U.S. President Barack Obama heads inside to deliver a speech after meeting with construction workers building a new Solyndra solar panel factory May 26, 2010 in Fremont. President Obama toured Solyndra Inc., a growing solar power equipment facility that is adding jobs as they expand their operation.


Solyndra, a major manufacturer of solar technology in Fremont, has shut its doors, according to employees at the campus.

"I was told by a security guard to get my [stuff] and leave," one employee said. The company employs a little more than 1,000 employees worldwide, according to its website.

Shortly after it opened a massive $700 million facility, it canceled plans for a public stock offering earlier this year and warned it would be in significant trouble if federal loan guarantees did not go through.

The company has said it will make a statement at 9am California time, though it's not clear what that statement will be. An NBC Bay Area photographer on the scene reports security guards are not letting visitors on campus. He says "people are standing around in disbelief." The employees have been given yellow envelopes with instructions on how to get their last checks.

Solyndra was touted by the Obama administration as a prime example of how green technology could deliver jobs. The President visited the facility in May of last year and said "it is just a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism and the fact that we continue to have the best universities in the world, the best technology in the world, and most importantly the best workers in the world. And you guys all represent that."

The federal government offered $535 million in low cost loan guarantees from the Department of Energy. NBC Bay Area has contacted the White House asking for a statement.

Some Republicans have been very critical of the loans. "I am concerned that the DOE is providing loans and loan guarantees to firms that aren't capable of competing in the global market, even with government subsidies" Florida Congressman Cliff Stearns told the New York Times.

The Federal Government gave them 535million dollars in low cost loans, will they pay them back? I am a tax paying U.S. citizen and I want my half billion dollars back.
Tina Raddigan Welch
Good luck Dave! I hope you weren't one of the "hope and change" people? If so, your getting what you voted for. Don't vote party vote based on their principles and beliefs. You'll be very surprised.
Looks like MORE Green / Obama failure And I'm sure millions in lost taxpayer money. Drill Baby Drill!
The green jobs are disappearing as fast as the scientific backing for man made global warming.
Lori Flory · Emporia State University
Just another sad example of how "fake jobs", using US taxpayer money is failing. Are there any "green jobs" out there at all that are actually making money? Obummer doesn't have a clue what it takes to actually make a business work, all he's ever done is be a community organizer. The sooner he's out of office the better for the US.
The Obama jinx continues. If he cheers for a team, they lose if he visits a company, they close! This guy is a freaking disaster.
Shari Dawn Spors · Becker, Minnesota
this is almost funny, if not so stupid...
Jeff Jb Baptiste · Account executive at Ricoh Americas Corporation
This is typical of what we've seen from the clown in office! what a joke of a leader, an American, and a man.
Karl Stauss · Senior Counsel - IP Law at The Dow Chemical Company
If your business plan requires government subsidies to survive, you are in trouble.
Wayne Martin
So where did the $500M go? Will there be a Federal investigation? Will someone ask Obama what he has to say about their closing?
James Black
Another DNC / imam homobama fraud against the American taxpayers. "Green" = fraud!
Goofy Bone ·
John Bunch
I hope he never visit's the company I work for. Seems like everything he touches turns to poop.
Shawn Murphy
Another waste of taxpayer money! Green ain't worth it folks!
Christian Aguiar · TPS/Group Leader Development at New United Motor Manufacturing Inc.
The Chinese are making a cheaper alternative to Solyndra’s solar panels, that's what forced the company to revise its market strategy and cancel the planned IPO. This is a bad sign for all the company's in the Green Energy field, and good for the foreign companies that are making cheaper products :/
We really need to rethink how we are spending our money as a country...throwing it at companies and hoping they succeed is not working!
Michael Zacchio
Where did the dough go? Did or will some of the 'stimulus' $ end up as campaign donations to the DNC or the campaign to re-elect the least effective President since James Carter? Time for the 'media' to do a little digging. Inquiring minds want to know.
Michael Laney
OBAMA is "playing" all of us. He is a FRAUD to this Nation. Always has been, always will be!
Richard C Hamilton · Top Commenter
Guess I'll just have to buy a CheVy Volt. Ops, they only sold 100 this year.
William C. Findley · Assistant Distribution Center Manager at Diversified Distribution Systems
Only $535 million? Another project down the drain.
Jay Piper
This is what happens when a person with No business experience decides to make products instead of letting the free market decide.


Flashback Obama in 2010: New Jobs Plan after Vacation
Monday, August 29, 2011
By Matt Cover

(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama, in an Aug. 29, 2010 interview with NBC’s Brian Williams, said he would propose a plan for jobs and economic growth when he returned from his summer vacation, the same claim he made after returning from his vacation this year.

“We anticipated that the recovery was slowing – the economy is still growing, but it’s not growing as fast as it needs to. I’ve got things right now before Congress that we should move immediately, and I said so before I went on vacation, and I’ll keep on saying it now that I’m back,” Obama told Williams when asked if he had a jobs plan.

“There are a whole host of measures we could take – no single element of which is a magic bullet – but cumulatively can start continuing to build momentum for the recovery,” he said.

The promise of a plan echoes a similar promise Obama made on Monday, saying that in the coming week he would present concrete proposals that would spur hiring and economic growth.

“Next week, I will be laying out a series of steps that Congress can take immediately to put more money in the pockets of working families and middle-class families, to make it easier for small businesses to hire people, to put construction crews to work rebuilding our nation’s roads and railways and airports, and all the other measures that can help to grow this economy,” Obama said on Monday at a Rose Garden ceremony for new Council of Economic Advisors Chairman Alan Krueger.

Obama proposed only one concrete idea in the 2010 interview – legislation that “eliminates” capital gains taxes on small business. That idea did not make it through Congress. However, a similar measure allowing some small-businesses to write off 100 percent of their capital gains taxes on new investment was attached to the deal extending the Bush tax rates.

Another less-concrete idea, to allow businesses easier access to credit, did eventually pass, making $30 billion available to small banks in exchange for increased lending to small businesses.


Candidate Obama: "The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents - #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back -- $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic." (July 3, 2008)


Federal Stimulus Funds for Nevada's Green-Industry Grows Trees, But Few Jobs

A federal stimulus grant of nearly $500,000 to grow trees and stimulate the economy in Nevada yielded a whopping 1.72 jobs, according to government statistics.

In 2009, the U.S. Forest Service awarded $490,000 of stimulus money to Nevada's Clark County Urban Forestry Revitalization Project, aimed at revitalizing urban neighborhoods in the county with trees, plants, and green-industry training.

According to Recovery.gov, the U.S. government's official website related to Recovery Act spending, the project created 1.72 permanent jobs. In addition, the Nevada state Division of Forestry reported the federal grant generated one full-time temporary job and 11 short-term project-oriented jobs.

It also resulted in the planting of hundreds of trees -- which critics say is about the only good thing that came out of this stimulus project.

"Looking at the failure of the stimulus to live up to its promises, not just in Nevada, but throughout America, I think the question becomes ‘is there any good use of stimulus money?'" said Douglas Kellogg, communications manager for National Taxpayers Union, in an email to FoxNews.com.

A Nevada state official has a simple explanation for the low job growth.

"If the question is ‘was this a job-creating project?’ the answer is 'no, it wasn't,'" said Bob Conrad, public information officer for the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. "It was one of a number of projects that we do believe helped improve natural resources in the state."

Conrad said the $490,000 is being used for a number of projects. Those projects include tree inventories, salaries for staff at the nurseries through the Nevada Division of Forestry, plant material and plant supplies.

"The goal obviously was to make trees available to local government entities, parks, schools, things like that, at our state nursery," said Conrad. "We basically grew and provided about 2,000 trees to these local entities."

The grant also funds Spanish-language training for Hispanics in the landscaping and tree care industry to "develop employability skills and increase job retention."

Conrad could not say how many, if any, jobs were created by that training.

