Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: What if someone proposed a measure to create jobs & boost economic growth?

Posted 10 years ago on Sept. 25, 2012, 1:07 p.m. EST by TommyNYC (730)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Oh wait, someone already did. It was called the American Jobs Act.


Remember when we tried all of Obama's policies and they all failed? Me neither.



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

Obama's policies have been a great help in expanding the war on terror. They've worked brilliantly. Prosecuting a record number of whisteblowers. Increasing the amount of foreign entanglements. Signing NDAA. Kill lists. Asking the supreme court to deny hearing prisoners cases from Gitmo, and not shutting down Gitmo. Allowing the NSA to create a 2 billion dollar data center, and allowing them to record every cell phone call, text message, and email sent within the country. Letting the FAA clear the use for drones to be used within the country against citizens.

His policies have been a great stepping stone toward a police state. Let's keep it up!

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

According to your boy Romney, Obama hasn't done enough to expand the war on terror.


[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

My boy? Romney is horrible. Potentially worse than Obama. What does that have to do with Obama being a miserable President? Because Obama is horrible I must support Romney?

It sad to imagine somebody like you, your brain so crippled by indoctrination that you can't imagine a person not buying into the right-left paradigm. They're two sides of the same coin! The sooner people realize this, the sooner they'll quit getting played!

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Haven't you heard the news? If you don't like Obama that means you are a republican and you are in love with Mitt Romney. Duh.

This means all anarchists are actually Mitt Romney lovers.


[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

Yes, everyone who disagrees with someone must be destroyed. That's the kind of peaceful world these "progressives" and "conservatives" want to live in.

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 10 years ago

The time to take action against getting played was back during the primaries. Or even before that, when OWS could have become a political force. Missing those opportunities and then just forfeiting your right to participate in the final outcome is not the same as freeing yourself from the system. You're just ensuring that the system will not consider your input at all. Self-fulfilling prophesy.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

The time to take action was #S17 (2011). The "one demand" should have been passage of the American Jobs Act.

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

shooz, on the other hand, isn't smarter than that.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

Relegated to insults behind my back now, are we?

Such a shame, but oh so true.

That's all there really is, to that thing called you.

[-] -2 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

I thought you were tired of me typing it directly to you?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

Your mistake is your belief that "you thought".

It's a really big mistake too.

You should go and wash the dishes.

It would be more conducive to your wishes.

Your brain is full fishes.

[-] -1 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

If only rhyming were a substitute for thinking.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

It is in this case, as it's the truth.

Something you have failed to express.

You may be glib, but that's no substitute either.

[-] -2 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

Where is the proof that the system cares about input from voters? That argument is a non-starter, there's just no proof, other than rotating the face coming out of the suit, that politicians haven't just done what they want (or what they're moneyed interests want). A hundred years ago, banksters were directing politicians..that's how the Federal Reserve got started! Or have politicians had an eternal reputation as liars and thieves because of recent events??? You're smarter than that.

[-] 4 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

You are hanging around this forum trying to convince people that is is pointless to vote. This is a pro-democracy movement!

You are the lowest form of lizard.

[-] -1 points by thoreau42 (595) 10 years ago

"democracy passes into despotism" -Plato

Do you disagree?

[-] 4 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

Direct democracy is vulnerable. This is illustrated by how the lizardarians took over OWS.

[-] -2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago



[-] -1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

You closet right-wingers and your "right-left paradigm" lol. Just come out of the closet already!!

[-] 2 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

So because someone doesn't support Obama, he must support Mitt Romeny and the republicans? That's ridiculous. How about you black/white people who are so ideologically blinded that if someone says something factual that might step on your pre-conceived beliefs open your minds a little bit and look at the facts...the cold, hard, facts....which is exactly what thoreau was trying to provide above.

[-] -1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

The whole "left-right paradigm" thing was started by right-wing conspiracy nuts like Alex Jones.

Just because you are an isolationist doesn't mean you aren't right-wing.

Just because someone thinks that Austrian economics is BS doesn't mean that they are close minded.

[-] 2 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

"The whole "left-right paradigm" thing was started by right-wing conspiracy nuts like Alex Jones."

No it wasn't...it was started by looking at the facts.

Lets look at wars - What has Obama done differently? He's increased them right in line with Bush...kept up with drone attacks, invaded more countries, taken away more of our rights at home with re-signing the patiot act, NDAA, and assassination of americna citizens. Right in line with bush. Lets look at obama's economic side....he's just increased everything bush was doing...stimulus through the roof, gov spending through the roof. More gov programs like Bush. What exactly is different?

How does what i said make me an isolationist?

