The stimulus package failed because it consisted mostly of tax cuts. Tax cuts are among the very worst ways to create jobs and certainly the most expensive.
The stimulus package authorizes 787 billion dollars. According to the official website (Recovery.gov) $565 billion has actually been spent or credited. There are three categories of "stimulus." Citing amounts spent, they are:
- $243.4 billion in tax cuts.
- $154.5 billion in contracts, grants, and loans. This is what we actually think of as a stimulus, construction and research projects.
- $166.8 billion in entitlements. This is mostly money to the states to help with unemployment insurance.
Estimates of jobs "saved and created" by the package range from 800,000 to 2.4 million (both from the Congressional Budget Office), with other estimates at 1.25 million (IHS/Global Insight), 1.06 million (Macroeconomic Advisors), and 1.59 million (Moody's).
Let's use Moody's estimate (sort of the high middle, and independent) and round it off to 1.6 million jobs "saved and created."
That's $353,125 per job.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. It's obscene.
If you have an essentially unlimited line of credit, as the government essentially does, it would appear relatively easy to create jobs.
"Hey, you, over there on the unemployment line, wanna work cleaning up our national parks? Yeah, we'll give you a twenty dollar rake, some biodegradable garbage bags, and twenty bucks an hour." That happens to be 47 cents an hour over the average wage.
No national parks or monuments in your neighborhood?
All right, there are lots of empty lots and abandoned homes due to the housing market collapse. "Let's clean 'em up. Same deal. That's forty thousand a year. You can live on that."
Presumably the government will be decent about it and pay the usual benefits -- social security, unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and so on -- which adds $8.11 an hour. That's a little less than $17,000 a year, making a total cost of $57,000 per year, per job.
Jobs don't exist in a vacuum, not even sweeping the streets by hand with a broom. There has to be a certain number of overhead costs. Not counting salaries of supervisors and such (which would be part of the job creation numbers), not counting benefits (already in there), 15 percent is a very generous number, for another $8,550, a total of $65,550 per job.
So that's what a "created" job should cost. About $65,000.
If you actually want to "create jobs," that's how you should do it. Go out and create them.
But that's not how we do things. We were not goddamn Communists. Or even socialists. We're capitalists. So we give out contracts to private enterprises and grants to universities and other institutions.
Construction projects, one of the primary forms of job creation has lots of costs beside labor. They have machinery, materials, a variety of business expenses (accounting, insurance, legal, etc.), the purchase of land and so on. Labor accounts for 20-30 percent of a construction contract. Let's take the low end, 20 percent, and assume that a construction job is one of those $65,000 wages plus benefits for a full year jobs, and the cost of that job then becomes $325,000.
That's pretty close to the $353,125 per job number we got using the Moody's estimate.
Except that all those other construction costs (excluding land purchase, which should be less relevant here) involve additional labor. For example, materials are manufactured, a certain portion of them here, in the US. Truckers transport them. Building supply company employees handle them. Machinery is built (some portion of it here), and maintained (all of it here). The construction company pays it's staff and the professionals (lawyer and accountants), and so on. All those people buy food (keeping supermarket workers employed), buy other stuff, pay their bills, and so on.
This is the famous Keynesian multiplier effect.
It's also very difficult to calculate how many non-site, indirect jobs does a construction project support with all its other spending. In the figures we're using, that 80% of the costs. It's reasonable to say that at least half of that goes into people's pockets as it moves down the line.
If we figure it that way, it should probably cost about $130,000 per job.
Let's go back to the breakdown.
First let's take out the aid to the states for unemployment insurance assistance. Obviously that doesn't add jobs. It helps people. It goes to keeping the community afloat, but it doesn't create a whole lot of jobs.
Let's take out the tax cuts. Just as an academic exercise, for the moment.
That leaves projects, grants, and loans. $154.5 billion.
If we have 1,600,000 jobs created and saved, and divide it into the money spent on projects, it comes out at $96,562 per job.
That actually makes sense. It's expensive. But it makes sense.
Direct job creation, or job creation through contracts (like road building), has a multiplier effect. Each job creates more jobs, both through the support jobs and through the spending by the people who are employed.
Job creation through tax cuts works the opposite way.
The price per job is multiplied many times over.
In this last election cycle, Carl Paladino was running against Andrew Cuomo for governor of New York. One of the charges that Cuomo leveled against him was that he got $1.4 million in tax breaks but created only one job from that.
The implication was that Paladino was a sleazy rip-off artist. At best.
He may be, but it is only a particularly vivid example of how the tax cuts to job creation equation actually works.
We are still arguing about extending the Bush Tax Cuts.
The Bush Tax Cuts cost about two trillion dollars.
They were originally labeled and promoted as "jobs and stimulus" packages. Let's take him at his word. Over the course of his two terms 1.1 jobs were created. That didn't even keep up with population growth. It also cost $1,818,182 per job.
Close to the same numbers that Paladino was working with.
The Obama White House, a prisoner of the prevailing 'tax cuts stimulate the economy and create jobs' theology, passed a stimulus bill that was 40 percent tax cuts, 30 percent unemployment insurance, and only 27 percent actual stimulus.
That's why it didn't work.
That's not even the bad news.
Here's the bad news. The tax cuts are still in effect. The odds are they will be extended, even for the very wealthiest.
Here's worse news. There's only one thing stupider than cutting taxes to create jobs. It's to cut spending. In the recent NY governor's race, for example, both leading candidates promise to cut spending. That means cutting jobs. That's happening state by state all around the country. Not only does cutting jobs mean, in a very direct one-to-one way, fewer jobs, it has a negative multiplier effect. It means there are fewer people with money to spend on the things that create jobs for other people.
why is MSNBC going after Fox News so much? they are trying to paint Fox News as villains. what about the political crap MSNBC dose? no body talks about that and the controversies MSNBC has done
“Assertions of liberal bias
Commentators have described MSNBC as having a bias towards the political left and the Democratic Party. In November 2007, a New York Times article stated that MSNBC’s prime-time lineup is tilting more to the left. Washington Post media analyst Howard Kurtz has stated that the channel’s evening lineup “has clearly gravitated to the left in recent years and often seems to regard itself as the antithesis of Fox News.” In reference to changes in the channel’s evening programming, senior vice president of NBC News Phil Griffin has said that “It happened naturally. There isn’t a dogma we’re putting through. There is a ‘Go for it.’”
In the February 2008 issue of Men’s Journal magazine, a MSNBC interviewee quoted a senior executive who said that liberal commentator Keith Olbermann “runs MSNBC” and that “because of his success, he’s in charge” of the channel. The New York Times has called Olbermann MSNBC’s “most recognizable face”. In September 2008, MSNBC stated that they were removing both Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as live political event anchors, and replacing them with David Gregory, due to growing criticism that they were “too opinionated to be seen as neutral in the heat of the presidential campaign.” Olbermann continued to broadcast Countdown both before and after the presidential and vice-presidential debates, and both Matthews and Olbermann joined Gregory on the channel’s election night coverage. In September 2009, a Pew Research Poll showed that Democrats were much more likely than Republicans to rate the channel favorably and Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to see MSNBC unfavorably.
On November 13, 2009, in the days leading up to the release of 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s book “Going Rogue”, MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan used photoshopped pictures of Palin on the channel’s Morning Meeting program. Ratigan apologized a few days later stating, “I want to apologize to Governor Palin and all of our viewers. On Friday, in a very misguided attempt to have some fun in advance of Sarah Palin’s upcoming book Going Rogue, our staff mistakenly used some clearly photoshopped images of Ms. Palin without any acknowledgment.”
