How a Lowly Blogger Can Teach Obama to Create 15 Million Jobs

I know I’m just a lowly right-wing blogger … which to the media means I’m a dumb, violent  racist… but I have written my own one sentence  jobs plan and I’m happy to let Obama present it tonight and even have him take the credit. As an added bonus, I’ll provide proof my plan is better than any of plans proposed today. First, let’s look at how the last $800 Billion jobs plan worked out:

According to the San Francisco Fed (not exactly a partisan source) the net effect of the first $800,000,000,000 was exactly zero jobs created.  Debbie Wasserman, the reality-challenged head of the DNC, says they are wrong. She claims it “created an additional”  3.6 million jobs.  OK heck, let’s use her number.  $800,000,000,000 / 3,600,000 jobs = $222,222 per job. That’s right boys and girls, liberals are now bragging it only cost them a quarter of a million dollars per job!

[Note to the media, are you guys listening?  The next time some liberal makes this goofy claim please ask them how exactly that’s a success story. Please? ]


So now Obama wants to spend $300 billion more. Let’s compare his track record with my one sentence plan for the same money.

You give every small business who has less than 50 employees a tax credit of $10,000 for every employee they hire over the 12 month average of people they had on the payroll. For two years. So if they hire someone for 2 years they get a $20,000 tax credit. That’s a REAL business incentive.

$300,000,000,000 / $20,000 = FIFTEEN MILLION JOBS at a cost of $20,000 per job.  And here’s the kicker… it’s foolproof… if no jobs are created it doesn’t cost us a dime!

Now if a dumb violet racist blogger can figure this out, why can’t the smartest man in the world and his ruling party figure it out and -more importantly- why THE HELL can’t the media ask him for some accountability on this money?  BY THE BEST NUMBER it cost Obama over $200,000 for every job created.  And the media can’t be bothered to ask why we should trust them with another penny.

Feel free to share this plan with any dumb racist violent friends who might appreciate it.  Don’t bother send it to anyone in the media, they’re all too smart to understand it.

E.J. Dionne wants 9/11 left behind.
'My father always told me that “silence implies consent.”'
  • PBunyan

    Obama only needs to say a 2 word sentence to cause the private sector to start creating again:  “I resign”.

  • PBunyan

    Well actually it needs to be a longer sentence than that.   This one will do:  “Joe Biden and I both resign, so John Bohner is now the President.”

    • I think it would fall to Reid …

      • Nope the next one in line for the Presidency is the Speaker of the House, which in this case is Bohner. Barry and Biden will not resign, because they don’t not want a Republican in the White House. Now if Nancy Pelosi was still the speaker, they would consider that.

        • Man, Pelosi as Prez? That’ll give me nightmares.  Thanks a heap!

      • PBunyan

        Nope, Speaker of the House is 3rd in line.  4th is the President Pro-Tempore of the Senate which is not Harry Reid but the Klu Klux Klan leader. 

        • Byrd went to the Great Klan Rally in the Sky, I believe.

          • PBunyan

            D’oh!  I forgot about that and stand corrected.  I guess then it would be Daniel K. Inouye, then.  I don’t know much about the guy but there is at least a chance he’d  be an improvement over Comrade Barry or Clueless Joe.

          • Actually, the last couple of times I’ve seen Inouye . . . well, let’s just say I suspect they aren’t checking his pulse, on purpose.

  • Anonymous

    The Party of Food Stamps, better known as the Democratic Party wants you to take a survey.   Food Stamps.  Take the food stamp question-air/survey and let your voice/opinion be heard.

  • Yes, it is foolproof if your goal is to spend less per job than Obama has.

    But if your goal is to spend some amount of money (either in the form of tax credits or outright spending) in order to kick-start the economy, I doubt it will do much good.

    The $10,000 per newly hired employee tax credit isn’t enough to offset the total costs of hiring a new employee, it merely reduces the out of pocket cost of each newly hired employee.  Thus, the only businesses that would take advantage of this are (1) businesses that were already planning on hiring new people, for whom you’ve just given them a $10,000 gift, or (2) businesses for whom the $10,000 is the difference between an employee who pays for himself and an employee who doesn’t.  I argue that there are very few of the latter.

    • PBunyan

      Yes very true.  It is not lack of money that is keeping people from hiring.  It is fear and uncertainty created by the Obama regime, plain and simple.  No amout of money can fix that.  Why would you hire someone just to get an extra $10,000, when healthcare, workers comp, and unemployment insurance might cost more than twice that per employee next year.

  • herddog505

    No, no, NO!  Only money spent by wise politicians can save or create jobs!  Tax cuts, on the other hand, COST jobs because… um… er… they reduce the amount of money that the federal government can spend, and only federal spending creates jobs.  See how that works?  Anyway, if you just let greedy businessmen have tax breaks for hiring people (which they SHOULD do anyway, since businesses exist solely to give people jobs), they’ll just spend the money on private jets and silk hats and imported spats, which doesn’t create any jobs at all.

    Paul$800,000,000,000 / 3,600,000 jobs = $222,222 per job

    In government circles, this is called “a helluva deal”.