[-] 0 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

There was NO stimulus under Bush. What are you talking about? Are you getting "stimulus" and "bailout" mixed up? All Bush did was CUT social programs and infrastructure.

Bush dragged us into TWO MAJOR WARS. So you think Obama's foreign policy is a little hawkish? Sure. Sorry though, a few drone strikes is NO COMPARISON to Iraq and Afghanistan.

So the facts are right there. Obama: B- Bush: F

[-] 1 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

"There was no stimulus under Bush".....yes, there was. TARP (700 billion) and Bush's bailouts. So bush bought up troubled assets. What do you think the Fed is doing right now? QE3, going in and buying up long-term derivatives in the housing sector..increasing credit in the economy. Just because something isn't named "stimulus" doesn't mean it's not. Just look at the patriot act....is that a patriotic act? No.

Yes, lets look at how obama has drawn down overseas adventures, and domestic ones:


So Obama - F Bush - F

I realize you hate the Austrians....but when this house of cards comes crashing down, just remember that you said that...and the entire time they've been telling you exactly how and why it will come crashing down...just like they did in 2001 for the 2008 crisis...when noone would listen then either.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

TARP was a bailout, not stimulus. You should learn the difference. QE3 is monetary policy, not fiscal stimulus.

In other words, everything you just said is nonsense.

The Austrians have said that everything will come crashing down for the last 100 years. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[-] 0 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

QE3 is absolutely stimulus....in other words...everything you just said is nonsense...it's pumping money into the system via credit.

[-] 2 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

Or more directly...since you like wikipdea:


"Stimulus can also refer to monetary policies like lowering interest rates and quantitative easing."

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

but I don't want to get a loan

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

We don't need monetary stimulus. We need fiscal stimulus. There is a HUGE difference between the two.

[-] 1 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

In your opinion.

That's not what we were talking about though...you said that QE's weren't stimulus.

[-] -1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

I said QE3 isn't fiscal stimulus. It's not.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 10 years ago

it sounds like this argument you make is an attempt to remove the word stimulus by attaching it to one word and then dismissing that word. Let me help


It is stimulus, regardless of semantics. It's stimulus for investors, for WallSt.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

IT was the campaign donation that Obama was looking for. Looks like the banker's fav puppet is a shoe in.

Here, study up buddy.. http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-09-26/small-business-owners-understand-economy-better-our-fed-chairman

[-] 0 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

Argumentum ad populum

"Many lizards believe that..."

[-] 0 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

QE3 is a taxation....a hidden taxation. It increases the cost of your goods...exact same thing. They're either taxing you outright...or stealing it through devaluation of the currency via increasing the money supply (QE3...along with QE1 and QE2). One could argue that we've been in perpetual QE every since the Fed has been involved in interest rates manipulation...for the only way to manipulate interest rates...is to mess with the money supply.

Energy and food prices vs. money supply:


So bush had a stimulus (or a bailout in your language) via TARP...and Obama had his own...what was it...the American Recovery Act? Forget the official name.

Both (bush and obama) have been more than happy to also allow the Fed to continue to print untold sums of money via QE's and artificially low itnerest rates. What exactly is different then????

[-] 0 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

There is a huge difference between a "bailout" and fiscal stimulus.

Unless you are a debt-fetishist Repelican, then they are the same thing because they both increase the debt.

[-] 0 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

The government investing in schools and green energy IS NOT the same thing as the Federal Reserve purchasing bonds.

[-] 1 points by john23 (-272) 10 years ago

It's all stimulus...same thing...just because you view government investment in schools and green energy as more noble...doesn't mean it isn't stimulus.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

That was pathetic attempt at fixing the problems. How about instead of just lowering interest rates, having a sale on the money, or letting the Fed try to do it, we address the problems that we have been running from for the last 40 years?

Is that too much to ask? This has been a pathetic dispaly of leadership in every position for the last 10 years. Absolutely disgusting.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

What are you ever referring to? You should get some rest. Even lizards need sleep once and a while. Your getting your own talking points mixed up.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Im saying the "jobs Act" was nothing more than a Goldman Sachs pipe dream, and does nothing to address the underlying problems with our current economy.

ITs a cop out. Short term stimulus so DC can go back to deciding if they want the swordfish or the lobster.

Is that clearer for you? You have to follow the lines on the thread to see where they are responding too... haha.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

You are painting a great picture of your lizardarian hallucinations, sure.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Thats about the reply I would expect from you. You should run for office. Or maybe you have already done that.

Either way, you are either a sucker for propaganda, or are pushing it with an agenda.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

Right, Paul Krugman is just propaganda for Goldman Sachs.


