 come fast enough?

bflat879 on December 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

i’m confused as to how we could ahve a $15,000,000,000,000 debt.

acyl72 on December 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

remember folks she is the genius who is arguing that a trillion dollar pipeline w/the impact it will have on the world oil market can only create 6,000 jobs….

so since I guess she is right on her math we need to fill our cars with the gas she spews….

harlekwin15 on December 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

It’s not only amazing that they allow this woman to serve in US government, it’s amazing they allow her out of the house and near operating machinery. She is certifiable and should be locked up.

katablog.com on December 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM

If unemployment benefits are such growers of the economy, why don’t we just outlaw all jobs and just pay people unemployment? Think of how fast the economy will grow!!

Frank Drebin on December 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Pelosi did not name those “macroeconomic advisers.”

Hard to front off names when you’re just making shit up. There’s “reality” and then there’s Nancy-poo’s fantasy land.

GarandFan on December 16, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Archeologists 1,000 years ago will wonder why we botoxed & mummified our leaders while they were still alive.
29Victor on December 16, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Threadwinner. LOL!
totherightofthem on December 16, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Agreed. That’s one for the archives. : )

listens2glenn on December 16, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Pelosi is proof of the adage you cannot fix stupid. Combine that with insanity with a bit of criminality and you have Nancy Pelosi. She is dumber than a red brick.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on December 16, 2011 at 2:25 PM

.gov would have to hire someone to write out all those checks.

Cosmop on December 16, 2011 at 2:25 PM

The thing is your average low information voter will see this on the NBC Nightly News and believe it. Democrats don’t believe this crap. But they know there is a vast body of uneducated people in America that do. So they repeat the lies. UI create jobs. Taxes on the rich help the poor. Banning oil drilling lowers the cost of gas.

It’s pure Orwellian. But it works.

angryed on December 16, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Aunt Clara.

Over30 on December 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM

As macroeconomic advisers have stated, it would make a difference of 600,000 jobs to our economy.

Sure. That’s 600,000 potential jobs that won’t be created because we pay peolle to sit on their azzes in perpetuity.

This woman is divorced from reality.

CantCureStupid on December 16, 2011 at 2:29 PM

And if I cut a foot off your blanket, keep half of it for myself, and sew the other 6″ to the bottom of your blanket, I’ve made your blanket 6″ longer.

The Rogue Tomato on December 16, 2011 at 2:30 PM

This mentally ill menace is the POSTER CHILD for term limits. There’s no way in H*LL that the pathological San Fran Nan’s tiny, radical, nutjob district should have so much power to rule against 90% of the population of America. The twitchy bug-eyed witch has caused more damage to this country than any other single person beside Barry Soetoro in my lifetime. The three radical stooges Pelosi, Barry and Harry would be comical if they weren’t so diabolical and dangerous.

bob77 on December 16, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Stifle yourself Edith ! What a dingbat!

MCGIRV on December 16, 2011 at 2:32 PM

I would just call her an industrial strength idiot, but that would be an insult to industrial strength idiots.

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on December 16, 2011 at 2:33 PM

Why do Dems insist that pumping money into the economy like this grows the economy but can’t wrap their head around the idea that letting companies & people keep more of their money would help the economy?

29Victor on December 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Because they have to be able to get their piece (for the effort, of course)

Ditkaca on December 16, 2011 at 2:34 PM

i’m confused as to how we could ahve a $15,000,000,000,000 debt.

acyl72 on December 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

“I can’t be overdrawn, I still have some checks” \

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on December 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Food stamps are good for the economy too.

vcferlita on December 16, 2011 at 2:36 PM

See, it’s going to take 600,000 new postal workers to deliever all the welfare out of this administration.

jhffmn on December 16, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Comment pages: 1 2