Do Carney & Pelosi Need To Tie The Knot?

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.

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.

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