AP: Old people "are stealing jobs from young people."

How could you possibly have forgotten to add Reagan in that list?

 

What is was not accurate is that Obama ever claimed such a thing. It is fabrication of RW propaganda.

What is accurate is that Obama's economic advisors prepared a report in Dec 2008/Jan 2009 that estimated the effects of a stimulus bill to save or create 2-4 million jobs and lower the unemployment rate by a percentage point, and that based on economic forecasts at that time which underestimated the severity of the GR and had the UR topping out at 9%, the projected top UR with the stimulus would be 8%.

The didn't estimate that they'd have a party determined to undermine the economy controlling the House starting in Jan 2011.

- - - Updated - - -

Could you quote where Obama admits he knows NOTHING, or should I dismiss this as baseless partisan hyperbole along with the rest of your post?

 

You don't get to make up facts. Dishonest RW propaganda, dishonest RW acolytes.

 

Actually, it was you who first brought to my attention the fact, which I have since assumed is true, that Obama never did promise that under his leadership the unemployment rate would not go over 8%. I'm not sure if you provided me this link, but I found it, and there are numerous others: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/...ama-said-unemployment-wouldn-t-go-over-8-LIE#

You see, this is why I was warning Yosh Schmenge that he would not get any traction here by trying to pin this "8%" thing on Obama! See his Post #219.

According to the prevailing agit-prop of the time, Obama never espoused any such thing, and it was, as you see at the story at the link, a pronouncement by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Therefore, it was held that poor, maligned Obama never knew or said anything about the unemployment rate going over 8% level. Surely you are not now suggesting that he actually did, are you?!

 

That is if your old job will still hang on to you. My mother who had her job for 30 years was let go and replaced by a fresh college grad. At least they were honest with her. They straight up told her that her fabulous work had basically ruined her. Because she did such an excellent job and got a small raise every year, after a long time those small raises added up, and she was now paid too much money. So first, they took away her benefits. Then a year later they took away her job entirely.

This was right after her 401k got devastated by the market crash of course. So she was left unemployed, with vastley reduced savings, and a company who booted her out the door. Couple that to having to declare bankruptcy because her husband, who had a job at the time, AND insurance, had a heart attack. The bills still got so far out of hand, bankruptcy was the only option.

She had to sell the family home, and now lives in a trailer just to try and help make ends meet. Obviously we all help her out as much as we can.


But honestly. What should someone in her position do? She did EVERYTHING she was supposed to. Worked hard all her life. ( she often worked 2-3 jobs at a time when I was a child, as a single mother at the time ) Saved up. Paid her bills. Had medical insurance. Didnt use credit. And now she is financially ruined for no fault of her own.

 

the question is as relevant as young people replacing the better paid jobs of old people.

 

Right! Obama himself, personally, never claimed such a thing but his top advisors did without contradiction from the president or
any correction from Obama whatsoever!

Therefore your weak revisionist view of what was being said about the economy in light of the jobs stimulus bill is dishonest and you are trying your very best, with not much success, to distance the president from the results of his own dismal stimulus program.

 

Taxcutter says:
Tenure and seniority have been on the wane since the 1980s. Tenure and seniority add no value to one's work.

 

I had my hand spanked hard by Obama supporters when I tried to pin promises about unemployment never going over 8% on Obama, years ago, Yosh! They retaliated fiercely that it wasn't Obama who said anything about this -- it was his top advisors... Romer and Bernstein. Thus, they erected a wall of protection around Obama based on his total and complete ignorance of anything having to do with unemployment rates, and therefore made him immune to any criticism of him about it. Please see my Post #220 above, which summarizes the thing fairly well... and so far I have not seen a reply to it from anyone on the Left....

When you mash all the air bubbles out of it, Obama is a rather shallow person with a very limited attention-span... a person who prefers to rule in the vacuum of autocracy, and "executive orders" and decrees rather than bother with Constitutional restraints at all. It will be our lot to have to put up with him for three more long, horrible years....

 

Good thing about rule by Executive Order: His successor can rescind every one of them with just a signature.

 

Thats very comforting to someone who has worked hard their entire life, only to see it wiped out at the last second, and have everything taken away due to forces that were entirely outside of her control.

 

Of course as anyone knows the president's hand picked advisor's advance his programs and speak for him in economic matters, in this case.
Unless Obama specifically disavows or contradicts what people like Romer and Bernstein pronounce in public the message is considered to have come from the president himself and it represents Obama policy.

It isn't surprising that leftists will lie and try to distance Obama from the consequences of his own failed policies. When you defend a liar and failure you must necessarily become a liar yourself in order for your stories to match up. I'm very glad I haven't had to compromise myself daily in order to prop up the empty suit that rules from the White House.

 

Of course it was bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

Strawman. According to the prevailing agit-prop, repeated over and over by Sean and Rush and the RW propaganda and regurgitated in forums like this one I don't know how many countless times, Obama promised that unemployment would never go above 8%.

It was yet another RW propaganda fabrication and lie. Obama never said one word about 8%, much less promised it, and I defy you to find any quote of him saying anything to that effect.

Nor was their ever any "promise" made. The Romer report, put together in late 2008 when they underestimated the serverity of the GR, was based on forecasts that unemployment would problem top off at around 9%. She predicted that the stimulus would reduce unemployment by about one percentage point. Hence, based on the forecasts of the GR in 2008, her report included a graph showing that if unemployment was going to go to 9% in the recession, the stimulus would limit it to 8%.

Her predictions on the effect of the stimulus were pretty accurate. But we now know that the GR was far worse than they thought it would be in 2008.

 

RW propaganda never dies, it is just recycled.