In October 2010, MSNBC began using the tagline “lean forward”, which was described by some media outlets as the network embracing its politically progressive identity.
Assertions of pro-Obama bias
Some Democratic Party supporters, most notably Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and Clinton advisor Lanny Davis, criticized MSNBC during and after the 2008 Democratic Primaries, as covering Barack Obama more favorably than Hillary Clinton. A study done by the Project for Excellence in Journalism showed that MSNBC had less negative coverage of Obama (14% of stories vs. 29% in the press overall) and more negative stories about Republican presidential candidate John McCain (73% of its coverage vs. 57% in the press overall). MSNBC’s on-air slogan during the week of the 2008 presidential election, “The Power of Change”, was criticized as being overtly similar to Obama’s campaign slogan of “Change.” Following the 2008 presidential election, conservative talk-show host, John Ziegler worked on a documentary called Media Malpractice…. How Obama Got Elected, which was very critical of the media, especially MSNBC’s role, in the 2008 Presidential Election. While promoting the documentary, he engaged in an on-air dispute with MSNBC news anchor Contessa Brewer, on how the media, especially MSNBC, had portrayed Sarah Palin.
Michael Savage dismissal
During the spring and early summer of 2003, MSNBC featured a weekend talk show hosted by conservative radio host Michael Savage. In July of that year, Savage responded to a prank caller on his show by calling him a “pig” and a “sodomite”, and telling him he “should get AIDS and die.” Savage’s show was canceled; Savage fired from the channel shortly afterward (with some reports placing the termination immediately after the episode in question went off air).
Don Imus controversy
In early April 2007, Don Imus, whose radio show Imus in the Morning was simulcast on MSNBC, described members of the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, as “some nappy-headed hoes”. The comments sparked outrage, as many considered them to be racist and sexist. After a two-week suspension of Imus’ program, and after sponsors began to withdraw advertisements from the show, MSNBC canceled the simulcast. Imus, as well as NBC News, apologized to the Rutgers Basketball team for the remarks. Don Imus now has a feature show on the Fox Business Network.
“Rise of the New Right” documentary
In June 2010, a documentary airing on MSNBC and hosted by Chris Matthews called Rise of the New Right drew significant criticism from conservatives and the Tea Party movement. The documentary features interviews with Dick Armey, the former House Majority Leader, Orly Taitz, a leading figure in the “birther” movement, and radio host Alex Jones. The documentary also showed the Michigan Militia’s survival training camp and hit the campaign trail with Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul.
Since the documentary has aired, FreedomWorks, which is chaired by one of the stars of the documentary, Dick Armey, issued a letter calling for a boycott of Dawn and Proctor and Gamble, which advertises during Hardball with Chris Matthews, asking tea partyers to “call, fax, or email” the company until it drops its advertising. Its grassroots director Brendan Steinhauser said, “The Tea Party movement I know looks nothing like the one portrayed on MSNBC‘s Hardball. The movement is made up of good, hardworking, honest, smart people that love their country. It is a movement that reflects the best in America, and I will remind Dawn of this fact when I write my letter and make my phone calls.” The National Tea Party federation also pushed for a boycott of the show’s advertisers. Anna Puig of the Kitchen Table Patriots said in a statement, “The propaganda piece only serves a left-wing agenda, and I will do everything I can to convince Dawn to stop funding MSNBC’s lies.” A blogger on Hot Air wrote, “It’s a poor excuse of objective journalism. Calling it a documentary is a pathetic joke.” Where as Samuel P. Jacobs writer for the Daily Beast notes, “The sense of fear on the right is well captured in the documentary…When the words of Barry Goldwater—’Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice’—turn up on a brick thrown through the window of a local Democratic committee, the pundit’s history lesson doesn’t seem so farfetched.” Zeitgeisty Report followed with praise saying, “Chris Matthews’ special report, The Rise of the New Right , was one of those rare (these days) moments of essential viewing that we would be wise not to ignore.” The boycott has been thus far ineffective. Procter & Gamble continue to advertise with the show.
Keith Olbermann Suspension
On November 5, 2010, MSNBC President Phil Griffin suspended Olbermann indefinitely without pay for contributing $2,400 (the maximum personal donation limit) to each of three Democratic candidates during the 2010 midterm election cycle. Contributions to political campaigns, under NBC News policy, are not allowed without prior permission. On November 7, 2010, Olbermann posted a thank you message to supporters via Twitter. That same day, MSNBC announced that he would be back on the air starting Tuesday, November 9th.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC#Criticism_and_controversy
“Many observers of the channel have asserted that it has a bias favoring the political right and the Republican Party. Fox News has publicly denied such assertions, stating that, while its commentators are self-described conservatives, the reporters in the news room provide separate, neutral reporting.
Assertions of conservative bias
Critics and other observers have asserted that Fox News has a bias towards the political right at the expense of neutrality. Murdoch and Ailes have reacted against assertions of bias, with Murdoch saying that Fox has “given room to both sides, whereas only one side had it before.” In 2004, director Robert Greenwald produced the documentary film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, which argues that Fox News has a conservative bias. The film includes clips from Fox News as well as internal memos from editorial Vice President John Moody directing Fox News staff on how to report certain subjects.
A Pew Research poll released on October 29, 2009, found that Fox News is viewed as the most ideological channel in America. 47% of those surveyed said Fox News is “mostly conservative,” 14% said “mostly liberal,” and 24% said “neither.” In comparison, MSNBC had 36% identify it as “mostly liberal,” 11% as “mostly conservative,” and 27% as “neither.” CNN had 37% describe it as “mostly liberal,” 11% as “mostly conservative,” and 33% as “neither.” In 2004, the Pew Research Center survey showed that FNC was cited unprompted by 69% of national journalists to be a conservative news organization. The same survey also showed that 34% of national journalists describe themselves as liberals, compared to 7% that describe themselve as conservative.
A poll by Rasmussen Reports found that 31% of Americans say Fox News has a conservative bias and 15% say it has a liberal bias. The poll also reported that 36% believe Fox News delivers news with neither a conservative or liberal bias, compared to 37% who said NPR delivers news with no conservative or liberal bias and 32% who said the same of CNN. Rasmussen is a frequent contributor to Fox News and has been accused by Democrats of biased polling in favor of Republicans. A 2007 study looked at the introduction of Fox News into local US markets between 1996 and 2000, and found that in the 2000 presidential election “Republicans gained 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points in the towns that broadcast Fox News.” The study’s estimates “imply that Fox News convinced 3 to 28 percent of its viewers to vote Republican, depending on the audience measure.”
A 2010 study conducted by Professor Sean Aday comparing Fox News Channel’s Special Report With Brit Humes and NBC’s Nightly News coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during 2005 found that both underplayed bad news, but concluded that “Fox News was much more sympathetic to the administration than NBC, suggesting that, “if scholars continue to find evidence of a partisan or ideological bias at FNC…they should consider Fox as alternative, rather than mainstream, media.” Aday also pointed out, however, that the data used in his study may have come late enough in the war to be consistent with accepted practices.
According to trade magazine Broadcasting & Cable, Fox News is “largely circumscribed by conservative firebrands such as Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck”.
Accusations of misrepresentation of facts
The progressive media watchdog group Media Matters for America has cataloged what they claim are the ten most “egregious examples” of “distortion” by both Fox News and its TV personalities. The criticisms include several examples of cropping quotes from President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Vice President Gore so they appear out of context, using image manipulation software to edit the appearance of reporters from The New York Times, and using footage from other events during a report on the November 5 “Tea Party” rally in Washington DC. They claim the intention is to make it appear as if a larger number of protesters attended the event. Media Matters also called attention to the December 4 edition of Fox and Friends and accused the show of misleading their viewers with a “questionable graphic” that showed the results of a Rasmussen Reports climate change poll adding up to 120%.