  • Bob Armstrong

    Wiznutties are at it again.

    >>:That’s right boys and girls, liberals are now bragging it only cost them a quarter of a million dollars per job!

    How much of highway construction or a school remodel is attributable to “job creation”?

    Right wing morons might believe, but most of them are not smart enough to find a voting booth – so no worries there.

    If $10 million was spend on road work for example, that cost includes… wait for it… asphalt, heavy machinery, etc.

    To count the $10 million as “job creation” is moronic.

    • Except that only 1% of the ARRA (stimulus) money went to highway or bridge projects. 

      Get a haircut and take a bath, hippy.

      • Bob Armstrong

        whether its highway or bridge projects, or building a school, or whatever it involved a lot more than justlabor.

        But you idiots are too fucking stupid to know the difference.

        and hey, nice haircut, moron.

    • PBunyan

      And then there’s the fact that our infrastructure wouldn’t suck so much if the government wasn’t waisting  about 80% of it’s income on shit with which it has no business being involved.

    • Anonymous

      Please, if you are going to spew incoherent tripe please use your toilet and not your keyboard.

      • Anonymous

        Incoherent tripe is racepants middle name.

    • herddog505

      I disagree.  If the purpose of spending the money is to “create jobs”, then it’s reasonable to say that all the money was spent to create jobs.  Bad Luck Barry has not boasted that Porkulus resulted in “saving or creating” X miles of highway, Y bridges or Z school buildings; he talks about how many jobs were “saved or created” with the money.  Even Barry isn’t stupid enough to claim that he was trying to stimulate the economy by buying $850B worth of asphalt, concrete and rebar.

      Further, counting equipment, consumables, training, etc. along with salary and benefits as a cost of business is reasonable and common.  When my boss does a budget for our lab, it isn’t just our salaries that are counted: it’s salaries, benefits, equipment repair, replacement, and maintenance, consumables, waste disposal, etc.  So, while I may only see my salary and benefits, the cost to my company to employ me is actually much larger.  Sure, they can keep the equipment, etc. even if I’m let go, but the entire point of buying it in the first place is for me to use, so it’s really a cost of employment.

      • Bob Armstrong

        But clearly when building a highway or whatever it’s isn’t just about “creating jobs” — because there are tangible results above and beyond wages.

        It’s about putting money into the local economy in and around the project.

        Why are conservative so blatantly stupid. This is third grade level stuff and not one single right wing clown gets it.


  • Anonymous

    Wouldn’t the $10,000 tax credit mean a lot of jobs paying $10,000 per year, basically paid for by money borrowed from the Chinese to make up for the lost revenue?

    You could pay your nephew $10,000 to do nothing, get a nice kickback (or fake the payroll) and collect the tax credit.

    Plus the nephew making $10,000 would pay no income taxes at all. He might spend some money, but this is pure Keynesianism, isn’t it?

    Get real.

    • retired.military


      That would be better than spending $225k per job in money funded by the Chinese.   But in actuality your statement is no.  If a company’s overhead for a job is reduced by 10k per person it may be enough of an incentive to hire that person where as before they could not.  That person may in theory make $25k+.  

    • “Might as well print the money and hand it out.”
      Like they haven’t been doing that already.

      Let’s see – $300 billion in stimulus, added to the $800 billion from the first stimulus, add in another $400 billion from the deficit (hey, we’ve run up $4 tril since Obama took over, so a total $1.5 tril in ‘stimulus’ would fit in pretty well)  – distribute it to the head of household taxpayers and singles (About 115 million of them, according to the census…) and you’re talking about (with a little bit of governmental friction rounding things off…) about $13K per.

      If you divide the whole $4 tril deficit since Obama took office, you get almost $35k per.

      THAT would be a hell of a stimulus.  And, of course, just printing it and handing it out.

      I dunno – I think we’re gonna see a hell of a crash if we keep on like this.

    • Anonymous

      Wouldn’t the $10,000 tax credit mean a lot of jobs paying $10,000 per
      year, basically paid for by money borrowed from the Chinese to make up
      for the lost revenue?

      No, it’d mean getting $20,000 worth of worker for a year at half price. Or a $30,000 worker with 1/3 off. Or a $40,000 worker for $30,000.

      And so on.


      • PBunyan

        I’m guessing you meant to imply “worth of worker” in your second and third examples when you only wrote “worker” as there is a big difference.   Right now $20,000 “worth of worker” might get you a $12K -$15 worker if offer zero benefits– just employee taxes, workers comp & liability insurance, and factoring the risk of unemployment insurance costs.  If you pay benefits, you’re going get even less “worker” for $20K. 

        The problem is that right now employers have no clue what final coast of the $30,000 worker is going to be in the coming years.    I know of a lot of business that actually need more people but employers are just plain scared to hire.

      • Chico assumed the “worker” would be a Democrat, so their value couldn’t possibly be over $10,000.

    • Anonymous

      If a liberal was the boss of the small business it might.  They tend to be pretty small minded.

  • Anonymous

    How about 10k per new worker plus an Obumblecare waiver if you increase your workforce by at least 10%?