Show us where his top advisors claimed unemployment would never go above 8%.

We'll see about "weak revisionist view" when you fail to prove the claim.

 

I don't know what Obama supporters you are referring to, but it isn't me. I would never try to say that Romer promised unemployment going over 8%, because that would be promulgating a RW propoganda lie, you apparently feel for as well.

No one ever promised anything.

When you smash the air bubbles out of it, what this illustrates yet again is how the anti-Obama obsessed rely on deception, lies, and RW propaganda for their pre-existing ideological and anti-Obama positions.

 

You are running out of hiding room. You've never doubted the comments of Romer and Bernstrein before but now suddenly need to see proof?.........
http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/10/11/340451/the-real-problem-with-the-romerbernstein-chart/

Okay.

 

Thanks for proving my point. There is no claim that unemployment would never go above 8%, much less a promise. Just a projection based on a forecast of the GD that turned out to underestimate it's severity.

 

Calm down, Iriemon. I am not saying that Obama made a pledge that unemployment would never go over 8%! That is why I told Yosh not to put that forward -- the "blame", such as it was (and now, l-o-n-g forgotten) was put on Obama's "staffers". Fine! It is no different with Obama than with any other president: when something "good" happens, the president gets the praise and glory... and when something "bad" happens, the "staffers"/underlings get the criticism and castigation. Nothing new to see in any of this....

Back on topic...

What I'm seeing happening in the real world is that people in their late-50's and up to mid-60's stay in the workforce for a variety of reasons, many of which are intuitive and obvious. They want more money. They need more money. They're bored ****less in retirement (after having worked hard all their lives) and want something useful to do.

Focus on WHY employers find them desirable. They have a work ethic. That's worth repeating -- THEY HAVE A WORK ETHIC! They want to go to work and actually DO something... ACCOMPLISH something. Couple that with the fact that many want to work on a part-time basis, AND, that often they can get as much work done in a half-day as people half their age do in a full day! Older people don't fart around nearly so much, cruising the 'net, playing with Facebook and Twitter, and playing games. I hear this from friends and acquaintances who own and/or manage businesses too often for it not to be true!

Hint to the 20-somethings who want to get hired, and stay hired:
1. Go to work every single day, on time!
2. Never call in "sick" or with an "emergency" unless you really have a valid situation.
3. Never call your boss in the morning with your sudden decision to "take a personal day" or a vacation day with no more advance notice than that!
4. Unless it's part of your job, never Facebook, Twitter, or play games during work time. BTW, they have monitoring software that shows everything you look at on your computer monitor, and records every keystroke and phone call you make and receive. No bull****! And they have been using these tools for at least 14 years that I know of. Hmmm... you think this might explain why some people get "let go" when there are headcount cuts...?

If you've got a cushy job working for the government, inherited a tubful of money, or if you're making a vast fortune mining Bitcoins, pay no attention to the above. Otherwise, at least mull it over....

 

You can rant all day about how worthless the younger generation is. When has that not been done? When the baby boomers were young old farts like you and I are now would (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about how worthless the hippies were and the "me" generation and all that. Nothing new under the sun.

But if you're trying to argue that is why we have high unemployment now, you are barking up the wrong tree and that point I'll contest.

 

Link to the source of that quote you claim they said.

We'll see who is being dishonest.

 

Man, we're really off of each other's wavelengths today, I guess. Unemployment stats are decreasing, as you frequently tell the rest of us! It's good news, right? I'm not raising hell about high unemployment stats. I'm just trying to give an opinion concerning this thread's topic that old people are "stealing jobs" away from younger ones. Ask yourself this, Iriemon -- if older people had nothing that recommended them, if they contributed little of any use, and were lazy, unreliable, and only really worked about two-thirds of the time, do you think any employer in his right mind would want to have them on their work force?

But don't take my word for anything. I'm sure that you know some business owners/managers... ask them what they think.

 

Fair enough, but I think the gist wasn't about old folks being more qualified or not (and there are certainly lots of instances where older people are in fact discriminated again in favor of younger, who often will work for less $$) but by the fact that (at least until recently) they haven't been following usual patterns of retirement, and have been staying on the job longer than they might have absent the GR. Those jobs that otherwise would have opened up for younger workers are not opening up. I thought that was the gist of the issue.

 

My "gist"-detector has been a bit erratic the last couple of weeks, but it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that legalized marahoochie sales began here in Colorado on January 1st!

Young people do not have it easy today, and I am sure of that. Everything is expensive, and wages are flat. There are more jobs today than in, say, 2008 -- but a lot of them are crap-pay jobs designed to use a person up and spit them out. I think the young guys call these jobs "grinders". It was no cake-walk when you and I were first hitting the job market, but it's not one bit better today in all honesty. That's a real shame because, following the pattern of the "American Dream" things are supposed to be better for each successive generation, or so I thought.... You know the facts and stats better than anybody else, and I'm sure you'd agree that things are not a hell of a lot better now than they were back in the dark days of Stagflation.

One thing's for sure -- if I were a 20-something today, I'd be doing everything in my power to go overseas with a big multi-national corp on an ex-pat basis. You can make a very large sum of money, get lots of perk's, and pay comparatively little in taxes. International is "where it's at". Here, in the States, for so many young people, it's just dog-eat-dog for crap-pay jobs that people do mostly because the only other choice is the welfare circus....

 

I've already given you a link the first time you requested it. You are blatantly dodging the facts and wasting my time asking for proof over and over again when it's been given. You have earned the ignore list so enjoy the experience.

 

No link, no quote. I rest my case.

Romer and Bernstein never made that statement you falsely quoted. Your post was absolutely untrue.