"We had to put together projects within very specific parameters. If the particular project you're referring to didn't create jobs necessarily, that's really something that's beyond the parameters of the program and it's really something you'd have to ask the federal government, the U.S. Forest Service."

Repeated calls by FoxNews.com to the U.S. Forest Service were not returned.

A project summary provided by Conrad showed an even lower amount of full-time jobs, with 1.37 full-time employees at the Las Vegas Nursery.

Conrad explained that the number of full-time jobs is low because most of the tasks, such as planting trees or driving plants from the nursery to participating schools or parks, are given to individuals on a short-term basis via a temp agency. For example, 11 people were hired temporarily for different aspects of the project, such as planters, trainers, drivers, and individuals to develop programs.

"You're not going to hire a driver full-time for this entire project if the driver is only needed for a limited number of hours," said Conrad. "It wouldn't make good business sense to hire a full-time person to do something that's really just a short-term need for the project."

Nevada has the highest unemployment rate in the nation, which, according to latest U.S. Department of Labor statistics, stood at 12.9 percent in July.

Kellogg said that the low job growth from this project could rub taxpayers the wrong way.

"Job-killing taxes, or more debt for a downgraded nation, are not likely to bring relief to our unemployment crisis," said Kellogg.

Conrad said that only 60 percent of the stimulus money has been used so far and of that amount, 90 to 95 percent of it is already allocated to salaries, sub grants, and other projects.

"The project isn't done," said Conrad.

But Kellogg believes it's a bad use of taxpayer money during these tough economic times.

"The president may well propose new stimulus efforts when Congress returns from recess,” said Kellogg, “and those who learn from past stimulus debacles will not be fooled again.”



I do not know about you, but I am really sick and tired of seeing the daily photos of our clueless Obama riding a bicycle like a dork, or eating ice cream or having Michelle sitting next to him with her iPod headphones on.

Oh did I forget to mention that his vacation home is costing $50,000 a day?

I do not think that all may vacations during me life cost me $50,000, but then again he is the President and he did earn those book royalties from his wonderful memoirs.

That really is not what I expect the President to be doing.

First of all I am not the only one who noticed that. Last week Maxine Waters. a racist white hating dingbat of a Congresswoman from some hellhole that is dumb enough to elect this total moron to represent them, complained that Obama never seems to visit with black folks.

His friends are apparently Warren Buffet and Hollywood celebrities, not the 95% of the black folks who voted for him. I can not remember the last black person who rented a $50,000 a day vacation home on Martha's Vineyard. Or for that matter I did not notice black vacationers there either.

He despises and considers terrorists the Tea Party members, does this clueless leader even understand who are the members of the Tea Party?

This was to be the President to bring us all together, remember?

He has instead been the most divisive and extremely class war monger ever!

While people are looking for jobs, and getting food stamps, the nation is being led by a clueless financially illiterate president.

He claimed to be taking a listening tour...remember his bus and the 45 attending automobiles and trucks?

he lectured, like he knows something. he did not listen to anyone, and now we are forced to endure the wimpy look on the bicycle?

His counterpart, Vladimir Putin of Russia no less, instead lectures him on the stupidity of spending, and onerous regulations as stifling business growth and prosperity in the USA. Russia just lowered its corporate tax rates.

Putin is shown in photos of doing "manly" things like hunting, arm wrestling and in stately positions of heading the government, while Obama is back to being ready for the photo op to be next at the children's petting zoo, kissing a baby lamb.

We need a President with Gravitas....not a flunky who can not reveal his grades from College, and is leading the country astray.


Swallow all liquids in your mouth before reading any further.

Updated numbers for the national debt are just out: It's now $14,639,000,000,000.

When Barack Obama took the oath of office twice on Jan. 20, 2009, CBS' amazing number cruncher Mark Knoller reports, the national debt was $10,626,000,000,000.

That means the debt that our federal government owes a whole lot of somebodies including China has increased $4,247,000,000,000 in just 945 days. That's the fastest increase under any president ever.

Remember the day the Democrat promised to close the embarrassing Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility within one year? That day the national debt increased $4,247,000,000. And each day since that the facility hasn't been closed.

Same for the day in 2009 when Obama flew all the way out to Denver to sign the $787 billion stimulus bill that was going to hold national unemployment beneath 8% instead of the 9.1% we got today anyway? Another $4,247,000,000 that day. And every day since, even Obama golfing and vacation days.

Same sum for the day Obama flew Air Force One nearly four hours roundtrip to Columbus, Ohio for a 10-minute speech about how well the stimulus was working in the politically crucial Buckeye state. Ohio's unemployment rate just jumped to 9% from 8.8% anyway.Obama stops his tour bus to Eat some Ice Cream in Iowa 8-16-11

Or last week's three-day Midwestern tour in the president's new $1.1 million Death Star bus? National debt went up $16,988,000,000 while he rode around speaking and buying ice cream cones.

Numbers with that many digits are hard to grasp, even for a Harvard head. So, let's put it another way:

One billion seconds ago Bill Clinton was nearing the end of his two terms and George W. Bush's baseball collection was still on the shelves in the Austin governor's office.

The nation's debt increased $4.9 trillion under President Bush too, btw. But it took him 2,648 days to do it. Obama will surpass that sum during this term.

Now, how to portray a trillion, or 1,000 billions. One trillion seconds ago much of North America was still covered by ice sheets hundreds of feet thick. And the land was dotted by only a few dozen Starbuck's.

Obama is saying yes, we can get control of the national debt. But ominously every time he says that he adds that trillions of dollars in infrastructure repairs are badly needed across the country. And with interest rates so low, according to the thinking on Obama's planet, now is an excellent time to borrow even more money.

So, it looks like not too long before Americans learn what comes after 1,000 trillions.

It's quadrillion. But for Bernanke's sake, please don't tell anyone in Washington.


Musings of Obama:It's tough being cool and aloof when the world is falling around you. The Midwestern bus tour isn't going well. The proletariat is coming dressed as Tea Party members questioning my civility. I wish I hadn't made that speech in Tucson. Who was it again that suggested I choose Biden? Ah, just a few more days and I can fly away to Martha's Vineyard once again.

I hope the people don't notice that Blue Heron farm is near the town of Chilmark, which the Vineyard Gazzette said was the most expensive small town in all of America. Oh well, if they do, they must understand that I am the president of the United states. After all, I and I alone stopped this country from going into a great depression, and the problems we're having now are due to circumstances beyond my control. Japanese tsunamis, and the Arab spring to name a few.
I hope they don't blame the tsunami on me. After all I did say I would cause the oceans to recede.

Where is Biden when I need him? If I could sneak out with him without Michelle knowing, we could go score another cheeseburger. Everyone would think we're regular folks. Maybe I won't ask for Dijon mustard on my burger this time.

Maybe while I'm at the Vineyard, I'll fly in that pizza chef again for an impromptu pizza party. All America loves pizza, and no one will notice the taxpayer cost. You know what, for a 1.1 million dollar bus this thing has terrible air conditioning. You know that Rick Perry is becoming a thorn in my side. But, when he accused Bernanke of treason he opened the door for me to scold him on civility. Thank God for that Tucson speech.

Maybe it's time I began formulating this new program for job growth. I promised I'd reveal it after Labor Day. Damn, Gallop has my approval at 39% again. Right after the senate convenes hearings on S&P, maybe we should investigate Gallop. I wish my bus was more colorful like Sarah Palin's, but no way will I have We The People painted on the side.

I hope no one notices that over 50 servicemen have been killed in Afghanistan already this month. If they do, they may blame my hasty pull out of troops beginning last month.

I do sincerely regret the death of many Seal Team 6 members in that chopper attack. After all, they did get my poll numbers up after the Bin Laden raid. It's tough being commander in chief. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. How did W. prosecute the Iraq war without being political? It has to be that he wasn't up for reelection when he implemented the surge and whipped their butts.