In November, 2009, Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett told viewers that a Sarah Palin book signing in Grand Rapids, Michigan had a massive turnout while showing footage of Palin with a large crowd. Jarrett noted that the former Republican vice-presidential candidate is “continuing to draw huge crowds while she’s promoting her brand-new book”, adding that the images being shown were “some of the pictures just coming in to us…. The lines earlier had formed this morning.” The video was actually taken from a 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally. Fox senior vice-president of news Michael Clemente issued an initial statement saying, “This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn’t alert the control room to update the video.” Fox offered an on-air apology the following day during the same “Happening Now” segment citing regrets for what they described as a “video error” with no intent to mislead.
Talking points from Bush White House
While promoting his memoir, What Happened, Scott McClellan, former White House Press Secretary (2003–2006) for President George W. Bush stated on the July 25, 2008 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews that the Bush White House routinely gave talking points to Fox News commentators — but not journalists — in order to influence discourse and content. McClellan stated that these talking points were not issued to provide the public with news; instead, they were to provide Fox News commentators with issues and perspectives favorable to the White House and the Republican Party. McClellan later apologized to Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly for not responding to Matthews’ suggestion that “Bill” or “Sean” received the talking points; McClellan said he had no personal knowledge that O’Reilly ever received the talking points. Furthermore he pointed out “the way a couple of questions were phrased in that interview along with my response left things open to interpretation and I should not have let that happen”.
Obama administration conflict with Fox News
In September 2009, the Obama administration engaged in a verbal conflict with Fox News Channel. On Sept. 20, 2009, President Obama appeared on all the major news programs except Fox News, a snub partially in response to remarks about the President by commentators Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and general coverage by Fox with regard to Obama’s Health Care proposal. Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace called White House administration officials “crybabies” in response. Following this, a senior Obama adviser told U.S. News that the White House would never get a fair shake from Fox News.[Full citation needed]
In late September 2009, Obama senior advisor David Axelrod and Roger Ailes met in secret to try and smooth out tensions between the two camps without much success. Two weeks later, White House officials referred to FNC as “not a news network”, communications director Anita Dunn asserting that “Fox News often operates as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party.” President Obama followed with “If media is operating basically as a talk radio format, then that’s one thing, and if it’s operating as a news outlet, then that’s another,” and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel stated that it was important “to not have the CNN’s and the others in the world basically be led in following Fox.”
Within days it was reported that Fox had been excluded from an interview with administration official Ken Feinberg, with bureau chiefs from the White House Pool (ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN) coming to the defense of Fox. One of the major bureau chiefs stated, “If any member had been excluded it would have been the same thing, it has nothing to do with Fox or the White House or the substance of the issues.” Shortly after this story broke the White House admitted to a low-level mistake, but that said that Fox had not made a specific request to interview Feinberg. Fox White House correspondent Major Garrett responded by stating that he had not made a specific request, but that he had a “standing request from me as senior White House correspondent on Fox to interview any newsmaker at the Treasury at any given time news is being made.”
On November 8, 2009 the Los Angeles Times reported that an unnamed Democratic consultant was warned by the White House not to appear on Fox News again. According to the article, Anita Dunn claimed in an e-mail to have checked with colleagues who “deal with TV issues” and had been told that nobody had been instructed to avoid Fox. Patrick Caddell, a Fox News contributor and former pollster for President Jimmy Carter said he had spoken with other Democratic consultants who had received similar warnings from the White House.
International transmission”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Criticism_and_controversies
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
The stimulus package failed because it consisted mostly of tax cuts. Tax cuts are among the very worst ways to create jobs and certainly the most expensive.
The stimulus package authorizes 787 billion dollars. According to the official website (Recovery.gov) $565 billion has actually been spent or credited. There are three categories of "stimulus." Citing amounts spent, they are:
- $243.4 billion in tax cuts.
- $154.5 billion in contracts, grants, and loans. This is what we actually think of as a stimulus, construction and research projects.
- $166.8 billion in entitlements. This is mostly money to the states to help with unemployment insurance.
Estimates of jobs "saved and created" by the package range from 800,000 to 2.4 million (both from the Congressional Budget Office), with other estimates at 1.25 million (IHS/Global Insight), 1.06 million (Macroeconomic Advisors), and 1.59 million (Moody's).
Let's use Moody's estimate (sort of the high middle, and independent) and round it off to 1.6 million jobs "saved and created."
That's $353,125 per job.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. It's obscene.
If you have an essentially unlimited line of credit, as the government essentially does, it would appear relatively easy to create jobs.
"Hey, you, over there on the unemployment line, wanna work cleaning up our national parks? Yeah, we'll give you a twenty dollar rake, some biodegradable garbage bags, and twenty bucks an hour." That happens to be 47 cents an hour over the average wage.
No national parks or monuments in your neighborhood?
All right, there are lots of empty lots and abandoned homes due to the housing market collapse. "Let's clean 'em up. Same deal. That's forty thousand a year. You can live on that."
Presumably the government will be decent about it and pay the usual benefits -- social security, unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and so on -- which adds $8.11 an hour. That's a little less than $17,000 a year, making a total cost of $57,000 per year, per job.
Jobs don't exist in a vacuum, not even sweeping the streets by hand with a broom. There has to be a certain number of overhead costs. Not counting salaries of supervisors and such (which would be part of the job creation numbers), not counting benefits (already in there), 15 percent is a very generous number, for another $8,550, a total of $65,550 per job.
So that's what a "created" job should cost. About $65,000.
If you actually want to "create jobs," that's how you should do it. Go out and create them.
But that's not how we do things. We were not goddamn Communists. Or even socialists. We're capitalists. So we give out contracts to private enterprises and grants to universities and other institutions.
Construction projects, one of the primary forms of job creation has lots of costs beside labor. They have machinery, materials, a variety of business expenses (accounting, insurance, legal, etc.), the purchase of land and so on. Labor accounts for 20-30 percent of a construction contract. Let's take the low end, 20 percent, and assume that a construction job is one of those $65,000 wages plus benefits for a full year jobs, and the cost of that job then becomes $325,000.
That's pretty close to the $353,125 per job number we got using the Moody's estimate.
Except that all those other construction costs (excluding land purchase, which should be less relevant here) involve additional labor. For example, materials are manufactured, a certain portion of them here, in the US. Truckers transport them. Building supply company employees handle them. Machinery is built (some portion of it here), and maintained (all of it here). The construction company pays it's staff and the professionals (lawyer and accountants), and so on. All those people buy food (keeping supermarket workers employed), buy other stuff, pay their bills, and so on.
This is the famous Keynesian multiplier effect.
It's also very difficult to calculate how many non-site, indirect jobs does a construction project support with all its other spending. In the figures we're using, that 80% of the costs. It's reasonable to say that at least half of that goes into people's pockets as it moves down the line.
If we figure it that way, it should probably cost about $130,000 per job.
Let's go back to the breakdown.
First let's take out the aid to the states for unemployment insurance assistance. Obviously that doesn't add jobs. It helps people. It goes to keeping the community afloat, but it doesn't create a whole lot of jobs.
Let's take out the tax cuts. Just as an academic exercise, for the moment.
That leaves projects, grants, and loans. $154.5 billion.
If we have 1,600,000 jobs created and saved, and divide it into the money spent on projects, it comes out at $96,562 per job.
That actually makes sense. It's expensive. But it makes sense.
Direct job creation, or job creation through contracts (like road building), has a multiplier effect. Each job creates more jobs, both through the support jobs and through the spending by the people who are employed.
