ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Economy & Government

Do Carney & Pelosi Need To Tie The Knot?

Updated on January 28, 2012

A Marriage Made In Heaven?

When I ran across this video clip of the recent press conference where a WSJ reporter asked Jay Carney a very valid question about extending unemployment benefits and job creation I thought of the last person who gave such a nonsensical answer. That would be Nancy Pelosi of "we need to pass the bill so we can find out what's in it" fame. What a match! Whenever the mindless meet the mindless anything is likely to happen. However, first he had to attack the source of the question. So he leads into the question with this, “Oh, uh, it is by, uh, I would expect a reporter from the Wall Street Journal would know this as part of the entrance exam.” Go ahead and take a listen to his completely circular argument regarding how unemployment stimulates an economy and creates jobs.

What Did He Just Say?

It appears that Carney knows as much about economics as Timothy Geithner does. When he started stammering I knew the jig was up. He has obviously been taking notes from San Fran Nan and they are on some cosmic wave length that the rest of us may not be on. They might just make it together if they decide to walk down the aisle of blissful ignorance.

What Did She Just Say?

Isn't what Jay Carney said here just the perfect kissing cousin to what came out of Peloi's mouth during the stimulus period? His way of putting it was, “It is one of the most direct ways to infuse money directly into the economy because people who are unemployed and obviously aren’t earning a paycheck are going to spend the money that they get. They’re not going to save it, they’re going to spend it. And with unemployment insurance, that way, the money goes directly back into the economy, dollar for dollar virtually.” This guy obviously isn't a nuclear scientist or an economist. He's no more than a partisan talking head and just think, he earns a paycheck for saying stuff like this, as does his prospective bride. Both are extremely overpaid and maybe should spend some time in the unemployment office.

I'm beginning to wonder exactly where common sense in this administration went. It seems to have vacated the premises and left no forwarding address. Now according to this logic, not having a job and collecting money for not having a job creates jobs? Someone explain that to me and don't tell me to watch either video clip.

I fully understand that paying people unemployment compensation gives people money and that they will spend that money. What are those people producing? Production is part of growth and growth is keyed into job creation. But aren't those people being paid not to work? I have a neighbor whose attitude is that as long as she receives money not to work she isn't going to work. She's not the only one I have met with that attitude by the way.

Then I scratch my head and wonder where the money to keep extending unemployment benefits, rather than fixing the problems in the economy, comes from. Doesn't take much scratching to come up with the answer either, nor much wonder. It comes from working people who are being productive and are just as likely to spend their money too. What is intended to be a safety net, which is what it was designed to be, suddenly becomes the driver of our economic engine and create jobs?

His math gets a little fuzzy too when he talks about the 2+ million jobs that were created. He forgot to factor in the jobs lost during the same period which equals a very negative number. Spin on Carney.

There's only one person alive that I know of who knows less about economics than Jay and Nancy. That would be Barack Obama. Maybe he should officiate at the wedding!

As Always,

The Frog

It's Friday So Here's A Free Gas Coupon For Stopping By!


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Harvey Stelman 6 years ago

      Froggy, I feel so bad for Carney. I'll be his job description didn't include "double talking," he's not even good at it.

      Look at his face, he's not even a convincing liar. Maybe that's because Obama told him how to do it. Idiots have believed Obama, why wouldn't they believe this.

      I say, print-print-print. Then give it away as a paycheck. You know that will stimulate the economy.

      Your Hub, WTF is no longer there WTF happened? I was using WTF in the 60's, it didn't catch on. H

    • profile image

      34th Bomb Group 6 years ago

      They're both ignorant fools, Your Highestness! Fortunately - YOU are NOT!

      Love the avatar, my friend

      The first thing that tipped me off to just how ignorant this man is - in THIS particular instance - is the guy has his hands in his pockets. No class - Bush League - all hat, no cattle, etc. He's always condescending and rude - but at least Republicans know how to LOOK when delivering lousy news. Don't slouch and get your hands outta your pockets. (My Dad would KILL me!)