The Vineyard can come none to soon. I'll play some hoops and hit the links. I think I'm going to play my far left slice from now on. It would be foolish to change now. When I get back from the Vineyard, I'm going to have another Wednesday night White House party.

The Chef will serve up $100 a pound imported Japanese steak for appetizers and vodka martinis again. We'll have Stevie Wonder and Sir Paul McCartney entertain us while we contemplate how we can tax the rich and blame them for the huge deficits we're running. Thank God for Warren Buffet. We'll retool our attack and demonize the Tea party as obstructionists, who hinder our economic plan for job creation. Damn, I wish I hadn't made that Tucson speech.

Rings true????


Have you ever had the unpleasant experience of dealing with a Federal Agency in person or on the phone....well, it's worse on the phone.

At a town hall in Atkinson, Ill., a local farmer who said he grows corn and soybeans expressed his concerns to President Obama about “more rules and regulations” – including those concerning dust, noise and water runoff -- that he heard would negatively affect his business.

The president, on day three of his Midwest bus tour, replied: “If you hear something is happening, but it hasn’t happened, don’t always believe what you hear.”

When the room broke into soft laughter, the president added, “No -- and I’m serious about that.”

Saying that “folks in Washington” like to get “all ginned up” about things that aren’t necessarily happening (“Look what’s comin’ down the pipe!”), Obama’s advice was simple: “Contact USDA.”

“Talk to them directly. Find out what it is that you’re concerned about,” Obama told the man. “My suspicion is a lot of times they’re going to be able to answer your questions and it will turn out that some of your fears are unfounded.”

Call Uncle Sam. Sensible advice, but perhaps the president has forgotten just how difficult it can be for ordinary citizens to get answers from the government.

When this POLITICO reporter decided to take the president's advice and call USDA for an answer to the Atkinson town hall attendee's question, I found myself in a bureaucratic equivalent of hot potato -- getting bounced from the feds to Illinois state agriculture officials to the state farm bureau.

Here's a rundown of what happened when I started by calling USDA's general hotline to inquire about information related to the effects of noise and dust pollution rules on Illinois farmers:

Wednesday, 2:40 p.m. ET: After calling the USDA’s main line, I am told to call the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Here, I am patched through to a man who is identified as being in charge of "support services." I leave a message.

3:53 p.m.: The man calls me back and recommends in a voicemail message that I call the Illinois Farm Bureau -- a non-governmental organization.

4:02 p.m.: A woman at the Illinois Farm Bureau connects me to someone in the organization’s government affairs department. That person tells me they "don't quite know who to refer you to."

4:06 p.m.: I call the Illinois Department of Agriculture again, letting the person I spoke with earlier know that calling the Illinois Farm Bureau had not been fruitful. He says "those are the kinds of groups that are kind of on top of this or kind of follow things like this. We deal with pesticide here in our bureau."

"You only deal with pesticides?" I ask.

"We deal with other things … but we mainly deal with pesticides here," he said, and gives me the phone number for the office of the department’s director, where he says there are "policy people" as well as the director's staff.

4:10 p.m.: Someone at the director's office transfers me to the agriculture products inspection department, where a woman says their branch deals with things like animal feed, seed and fertilizer.

"I'm going to transfer you to one of the guys at environmental programs."

4:15 p.m.: I reach the answering machine at the environmental programs department, and leave a message.

4:57 p.m.: A man from the environmental programs department gets back to me: "I hate to be the regular state worker that's always accused of passing the buck, but noise and dust regulation would be under our environmental protection agency, rather than the Agriculture Department," he says, adding that he has forwarded my name and number to the agriculture adviser at IEPA.

On Thursday morning, POLITICO started the hunt for an answer again, this time calling the USDA's local office in Henry County, Ill., where the town hall took place.

9:42 a.m.: Asked if someone at the office might be able to provide me with the information I requested, the woman on the phone responds, “Not right now. We may have to actually look that up -- did you Google this or anything?”

When I say that I’m a reporter and would like to discuss my experience with someone who handles media relations there, I am referred to the USDA’s state office in Champaign. I leave a message there.

10:40 a.m.: A spokeswoman for the Illinois Natural Resources Conservation Service calls me, to whom I explain my multiple attempts on Wednesday and Thursday to retrieve the information I was looking for.

“What I can tell you is our particular agency does not deal with regulations,” she tells me. “We deal with volunteers who voluntarily want to do things. I think the reason you got that response from the Cambridge office is because in regard to noise and dust regulation, we don’t have anything to do with that.”

She adds that the EPA would be more capable of answering questions regarding regulations.

Finally, I call the USDA’s main media relations department, based here in Washington, where I explain to a spokesperson about my failed attempts to obtain an answer to the Illinois farmer’s question. This was their response, via email:

“Secretary Vilsack continues to work closely with members of the Cabinet to help them engage with the agricultural community to ensure that we are separating fact from fiction on regulations because the Administration is committed to providing greater certainty for farmers and ranchers. Because the question that was posed did not fall within USDA jurisdiction, it does not provide a fair representation of USDA’s robust efforts to get the right information to our producers throughout the country.”

So, still no answer to the farmer’s question.

DID ANYONE EXPECT AN ANSWER? Just watch whet happens when this farmer's cow pees on the ground, and the EPA fines him for that!!!!


Clueless president Barack Obama (take note he is talking to the wrong end of the phone) toured a vehicle battery plant in Michigan, touting his administration’s focus on green technology and jobs, at a corporation where federal money authorized by the economic stimulus law that Obama signed at the beginning of his presidency had created "green" jobs at a cost of about $2 million in federal subsidies per job.

Obama told the employees of Johnson Controls Inc., in Holland, Mich., gathered at the factory that they represented how America can come out of a recession by making products that can be sold around the world. yes, but after we give them $300 million of our money!

“Look what’s happening in Holland, Mich.,” said the president. “Every day, hundreds of people are going to work on the technologies that are helping us fight our way out of this recession. Every day you’re building high-tech batteries so that we lead the world in manufacturing the best cars and the best trucks -- that just doesn’t mean jobs in Michigan. You’re buying equipment and parts from suppliers in Florida and New Mexico and Ohio and Wisconsin, all across America.”

The economic stimulus, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, provided $2.4 billion in grants to advanced vehicle batteries technology. From that amount, $300 million in grants went to Johnson Controls to manufacture batteries.

According to the White House, thus far the firm has added 150 jobs because of the grant. That means the government spent about $2 million per job, but only if no more jobs are added.

Some in the crowd at the factory held up signs, one saying, “Thank you for the jobs,” and another saying, “Hang tough, you’re right.” Michigan has a 10.5 percent unemployment rate, among the highest in the nation, and could be a contested state in the 2012 presidential race.

Obama reminded the workers that the government made the jobs possible.

“What made this possible? The most important part is you,” said Obama. “Your drive, your work ethic, your ingenuity, your management, the grit and optimism that says we’ve got an idea for a new battery technology or a new manufacturing process and we’re going to take that leap. But what also made this possible are the actions that we took together as a nation through our government.”

Johnson Controls planned a total $600 million investment in battery manufacturing. The federal grant allowed the company to open the plant in Holland, Mich., with plans for opening another plant near Toledo, Ohio.

The administration plans to create incentives for consumers to purchase electric vehicles, fuel cell cars, plug-in hybrids vehicles and incentives for manufacturers to make and market the products, the White House announced before Obama spoke.

The Obama administration announced this week new fuel-efficiency standards for trucks and buses built in 2014 through 2018 to reduce oil consumption from a projected 530 million barrels of carbon emissions by 270 million metric tons.

By 2018, the new standards are supposed to reduce emissions by 20 percent for big rigs and semi trucks, 15 percent for pick-up trucks and 10 percent for vehicles such as garbage trucks and school buses.

By 2014, capacity to build batteries will be three times greater than the demand, the Washington Post reported. In other words, there will be no need for these workers and they will all be fired!