Job creation through tax cuts works the opposite way.
The price per job is multiplied many times over.
In this last election cycle, Carl Paladino was running against Andrew Cuomo for governor of New York. One of the charges that Cuomo leveled against him was that he got $1.4 million in tax breaks but created only one job from that.
The implication was that Paladino was a sleazy rip-off artist. At best.
He may be, but it is only a particularly vivid example of how the tax cuts to job creation equation actually works.
We are still arguing about extending the Bush Tax Cuts.
The Bush Tax Cuts cost about two trillion dollars.
They were originally labeled and promoted as "jobs and stimulus" packages. Let's take him at his word. Over the course of his two terms 1.1 jobs were created. That didn't even keep up with population growth. It also cost $1,818,182 per job.
Close to the same numbers that Paladino was working with.
The Obama White House, a prisoner of the prevailing 'tax cuts stimulate the economy and create jobs' theology, passed a stimulus bill that was 40 percent tax cuts, 30 percent unemployment insurance, and only 27 percent actual stimulus.
That's why it didn't work.
That's not even the bad news.
Here's the bad news. The tax cuts are still in effect. The odds are they will be extended, even for the very wealthiest.
Here's worse news. There's only one thing stupider than cutting taxes to create jobs. It's to cut spending. In the recent NY governor's race, for example, both leading candidates promise to cut spending. That means cutting jobs. That's happening state by state all around the country. Not only does cutting jobs mean, in a very direct one-to-one way, fewer jobs, it has a negative multiplier effect. It means there are fewer people with money to spend on the things that create jobs for other people.
why is MSNBC going after Fox News so much? they are trying to paint Fox News as villains. what about the political crap MSNBC dose? no body talks about that and the controversies MSNBC has done
“Assertions of liberal bias
Commentators have described MSNBC as having a bias towards the political left and the Democratic Party. In November 2007, a New York Times article stated that MSNBC’s prime-time lineup is tilting more to the left. Washington Post media analyst Howard Kurtz has stated that the channel’s evening lineup “has clearly gravitated to the left in recent years and often seems to regard itself as the antithesis of Fox News.” In reference to changes in the channel’s evening programming, senior vice president of NBC News Phil Griffin has said that “It happened naturally. There isn’t a dogma we’re putting through. There is a ‘Go for it.’”
In the February 2008 issue of Men’s Journal magazine, a MSNBC interviewee quoted a senior executive who said that liberal commentator Keith Olbermann “runs MSNBC” and that “because of his success, he’s in charge” of the channel. The New York Times has called Olbermann MSNBC’s “most recognizable face”. In September 2008, MSNBC stated that they were removing both Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as live political event anchors, and replacing them with David Gregory, due to growing criticism that they were “too opinionated to be seen as neutral in the heat of the presidential campaign.” Olbermann continued to broadcast Countdown both before and after the presidential and vice-presidential debates, and both Matthews and Olbermann joined Gregory on the channel’s election night coverage. In September 2009, a Pew Research Poll showed that Democrats were much more likely than Republicans to rate the channel favorably and Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to see MSNBC unfavorably.
On November 13, 2009, in the days leading up to the release of 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s book “Going Rogue”, MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan used photoshopped pictures of Palin on the channel’s Morning Meeting program. Ratigan apologized a few days later stating, “I want to apologize to Governor Palin and all of our viewers. On Friday, in a very misguided attempt to have some fun in advance of Sarah Palin’s upcoming book Going Rogue, our staff mistakenly used some clearly photoshopped images of Ms. Palin without any acknowledgment.”
In October 2010, MSNBC began using the tagline “lean forward”, which was described by some media outlets as the network embracing its politically progressive identity.
Assertions of pro-Obama bias
Some Democratic Party supporters, most notably Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and Clinton advisor Lanny Davis, criticized MSNBC during and after the 2008 Democratic Primaries, as covering Barack Obama more favorably than Hillary Clinton. A study done by the Project for Excellence in Journalism showed that MSNBC had less negative coverage of Obama (14% of stories vs. 29% in the press overall) and more negative stories about Republican presidential candidate John McCain (73% of its coverage vs. 57% in the press overall). MSNBC’s on-air slogan during the week of the 2008 presidential election, “The Power of Change”, was criticized as being overtly similar to Obama’s campaign slogan of “Change.” Following the 2008 presidential election, conservative talk-show host, John Ziegler worked on a documentary called Media Malpractice…. How Obama Got Elected, which was very critical of the media, especially MSNBC’s role, in the 2008 Presidential Election. While promoting the documentary, he engaged in an on-air dispute with MSNBC news anchor Contessa Brewer, on how the media, especially MSNBC, had portrayed Sarah Palin.
Michael Savage dismissal
During the spring and early summer of 2003, MSNBC featured a weekend talk show hosted by conservative radio host Michael Savage. In July of that year, Savage responded to a prank caller on his show by calling him a “pig” and a “sodomite”, and telling him he “should get AIDS and die.” Savage’s show was canceled; Savage fired from the channel shortly afterward (with some reports placing the termination immediately after the episode in question went off air).
Don Imus controversy
In early April 2007, Don Imus, whose radio show Imus in the Morning was simulcast on MSNBC, described members of the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, as “some nappy-headed hoes”. The comments sparked outrage, as many considered them to be racist and sexist. After a two-week suspension of Imus’ program, and after sponsors began to withdraw advertisements from the show, MSNBC canceled the simulcast. Imus, as well as NBC News, apologized to the Rutgers Basketball team for the remarks. Don Imus now has a feature show on the Fox Business Network.
“Rise of the New Right” documentary
In June 2010, a documentary airing on MSNBC and hosted by Chris Matthews called Rise of the New Right drew significant criticism from conservatives and the Tea Party movement. The documentary features interviews with Dick Armey, the former House Majority Leader, Orly Taitz, a leading figure in the “birther” movement, and radio host Alex Jones. The documentary also showed the Michigan Militia’s survival training camp and hit the campaign trail with Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul.
Since the documentary has aired, FreedomWorks, which is chaired by one of the stars of the documentary, Dick Armey, issued a letter calling for a boycott of Dawn and Proctor and Gamble, which advertises during Hardball with Chris Matthews, asking tea partyers to “call, fax, or email” the company until it drops its advertising. Its grassroots director Brendan Steinhauser said, “The Tea Party movement I know looks nothing like the one portrayed on MSNBC‘s Hardball. The movement is made up of good, hardworking, honest, smart people that love their country. It is a movement that reflects the best in America, and I will remind Dawn of this fact when I write my letter and make my phone calls.” The National Tea Party federation also pushed for a boycott of the show’s advertisers. Anna Puig of the Kitchen Table Patriots said in a statement, “The propaganda piece only serves a left-wing agenda, and I will do everything I can to convince Dawn to stop funding MSNBC’s lies.” A blogger on Hot Air wrote, “It’s a poor excuse of objective journalism. Calling it a documentary is a pathetic joke.” Where as Samuel P. Jacobs writer for the Daily Beast notes, “The sense of fear on the right is well captured in the documentary…When the words of Barry Goldwater—’Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice’—turn up on a brick thrown through the window of a local Democratic committee, the pundit’s history lesson doesn’t seem so farfetched.” Zeitgeisty Report followed with praise saying, “Chris Matthews’ special report, The Rise of the New Right , was one of those rare (these days) moments of essential viewing that we would be wise not to ignore.” The boycott has been thus far ineffective. Procter & Gamble continue to advertise with the show.
