• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rasmussen: Rick Perry now up 11 points on GOP field

Status
Not open for further replies.
roguenuke said:
It is all about the comparisons. You could move from some state with a high cost of living to TX, where the cost of living is real low. If you are making minimum wage or just around minimum wage in both places but you can actually afford decent housing and to eat in TX but not whatever state you were living in, then it is worth it to move to TX. Plus, if you live in a state where you can't find a job, but there is some job opening for what you know how to do in TX, then why not move to TX.

Then, you have to figure that some people are sort of moved there without much choice. One good example, since we are talking about TX, is military spouses. Military spouses usually go where their spouse gets stationed. It is quite possible that they had a decent job whereever they were, but, considering the benefits from the military, many spouses give up okay paying jobs for minimum wage or just above minimum wage jobs to be with their spouse. This would also apply to others outside of the military who move to TX for their job but the spouse can't find a job/decent job when the family gets there.

Another thing that could affect the numbers is people simply taking chances and those chances going south, but they can't really afford to move back. This actually happened to my family when I was 17. My mother got a job in SC, we bought a home and moved, and then my mother lost her job because of some stupid rule they had about bank accounts (they told her she had to get a checking account for her direct deposit at a specific bank after she started working there). She lost her job and we were living off my father's WalMart paycheck at least til I went into the Navy.
Click to expand...

The political climate is also a factor...

Take for instance.... Oregon. The last couple of years has turned a hard left in politics. Everybody and their retarded ****ing socialist gay bro is moving there from Kalifornia. As a result, property values and cost of living are going through the roof while the wages are stagnating because Oregon is inexplicably hostile to industry. No matter where you are in the state, the left wing politics in Portland decide your fate.

The move towards a conservative state helps in that regard.
 
Conservative said:
Interesting that you seem to believe it is ok to have your money "taken" by the govt. and put into a SS fund and then never get it back.
Click to expand...

It happens every day; someone who dies one year into receiving S.S. never gets it back. If you bothered to actually read parts of the study i provided, how/why this happens should be perfectly clear. But not, you read the first line of my statement and immediately hit reply.

Seems that "libertarians" have a problem with logic and common sense as well, not all, just some that post here. Seems that only "libertarians", some that post here are the intelligent ones and post theory as fact and ignore actual facts. Let me know when you are going to address questions.
Click to expand...

No. It seems like Conservative does not possess the ability to refute anything i have stated, and has to resort to getting personal in a last ditch effort to discredit me.:lol:

:failpail:
 
Goldenboy219 said:
It happens every day; someone who dies one year into receiving S.S. never gets it back. If you bothered to actually read parts of the study i provided, how/why this happens should be perfectly clear. But not, you read the first line of my statement and immediately hit reply.



No. It seems like Conservative does not possess the ability to refute anything i have stated, and has to resort to getting personal in a last ditch effort to discredit me.:lol:

:failpail:
Click to expand...

Not quite true, someone that dies one year into SS sees some of their benefits going to their heir but your statement didn't reference dying while collecting SS. you seem to have no problem contributing your entire work career into a fund and never getting it back. If you don't need SS then take the check and give it away. Instead you prefer govt. taking their administrative costs and low return and sending it to someone else.

For someone who claims I have personally attacked you, you seem to be doing what you condemn. That makes you the liberal in libertarian. Claiming you are a libertarian and showing your support for Obama discredits you, not me.
 
Conservative said:
For someone who claims I have personally attacked you, you seem to be doing what you condemn. That makes you the liberal in libertarian. Claiming you are a libertarian and showing your support for Obama discredits you, not me.
Click to expand...

Look at your post record. All you do is repeat yourself, make personal references based on subjective assumption, and side-step at every turn. I called you out for lacking the ability to adequately respond to my post(s) based on the content (or lack there of) you provide here on DP. Maybe you should put more effort into your posts?
 
ric27 said:
The political climate is also a factor...

Take for instance.... Oregon. The last couple of years has turned a hard left in politics. Everybody and their retarded ****ing socialist gay bro is moving there from Kalifornia. As a result, property values and cost of living are going through the roof while the wages are stagnating because Oregon is inexplicably hostile to industry. No matter where you are in the state, the left wing politics in Portland decide your fate.

The move towards a conservative state helps in that regard.
Click to expand...

Except, the political climate isn't really what is helping business in TX. This was posted before to try to show that it was, because TX is 2nd for top state to do business.

News Headlines

But if you look at the separate areas that determine what makes TX in the top states to do business, it is due to transportation and infrastructure, cost of living, access to capital, and tech and innovation. TX actually ranks 33rd, which is pretty bad considering, for the cost of doing business. And Oregon, since you brought it up, is well above TX for the cost of doing business and is just 5 ranks below TX for business friendliness.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Look at your post record. All you do is repeat yourself, make personal references based on subjective assumption, and side-step at every turn. I called you out for lacking the ability to adequately respond to my post(s) based on the content (or lack there of) you provide here on DP. Maybe you should put more effort into your posts?
Click to expand...