[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

Mr. propaganda accusing some else of pushing propaganda?

If you weren't such a die hard Bircher, that would be funny.

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

"Die hard Bircher"

You are so lame.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

The defender of Norquist, and Ryan apologist.

(and that's just today.)

Calls me lame???

OK, kid, whatever you say.

Go back to the John BIrch site now. You know you love their stye of propaganda.

You pass it on all the time.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

What if someone already did and it's much better? It's called H.R. 2990: National Emergency Employment Defense Act

To create a full employment economy as a matter of national economic defense; to provide for public investment in capital infrastructure; to provide for reducing the cost of public investment; to retire public debt; to stabilize the Social Security retirement system; to restore the authority of Congress to create and regulate money, modernize and provide stability for the monetary system of the United States; and for other public purposes.

Declaring that "the creation of money by private financial institutions as interest-bearing debts should cease once and for all," the NEED Act would abolish what is referred to as fractional reserve banking by prohibiting the creation of credit lent out against deposits held by private institutions; eliminate the quasi-independent status of the Federal Reserve System, and grant the U.S. Department of the Treasury, on behalf of Congress, the exclusive authority to originate money. The legislation would also bar the federal government from all future borrowing, institute an 8% cap on interest rates across the country, mandate that new money spent into circulation include annual block grants to the States, and establish a Monetary Authority inside the Treasury to manage national monetary policy.


This would also allow for tax breaks for the middle class.

This bill was written by the Democrat that actually tried to impeach George Bush for war crimes.

Currently our monetary system provides unlimited resources for the banks... and nothing for the people. It's time for some fundamental change in monetary policy.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

In what way does that address employment? It's talking about the monetary system. Where are the jobs?

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Use the monetary system to fund job creation.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

That's pretty vague, and so is the bill. Where does the money come from?

It's possible to fund job creation without totally reforming the monetary system and outlawing fractional reserve banking and interest. For one thing, it would be way harder to get a loan, if that were to be put in place.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

The bill is not vague.

Do you know how the federal reserve works or where it gets it's money that it gives out to banks?

Our current monetary policy is based on unlimited resources for banks and nothing for the people. This bill reverses that and provides funding for the bills like you're talking about all while allowing to pay off the debt as well.

This bill would also allow funding for true universal healthcare if legislation was presented.

All this can be done without inflation.

I'm wondering why the president would not support a bill that would allow funding for his bill.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

Here's the only part of the bill that specifically addresses infrastructure, etc.:

"SEC. 501. DIRECT FUNDING OF INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. (a) Report Required on Opportunities for Direct Funding- Before the effective date, the Secretary, after consultation with the heads of Executive branch departments, agencies and independent establishments, shall report to the Congress on opportunities to utilize direct funding by the United States Government to modernize, improve, and upgrade the physical economy of the United States in such areas as transportation, agriculture, water usage and availability, sewage systems, medical care, education, and other infrastructure systems, to promote the general welfare, and to stabilize the Social Security retirement system.

(b) Broad Equitable Dispersion of Funding- Generally, any program recommended for direct funding shall be undertaken throughout the Nation based on per capita amounts and other criteria to assure equity as determined by the Monetary Authority."

Totally vague. Where does the money come from? How much?

It says: "shall report to the Congress on opportunities to utilize direct funding by the United States Government..."

In other words, somebody goes before congress and says "hey, do you guys think we have money for this?"

That's hardly a solution. For Kucinich to put the word "employment" in the title of this bill is totally misleading.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Again i will point out that this bill makes monetary policy available for funding these programs.

that's where the money comes from. Instead of just going to banks it allows funding for investment in our economy, infrastructure etc.

[-] 2 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

What kind of monetary policy, exactly, will create funds for infrastructure without causing inflation?

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Washington, Sep 21 -

International Monetary Experts Meet in Chicago To Discuss Kucinich Legislation, HR 2990, The NEED Act, to Create Millions of Jobs, and Rebuild America, Debt-Free

Today a panel of international monetary policy experts gather in Chicago at an event sponsored by the American Monetary Institute (AMI) to discuss major changes in U.S. monetary policy proposed by United States Congressman Dennis Kucinich. The meeting is occurring on the one year anniversary of the introduction of H.R. 2990, the National Emergency Employment Defense (“N.E.E.D.”) Act, at the University Center at 525 South State Street in downtown Chicago.

Conferees at the AMI conference in Chicago are hearing from monetary theorists, economists, advocates and professors as they discuss the moral approach at the heart of successful monetary reform.