The General Motors Chevrolet Volt electric vehicle, priced at about $40,000, sold just 125 models in July, according to Market Watch. Though the $7,500 tax credit for the car reduced the price, less expensive cars are still selling better, according to Market Watch.

The Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry said, “GM is at least one generation behind Toyota on advanced, ‘green’ powertrain development. In an attempt to leapfrog Toyota, GM has devoted significant resources to the boondoggle Chevy Volt. While the Volt holds promise, it is currently projected to be much more expensive than its gasoline-fueled peers and will likely need substantial reductions in manufacturing cost in order to become commercially viable.”

Which in government translation means...NEVER!


This is OUR MONEY the government spent and is exactly why Spain went bust. It heavily invested in green energy and spent millions per job which resulted in higher energy costs and loss of jobs in the private sector.

John Hanlon
All those batteries require "rare earth" metals, many of which come from China. China is starting to regulate exprt of those materials to protect their industries (it is not "one world"). The electric cars now get most of their charge from coal buring power plants and 50% of that electricity is lost in transmission. So it takes twice as much dirty coal to get the same power to your wheels but you have a "feel good" car that leaves its emissions elsewhere. The whole concept is miss guided. We need a better solution.

He also refused to invite the Rebpublican congressman in whose district this event occured. Times have changed! Our new Repub governor didn't care to show up. And last year Peter Hoekstra showed up at the ground breaking and was chastised by this jerk of a president. This voting district is one of the most conservative in the states. They won't take kindly to this massive cost per job. Thank God Jennifer Granholm is gone. She's teaching at Berkley where she belongs!

With half the money, the workers could have lived off the interest without working at all.

La Billyboy
Electric Vehicles just move pollution from the tailpipe to the smokestack... with a lot less efficiency. It is a religion for the far left who will applaud the government subsidy for this and other debacles like windmills and solar that survive only due to heavy tax benefits and gov't subsidies. Even with the enormous government subsidy, sales of the electric vehicles has been anemic at best. The technology has a long, long way to go before it is commercially feasible. This would be a great area for the Feds to focus on for the huge upcoming budget cuts that have to be made...

Man, this GM deal is working out GREAT! $8 Billion loss on bonds; $11 Billion loss on equity position, Volt sold 125 units WITH a $ 7,500 tax credit (more GM special treatment). Now the suppliers to GM are rising to the top as massive losers, too. This "green jobs" thing is wonderful, I wonder why nobody thought of it before...OH, wait, yeah, that's it ...nobody ever needed an excuse to take over a company and GIVE it to a labor union, creditors be damned. If there is somebody out there that can see this as ANYTHING OTHER than criminal activity tell them to turn in their Socialist Party Member card and leave the country. And better yet, the Chrysler deal hasn't even finished turning in all the same kind of success.
honestynow and 8 more liked this

Zander Thomas
Got that right! We have LOST OUR REPUBLIC! Nothing but BIG GOVERNMENT FROM YOU, MR. OBAMA! WE DO NOT WANT BIG GOVERNMENT, BIG GOVERNMENT IS NOT IN AMERICAN'S DNA! Our Nation is coming apart at the seams, we have a President that does not know how to lead and thinks that America's greatness comes from BIG GOVERNMENT! This man also thinks that the FREE MARKET is the enemy, he wants to destroy our Freedom and Liberty but first he must destroy our economy (and it looks like he is doing a great job), yet we have more people worried about Bert and Ernie getting married and other "Mickey Mouse" issues! More people need to be focused on stopping this Big Government and Tyranny that they are wanting to impose on us! It will be Orwellian! Our System of Government is the BEST IN THE WORLD, We LOVE our US Constitution and Bill of Rights! It's the corrupt politicians running the show that are the problem!

You know this "Green Battery Plant" that Obama went to yesterday, they got 300 million dollars from the "Stimulus" so they could employ 150 people, in the "Private (FREE) Market" it would have only cost about 3 million! They would still get paid the same! See how wasteful Government is with our TAX MONEY?!? And they want MORE!

“There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” ~ John Adams

What a load of horsefeathers. Government efficiency at its finest.

Steven Moshlak
I wouldn't:
Buy Obama dog food
Follow Obama out of a burning building
Follow him to a free buffet.

'nuff said. Okay people, you proved you weren't "racists" in 2008. With 95% of Blacks voting for Obama, we know who the racists are. Now prove you aren't "stupid" in 2012.

Are this the shovel ready jobs. Good for Obama he succeeds again, 125 cars sold, I wonder did he buy all of them? Looks like it, and using our tax money

OBama doesn't know ONE Person who had to create wealth ( besides his felon best friend Tony Rezko...we forgot about him). All his advisors only know how to fill out forms to ask for government endowments. He still thinks that the Federal Government creates wealth - he nor his advisors understand the money comes from the TAXES we pay !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama also makes sure to mention that Johnson Controls is "buying parts" from New Mexico,Ohio,Florida and Wisconsin.......ALL states he needs in 2012.....be cause of what HE did with this ridiculous grant.

It only costs 2 million a year in federal subsidies to create a 25 grand a year job? Wow, I don't know why were not all recovered right now. Stimulus me some more, I'm stupid.

Now do you see why we don't think the government shouldn't be given all our money? They are irresponsible and horrible shoppers. I can PROVE that I manage my money better. So hands off. I don't need you to take care of me. I can do it BETTER myself.
honestynow and 9 more liked this

Dysfunctional utopian liberals spending OPM and picking losing companies. They simply refuse to live in the real world. If I had 40K to spend on a new vehicle, it wouldn't be a roller skate on wheels that I need to plug-in at night. GOD! I wish I HAD 40K to buy a new F-150!

Rod Anders
Barack Hussein Obamoron is the biggest, f**g, lying, piece of s**t I've seen in 70 years. Who are his followers....?

Dear President Obama,
I read this morning that you are going to go on the “America would have been worse without me” tour to boost your partys poll numbers. Being a natural born and bred capitalist I find this fascinating. Think of it this way; if I invented a new car with square wheels and then did a tour around the country trying to convince people, that those square wheels are just too darn efficient and useful - how many people could I convince? Not many. Unless they are attendees of the “Nut Roots” convention, you could probably sell a whole bunch of my square wheeled cars to those people!

See, Mr Obama, in my world I’ve got to do or create something that others find enough value in to part with their money, that they could use for an infinite number of purposes. To illustrate this; take Al Gore for instance. Does Al buy another massage at the happy ending saloon, or, does he buy more earth polluting energy efficient light bulbs? Tough call. If he was real careful he could have as much fun with the light bulb I guess, but even Mr. Gore would have to realize it was not worth the risk. In your world, Mr. Obama, you have to create words on a page that will either use force or coercion to get my fellow citizens to do the federal governments bidding. Do you see the difference? One is based on a voluntary association the other being foisted upon a citizen through threat of death or financial coercion.

So you, and other liberals, must go on tour and tell us how we can be best managed by those of your ilk rather then on our own. Now, Mr. Obama, it would be one thing if liberal progressive democrats had a record worth aspiring to. But no sane citizen can make that claim, every program that you and those of your ilk have pushed has placed this nation in bankruptcy - morally as well as fiscally. In essence the United States of America has had its perfectly round wheels converted into square ones and now you, Mr. Obama, must explain to us why we must abandon the round ones and drive our lives on the square ones.

To borrow a phrase from you, “Make no mistake,” if there is one person that can convince America to commit suicide your election is proof that you have that ability. Maybe while you are touring you can link up with Dr. Kevorkian and discuss the death panels? After all you always claim that you are seeking the most experienced minds on any given topic - until you decide only to use them as cover all the while spouting the liberal line, and ignoring their advice anyway. Senator Judd Greg is darn near clairvoyant on this reality. Have a good week Mr. President and please remember that every dollar you will be spending on your travel and entertainment my kids are paying for, so take it easy on the Jet A and the Kobe Beef. Maybe you should figure out which President bought his own postage stamps, and tear a page out of his code of conduct and follow it?
Respectfully, Joe Doakes


Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent youngsters.