      I, personally, know at least 5 people who went on the dole and didn't even bother looking for a job. As you drive into my little city you are met with a two mile stretch of fast food and casual restaurants, e.g. Olive Garden to Mickey D's. They are ALWAYS looking for help. Many of these acquaintences, when pushed, admit there's no way in hell they'd take a job like that because "It's beneath them," and, always "I get more in unemployment than I'd earn by washing dishes..."

      And, yes, it had me in giggles, too. Too bad these people are running the f'n Country.


    • profile image

      Lynn S. Murphy 6 years ago

      Love the new avi and thanks for taking the terror of this admin and making it somewhat bearable. Laughing is way better than crying; which makes my eyes puffy and red.

    • marcoujor profile image

      Maria Jordan 6 years ago from Jeffersonville PA

      You handsome, funny devil... I know I should be serious but I am laughing at this silliness and your adorable avatar-- voted UP and FABI, mar.

    • profile image

      Pat Potts 6 years ago

      sense and sensibility

      Thanks for the great hub

    • TheManWithNoPants profile image

      TheManWithNoPants 6 years ago from Tucson, Az.

      oh, off the subject.

      Every one of the candidates lied on the 10 to 1 question. At least I hope they were lying. I'd hate to think they or anyone would be stupid enough to turn down a deal like that. Principle becomes re defined at saying no to a 10 to 1 deal. It then becomes politics.


    • TheManWithNoPants profile image

      TheManWithNoPants 6 years ago from Tucson, Az.

      Love the new logo

      ... and these are the guys pulling the 14 trillion dollar strings. Holy freaking yikes!

      Good job my brother. You tha frog!


    • cjv123 profile image

      Carol 6 years ago from Michigan

      Wow - both you and those who have made comments know more than Obama and his lame administration. All well said and voted up and clicked across for another excellent Hub!

    • profile image

      Ghost32 6 years ago

      Jim, with the economy the way it is under this misadministration, what I REALLY want to know is: Where on Earth did you find an entire $5 bill for that photo? it just me, or is Abe looking a tad more dour than even his usual glum self?

      Let's see...she would no doubt hyphenate, becoming Nancy Pelosi-Carney. Has a ring to it. Wait. Isn't a carney one of those guys at the ring toss on the midway who takes your cash and gives nothing back?


    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      I suggested doing just that when it was first announced. A trillion dollar stimulus would have resulted in a check for approximately $3333.00 per American, or $13,332 for a family of four.

      Instead, it was wasted on government boondoggles!

      It could also have built 100 big, new nuke plants (2 per state) that would have resulted in retiring all coal fired plants, put millions to work for years, and would then have paid us back by selling power!

    • The Frog Prince profile image

      The Frog Prince 6 years ago from Arlington, TX

      Will - If they'd taken that wasted stimulus money and sent all of us who work and pay taxes a check then a lot of problems would have been solved. People could pay off their mortgages, pay off their debts and go out to dinner.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      The test for such claims is to extend it to everybody. Suppose government sent each of us a million dollars. Wouldn't that create employment too?

      It's similar to setting an artificial minimum wage that's not based on the reality of supply and demand. Why stop at $7 an hour? Why not $25 an hour or $50 an hour?

    • profile image

      Stewart Engelman 6 years ago

      With a savings rate near zero, transferring cash to the unempoloyed won't stoke aggregate demand. They only way to to stoke overall demand is to produce more. More people employed means more total wealth, and more overall spending. It's the old saw "supply creates its own demand." And business won't invest more domestically unless we cut red tape, flatten the tax code so we don't have entire business sectors being overtaxed, reduce the incentive to offshore American jobs (stop granting export protection to China and other low wage countries in exchange for permission to offshore; business won't like paying the higher American wages, but they'll have no choice), and incent illegals to leave (E-Verify, much higher penalties for illegal presence and hiring, ending social beneits and tuition breaks, etc.).

      Admittedly, the above steps reduce "demand" for regulators, and would require Congress to spurn corporate bribes for special tax and export tariff deals, and demand real action on border security and immigration law enforcement (which will of course further reduce corporate bribes). The truth is, the government is contributing to, instead of helping to solve, the jobs recession because it makes government bigger and richer.