Keith Olbermann Suspension
On November 5, 2010, MSNBC President Phil Griffin suspended Olbermann indefinitely without pay for contributing $2,400 (the maximum personal donation limit) to each of three Democratic candidates during the 2010 midterm election cycle. Contributions to political campaigns, under NBC News policy, are not allowed without prior permission. On November 7, 2010, Olbermann posted a thank you message to supporters via Twitter. That same day, MSNBC announced that he would be back on the air starting Tuesday, November 9th.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC#Criticism_and_controversy
“Many observers of the channel have asserted that it has a bias favoring the political right and the Republican Party. Fox News has publicly denied such assertions, stating that, while its commentators are self-described conservatives, the reporters in the news room provide separate, neutral reporting.
Assertions of conservative bias
Critics and other observers have asserted that Fox News has a bias towards the political right at the expense of neutrality. Murdoch and Ailes have reacted against assertions of bias, with Murdoch saying that Fox has “given room to both sides, whereas only one side had it before.” In 2004, director Robert Greenwald produced the documentary film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, which argues that Fox News has a conservative bias. The film includes clips from Fox News as well as internal memos from editorial Vice President John Moody directing Fox News staff on how to report certain subjects.
A Pew Research poll released on October 29, 2009, found that Fox News is viewed as the most ideological channel in America. 47% of those surveyed said Fox News is “mostly conservative,” 14% said “mostly liberal,” and 24% said “neither.” In comparison, MSNBC had 36% identify it as “mostly liberal,” 11% as “mostly conservative,” and 27% as “neither.” CNN had 37% describe it as “mostly liberal,” 11% as “mostly conservative,” and 33% as “neither.” In 2004, the Pew Research Center survey showed that FNC was cited unprompted by 69% of national journalists to be a conservative news organization. The same survey also showed that 34% of national journalists describe themselves as liberals, compared to 7% that describe themselve as conservative.
A poll by Rasmussen Reports found that 31% of Americans say Fox News has a conservative bias and 15% say it has a liberal bias. The poll also reported that 36% believe Fox News delivers news with neither a conservative or liberal bias, compared to 37% who said NPR delivers news with no conservative or liberal bias and 32% who said the same of CNN. Rasmussen is a frequent contributor to Fox News and has been accused by Democrats of biased polling in favor of Republicans. A 2007 study looked at the introduction of Fox News into local US markets between 1996 and 2000, and found that in the 2000 presidential election “Republicans gained 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points in the towns that broadcast Fox News.” The study’s estimates “imply that Fox News convinced 3 to 28 percent of its viewers to vote Republican, depending on the audience measure.”
A 2010 study conducted by Professor Sean Aday comparing Fox News Channel’s Special Report With Brit Humes and NBC’s Nightly News coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during 2005 found that both underplayed bad news, but concluded that “Fox News was much more sympathetic to the administration than NBC, suggesting that, “if scholars continue to find evidence of a partisan or ideological bias at FNC…they should consider Fox as alternative, rather than mainstream, media.” Aday also pointed out, however, that the data used in his study may have come late enough in the war to be consistent with accepted practices.
According to trade magazine Broadcasting & Cable, Fox News is “largely circumscribed by conservative firebrands such as Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck”.
Accusations of misrepresentation of facts
The progressive media watchdog group Media Matters for America has cataloged what they claim are the ten most “egregious examples” of “distortion” by both Fox News and its TV personalities. The criticisms include several examples of cropping quotes from President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Vice President Gore so they appear out of context, using image manipulation software to edit the appearance of reporters from The New York Times, and using footage from other events during a report on the November 5 “Tea Party” rally in Washington DC. They claim the intention is to make it appear as if a larger number of protesters attended the event. Media Matters also called attention to the December 4 edition of Fox and Friends and accused the show of misleading their viewers with a “questionable graphic” that showed the results of a Rasmussen Reports climate change poll adding up to 120%.
In November, 2009, Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett told viewers that a Sarah Palin book signing in Grand Rapids, Michigan had a massive turnout while showing footage of Palin with a large crowd. Jarrett noted that the former Republican vice-presidential candidate is “continuing to draw huge crowds while she’s promoting her brand-new book”, adding that the images being shown were “some of the pictures just coming in to us…. The lines earlier had formed this morning.” The video was actually taken from a 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally. Fox senior vice-president of news Michael Clemente issued an initial statement saying, “This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn’t alert the control room to update the video.” Fox offered an on-air apology the following day during the same “Happening Now” segment citing regrets for what they described as a “video error” with no intent to mislead.
Talking points from Bush White House
While promoting his memoir, What Happened, Scott McClellan, former White House Press Secretary (2003–2006) for President George W. Bush stated on the July 25, 2008 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews that the Bush White House routinely gave talking points to Fox News commentators — but not journalists — in order to influence discourse and content. McClellan stated that these talking points were not issued to provide the public with news; instead, they were to provide Fox News commentators with issues and perspectives favorable to the White House and the Republican Party. McClellan later apologized to Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly for not responding to Matthews’ suggestion that “Bill” or “Sean” received the talking points; McClellan said he had no personal knowledge that O’Reilly ever received the talking points. Furthermore he pointed out “the way a couple of questions were phrased in that interview along with my response left things open to interpretation and I should not have let that happen”.
Obama administration conflict with Fox News
In September 2009, the Obama administration engaged in a verbal conflict with Fox News Channel. On Sept. 20, 2009, President Obama appeared on all the major news programs except Fox News, a snub partially in response to remarks about the President by commentators Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and general coverage by Fox with regard to Obama’s Health Care proposal. Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace called White House administration officials “crybabies” in response. Following this, a senior Obama adviser told U.S. News that the White House would never get a fair shake from Fox News.[Full citation needed]
In late September 2009, Obama senior advisor David Axelrod and Roger Ailes met in secret to try and smooth out tensions between the two camps without much success. Two weeks later, White House officials referred to FNC as “not a news network”, communications director Anita Dunn asserting that “Fox News often operates as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party.” President Obama followed with “If media is operating basically as a talk radio format, then that’s one thing, and if it’s operating as a news outlet, then that’s another,” and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel stated that it was important “to not have the CNN’s and the others in the world basically be led in following Fox.”
Within days it was reported that Fox had been excluded from an interview with administration official Ken Feinberg, with bureau chiefs from the White House Pool (ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN) coming to the defense of Fox. One of the major bureau chiefs stated, “If any member had been excluded it would have been the same thing, it has nothing to do with Fox or the White House or the substance of the issues.” Shortly after this story broke the White House admitted to a low-level mistake, but that said that Fox had not made a specific request to interview Feinberg. Fox White House correspondent Major Garrett responded by stating that he had not made a specific request, but that he had a “standing request from me as senior White House correspondent on Fox to interview any newsmaker at the Treasury at any given time news is being made.”
On November 8, 2009 the Los Angeles Times reported that an unnamed Democratic consultant was warned by the White House not to appear on Fox News again. According to the article, Anita Dunn claimed in an e-mail to have checked with colleagues who “deal with TV issues” and had been told that nobody had been instructed to avoid Fox. Patrick Caddell, a Fox News contributor and former pollster for President Jimmy Carter said he had spoken with other Democratic consultants who had received similar warnings from the White House.
International transmission”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Criticism_and_controversies
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
The stimulus package failed because it consisted mostly of tax cuts. Tax cuts are among the very worst ways to create jobs and certainly the most expensive.
The stimulus package authorizes 787 billion dollars. According to the official website (Recovery.gov) $565 billion has actually been spent or credited. There are three categories of "stimulus." Citing amounts spent, they are:
- $243.4 billion in tax cuts.
- $154.5 billion in contracts, grants, and loans. This is what we actually think of as a stimulus, construction and research projects.
