Not so much Obamanomics as “it’s time for Chambers to go.”
What is it going to axe them?
WHAT!?! I LOVE my Flip video camera! Are they going away, is that it?
Just another beautiful day in the Obamanation!
Keynesian ecomomics at work. If you want to destroy an economy, employ Keynesian economic policies.
For those unfamiliar with Keynes and Hayek, the following is a good explaination:
“Hayek seemed to view economic systems as organic, rather like living organisms, in which there are stocks and flows that tend to produce good health, effective operation, healing processes; automatically seeking correction and resolution of imbalances and perturbations. Keynes seems to have viewed economic systems as machines that need starting and stopping, steering and controlling, speeding up and slowing down, balancing against other machines and other objectives; generally in need of management to correct imbalances and perturbations. These are quite fundamental differences in philosophy and in political outlook.
Hayek felt that application of Keynes policies gives too much power to the state and leads to socialism. Keynes believed that Hayek’s acceptance of “natural” market mechanisms was naive and failed to explain the major movements in the world economy and in national developments.
In recent history, the period 1945-1980 saw mainly a Keynesian trend in economic policies throughout the “western” world, in which governments saw it as their responsiblity to intervene to maintain high employment, stable prices, acceptable exchange rates, balance of trade and so on. From 1980 to about 1998, Hayek’s ideas and those of Milton Friedman were more influential so that governments were seeking to be less engaged in intervention and more concerned to improve the smooth, unimpeded operations of markets. Since about 2000, there has been an uneasy movement to use elements of both philosophies, and some economists have embarked on a re-evaluation of the “classical” and the “Keynesian” approaches to see if a synthesis exists at the various boundaries of understanding.”
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080221111905AAJmA5t
This needs to be brought up every time someone trots out the fictitious “saved or created” number.
Some federal workers more likely to die than lose jobs
Death — rather than poor performance, misconduct or layoffs — is the primary threat to job security at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Small Business Administration, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Office of Management and Budget and a dozen other federal operations.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-18-fderal-job-security_n.htm
at least they’re livin large in DC...