By Max Hastings

A few weeks after the U.S. city of Detroit was ravaged by 1967 race riots in which 43 people died, I was shown around the wrecked areas by a black reporter named Joe Strickland.

He said: ‘Don’t you believe all that stuff people here are giving media folk about how sorry they are about what happened. When they talk to each other, they say: “It was a great fire, man!” ’

I am sure that is what many of the young rioters, black and white, who have burned and looted in England through the past few shocking nights think today.
Manchester: Hooded looters laden with clothes run from a Manchester shopping centre

It was fun. It made life interesting. It got people to notice them. As a girl looter told a BBC reporter, it showed ‘the rich’ and the police that ‘we can do what we like’.

PHILIP JOHNSTON (Telegraph): The long retreat of order
SIMON JENKINS: (Guardian): In this crisis, our cities need local leaders with real power
MICHAEL MCCARTHY (Independent): No shame, no limits: Has the behaviour of the mob destroyed the idea of British civility for ever?
RICHARD WILLIAMS (Guardian): Could disorder erupt again and threaten the Olympics?

If you live a normal life of absolute futility, which we can assume most of this week’s rioters do, excitement of any kind is welcome. The people who wrecked swathes of property, burned vehicles and terrorised communities have no moral compass to make them susceptible to guilt or shame.

Most have no jobs to go to or exams they might pass. They know no family role models, for most live in homes in which the father is unemployed, or from which he has decamped.

They are illiterate and innumerate, beyond maybe some dexterity with computer games and BlackBerries.

They are essentially wild beasts. I use that phrase advisedly, because it seems appropriate to young people bereft of the discipline that might make them employable; of the conscience that distinguishes between right and wrong.

They respond only to instinctive animal impulses — to eat and drink, have sex, seize or destroy the accessible property of others.

Their behaviour on the streets resembled that of the polar bear which attacked a Norwegian tourist camp last week. They were doing what came naturally and, unlike the bear, no one even shot them for it.

A former London police chief spoke a few years ago about the ‘feral children’ on his patch — another way of describing the same reality.

The depressing truth is that at the bottom of our society is a layer of young people with no skills, education, values or aspirations. They do not have what most of us would call ‘lives’: they simply exist.

Nobody has ever dared suggest to them that they need feel any allegiance to anything, least of all Britain or their community. They do not watch royal weddings or notice Test matches or take pride in being Londoners.

Not only do they know nothing of Britain’s past, they care nothing for its present.

They have their being only in video games and street-fights, casual drug use and crime, sometimes petty, sometimes serious.

The notions of doing a nine-to-five job, marrying and sticking with a wife and kids, taking up DIY or learning to read properly, are beyond their imaginations.

Undercover police officers arrest looters in the Swarovski Crystal shop in Manchester. One rioter lies injured and blood can be seen on the wall

Last week, I met a charity worker who is trying to help a teenage girl in East London to get a life for herself. There is a difficulty, however: ‘Her mother wants her to go on the game (welfare payments).’ My friend explained: ‘It’s the money, you know.’

An underclass has existed throughout history, which once endured appalling privation. Its spasmodic outbreaks of violence, especially in the early 19th century, frightened the ruling classes.

Its frustrations and passions were kept at bay by force and draconian legal sanctions, foremost among them capital punishment and transportation to the colonies.

Today, those at the bottom of society behave no better than their forebears, but the welfare state has relieved them from hunger and real want.

When social surveys speak of ‘deprivation’ and ‘poverty’, this is entirely relative. Meanwhile, sanctions for wrongdoing have largely vanished.

When Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith recently urged employers to take on more British workers and fewer migrants, he was greeted with a hoarse laugh.

Every firm in the land knows that an East European — for instance — will, first, bother to turn up; second, work harder; and third, be better-educated than his or her British counterpart.Who do we blame for this state of affairs?

Ken Livingstone, contemptible as ever, declares the riots to be a result of the Government’s spending cuts. This recalls the remarks of the then leader of Lambeth Council, ‘Red Ted’ Knight, who said after the 1981 Brixton riots that the police in his borough ‘amounted to an army of occupation’.

But it will not do for a moment to claim the rioters’ behaviour reflects deprived circumstances or police persecution.

Of course it is true that few have jobs, learn anything useful at school, live in decent homes, eat meals at regular hours or feel loyalty to anything beyond their local gang.

This is not, however, because they are victims of mistreatment or neglect.

It is because it is fantastically hard to help such people, young or old, without imposing a measure of compulsion which modern society finds unacceptable. These kids are what they are because nobody makes them be anything different or better.
Rampage: We are told that youths roaming the streets are doing so because they are angry at unemployment, but a quick look at an apprenticeship website yields 2,228 vacancies in London

A key factor in delinquency is lack of effective sanctions to deter it. From an early stage, feral children discover that they can bully fellow pupils at school, shout abuse at people in the streets, urinate outside pubs, hurl litter from car windows, play car radios at deafening volumes, and, indeed, commit casual assaults with only a negligible prospect of facing rebuke, far less retribution.

John Stuart Mill wrote in his great 1859 essay On Liberty: ‘The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people.’

Yet every day up and down the land, this vital principle of civilised societies is breached with impunity.

Anyone who reproaches a child, far less an adult, for discarding rubbish, making a racket, committing vandalism or driving unsociably will receive in return a torrent of obscenities, if not violence.

So who is to blame? The breakdown of families, the pernicious promotion of single motherhood as a desirable state, the decline of domestic life so that even shared meals are a rarity, have all contributed importantly to the condition of the young underclass.

The social engineering industry unites to claim that the conventional template of family life is no longer valid. Asian shopkeepers stood outside their stores in Hackney that was battered by the looters. This time, though, they're ready to take them on.

And what of the schools? I do not think they can be blamed for the creation of a grotesquely self-indulgent, non-judgmental culture.

This has ultimately been sanctioned by Parliament, which refuses to accept, for instance, that children are more likely to prosper with two parents than with one, and that the dependency culture is a tragedy for those who receive something for nothing.

The judiciary colludes with social services and infinitely ingenious lawyers to assert the primacy of the rights of the criminal and aggressor over those of law-abiding citizens, especially if a young offender is involved.

The police, in recent years, have developed a reputation for ignoring yobbery and bullying, or even for taking the yobs’ side against complainants.

‘The problem,’ said Bill Pitt, the former head of Manchester’s Nuisance Strategy Unit, ‘is that the law appears to be there to protect the rights of the perpetrator, and does not support the victim.’

Police regularly arrest householders who are deemed to have taken ‘disproportionate’ action to protect themselves and their property from burglars or intruders. The message goes out that criminals have little to fear from ‘the feds’.
Do rioters, pictured looting a shop in Hackney, have lower levels of a brain chemical that helps keep behaviour under control? Scientists think so

Figures published earlier this month show that a majority of ‘lesser’ crimes — which include burglary and car theft, and which cause acute distress to their victims — are never investigated, because forces think it so unlikely they will catch the perpetrators.

How do you inculcate values in a child whose only role model is footballer Wayne Rooney — a man who is bereft of the most meager human graces?

How do you persuade children to renounce bad language when they hear little else from stars on the BBC?

A teacher, Francis Gilbert, wrote five years ago in his book Yob Nation: ‘The public feels it no longer has the right to interfere.’

Discussing the difficulties of imposing sanctions for misbehaviour or idleness at school, he described the case of a girl pupil he scolded for missing all her homework deadlines.

The youngster’s mother, a social worker, telephoned him and said: ‘Threatening to throw my daughter off the A-level course because she hasn’t done some work is tantamount to psychological abuse, and there is legislation which prevents these sorts of threats.