- $166.8 billion in entitlements. This is mostly money to the states to help with unemployment insurance.
Estimates of jobs "saved and created" by the package range from 800,000 to 2.4 million (both from the Congressional Budget Office), with other estimates at 1.25 million (IHS/Global Insight), 1.06 million (Macroeconomic Advisors), and 1.59 million (Moody's).
Let's use Moody's estimate (sort of the high middle, and independent) and round it off to 1.6 million jobs "saved and created."
That's $353,125 per job.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. It's obscene.
If you have an essentially unlimited line of credit, as the government essentially does, it would appear relatively easy to create jobs.
"Hey, you, over there on the unemployment line, wanna work cleaning up our national parks? Yeah, we'll give you a twenty dollar rake, some biodegradable garbage bags, and twenty bucks an hour." That happens to be 47 cents an hour over the average wage.
No national parks or monuments in your neighborhood?
All right, there are lots of empty lots and abandoned homes due to the housing market collapse. "Let's clean 'em up. Same deal. That's forty thousand a year. You can live on that."
Presumably the government will be decent about it and pay the usual benefits -- social security, unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and so on -- which adds $8.11 an hour. That's a little less than $17,000 a year, making a total cost of $57,000 per year, per job.
Jobs don't exist in a vacuum, not even sweeping the streets by hand with a broom. There has to be a certain number of overhead costs. Not counting salaries of supervisors and such (which would be part of the job creation numbers), not counting benefits (already in there), 15 percent is a very generous number, for another $8,550, a total of $65,550 per job.
So that's what a "created" job should cost. About $65,000.
If you actually want to "create jobs," that's how you should do it. Go out and create them.
But that's not how we do things. We were not goddamn Communists. Or even socialists. We're capitalists. So we give out contracts to private enterprises and grants to universities and other institutions.
Construction projects, one of the primary forms of job creation has lots of costs beside labor. They have machinery, materials, a variety of business expenses (accounting, insurance, legal, etc.), the purchase of land and so on. Labor accounts for 20-30 percent of a construction contract. Let's take the low end, 20 percent, and assume that a construction job is one of those $65,000 wages plus benefits for a full year jobs, and the cost of that job then becomes $325,000.
That's pretty close to the $353,125 per job number we got using the Moody's estimate.
Except that all those other construction costs (excluding land purchase, which should be less relevant here) involve additional labor. For example, materials are manufactured, a certain portion of them here, in the US. Truckers transport them. Building supply company employees handle them. Machinery is built (some portion of it here), and maintained (all of it here). The construction company pays it's staff and the professionals (lawyer and accountants), and so on. All those people buy food (keeping supermarket workers employed), buy other stuff, pay their bills, and so on.
This is the famous Keynesian multiplier effect.
It's also very difficult to calculate how many non-site, indirect jobs does a construction project support with all its other spending. In the figures we're using, that 80% of the costs. It's reasonable to say that at least half of that goes into people's pockets as it moves down the line.
If we figure it that way, it should probably cost about $130,000 per job.
Let's go back to the breakdown.
First let's take out the aid to the states for unemployment insurance assistance. Obviously that doesn't add jobs. It helps people. It goes to keeping the community afloat, but it doesn't create a whole lot of jobs.
Let's take out the tax cuts. Just as an academic exercise, for the moment.
That leaves projects, grants, and loans. $154.5 billion.
If we have 1,600,000 jobs created and saved, and divide it into the money spent on projects, it comes out at $96,562 per job.
That actually makes sense. It's expensive. But it makes sense.
Direct job creation, or job creation through contracts (like road building), has a multiplier effect. Each job creates more jobs, both through the support jobs and through the spending by the people who are employed.
Job creation through tax cuts works the opposite way.
The price per job is multiplied many times over.
In this last election cycle, Carl Paladino was running against Andrew Cuomo for governor of New York. One of the charges that Cuomo leveled against him was that he got $1.4 million in tax breaks but created only one job from that.
The implication was that Paladino was a sleazy rip-off artist. At best.
He may be, but it is only a particularly vivid example of how the tax cuts to job creation equation actually works.
We are still arguing about extending the Bush Tax Cuts.
The Bush Tax Cuts cost about two trillion dollars.
They were originally labeled and promoted as "jobs and stimulus" packages. Let's take him at his word. Over the course of his two terms 1.1 jobs were created. That didn't even keep up with population growth. It also cost $1,818,182 per job.
Close to the same numbers that Paladino was working with.
The Obama White House, a prisoner of the prevailing 'tax cuts stimulate the economy and create jobs' theology, passed a stimulus bill that was 40 percent tax cuts, 30 percent unemployment insurance, and only 27 percent actual stimulus.
That's why it didn't work.
That's not even the bad news.
Here's the bad news. The tax cuts are still in effect. The odds are they will be extended, even for the very wealthiest.
Here's worse news. There's only one thing stupider than cutting taxes to create jobs. It's to cut spending. In the recent NY governor's race, for example, both leading candidates promise to cut spending. That means cutting jobs. That's happening state by state all around the country. Not only does cutting jobs mean, in a very direct one-to-one way, fewer jobs, it has a negative multiplier effect. It means there are fewer people with money to spend on the things that create jobs for other people.
why is MSNBC going after Fox News so much? they are trying to paint Fox News as villains. what about the political crap MSNBC dose? no body talks about that and the controversies MSNBC has done
“Assertions of liberal bias
Commentators have described MSNBC as having a bias towards the political left and the Democratic Party. In November 2007, a New York Times article stated that MSNBC’s prime-time lineup is tilting more to the left. Washington Post media analyst Howard Kurtz has stated that the channel’s evening lineup “has clearly gravitated to the left in recent years and often seems to regard itself as the antithesis of Fox News.” In reference to changes in the channel’s evening programming, senior vice president of NBC News Phil Griffin has said that “It happened naturally. There isn’t a dogma we’re putting through. There is a ‘Go for it.’”
In the February 2008 issue of Men’s Journal magazine, a MSNBC interviewee quoted a senior executive who said that liberal commentator Keith Olbermann “runs MSNBC” and that “because of his success, he’s in charge” of the channel. The New York Times has called Olbermann MSNBC’s “most recognizable face”. In September 2008, MSNBC stated that they were removing both Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as live political event anchors, and replacing them with David Gregory, due to growing criticism that they were “too opinionated to be seen as neutral in the heat of the presidential campaign.” Olbermann continued to broadcast Countdown both before and after the presidential and vice-presidential debates, and both Matthews and Olbermann joined Gregory on the channel’s election night coverage. In September 2009, a Pew Research Poll showed that Democrats were much more likely than Republicans to rate the channel favorably and Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to see MSNBC unfavorably.
On November 13, 2009, in the days leading up to the release of 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s book “Going Rogue”, MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan used photoshopped pictures of Palin on the channel’s Morning Meeting program. Ratigan apologized a few days later stating, “I want to apologize to Governor Palin and all of our viewers. On Friday, in a very misguided attempt to have some fun in advance of Sarah Palin’s upcoming book Going Rogue, our staff mistakenly used some clearly photoshopped images of Ms. Palin without any acknowledgment.”
In October 2010, MSNBC began using the tagline “lean forward”, which was described by some media outlets as the network embracing its politically progressive identity.
