Is there really an unemployment problem?
I don’t think so.

One of the reasons there are such long lines at the lottery counters is that people are trying to create “unemployment” for themselves. People love “unemployment.”

Not having enough money to buy the things we need and want IS a problem…and a horrible problem at that. Unfortunately, when we are “unemployed” (and when we haven’t hit the lottery) the “not enough money” problem raises its ugly head.

We tend to confuse the two, but they are two different things. “Unemployment” gives you time to play golf, go to museums, tend to the lawn and house, spend time with the kids, and generally enjoy life. “Unemployment” is a blessing, not a problem.

“Not having enough money to get by” is a huge problem.

On another note, McGarrett…I think American conservatism sucks.If you would like to discuss that, I’m game.

Yep, Europe is burning and crashing on their euro and huge debt. We'll watch them and take notes.

Great post. Rated.

How much evidence of the pernicious effect of Obama do people need to understand that we need a different leader and direction?

strangely enough, only congress has the power to act, the president can only say 'no,' and then just if the issue is close.

but congress will not act, as the reps are controlled by republicans, who regard legislation as a tool to rid themselves of a democrat president rather than a duty to the unemployed.

fortunately, the loss of the obama jobs act will be minimal, since it is vastly inadequate. the failure to pass it will be a visible demonstration that republicans don't give a damn about america's losers, but no news there.

And Obama, in the interest of pursuing re-election, will sacrifice national security, national solvency, the truth and reason.

I don't know what's happening on the Jon Stewart show, but I can guarantee you that in my circle of friends, most of whom would be considered very "liberal," criticism of Obama is a daily event. At this point, everyone I know who would vote for Obama would do so only because the Republican candidate would probably be far worse. If the Republicans could manage to nominate a moderate Republican -- which would also probably be a sign of the Second Coming -- my liberal friends would likely vote for the Republican.

Hi Frank, your distinction between unemployment and not having money is technically accurate and somewhat clever. However, I think it mainly serves to obscure the issue which everyone understands: we are nowhere near a healthy economy that can lead to full employment and stable incomes. And, my point is that this would normally be a major object of ridicule by comedians seeking to provide some small joy to suffering millions. But, I don't see that happening. It's odd and different from historical norms.

As to your desire to begin a debate by saying "I don't like something," I take that as a clue that the debate would be rather pointless. So, I'm not up for your proposed game.

Deb, thanks for visiting me again even though I rarely visit OS anymore. I think our notes will have to be shorthand because I think the elapsed time between Europe falling hard and us being next is small. Not much time to write!

Gordon, I'll answer your rhetorical question: for some, no amount of evidence will persuade that Obama has failed.

Mishima, having read your past, objectives appraisals of topics, I believe that you and your friends criticize Obama. That would seem to mean there is an audience for humor that ridicules Obama. I see little of it on two well-known political humor shows. Again, it's odd.

al, sorry, I overlooked your comments a minute ago. I'm not sure how they related to my post.

Barack Obama is a decent man…a reasonable person. He is a lot more capable, competent, and effective than many want to acknowledge. And he is head and shoulders better than any of the choices being offered by the Republicans or conservatives.

Frank, you achieved something. You prompted me to look up the opposite of "ad hominem." Apparently, one version is "ex hominem" which essentially means that you are asserting that Obama being a decent, reasonable man is a reason to ignore three years evidence of failure for the economy and employment/income situation for millions of Americans.

Conservatism killed the economy. Most Americans still blame Bush, but it's conservatism that did it. Rigid ideologies, like conservatism or communism or that other one conservatism resembles but nobody wants to mention tend to deteriorate because they cannot address reality when it conflicts with ideology. No matter, as the conservative effort can't run a government, but they are experts at blaming anything but conservatism.
Yes, once again the "conservatives" are being treated unfairly by the "liberal" media.
Kind of conservative-trite with this one, McG. Just be thankful that truth and justice don't hold sway or God and the media would spend every day ridiculing the massive ideological failure that is conservatism.

Frank, you achieved something. You prompted me to look up the opposite of "ad hominem." Apparently, one version is "ex hominem" which essentially means that you are asserting that Obama being a decent, reasonable man is a reason to ignore three years evidence of failure for the economy and employment/income situation for millions of Americans.

I haven't overlooked anything, McGarrett. Yes, the economy sucks. But to suppose the major reason the economy sucks is because you think Barack Obama is a failure is ignoring the realities of what the man has faced during the last three years. Frankly, no person could have put this train back on the track...especially since there were people like the Republican/conservatives in congress doing everything possible to prevent getting it back on line.

Look...you don't like Obama. Fine! That is your right. But to suggest that he is more responsible for our economic woes than the people who put us into the mess (the Republicans and conservatives) is being an ostrich.

I'll go even further than that. In my estimation, the situation will not appreciably better during the next four years if Obama is re-elected...and it probably will get worse. But electing one of the Republicans will almost insure that the problem will get much, much, much worse. Truly, your side doesn't have a clue.

Takes a lot to get me agreeing enthusiastically with Paul, but his last remark was right on the nail head.. The conservatives—and their pathetic excuse for economic policy—have gotten our country into a mess from which NOBODY may be able to extract us.

Enjoy yourself blaming Obama...but the myopia of the right (people like you) got us to the edge and will most likely end up pushing us off into the abyss.

"Takes a lot to get me agreeing enthusiastically with Paul, "

Usually only strong drugs will do it.

This sob story about how imposed upon Obama has been is just plain silly. I tend not to belabor the obvious, so I'll leave it that.

These defenses of Obama are lame. He had a super-majority in Congress for two years and got what he wanted. It has not helped the economy. Does he learn and try something different? No, he proposes more of the same failed policies. Worse, he continually whines and blames everyone else.

Systemic 9% unemployment is unheard of in the last 75 years. All other Presidents, whether Democrat or Republican, somehow avoided this problem. Obama doesn't. He deserves to be mocked.