With its introduction one year ago by Congressman Kucinich the NEED Act’s paradigm-shifting legislation has broken new ground, formally advancing a simple but powerful idea: that the creation of wealth should be in the hands of the people, and used not for the benefit of financial speculators.

In the last year, the NEED Act has received endorsements from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (Chicago area Local 126) Executive Board, the Chicago’s Teacher’s Union and the Northeast Ohio American Friends Service Committee.

The bill has been favorably modeled by experts. Professor Kaoru Yamaguchi of Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan, conducted an economic analysis of the bill, showing how H.R. 2990 pays off the national debt in full as it comes due, eliminates government borrowing without tax hikes or spending cuts, and can pull the economy out of recession without inflation.

Professor Yamaguchi’s analysis showed that present policies cannot work. Attempts to reduce deficits by either spending cuts or tax hikes plunges the economy into deeper recession, reduces revenues, and ends up increasing deficits. An International Monetary Fund Modeler also studied the NEED Act. He concluded that direct governmental control of the money supply could significantly reduce business cycles, and would eliminate bank runs, lead to large reductions in the levels of both government and private debt, and generate large steady state output gains due to the removal or reduction of interest rate risk spreads, taxes, and bank costs, and zero steady state inflation.

“The NEED Act is so named because America has a jobs emergency and a monetary policy emergency. Congress has not stood up and reasserted its Constitutional control over the monetary system. Instead, our nation’s ability to create money was farmed out to the Federal Reserve in 1913. The ‘Fed’ is an institution which operates with virtually no oversight from Congress. Its primary function has been to assist private financial institutions, many of which are multinational,” said Kucinich.

“The NEED Act places the Federal Reserve under the authority of the Treasury. It creates verifiable transparency in our nation’s monetary policy choices. It will put our nation’s resources to work for the American people. The NEED Act would put 7 million Americans back to work rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure without debt or inflation,” Kucinich concluded.

Learn more about the NEED Act at www.Kucinich.House.gov/TheNEEDAct




[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

I read your entire post, and it still didn't answer my question.

What kind of monetary policy, exactly, will create funds for infrastructure without causing inflation? How would that work?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

I'm glad you're interested and have taken the time to read through the bill.

To more directly answer your question I have the following response

  • “The NEED Act would control inflation because it will enable the government to invest in America by creating infrastructure, which is real wealth. Inflation is caused when new money is created without the creation of new wealth,” - dennis kucinich

Kucinich Proposes Landmark Jobs Plan

Bill To Put 7 Million Americans Back to Work, Rebuild Infrastructure Washington D.C. (September 21, 2011) -- As the nation struggles with long-term unemployment at rates not seen in generations and as infrastructure crumbles across the nation, Congressman Kucinich (D-OH) today introduced a dramatic new proposal to address our structural economic problems directly by creating over 7 million jobs.

The National Emergency Employment Defense (NEED) Act of 2011 would allow the federal government to directly fund badly-needed infrastructure repairs and fund education systems nationwide by spending money into circulation without increasing the national debt or causing inflation.

“Today, nearly 25 million Americans are either unemployed or cannot find a job on which they can live and support their families. FDR’s response to such circumstances was the New Deal. Today, we need similarly bold solutions,” said Kucinich. “We need a solution that will revive our economy in a sustainable way that will put millions of American back to work.”

“There should be work for those who are able to work. Government must become the employer of last resort. The private sector is not providing the jobs. When the private sector fails to provide the jobs, the government has a moral responsibility and a practical responsibility to step forward to put the country back to work.

“The ability to coin money is an inherent power under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. The NEED Act would control inflation because it will enable the government to invest in America by creating infrastructure, which is real wealth. Inflation is caused when new money is created without the creation of new wealth,” explained Kucinich.

The proposal would also establish fiscal integrity, reassert Congressional sovereignty and regain control of monetary policy from private banks.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Establishing a monetary authority in the treasury would be huge. Just moving the Fed into the Treasury would be better.

Economy would automatically pick up from the latter. May get better with the first.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

That has absolutely nothing to do with employment.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

If you dont think the markets and the attitude of the country, those that understand what is going on, would take off, then you clearly arent in touch with the current level of uncertainty and how detrimental it is to risk taking.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

If you don't think that outlawing modern banking would create uncertainty, than you are in la-la land.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

No one is saying to outlaw modern banking, its called getting some accountablity. Where did you get that from?

If you dont think what the central banks have done over the last 10 years has scared the shit out of anyone who may want to start something....come on man.....

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 10 years ago

You should read your own bill.

It bans fractional-reserve lending and interest debt (AKA, modern banking over the last 400 years) outright.