Obama's New Job Plan: Kill 400,000 Jobs Immediately

Forums: Politics, Fake Politics, U S-Politics, Us-Politics, Delusional-Democrat
Email this Topic • Print this Page

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2011/11/12/obamas_new_job_plan_kill_400,000_jobs_immediately

Quote:

The decision by the Obama administration to delay any action on the XL Keystone pipeline until after the election is a fitting development for an administration that has pursued a bankrupt energy policy, a bankrupt jobs policy and is quite literally bankrupting the country with politics thinly veiled as policy.

And the beauty for Obama in this latest axe he's taken to jobs in the USA is that he doesn't even have consider Congress while he's swinging it. He can kill close to a half-a-million jobs all on his own.

“The State Department said Thursday it would take up to 18 months to review alternative routes for the Keystone expansion,” reports MarketWatch, “so it avoids carrying heavy Canadian crude past Nebraska's environmentally sensitive Sand Hills region and a major regional aquifer.”

The pipeline could ultimately supply about a million barrels of Canadian oil to the US per day and 400,000 US jobs, most of them almost immediately. But instead, the president, who has been railing against Congress for not passing another expensive jobs bill just killed 400,000 American jobs, while making sure the price of gas stays high for citizens.

And despite everything the Obama administration has done to slow down domestic development of oil and gas resources, the oil and gas sector is one of the fastest growing jobs markets in a very anemic job market. While other sectors are shedding jobs, oil and gas is hot....

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,041 • Replies: 35

@gungasnake,

Who got fired because of this?

Oh.. No one? You mean this is just more made up crap?

Meanwhile we DO see actual people losing their jobs because of inaction by Congress.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

i'm not actually opposed to the pipe line, but don't fool yourself about it's ability to lower oil prices, the only reason oil sands are profitable is high crude prices, if prices drop, oil sands production slows down or stops

1 Reply

@djjd62,

What I have heard is that OPEC no longer has the excess capacity to simply dump oil on the market to kill off new initiatives like this one.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

then don't expect oil prices to drop anytime soon, it's the high cost of crude that makes the oil sands viable

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

I'm curious how that pipeline will create 400,000 jobs.

At it's peak 3,400 people were employed building the Alaskan pipeline.

Where exactly are these 400,000 jobs going to be gunga?

I love the math though...
The pipeline is projected to cost $7 billion. If we assume every dollar goes towards jobs and there are no materials used, that would mean those jobs would only pay $17,500.

2 Replies

@parados,

They are obviously talking about a multiplier effect of sorts.

1 Reply

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

then don't expect oil prices to drop anytime soon, it's the high cost of crude that makes the oil sands viable

Absolutely. Matter of fact, it's the high cost of crude that makes ethanol a viable fuel. That, and a .5x per gallon subsidy, and federally mandated use.

On the jobs that will be created, the number I keep hearing is 20,000. Don't know the original source of that number but it sounds much more plausible than millions of jobs "created or saved."

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

The present route over the Sandhills and the Ogalalla is a stupid stupid plan. Several of my professional organizations have opposed the pipeline as it is routed. It took an 11th hour stay to get the damn thing rerouted.
The oil pipeline shills had said that "there couldnt possibly be any environmental damage should a leak occur in the pipeline". YEt they produced no evidence that they even knew what the hell they were talking about

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

They are obviously talking about a multiplier effect of sorts.

I am curious what imaginary number you used to multiply?

Even if we assume a certain % trickles down and goes back into a local economy, it doesn't become 400,000 jobs.

1 Reply

@parados,

Come on guys. Dont argue with Gunga. He knows how to lie with the best of them.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

I'm curious how that pipeline will create 400,000 jobs.

The Pipeline will end up being something like the "Big Dig" here in Boston. After it's finally built, it will take decades to work out all the problems. It could easily provie jobs into the next century if you factor in the pollution and of course, the explosions.

2 Replies

@Miller,

Oh. so it would employ 4,000 people for the next 100 years and that works out to 400,000 jobs?

1 Reply

@Miller,

I favor the pipeline. Nice that it will create jobs, but that's not the purpose. The real purpose is to get a return on investment greater than the total costs - including the cost of those jobs. I don't really consider cost overruns, leaks, and explosions(?) to be real big talking points.

Let me add that if it were build at federal (taxpayer) expense with the announced purpose of creating jobs, I could turn negative quickly.

Wouldn't mind Farmerman expanding on his comments regarding the routing. Are the Nebraska Sand Hills supposed to be especially sensitive, or at least more sensitive than some other route?

1 Reply

@roger,

I favor the pipeline, but...

my drinking water supply lies below the proposed route. I'm all for very careful planning with all of this. and I'm really glad I don't drink from the gulf...

1 Reply

@parados,

Now, now. I think we crossposted. Personally, I'm not happy about spending tons of cash for some hoped for multiplier effect. I suspect the concept includes a hefty dose of wishful thinking. That suspicion extends to many 'stimulus' projects as well, of course.

1 Reply

@roger,

Quote:

I suspect the concept includes a hefty dose of wishful thinking.

I don't think it's wishful thinking at all. I think it's outright lying to try to create an issue to slam Obama.

Who needs reality when it comes to conservative politics, or most other politics for that matter.

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Exactly. We can be in favor of the pipeline without being in favor of leaks. I think we've discovered in the past year, if not more, that there have been some problems in both pipeline specifications and inspection. The gas lines are just more spectacular.

0 Replies

@parados,

If you can honestly delude yourself, it isn't lying. Sometimes I think Obama actually means well. Sometimes. If you want to get all political, I mean.

1 Reply

@roger,

Quote:

If you can honestly delude yourself, it isn't lying.

Then it would be psychosis.

Something that seems to appear a lot on the conservative side of the aisle lately.
I watched a GOP congressman on CNBC the other day declare that less than 100,000 state and local employees have been let go in the last 3 years. The host pointed out that the congressman was in direct contradiction to Senator Reid and the congressman called Reid a liar. (The actual number from the normal sources is over 400,000 so Reid was correct.)

0 Replies

Obama's New Job Plan: Kill 400,000 Jobs Immediately

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know