Related to the Thread

Rick Perry, net job gain, increasing labor force, more jobs today than when Obama took office, and a two year balanced budget; Barack Obama net job loss, declining labor force, less people working, and 4 trillion ADDED to the debt.
 
Conservative said:
Related to the Thread

Rick Perry, net job gain, increasing labor force, more jobs today than when Obama took office, and a two year balanced budget; Barack Obama net job loss, declining labor force, less people working, and 4 trillion ADDED to the debt.
Click to expand...

Odd isn't it though the unemployment rate has gone on his tenure?
 
winston53660 said:
Odd isn't it though the unemployment rate has gone on his tenure?
Click to expand...

He could do what Obama has done, reduce the labor force and reduce that number from the unemployed to make the rate better. Is that what you are proposing?

Do you have any idea how unemployment rate is calculated?
 
Conservative said:
He could do what Obama has done, reduce the labor force and reduce that number from the unemployed to make the rate better.
Click to expand...

False!

Obama has not reduced the labor force and has not reduced the number from the unemployed to make the rate better.

Do you have any idea how unemployment rate is calculated?
Click to expand...

Yes i do.
 
Conservative said:
He could do what Obama has done, reduce the labor force and reduce that number from the unemployed to make the rate better. Is that what you are proposing?
Click to expand...

Well I guess Obama could double the unemployment rate like what has happened on Perry's watch.

Do you have any idea how unemployment rate is calculated?
Click to expand...

Sure do you? Do you understand how there can be a net job gain yet still have a rising unemployment rate?

Do you understand the impact of a rising population on a water poor state?
 
Conservative said:
Yet you support someone who has higher unemployment and someone who has lost jobs, added trillions to the debt, increased the misery index, and promotes the nanny state. Is the population of the country declining? How do you think the 25+ million unemployed and under employed Americans feel about the Obama record? Wonder if they are in the 38% that support Obama.

Pretty simple comparison

Rick Perry, net job gain, increasing labor force, more jobs today than when Obama took office, and a two year balanced budget; Barack Obama net job loss, declining labor force, less people working, and 4 trillion ADDED to the debt.
Click to expand...

The difference is that I prefer to consider cause and effect while you concern yourself only with effect ... or rather those effects that support your preordained conclusions.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
False!

Obama has not reduced the labor force and has not reduced the number from the unemployed to make the rate better.



Yes i do.
Click to expand...

wrong? LOL, in 1994 the Bureau of Labor Statistics created the Discouraged worker class and eliminated that number from the labor force and the unemployment number. I believe it was 1994 because that is the first year it appears on BLS and is a way of showing lower unemployment not to be confused with U-6. Obama economic policies have led to people dropping out of the labor force in record numbers which is why U-6 is so high and the labor force dropping, or so it seems.

If you know how the unemployment rate is calculated then you would know what affect discouraged workes has on that rate.

Let me remind you

Rick Perry, net job gain, increasing labor force, more jobs today than when Obama took office, and a two year balanced budget; Barack Obama net job loss, declining labor force, less people working, and 4 trillion ADDED to the debt.
 
AdamT said:
The difference is that I prefer to consider cause and effect while you concern yourself only with effect ... or rather those effects that support your preordained conclusions.
Click to expand...

I have seen no evidence that you consider cause and effect because you don't hold Obama economic policy responsible for anything
 
winston53660 said:
Well I guess Obama could double the unemployment rate like what has happened on Perry's watch.



Sure do you? Do you understand how there can be a net job gain yet still have a rising unemployment rate?

Do you understand the impact of a rising population on a water poor state?
Click to expand...

I have seen no evidence that you have a clue, rising unemployment rate is product of the rising labor force because of people moving to TX. The fact that Perry has a net job gain however speaks volumes even though currently the jobs cannot keep up with the labor force increase but will catch up quickly as more and more businesses flock to TX. Let Obama raise taxes on business and see what happens. Businesses are going to pay those higher taxes but look to lower state tax locations to move their business to offset that tax rate. Right to work states are going to boom. Bring it on, Barack
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
I have seen no evidence that you consider cause and effect because you don't hold Obama economic policy responsible for anything
Click to expand...

Sure I do. As I've explained to you many times, Obama's stimulus significantly improved employment and GDP through '09-10, and Obama's decision to bail out the auto industry was critical in propping up the economy. He should be pressing for more short-term stimulus and deeper long-term spending cuts.
 
Conservative said:
I don't recall the Republicans ever proposing national health care so please let us know when that happened. What does this have to do with the thread topic and Rick Perry, just more diversion on your part and I don't blame you. 38% JAR isn't a very good rating a year from the election and with no economic plan to reverse the trend. Then there is the Gallup Poll showing Perry and Obama tied. I fully expect Obama to be in the 30's in the polls vs. Republican candidates soon. There is no reason to vote for Obama with the results he has generated, results that liberals always ignore. Your state is a disaster financially and from I heard is looking for a bailout from the Federal Taxpayer. Not going to happen with the GOP in charge of the House so the people of California are going to have to pay up for liberalism and the entitlement mentality you have
Click to expand...