Assertions of pro-Obama bias
Some Democratic Party supporters, most notably Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and Clinton advisor Lanny Davis, criticized MSNBC during and after the 2008 Democratic Primaries, as covering Barack Obama more favorably than Hillary Clinton. A study done by the Project for Excellence in Journalism showed that MSNBC had less negative coverage of Obama (14% of stories vs. 29% in the press overall) and more negative stories about Republican presidential candidate John McCain (73% of its coverage vs. 57% in the press overall). MSNBC’s on-air slogan during the week of the 2008 presidential election, “The Power of Change”, was criticized as being overtly similar to Obama’s campaign slogan of “Change.” Following the 2008 presidential election, conservative talk-show host, John Ziegler worked on a documentary called Media Malpractice…. How Obama Got Elected, which was very critical of the media, especially MSNBC’s role, in the 2008 Presidential Election. While promoting the documentary, he engaged in an on-air dispute with MSNBC news anchor Contessa Brewer, on how the media, especially MSNBC, had portrayed Sarah Palin.
Michael Savage dismissal
During the spring and early summer of 2003, MSNBC featured a weekend talk show hosted by conservative radio host Michael Savage. In July of that year, Savage responded to a prank caller on his show by calling him a “pig” and a “sodomite”, and telling him he “should get AIDS and die.” Savage’s show was canceled; Savage fired from the channel shortly afterward (with some reports placing the termination immediately after the episode in question went off air).
Don Imus controversy
In early April 2007, Don Imus, whose radio show Imus in the Morning was simulcast on MSNBC, described members of the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, as “some nappy-headed hoes”. The comments sparked outrage, as many considered them to be racist and sexist. After a two-week suspension of Imus’ program, and after sponsors began to withdraw advertisements from the show, MSNBC canceled the simulcast. Imus, as well as NBC News, apologized to the Rutgers Basketball team for the remarks. Don Imus now has a feature show on the Fox Business Network.
“Rise of the New Right” documentary
In June 2010, a documentary airing on MSNBC and hosted by Chris Matthews called Rise of the New Right drew significant criticism from conservatives and the Tea Party movement. The documentary features interviews with Dick Armey, the former House Majority Leader, Orly Taitz, a leading figure in the “birther” movement, and radio host Alex Jones. The documentary also showed the Michigan Militia’s survival training camp and hit the campaign trail with Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul.
Since the documentary has aired, FreedomWorks, which is chaired by one of the stars of the documentary, Dick Armey, issued a letter calling for a boycott of Dawn and Proctor and Gamble, which advertises during Hardball with Chris Matthews, asking tea partyers to “call, fax, or email” the company until it drops its advertising. Its grassroots director Brendan Steinhauser said, “The Tea Party movement I know looks nothing like the one portrayed on MSNBC‘s Hardball. The movement is made up of good, hardworking, honest, smart people that love their country. It is a movement that reflects the best in America, and I will remind Dawn of this fact when I write my letter and make my phone calls.” The National Tea Party federation also pushed for a boycott of the show’s advertisers. Anna Puig of the Kitchen Table Patriots said in a statement, “The propaganda piece only serves a left-wing agenda, and I will do everything I can to convince Dawn to stop funding MSNBC’s lies.” A blogger on Hot Air wrote, “It’s a poor excuse of objective journalism. Calling it a documentary is a pathetic joke.” Where as Samuel P. Jacobs writer for the Daily Beast notes, “The sense of fear on the right is well captured in the documentary…When the words of Barry Goldwater—’Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice’—turn up on a brick thrown through the window of a local Democratic committee, the pundit’s history lesson doesn’t seem so farfetched.” Zeitgeisty Report followed with praise saying, “Chris Matthews’ special report, The Rise of the New Right , was one of those rare (these days) moments of essential viewing that we would be wise not to ignore.” The boycott has been thus far ineffective. Procter & Gamble continue to advertise with the show.
Keith Olbermann Suspension
On November 5, 2010, MSNBC President Phil Griffin suspended Olbermann indefinitely without pay for contributing $2,400 (the maximum personal donation limit) to each of three Democratic candidates during the 2010 midterm election cycle. Contributions to political campaigns, under NBC News policy, are not allowed without prior permission. On November 7, 2010, Olbermann posted a thank you message to supporters via Twitter. That same day, MSNBC announced that he would be back on the air starting Tuesday, November 9th.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC#Criticism_and_controversy
“Many observers of the channel have asserted that it has a bias favoring the political right and the Republican Party. Fox News has publicly denied such assertions, stating that, while its commentators are self-described conservatives, the reporters in the news room provide separate, neutral reporting.
Assertions of conservative bias
Critics and other observers have asserted that Fox News has a bias towards the political right at the expense of neutrality. Murdoch and Ailes have reacted against assertions of bias, with Murdoch saying that Fox has “given room to both sides, whereas only one side had it before.” In 2004, director Robert Greenwald produced the documentary film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, which argues that Fox News has a conservative bias. The film includes clips from Fox News as well as internal memos from editorial Vice President John Moody directing Fox News staff on how to report certain subjects.
A Pew Research poll released on October 29, 2009, found that Fox News is viewed as the most ideological channel in America. 47% of those surveyed said Fox News is “mostly conservative,” 14% said “mostly liberal,” and 24% said “neither.” In comparison, MSNBC had 36% identify it as “mostly liberal,” 11% as “mostly conservative,” and 27% as “neither.” CNN had 37% describe it as “mostly liberal,” 11% as “mostly conservative,” and 33% as “neither.” In 2004, the Pew Research Center survey showed that FNC was cited unprompted by 69% of national journalists to be a conservative news organization. The same survey also showed that 34% of national journalists describe themselves as liberals, compared to 7% that describe themselve as conservative.
A poll by Rasmussen Reports found that 31% of Americans say Fox News has a conservative bias and 15% say it has a liberal bias. The poll also reported that 36% believe Fox News delivers news with neither a conservative or liberal bias, compared to 37% who said NPR delivers news with no conservative or liberal bias and 32% who said the same of CNN. Rasmussen is a frequent contributor to Fox News and has been accused by Democrats of biased polling in favor of Republicans. A 2007 study looked at the introduction of Fox News into local US markets between 1996 and 2000, and found that in the 2000 presidential election “Republicans gained 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points in the towns that broadcast Fox News.” The study’s estimates “imply that Fox News convinced 3 to 28 percent of its viewers to vote Republican, depending on the audience measure.”
A 2010 study conducted by Professor Sean Aday comparing Fox News Channel’s Special Report With Brit Humes and NBC’s Nightly News coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during 2005 found that both underplayed bad news, but concluded that “Fox News was much more sympathetic to the administration than NBC, suggesting that, “if scholars continue to find evidence of a partisan or ideological bias at FNC…they should consider Fox as alternative, rather than mainstream, media.” Aday also pointed out, however, that the data used in his study may have come late enough in the war to be consistent with accepted practices.
According to trade magazine Broadcasting & Cable, Fox News is “largely circumscribed by conservative firebrands such as Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck”.
Accusations of misrepresentation of facts
The progressive media watchdog group Media Matters for America has cataloged what they claim are the ten most “egregious examples” of “distortion” by both Fox News and its TV personalities. The criticisms include several examples of cropping quotes from President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Vice President Gore so they appear out of context, using image manipulation software to edit the appearance of reporters from The New York Times, and using footage from other events during a report on the November 5 “Tea Party” rally in Washington DC. They claim the intention is to make it appear as if a larger number of protesters attended the event. Media Matters also called attention to the December 4 edition of Fox and Friends and accused the show of misleading their viewers with a “questionable graphic” that showed the results of a Rasmussen Reports climate change poll adding up to 120%.
In November, 2009, Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett told viewers that a Sarah Palin book signing in Grand Rapids, Michigan had a massive turnout while showing footage of Palin with a large crowd. Jarrett noted that the former Republican vice-presidential candidate is “continuing to draw huge crowds while she’s promoting her brand-new book”, adding that the images being shown were “some of the pictures just coming in to us…. The lines earlier had formed this morning.” The video was actually taken from a 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally. Fox senior vice-president of news Michael Clemente issued an initial statement saying, “This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn’t alert the control room to update the video.” Fox offered an on-air apology the following day during the same “Happening Now” segment citing regrets for what they described as a “video error” with no intent to mislead.