‘I believe you are trying to harm my child’s mental well-being, and may well take steps . . . if you are not careful.’

That story rings horribly true. It reflects a society in which teachers have been deprived of their traditional right to arbitrate pupils’ behaviour. Denied power, most find it hard to sustain respect, never mind control.

I never enjoyed school, but, like most children until very recent times, did the work because I knew I would be punished if I did not. It would never have occurred to my parents not to uphold my teachers’ authority. This might have been unfair to some pupils, but it was the way schools functioned for centuries, until the advent of crazy ‘pupil rights’.

I recently received a letter from a teacher who worked in a county’s pupil referral unit, describing appalling difficulties in enforcing discipline. Her only weapon, she said, was the right to mark a disciplinary cross against a child’s name for misbehaviour.

Having repeatedly and vainly asked a 15-year-old to stop using obscene language, she said: ‘Fred, if you use language like that again, I’ll give you a cross.’

He replied: ‘Give me an effing cross, then!’ Eventually, she said: ‘Fred, you have three crosses now. You must miss your next break.’

He answered: ‘I’m not missing my break, I’m going for an effing fag!’ When she appealed to her manager, he said: ‘Well, the boy’s got a lot going on at home at the moment. Don’t be too hard on him.’

This is a story repeated daily in schools up and down the land.

A century ago, no child would have dared to use obscene language in class. Today, some use little else. It symbolises their contempt for manners and decency, and is often a foretaste of delinquency.

If a child lacks sufficient respect to address authority figures politely, and faces no penalty for failing to do so, then other forms of abuse — of property and person — come naturally.

So there we have it: a large, amoral, brutalised sub-culture of young British people who lack education because they have no will to learn, and skills which might make them employable. They are too idle to accept work waitressing or doing domestic labour, which is why almost all such jobs are filled by immigrants.

They have no code of values to dissuade them from behaving anti-socially or, indeed, criminally, and small chance of being punished if they do so.

They have no sense of responsibility for themselves, far less towards others, and look to no future beyond the next meal, sexual encounter or TV football game.

They are an absolute deadweight upon society, because they contribute nothing yet cost the taxpayer billions. Liberal opinion holds they are victims, because society has failed to provide them with opportunities to develop their potential.

Most of us would say this is nonsense. Rather, they are victims of a perverted social ethos, which elevates personal freedom to an absolute, and denies the underclass the discipline — tough love — which alone might enable some of its members to escape from the swamp of dependency in which they live.

Only education — together with politicians, judges, policemen and teachers with the courage to force feral humans to obey rules the rest of us have accepted all our lives — can provide a way forward and a way out for these people.

They are products of a culture which gives them so much unconditionally that they are let off learning how to become human beings. My dogs are better behaved and subscribe to a higher code of values than the young rioters of Tottenham, Hackney, Clapham and Birmingham.

Unless or until those who run Britain introduce incentives for decency and impose penalties for bestiality which are today entirely lacking, there will never be a shortage of young rioters and looters such as those of the past four nights, for whom their monstrous excesses were ‘a great fire, man’.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2024284/UK-riots-2011-Liberal-dogma-spawned-generation-brutalised-youths.html#ixzz1UgluWUSc



The US Postal Service warned on Friday that it could default on payments it owes the federal government, just days after the US government itself narrowly averted a default.

No surprise here, it should file for bankruptcy reorganization NOW, as soon as possible and get rid of the expensive pensions and health plans and union rules as well through the reorganization process.

The government's mail service said it lost $3.1 billion in the period from April to June, blaming "the anemic state of the economy" and the growing popularity of electronic communications over old-fashioned letters. This is not the correct reason, and we all know it!

The real reason that the electronic communications are part of the reason, and only a part, is the horrific service especially in the large metropolitan areas. The worst service is at the windows of the post offices themselves; surly workers, seemingly doing customers a favor by actually providing service at the window.

Going there for service is like a trip to a bad dentist, or a used car dealer to complain about the lemon he sold you.

The over-staffing and the inability of management to actually have workers DO WORK, is the main problem.

The USPS has started coming up with technology itself...for instance the self service KIOSKS that work hard 24/7 and actually provide a service ( whenever they are in service and not needing repair). There can be more...they are able to do for the USPS what the ATM has done for banking as well.

I am now able to do all my banking at the ATM! No human contact at all!

There is no need to worry about the proverbial "rural" post office not getting service...this can easily be replaced for service with a KIOSK and a person at a local grocery store or with a proper postage cost for delivery to such places....so what it it cost $1 to mail a letter to a rural post office or say .75 cents otherwise and have 5 day delivery?


What happens when a business starts to provide a service or its manufactured product below cost? IT RAISES PRICES OR GOES OUT OF BUSINESS or files for bankruptcy reorganization and cuts costs and reorganizes to operate at a lower cost structure!

With president DUMBAMA, with his penchant for UNIONS such as demonstrated in the GM bankruptcy case,we can never expect a real solution to anything as this clueless "leader" would fight any attempt at real financial responsibility...but there are solutions to all financial problems.

As a result of its mounting losses, the US Postal Service said it would not be able to make a legally required $5.5 billion payment in September to a health-benefits trust fund. SOLUTION....FILE FOR BANKRUPTCY REORGANIZATION NOW.

"Absent substantial legislative change ( this means loan from government), the Postal Service will be forced to default on payments to the federal government," it said in a statement.

Dating back to 1775, the US Postal Service was once a crucial branch of the federal government, but in recent years it has come under increasing fire from critics ( meaning everyone who uses the service or has had to actually go to a post office in person) who consider it bureaucratic and inefficient.

In July, it unveiled plans to identify nearly 3,700 under-used post offices around the United States for possible closure. The Post Office has been hemorrhaging billions of dollars in recent years.

Lets add another few thousand....also quite easily all new hires can be hired at a typical starting wage at say $12.00 and hour with very basic benefits and Social security as the retirement plan...there would be plenty of takers....

Let's start making decisions NOW to stop the waste and impossible wages...a friend of mine who is a long time clerk at the post office...told me that last year he grossed over $80,000 in salary, plus he had the various benefits on top of that...he was going to retire but then he learned that he would be up for increases due to the contract so he is staying to get more money!


Ok here is a popular USPS joke:

"A lady that was with child was standing in a long line at a local United States Postal Service Office. When it was her turn to go up to the counter she told the clerk that she was going to have her baby. The clerk told her a pregnant woman in your condition shouldn't be in a postal office. The lady replied, "I wasn't pregnant when I got in line."

Job Story: Postal Service Clerk....good pay, but too many Post Office psycho nuts.

I am an almost 13 years at the Post Office. For 19 years, used to work in heavy manufacturing. I thought I had worked for a bunch of stupid managers, but they were "brain surgeons" compared to the ones I see in the post office. Most of them cannot manage or wish to do anything. We have to many useless reports to fill out because of some "seat warmers" need to feel important, and even if there is some purpose for the numbers they can't figure out how to use them anyway. We are a dumping ground for vets that do not want work and are looking towards retirement from the day they are hired and work like they are retired, and the postal service owes them a job. When I was in the private sector I used to respect vets, but now all I see these people as a bunch of whiney babies. If it wasn't for the customers I serve and the decent pay I would quit.


Readers of this blog will remember that we called this long before it was in Vogue to predict the lowered rating for our country.

Let's face it, it is shocking that the country could continue to think that it deserved a AAA rating with its insurmountable debt accumulation and the irresponsible deficit spending fueled by two financial morons-Geithner and Obama would spare us the downgrade?

Mr. Geithner just said that he never had a "real job". Obama never had a real job either...in fact only about 5% of Obama's appointees had any real jobs! Now you see the results...and it is no surprise. He even said in April on multiple interviews, that there is no way the AAA RATING WOULD BE LOWERED...remember this is the guy that let's TURBO TAX do his taxes....( or should we say not do).

This kind of reminds me of Rome burning while the emperor fiddles. Obama had a great birthday party for himself the week of the downgrade.

