Department of Cognitive Dissonance
Peter Robinson ·
Jun 13, 2010 at 5:40pm
Headline in today's Washington Post:
Obama Pleads for $50 Billion in State, Local Aid
Vice President Joseph Biden, September 2009:
[The stimulus is] doing more, faster, more efficiently, and more effectively than most expected.
- Comment (6)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '10
Re: Department of Cognitive Dissonance
If they bail out the profligate spenders yet again, I swear I will be about ready to join a revolutionary militia movement.
Re: Department of Cognitive Dissonance
Careful, Comrade Robinson.
Under Chairman Obama's glorious leadership, the Economic Recovery Act has been a smashing success. Throughout the homeland, people cheer his bold leadership. Prosperity and patriotic purpose fill the people with great joy. It has been such a triumph that naturally our Chairman would like to bring even more happiness to the people through another bold and decisive Economic Plan.
Only a despised reactionary conspirator would say otherwise.
May '10
Re: Department of Cognitive Dissonance
What does the latest five year plan say about California aircraft production?
Jun '10
Re: Department of Cognitive Dissonance
Latest plan eez for comrades Robinson and Oyen to take vacation. We hav'ed place for you just east of Ural Mountains. Eez like summer camp only colder. Eez place we teach you to concentrate. Eez why we call it concentration camp. Ha! Soviet humor eez very funny.
May '10
Re: Department of Cognitive Dissonance
You guys are missing the "big picture." The $50 billion keeps the unions happy, helps show an increase in wages (as public employees make approx. 40% more than private in total comp), demonstrates that the O is both concerned and acting (as opposed to the Gulf) and is timely - several months before the election helping to ramp up turn out of the loyal.
for those of us with an IQ over 10 however, Duane's first comment is operative.
May '10
Re: Department of Cognitive Dissonance
We do need to be somewhat careful with the 40% public over private compensation number, though- to the extent that it is all about defined benefit pensions, it is an issue. And there is a strong set of reasons to oppose all that hiring- if you need the service that badly, contract out.
But there is a touch of "how to lie with statistics" in some of the comparisons I see on line, and I don't want the Right to be lazy and lean into the punch. Making compensation comparisons based on total groups of employees puts custodians in the same class as Cabinet secretaries, the same statistical legerdemain used by the NOW types to pretend that women earn 59 or 72 cents for every dollar earned by men. Most government employees are certain types of "white collar", and thus higher on wage scales than many other positions. There may be too many overall, but the jobs don't necessarily equate; I'd like to see an analytical breakdown of DoL job types, just to be reassured.
Meanwhile, the governments should not be hiring, and should be laying staff off if they are short of cash.