    • profile image

      partisan patriot 6 years ago


      Fact is Old Jay and Queen "Stitch Face" both suscribe to the same political position; ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE ME OR ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE YOUR LYING EYES!

      They don't have a clue and are counting on those listening to them to also be clueless!

    • wicked_lover profile image

      wicked_lover 6 years ago from New England

      Excellent HUB Frog. And great response Mary. I am in full agreement in regards to mandatory economic and accounting classes for those running for office.

      When I read this story yesterday on The Drudge, I was like ... what? Did he say what I just read? The position of Press Secretary is a job that I would NEVER want. To have to face the press everyday with spin and lies, being the current President's sock puppet is not something I would aspire to.

    • The Frog Prince profile image

      The Frog Prince 6 years ago from Arlington, TX

      BPOP - Grab your broom because we have some heavy sweeping to do in 2012.

    • breakfastpop profile image

      breakfastpop 6 years ago

      Jay Carney is a blooming onion! I am sick of him and his stammering condescending non answers. He can leave, take President Obama, Pelosi, Reid and all the rest of these fools with him.

    • The Frog Prince profile image

      The Frog Prince 6 years ago from Arlington, TX

      Mary - I follow what you are saying but the grocer probably isn't making any more money but maintaining the status quo because people need to eat. The money they are receiving is coming primarily from the former employer who isn't going to hire anybody until the till runs dry on the benefit bank. Then the federal government wants to step in and extend those benefits. We know who is paying for that - those of us who actually pay taxes. In the interim, no jobs are created and nothing is produced by those collecting unemployment except paperwork for some bureaucrat. What a mess.

    • profile image

      MaryinMinnesota 6 years ago

      Actually what Jay is saying is true, but only partially true. Everyone needs to buy groceries, gas, prescriptions, etc., and that money comes from their source of income. In this case, it's unemployment.

      What Jay is not telling the reporters and public is this:

      1) Just because unemployment checks do pay for a household's basic needs does not necessarily then generate new jobs from those who are receiving the money in return for their goods.

      For instance, let's take the grocer who now is getting the unemployed person's unemployment money for his groceries he sells, that money generated to the grocer may make his income higher, but then that same grocer maybe loosing money from those who have had their unemployment benefits stopped, and are now getting their food from food shelves. So the grocer is basicially getting more income and loosing more income at the same time. That does not generate jobs.

      2)Jay forgets to mention where that unemployment check comes from. As an accountant who worked for a non-profit school with an income of more than 1 milion dollars every year, I can tell you where at least the first 6 months of unemployment comes from. It comes from the business that either laid off or fired the person getting the unemployment checks.

      Prior to Obama getting his damn fingers into the unemployment funds, when a person's 6 months of unemployment checks ran out, that person got his butt out and took any job that was available, because he knew there were no more unemployment checks coming any more.

      After paying out 6 months of unemployment, the former employer's respnsibility to pay that, then ceases. Let's say that employer had to lay off 100 people, even though those people are not showing up for work every day, the employer is still paying that former employee his wages at usually 80% of their former checks. So the former employee is not working for the former employer, but for the former employer, it is as if the former employee is still working for him because he is paying that unemployment checks out.

      So then Jay needs to think about this: If an employer is paying out unemployment to numerous employees he had to let go due to economic downfalls, then that employer is not going to be hiring further employees. That's just common sense, but apparently Jay and Obama don't realize this.

      So now we have the grocer who has more income due to unemployment checks buying his groceries, but he also has less income coming in due to those whose benefits have stopped and they are now getting their food from food shelves. We also have the employer who is paying out unemployment checks to laid off workers, which then makes that employers income less, which in turn says he will not be hiring others.

      Your right Jim... Jay needs economic classes... AND accounting courses. All of congress needs economic and accounting classes. I think it should be made mandatory... take the classes and get the degree, or don't run for office. That would get rid of more than the majority of buffoons who are now sitting in congress, who all seem to not know anything about economics and accounting.