The reality is simple...the fact that this country has no plan to stop the trillion dollar deficits in the foreseeable future, and it has over $100 trillion in future obligations, it has no reason to be rated as AAA. That is the simple fact.

The nonsense that resulted in the recent debt "compromise" is meaningless in the big picture sense. Nothing will stop the trillion dollar annual deficits and nothing will stop from thus increasing the debt by the same amounts...there is no possibility of repayment and no possibility to see a balanced budget, ever!

Oh, it was interesting to note that Warren Buffet, that Obama supporter now turned pragmatist who just had a solution to solve the deficit.

Buffet suggested that the entire problem would be solved immediately, if a new law was passed that stated that whenever the deficit was over 3% of GDP, no existing member of Congress would be eligible for re-election. problem solved!

I would add to that to say that whenever there was any deficit, they would not be eligible for re-election!

Also, I do not understand the concept of re-distribution of income and benefits like Obama wants.

Let me see, I work my butt off 80 hours a week, pay my bills and then the government wants to take at least half of my income and give it to people that do not get off their butt and live on Section 8 housing vouchers paid for by my work?

I do not feel that anyone should get that type of handout...why?

Being poor, for the most part is a choice....YES believe it...ok a few people that may have serious medical issues may be excluded from that comment, but then again that should be a serious screening.

I like to use the example of two waitresses working to support their family. One works at an upscale restaurant, and makes $700-$800 a week in tips, and another chooses to work ( emphasis on the word chooses) at a Denny's and makes $200 a week in tips. get my point...choose better, make a better choice....!!!!!Finish school, apply yourself, etc!!!!

Every person knows that in managing our own personal financial lives, we spend what we make or just up to the limits of our credit cards, right?

So why do these morons we send to Washington, who manage their own checkbooks, can not in the least manage the nation's checkbook?



by Joe Mont

Medical strides have allowed people all over the world to live longer. According to one researcher, we are on the cusp of routinely living to 150, and the first person to blow out 1,000 candles on their birthday cake could be born within the next two decades.

Biomedical gerontologist Dr. Aubrey de Grey, of the California-based Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence Foundation, made those claims in a recent research paper. His prediction is that the increasing ability of scientists to engineer replacement tissue will allow for customizable, replaceable organs in the not-so-distant future.

Living to 150 or even 1,000 may not be as far-fetched as it might seem. In the U.S., life expectancy has nearly doubled since 1900. More telling, the number of 100-year-olds in 1990 totaled roughly 37,000, but there are more than 84,000 now and, according to Census Bureau projections, by 2050 there could be more than 580,000 Americans older than 100.

If mega aging occurs as de Grey theorizes, it would have a monumental impact on society. Would natural resources be able to keep pace with the population? How would governments and global economies manage?

As humans reach 150 years old and beyond, financial playbooks would be thrown out the window.

With "aging workforce" taking on a whole new meaning, employee churn would be rare. As companies hold onto employees for many decades, how will a younger workforce earn their paycheck?

A big question would be how long a person could continue to work and how long a post-career retirement would last. Would dementia and other physical ailments add millions to the ranks of the disabled, requiring ever-escalating financial and medical support for decade after decade?

The insurance industry would be thrown into chaos, as actuarial tables and mortality credits prove no longer viable in an era of artificially prolonged life. An upside for the industry might come from all those added years of premiums they can collect before a life insurance policy is paid out.

Retirement strategies would need to radically evolve to keep up with changes in society.

"Retirement is expensive and will become even more expensive in the future," said Jean-Claude Menard, chief actuary of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions in Canada, at the Society of Actuaries' symposium Living to 100 in January. "No matter if it is a fully funded plan or a pay-as-you-go plan, no matter if it is a [defined-benefit] or a defined-contribution solution, no matter if it is a national public scheme or a private pension plan, the fact is that increased longevity will continue to put pressure on the financing of pension plans."

Corporate pensions and government entitlement programs — Social Security and Medicare — would likely be stressed beyond their capability.

On top of the strain already felt in budgets for Social Security and Medicare, research shows that their funding gaps will increase along with the average age of beneficiaries.

A study by the MacArthur Research Network on an Aging Society found that by 2050 Americans may live 3.1 to 7.9 years longer than official government projections, resulting in sharply higher costs for government programs that serve older citizens. The study estimates that cumulative outlays for Medicare and Social Security could rise by $3.2 trillion to $8.3 trillion from current government projections by 2050.

"Even small changes in life expectancy produce large changes in the number of older Americans," said Dr. S. Jay Olshansky, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago's School of Public Health and one of the authors of the study. "Therefore, our projections of longer life expectancy have profound implications for America's fiscal situation, health care system and labor markets."

"Although the nation will become increasingly gray in subsequent decades, the United States is not well prepared to deal with the myriad consequences of this impending reality," said Dr. John Rowe, who chairs the MacArthur Research Network and is former CEO of Aetna.

With the ability to age like Methuselah, a massively longer time horizon for retirement savings might ease some of the concerns for investors.

If a preretiree were to add just an additional $1,000 a year to an initial 10,000 in a 401(k) or IRA (assuming a 5% compounding return), they will amass roughly $4 million over the course of a century. Saving or investing for 150 years would see that total rise to $6.7 million within 150 years and $536 million after 200 years.

The longer they live, the better the news: That mere $1,000 a year would accrue $6.1 billion over 250 years. By the time they reach 800 to 1,000 years old, they will hypothetically have trillions at their disposal.

Those science fiction-level returns may be of little consolation to a society on the cusp of making 100 years old the new norm.

A recent study by SunAmerica Financial Group and Age Wave, a research and consulting firm focused on population aging, found that 67% of respondents say they would like to live to 100. Among the advantages of living to 100 they cited were "remaining productive, establishing deep relationships with family, witnessing new discoveries and experiencing many years of leisure."

Jana Greer, president and CEO of SunAmerica Retirement Markets and senior vice president of SunAmerica Inc., says many Americans are postponing retirement because they have the health and willingness to work later into life. While 10 years ago most were planning to retire at about age 64 or 65, today's workers have moved that target up to 69. She refers to the trend as "Retirement 3.0."

"You might think they are delaying it simply because of the challenges obviously of the recession and the impact that has had on their financial condition," Greer says. "Actually, we are finding that people want to stay engaged. Not only are they working full-time longer, but one of the huge findings out of the study was that retirement doesn't mean 'retirement' any more. It doesn't mean the end of work. About two-thirds of the people in the study — both preretirees and retirees — want to stay working in some way during their retirement, whether it is part-time or flexible, coming in and out of the workforce."

Living longer, however, doesn't always mean being able to work longer or preserving savings.

Asked about the "major worries of living to 100," 73% of those surveyed cited serious health problems; 59% feared being a burden to their family; 49% said a top concern was running out of money; and 26% said they fretted about not being able to leave an inheritance for their family.

Those fears are reflected in investment goals. Priorities were to "not lose value" and "to protect their income stream from market loss and guarantee it for life," Greer says.

"I think people are realizing that with increased longevity they have got to plan for their future income stream, not just a lump sum that is going to tide them through," she adds.

These findings feed into SunAmerica's projection that the annuity marketplace, specifically the variable annuities they offer, will continue to grow in popularity among investors.

Research earlier this year by the Society of Actuaries revealed that as ages draw close to triple digits, many are woefully underprepared for the challenge.

Nearly half (48%) of the polled respondents, ages 45-70, "have no financial plans in place to protect themselves against outliving their assets and the rising cost of health care should they live longer than they expected," the research showed. More than one-third are worried about running out of money during retirement, but only 20% plan to buy an annuity or other form of guaranteed lifetime income to protect their assets.

The survey also found that 75% of those ages 45-70 protect their tangible assets, such as housing, through home or renter's insurance. Only 19%, however, plan to insure the extra costs of disability and well-being by buying long-term care insurance.


