Well, I’ll answer you first since you made a valid argument.
I agree, this is why I think we should try to find the best GOP candidate we can. I’m personally not thrilled with any of the possibilities. The guys who might have done a good job like Mitch Daniels opted out. Pawlenty would be good, but man, he is running such a terrible campaign I’m having second thoughts.
The sad thing is, I live in IL, which means that it will probably be the only state Obama wins even if he takes a Carter-like Shelacking. So my only chance to have any influence on the process is to pick the best candidate possible in the primary.
Oh, I hope we do. We might even hear what he ACTUALLY said and not the way you fellows characterize it.
“We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot.”
I think he was expressing the frustration with Washington everyone was feeling. (did the 2010 elections not happen in your universe?)
There are some things about Perry I don’t like. His stands on Abortion (really not the government’s business) and gay marriage (a distraction from fixing the real problems.)
But running as the “anti-Washington” candidate. I don’t think anyone ever lost an election doing that. It’s why four of the last six presidents have been governors. We want someone to come in from the outside and clean the mess up.
He did provide a link to some statistics having to do with functional literacy, though some posters dug a little deeper and found the situation was a bit different than what RR was purporting. Don’t remember exactly what conclusion they came to, but if you go back a page or two (or three), you’d be able to see what they said.
And we established (by, you know, looking for evidence of people getting sacked) that bad teachers can actually get fired.
Are there many unemployed teachers? Maybe they have to hang on to bad ones as there is no one to replace them, possibly due to idiots like you declaring that it isn’t a “real job” and pouring scorn on them?
And teachers earn 100k now? According to my very, very brief research not a single state has an average over 60k.
I started a thread on “Great Debates” about this and found TWO cases where teachers were making close to $100K after being caught molesting students, and the administration was unable to fire them.
Now, I don’t want to get bogged down on this subject because this is really supposed to be a thread about Bachmann.
Bachmann and Assoc. universities staff attended
Regeant Univ.
Argosy U.
Bethel Univ.
Walden U.
Asuza Pacific U.
Adler
And a couple from U of Wisconsin.
A strange group, don’t you think?
Since you made a direct response to my criticism I’ll respond once and then quit from hijacking this thread any further.
My cite is your own paper.
I can’t understand how you could have not found studies that supported the CBO’s estimates when your own cite lays them out in a neat row.
The only real outlier is, of course, that Conley and Dupor paper, which was designed from the beginning with the sole purpose of refuting the CBO. Nothing else can explain the use of the lowest possible confidence internal allowable in a published paper. They gloss over the natural result of producing error bars so huge that no legitimate conclusion could be drawn from the data. The proper abstract would be “we found no support in either direction” but that wouldn’t have gotten them any attention.
Bachmann (who?) did propose a stimulus alternative in 2009, according to her site, but the abstract takeaway listed nothing but tax cuts and the link to a fuller explanation no longer works.
Sam, I could see how you missed in in post 300. So, I’ll repeat it here.
Yep, and you missed this part of the paper:
“It is important to note that we do not have enough precision in our estimates to conclude that number of jobs lost/destroyed was (probably) greater than the number created/saved. Our estimates are consistent with there being a net positive (but not large) number of jobs saved/created. We leave completing an evaluation of crowding explanations for future research.”
Read the conclusion, which is full of “more research needed.”
Maybe you can find where the authors make a solid case for the AARP “crowding out” private sector jobs. I mean, their biggest arguement was that (paraphrase) State Employees are better educated and “would” have found private sector jobs had their State jobs not been saved by the Fed government spending…" I couldn’t find anything better than that in the paper, and I would like to read their analysis if it’s in there.
I’ve picked up the argument in this thread. Join me there if you’d like.
But very quickly: Those other studies listed are also just the results of the same kinds of Keynesian models used by the CBO. The CBO didn’t cite them as evidence of what actually happened, but to show that their choice of models was reasonable, and that the output of their model was roughly in line with other models. The various papers listed vary primarily in the assumptions chosen for their models and forecasts. They’re not based on actual measured results.
Actual empirical evidence determines if the models themselves are correct, and that’s what we’re looking at now. And it’s not looking good for the models.
Which is why I’d like to see more potential runners who aren’t from the cheerleading faction of the Republican party. It’d be nice to have a woman become president, but not just any woman. Certainly neither of the ones who are now in the spotlight.
I can not believe there are people still bigoted enough to believe such a neanderthalish meme. A lot of government workers are dedicated, hard working employees. You are insulting them all.
I left my office at 7 tonight. At least 2 guvies were still there. I’m pretty sure they both were at 8:00 AM meetings today. I would be surprised if they did not have 8 AM meetings tomorrow. Myth != Data.
Usually when I have to go to the DMV or any other government agency, it’s usually an excercise in frustration as an unnecessary exchange that should only take five minutes usually ends up taking hours.
Maybe it’s you? The last time I went to the DMV it took five minutes and they were very pleasant and efficient. Then I went across the parking lot to a different building to register for an absentee ballot, which also took no time at all. And on the occasions I go to the Embassy here they’re very easy to deal with (apart from the security staff who are Professionally Difficult). Usually if there’s a holdup or problem it’s because a member of the public is causing it.