'State Of The Union Address': President Barack Obama Focuses On Economy, Jobs (VIDEO)

President Barack Obama put the economy front and center during his latest "State Of The Union Address" (Tue., 9 p.m. EST on CBS). He spoke about the importance of closing the "skills gap" between under-trained and under-educated Americans out of work and the jobs they're not quite qualified for. He proposed an initiative to work with businesses and colleges to train and place as many as two million workers in those open positions.

He spoke positively about visible increases in new jobs in the business sector, though it's going to take a while to reach the 13.1 million unemployed people, 42.5% who've been out of work for six months or more. It was a speech of hope and promise that these goals can be achieved, and that 2012 -- and of course a second Obama term -- can see America back at work.

Labor leaders and economists spoke to HuffPost Business after the President's address, and seemed less optimistic with his initiative proposals. They also said the president was perhaps a bit misleading in speaking about notable increases in manufacturing, though union leaders did agree that his rhetoric was mostly spot-on about the country's needs.

You can read the full text of President Obama's speech here.

Related on HuffPost:

Comments

[walk softly]

04:47 PM on 01/25/2012

What state of the union address? Oh you mean the campaign speech.

[gerald4]

05:02 PM on 01/25/2012

He think that he was promising to do better next time!

[gerald4]

04:43 PM on 01/25/2012

By the time that Our Texas political Primaries are held it might be down to the unelectable Vulture Capitalists Mitt Romney who typifies what is wrong with the US economic system, and the unelectable Philandering Newt Gengrich.

If the Republicans want any chance at all at the presidential office, they need to form some committee to draft some electable person as the Republican Nominee.

I was a card carrying member of the DNC until two years ago, voted for Obama, but now realize the error of my ways and repented.

Maybe the Texas Republicans State committee could draft my US Congressional Representative John Culberson and place his name on the Texas Primary election ballot.

Maybe the Republican National Committee could require that every state place “ANOTHER CANDIDATE DIFFERENT FROM THOSE ON THIS BALLOT” on all of the Super Tuesday (in early March) State Primary election ballot, and then place the same on every future primary election ballot.

Maybe the Democrats could also do the same thing.

[gerald4]

03:27 PM on 01/25/2012

FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS actually are TAX FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS that removed the US import tariffs that economically allowed US Businesses to pay US Workers more in wages and benefits than workers in the third world workers received in wages and benefits.

[kpacvt]

01:37 PM on 01/25/2012

End the nightmare................BANISH OBAMA 2012

[gerald4]

03:48 PM on 01/25/2012

I agree, but Republicans do not need Romney Business type business practices and Morman historical record, or Newt with his marital history. The Women that I know are all talking against Newt.

Maybe the Republicans need to "Draft" somebody else, anybody else!

[kpacvt]

04:01 PM on 01/25/2012

Is that why in SC the exit polls showed 41% of married women support him?

[limp]

01:04 PM on 01/25/2012

It's sad but this president lost all credibility during his first year in office. It was well known at that time that the biggest problem that existed was the state of the economy and unemployment. Yet, for the first 2 years his entire time was spent on Obama Care, which was then and still is, opposed by most Americans.
In his speech last night the president stated "no more bailouts and no more cop outs". The major bailouts were to GM, Chrysler and the auto unions. He now brags about this as being highlights of him term in office.
"No more cop outs" fits right into the biggest cop outs which are the waivers given to unions and hundreds of other pet companies on Obama Care.
We won't even touch the 850 billion Stimulus spent on "shovel ready projects" that produced no discernable results. It was so pathetic that even the president had to laugh about it when brought up on a TV talk show.

[gerald4]

03:38 PM on 01/25/2012

Well Stated, Thank you.

Where and how do you think that President Obama got his Billion Dollar re-election campaign fund?

[gerald4]

10:46 AM on 01/25/2012

All of these "FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS" destroyed jobs for the blue collar working citizens of the USA, so why did our elected congressmen create all of these "Free Trade Legislation" laws? Were our elected congressmen ignorant, stupid, dishonest, or some combination of these factors?

Do you think that maybe the foreign product manufacturers that export consumer products to the USA might have paid professional US lobbyists to spend hundreds of thousands of US dollars on wine, food, women, song, vacations, cash, sexual services, corporate jobs for the (unemployable) children/wives/girlfriends of enough of the US senators and US congressmen (and their congressional aids who actually control the members of congress) plus campaign contributions to entice (bribe) enough of our Republican and Democratic Presidents, Congressmen and Senators for the past 20 years to create all of that "FREE TRADE LEGISLATION" to ratify various trade agreements that allowed, caused, and ECONOMICALLY REQUIRED our businesses to take advantage of the lower labor costs, lower electrical energy costs, lower business taxes, lower payroll taxes to pay for health care costs, lower unemployment insurance costs, lower environmental manufacturing costs and other anti-business costs that are not required in various foreign countries with fewer anti-business laws that are/were applicable to businesses in the USA?

[gerald4]

11:00 AM on 01/25/2012

You should thank President Clinton for NAFTA which was the first FREE TRADE AGREEMENT that was signed into law, and then President Bush and also President Obama for many more subsequent FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS that economically required that US workers compete with foreign worker wage rates for jobs to make products, or those jobs will be relocated to nations with lower labor costs, lower EPA environmental compliance costs, lower taxes, lower energy costs, etc..

How do you think that US Government environmental damage liability limits, pharmaceutical liability limits, product liability limits, tax exemption loopholes, agricultural subsidies, and/or any other laws benefiting only a few people were created by our elected Presidents, congressnen and senators, and then enforced by our elected Presidents and their politically appointed bureaucrat administrators?

[JDLA]

12:58 PM on 01/25/2012

Yes

[gerald4]

10:37 AM on 01/25/2012

It is very interesting that has this article located under your "ENTERTAINMENT" heading.

Since President Obama has economically required that even more US jobs be relocated to foreign nations with all of his new "FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS", how can he say that he is for creating or retaining US jobs located in the USA.

How does President Obama even think that any of the big or small US manufacturing businesses (even if their balance sheets are in good shape) would ever even possibly consider creating and/or keeping any jobs in the USA (or Europe) if they are hamstrung with many times more expensive labor costs, electrical energy costs that is required to be generated in compliance with the EPA, health care payroll tax costs, unemployment payroll tax costs, social security and medical care payroll tax costs, environmental compliance manufacturing costs, fringe (holiday and vacation) benefit payroll costs, OSHA compliance payroll costs, union labor work rules, anti-business laws, and general anti-business attitudes that make manufacturing products in the USA many many times more costly than manufacturing the same product in almost any other foreign country in accordance with the FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS?

Taxes on business profits are another very small but still a significant factor that affects where jobs will be created and/or retained compared to the other manufacturing costs.

[des946]

07:50 AM on 01/25/2012

I found it to be somewhat "interesting" than neither Obama, nor the Republicans said anything about adverse impact of the the PACs on our poliitics in their speeches last night. Just proof that it is the big money that is influencing and controlling our political system. In the heat of campaigning, while needing money to finance their campaigns, no one can afford the integrity to speak out against the PACs.

[duey35]

10:12 AM on 01/25/2012

He did mention the bundlers must not have lobbiest in DC.
But like congress not using insider iformation on trading stock to make a fortune. It won't go anywhere, its all lip service.