Medicare and Medicaid were spared from immediate cuts in the debt deal, but it looks like just a temporary reprieve.

As usual and as expected from the OBAMA command-post of lies and distortions, the deal that was completed is nothing like its purported explanation. The hapless president Obama, then announced that now the country will concentrate on growing jobs...Huh?

How will jobs grow when the OBAMA policy is to bad mouth business, stop using gasoline and coal for industry and stop all drilling. Furthermore autos are supposed to get 54 miles to the gallon by 2025..which is not yet possible.

The public debt will probably grow by a whopping and unsustainable $10 trillion over the next 10 years!

Advocates for seniors and lobbyists for the health care industry are worried that Round Two of the budget battle, beginning this fall, could lead to cuts that raise costs for beneficiaries and squeeze providers such as hospitals, doctors, insurers and drug companies.

Nothing will be off limits for a powerful new congressional committee created under the deal to scour the budget for savings. That includes the two giant health care programs for 100 million Americans, the elderly, low-income people, and long-term nursing home residents.

If the debt committee hits a dead end, the agreement between President Barack Obama and congressional leaders decrees an automatic 2 percent cut to Medicare providers. That's on top of a 6 percent cut already enacted to finance the president's health care law, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. And the earlier cut is still being phased in.

"The story isn't over," said Joe Baker, president of the Medicare Rights Center, a New York-based advocacy group. "The future of the programs really hangs in the balance. It could lead to deep cuts and irreversible changes to Medicare and Medicaid that shift costs to beneficiaries."

The hospital industry, which agreed to cuts of $150 billion to help pay for Obama's expansion of coverage to the uninsured, says it's just about had it. Nonpartisan analysts in the government predict the cuts in the health care law alone are enough to push about 15 percent of hospitals, nursing homes and home health agencies into the red.

"America's hospitals find it difficult to support a debt ceiling proposal that could negatively affect Medicare for our nation's seniors," American Hospital Association president Rich Umbdenstock said in a statement. "Access to care could be curtailed by further cuts to Medicare funding for hospital care."

The debt deal allows the government to keep borrowing and staves off an unprecedented default on obligations to investors, Social Security recipients, federal employees and others. But it comes at the price of squeezing the budget in ways that sooner or later will affect average families.

The first $900 billion in savings from the deal doesn't have much impact on health care. It's the second round that counts, from $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

"These guys haven't really solved anything -- they have only set up a procedure to make cuts," said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry consultant. "We haven't seen the blood on the floor yet."

The White House is emphasizing that Medicaid for the poor and benefits guaranteed to seniors under traditional Medicare would not be touched if automatic reductions become necessary as a backstop.

But the new congressional "supercommittee" created under the deal is under no such restrictions. It can shape its own menu of cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Obama's health care law, assuming the panel could get the votes to pass a package through Congress and buy-in from the White House.

"Nothing is over. These debates are just going to continue," said Paul Van de Water, a senior analyst with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which advocates for the poor.

For Medicaid, that means a new funding formula proposed by the Obama administration in the debt talks remains on the table. It can be used to dial down the amount of federal money states get for the health needs of their low-income people and nursing home residents. Governors oppose it.

For Medicare, it means the committee could push increases in copays and deductibles, as have two bipartisan commissions within the last nine months.

Medicare providers are nervous.

Doctors could be particularly exposed. Current law calls for an automatic cut of 30 percent in Medicare payments to physicians starting next year, the consequence of a previous budget control law gone awry. It's unthinkable that lawmakers would allow that big a hit. But where Congress in previous years just waived the cut and added the cost to the deficit, that's not politically possible now.

Doctors got a modest Medicare raise out of Obama's health care law, but the American Medical Association will have to pull off a lobbying coup to avoid cuts this time.

Drug companies are also hunkered down. Having agreed to help close the Medicare prescription coverage gap, as well as billions in new fees under the health care overhaul, they could now be on the hook for additional rebates to cover the drug costs of low-income seniors.

The budget super committee has a deadline for action around Thanksgiving. That has advocates mobilizing to stave off or contain the scope of cuts. One way to do that is to put tax increases back on the table, and remember if all taxpayers were taxed at 100% of their income, that would still note cover the deficit as predicted over the next 10 years.

Think about this financial disaster that will fall in the laps of our children...financial disaster for our country indeed.


President Barack Obama announced on Sunday that Republican and Democratic leaders had agreed on a last-ditch deal to raise the U.S. borrowing limit and avoid a catastrophic default, and he urged lawmakers to "do the right thing" and approve the agreement.

This clueless president, who is driving the nation to bankruptcy which with this deal is a SURE THING, continues to lie about every aspect of this bogus program. His con-conspirators in the process are all the Republican and Democratic senators and representatives who will vote in favor of this worthless boondoggle of a financial rescue plan.

By definition, our nation has become insolvent...unable to pay its debts as they mature. This is not a fantasy or illusion as the Democrats state, but it is a FACT, an undeniable fact.

Our nation is committed to unmanageable debt that continues to accumulate at the rate of $4 billion DAILY...that is the amount that is being borrowed by the treasury every day to carry on its out of control operations. This is an amount that is not sustainable for the country, with no end predicted in the near future.

This "compromise" deal does absolutely nothing to stop the continuing growth of government spending, and worse yet we are now on a 10 year plan of wild spending.

This fantasy deal is just that, a fantasy, that will do nothing to improve the lives or finances of the citizens now or in the future. In fact, the plan assures the continued erosion of the value of the US dollar, and now solidly so for the next 10 years!

Worse yet, is is quite likely that the financial situation will deteriorate significantly as other ominous government mandates start to kick in over the next few years...such as Obama Care mandates and other mandates that stifle business growth.

We will be facing future crises such as this sooner..much sooner than is predicted. Just wait and see, and then it will be much more critical.

Here is a summary of the crazy deal, based on documents provided by both parties, as well as interviews with lawmakers and aides:

* The deal would allow President Barack Obama to raise the debt ceiling in three steps. Congress would get a chance to register its disapproval on two of these, but would not be able to block them unless it musters a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate -- an unlikely prospect.

* It envisions spending cuts of roughly $2.4 trillion over 10 years, which Congress would approve in two steps -- an initial $917 billion when the deal passes Congress and another $1.5 trillion by the end of the year.

* The first group of spending cuts would apply to the discretionary programs that Congress approves annually, covering everything from the military to food inspection.

* Those programs would be capped each year for 10 years. The caps would be relatively modest at first to avoid stifling the shaky economy -- spending for the fiscal year that begins October 1 would be only $6 billion below the current level of $1.049 trillion. The caps would have a greater impact in later years, when it is hoped that the economy will have recovered.

* Some $350 billion of the $917 billion total would come from defense and other security programs which now account for more than half of all discretionary spending. Republicans are resisting this idea and it is one of the few areas of dispute left.

* Automatic across-the-board spending cuts would kick in if Congress does not observe the caps in coming years.

* A 12-member congressional committee, made up equally of Republicans and Democrats from each chamber, would be tasked with finding a further $1.5 trillion in budget savings.

* That committee could find savings from an overhaul of the tax code and restructuring benefit programs like Medicare -- the politically risky decisions that lawmakers have not been able to agree on so far.

* The committee would have to complete its work by November 23. Congress would have an up-or-down vote, with no modifications, on the committee's recommendations by December 23.

* If the committee cannot agree on at least $1.2 trillion in savings, or Congress rejects its findings, automatic spending cuts totaling that amount would kick in starting in 2013.

* Those cuts would fall equally on domestic and military programs. Medicare would face automatic cuts as well, but Social Security, Medicaid, federal employee pay, and benefits for veterans and the poor would be exempt.

* The plan also calls for both the House and the Senate to vote on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution by the end of the year. It is not likely to receive the two-thirds vote in each chamber needed for passage, but its inclusion will make it easier for conservatives to back the overall deal.