Talking points from Bush White House
While promoting his memoir, What Happened, Scott McClellan, former White House Press Secretary (2003–2006) for President George W. Bush stated on the July 25, 2008 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews that the Bush White House routinely gave talking points to Fox News commentators — but not journalists — in order to influence discourse and content. McClellan stated that these talking points were not issued to provide the public with news; instead, they were to provide Fox News commentators with issues and perspectives favorable to the White House and the Republican Party. McClellan later apologized to Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly for not responding to Matthews’ suggestion that “Bill” or “Sean” received the talking points; McClellan said he had no personal knowledge that O’Reilly ever received the talking points. Furthermore he pointed out “the way a couple of questions were phrased in that interview along with my response left things open to interpretation and I should not have let that happen”.
Obama administration conflict with Fox News
In September 2009, the Obama administration engaged in a verbal conflict with Fox News Channel. On Sept. 20, 2009, President Obama appeared on all the major news programs except Fox News, a snub partially in response to remarks about the President by commentators Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and general coverage by Fox with regard to Obama’s Health Care proposal. Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace called White House administration officials “crybabies” in response. Following this, a senior Obama adviser told U.S. News that the White House would never get a fair shake from Fox News.[Full citation needed]
In late September 2009, Obama senior advisor David Axelrod and Roger Ailes met in secret to try and smooth out tensions between the two camps without much success. Two weeks later, White House officials referred to FNC as “not a news network”, communications director Anita Dunn asserting that “Fox News often operates as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party.” President Obama followed with “If media is operating basically as a talk radio format, then that’s one thing, and if it’s operating as a news outlet, then that’s another,” and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel stated that it was important “to not have the CNN’s and the others in the world basically be led in following Fox.”
Within days it was reported that Fox had been excluded from an interview with administration official Ken Feinberg, with bureau chiefs from the White House Pool (ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN) coming to the defense of Fox. One of the major bureau chiefs stated, “If any member had been excluded it would have been the same thing, it has nothing to do with Fox or the White House or the substance of the issues.” Shortly after this story broke the White House admitted to a low-level mistake, but that said that Fox had not made a specific request to interview Feinberg. Fox White House correspondent Major Garrett responded by stating that he had not made a specific request, but that he had a “standing request from me as senior White House correspondent on Fox to interview any newsmaker at the Treasury at any given time news is being made.”
On November 8, 2009 the Los Angeles Times reported that an unnamed Democratic consultant was warned by the White House not to appear on Fox News again. According to the article, Anita Dunn claimed in an e-mail to have checked with colleagues who “deal with TV issues” and had been told that nobody had been instructed to avoid Fox. Patrick Caddell, a Fox News contributor and former pollster for President Jimmy Carter said he had spoken with other Democratic consultants who had received similar warnings from the White House.
International transmission”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Criticism_and_controversies
eric seiger
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
Making Money on line – Exchange $469.90 for over $10,000
Yes, making money on line is not easy, unless you know what to do. There are a ton of resources that you can use to make a lot of money online, and you can actually do this all for free. It is amazing the amount of money you can could be making on line without investing any money of your own to begin with. To begin with the process of making money online, I recommend that you download this un-named free e-book (normally sells for $15). It's just a short 4 page introduction to making money on line and how to start out and start making some free money!
Now, the title talks about exchanging $470 for over $10,000. That's what we'll go over in this part of the series. So how does this whole money making thing play out? It is actually outrageously easy.
Step 1 – Join Prowealth Solutions. I'm sure you've heard of it already by now. It officially launched on the 15th of Sept 2006 and is one of the fastest growing programs. Prowealth Solutions pays you in 4 different ways:
Fast Start bonus - $25 per person you sign up.
- Monthly Matrix bonus – You are paid $1 per person in your 3x6 matrix. That can total up to $1092 per month. The cool part – you don't have to sponsor anyone yourself to get this. It can all be spillover and your down line's work.
- Matching Bonuses – You're paid 50% matching bonus on your direct referrals, 30% on the second level and 20% on the third level.
- Monthly Bonus Pools – 5% if you're bronze (3 personal recruits), 3% for silver (10 recruits or 3 bronzes), 3% for gold (30 recruits or 3 silver). 3% if you're platinum (100 recruits or 3 gold) and 5% for diamond members (3 platinum recruits).This totals to around $32 for bronze members, $75 for silver, $350 for gold, $2100 for platinum and $6800 for diamond members on top of everything else that they're already making.
Clearly, this is one of the best pay systems out there and you can be making a lot of money on line doing this, if you can recruit people. Isn't that the hardest thing though? Everyone can make money with MLM systems, if only you can get recruits. So how do you do it? You DONT!
This is one of the best things I've seen in recent history – you can get over 100 paid sign ups for $400 with a company named diamond central. Unlike most other guaranteed sign ups, these are not free members who're given a few cents to sign up under you as a free member, these are all people who WILL join under you in Prowealth Solutions.
Total Cost - $400 (for 100 sign ups) + $69.90 (for prowealth solutions - $34.95 for start up + $34.95 for the first month) = $469.90
Now let's see how much money you'll be making:
Fast Start bonuses - $2500, because of the fast start bonuses.
- Monthly Matrix bonus – At least $100, but it could be a lot more.
- Matching bonuses – based on the above, they can be a lot more too!
- Monthly Bonus Pools - $2100.
- This is the clincher – As a platinum member you get $1 for every person who becomes a paid member in the entire system in the Powerline after you. That's about $1 per minute - $60 per hour without doing anything!
Total at the end of the system (about 3 months at most) - $2500 + $300 + $700 + $60x24x30 (for just one month) = $46,700.
How's that for a return? So why did I say $10,000 in the title? Because $46,700 sounds like a big hoax! But it's possible, if only you're willing to do it. Many people never really experience God's grace because they refuse to believe that it's possible for them to sin (their pride) or that God is incapable of forgiving them because their sin is too great (belittling God). It's possible, you just need to analyze it. Look at it intellectually – is it possible? Yes! Then why let your emotions ruin the party for you?
Is it a scam? I'm already doing this! There's no way they can pretend like they signed up 100 people under you! You have your own tracking systems and you can know for sure that you are making money online regardless. Secondly, I've spoken to them many times myself, there responses have always been prompt and sincere. If there's a mistake they clarify and try to fix, but don't pretend like it never happened.
That's how easy it can be making money online. Now you're probably wondering – how do I make that initial $470? You'll learn how to do make the initial money on line without making an investment of your own in here, and in the next edition of – Making Money Online!
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
Wednesday Morning Fly By: NHL and Phantoms <b>News</b> - Broad Street Hockey
Today's open discussion thread, complete with your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news and notes... Remembering Pelle Lindbergh: [Flyers Faithful]; Looking at Peter Laviolette's impact on the Flyers: ...
Joel Klein to <b>News</b> Corp; Cathie Black to Head NYC Schools
Joel Klein, who's been the head of the New York City school system since 2002, is stepping down—to take a job at News Corp. One insane job to another! His replacement: Hearst chairman Cathie Black.
Cee-Lo Green sings 'Fox <b>News</b>' on 'Colbert Report' - The Dish Rag <b>...</b>
With William Shatner and possibly Gwyneth Paltrow taking a stab at “F*** You,” Cee-Lo Green shows them how it's done.The musician appears on Comedy Central's...
eric seiger
No comments:
Post a Comment