You're memory and defintions are somewhat selective. The fact remains, the mandate was a republican idea.

Health insurance mandate began as a Republican idea
In ’90s, GOP saw an alternative to Clinton plan

Health insurance mandate began as a Republican idea - Boston.com


Republicans Hatched Idea for Obama's Health Insurance Mandate


Read more: Republicans Hatched Idea For Obama's Health Insurance Mandate | FoxNews.com


I know Fox news is a liberal rag and such, but facts are facts. :coffeepap
 
Conservative said:
I have seen no evidence that you have a clue, rising unemployment rate is product of the rising labor force because of people moving to TX. The fact that Perry has a net job gain however speaks volumes even though currently the jobs cannot keep up with the labor force increase but will catch up quickly as more and more businesses flock to TX. Let Obama raise taxes on business and see what happens. Businesses are going to pay those higher taxes but look to lower state tax locations to move their business to offset that tax rate. Right to work states are going to boom. Bring it on, Barack
Click to expand...

Wow, you are so incredibly disingenuous (the nice word for it). The fact that people are moving to TX also accounts for the net increase in jobs. It does not excuse the rising unemployment rate, as Perry obviously isn't creating jobs fast enough to keep his head above water. Texas' unemployment problem is only going to get worse as Perry has been force to cut government spending which produced 2/3 of the new jobs.
 
AdamT said:
Sure I do. As I've explained to you many times, Obama's stimulus significantly improved employment and GDP through '09-10, and Obama's decision to bail out the auto industry was critical in propping up the economy. He should be pressing for more short-term stimulus and deeper long-term spending cuts.
Click to expand...

Then how do you explain the numbers today and please don't give me that bs "because of the Republican House" which took office January 2011. Fiscal year of the govt. runs from October to September, first qtr GDP was October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010. The stimulus passed was for shovel ready jobs and failed. Now you want to trust him to spend more money? That shows just how liberals continue to buy the Obama lies because of an ideology.
 
AdamT said:
Wow, you are so incredibly disingenuous (the nice word for it). The fact that people are moving to TX also accounts for the net increase in jobs. It does not excuse the rising unemployment rate, as Perry obviously isn't creating jobs fast enough to keep his head above water. Texas' unemployment problem is only going to get worse as Perry has been force to cut government spending which produced 2/3 of the new jobs.
Click to expand...

Logic and common sense always escape liberals. Apparently you don't seem to grasp the concept of growing population nationally and Obama economic policies that drive people to TX. The fact remains and you will continue to ignore it, Perry net job gain, Obama net job loss. TX is helping Obama's numbers. You should be saying thank you
 
Boo Radley said:
You're memory and defintions are somewhat selective. The fact remains, the mandate was a republican idea.

Health insurance mandate began as a Republican idea
In ’90s, GOP saw an alternative to Clinton plan

Health insurance mandate began as a Republican idea - Boston.com


Republicans Hatched Idea for Obama's Health Insurance Mandate


Read more: Republicans Hatched Idea For Obama's Health Insurance Mandate | FoxNews.com


I know Fox news is a liberal rag and such, but facts are facts. :coffeepap
Click to expand...

Republicans have a lot of ideas and is made up today of a big tent, something the liberals could learn from. Republicans never proposed universal healthcare and a federal mandate but that doesn't stop people like you from grasping for straws. We shall see probably my next Spring how the Supreme Court rules. In the meantime, try to stick to the thread topic.
 
AdamT said:
Wow, you are so incredibly disingenuous (the nice word for it). The fact that people are moving to TX also accounts for the net increase in jobs. It does not excuse the rising unemployment rate, as Perry obviously isn't creating jobs fast enough to keep his head above water. Texas' unemployment problem is only going to get worse as Perry has been force to cut government spending which produced 2/3 of the new jobs.
Click to expand...

Pssst Republican mantra 1 Government can't create jobs......yet Republican politicians can take credit for "creating" jobs.
 
winston53660 said:
Pssst Republican mantra 1 Government can't create jobs......yet Republican politicians can take credit for "creating" jobs.
Click to expand...

Rick Perry, net job gain, increasing labor force, more jobs today than when Obama took office, and a two year balanced budget; Barack Obama net job loss, declining labor force, less people working, and 4 trillion ADDED to the debt.
 
Conservative said:
Logic and common sense always escape liberals. Apparently you don't seem to grasp the concept of growing population nationally and Obama economic policies that drive people to TX. The fact remains and you will continue to ignore it, Perry net job gain, Obama net job loss. TX is helping Obama's numbers. You should be saying thank you
Click to expand...

The fact is that Perry's Texas has rising unemployment, while unemployment is falling in most of the country. No way to spin out of that choke hold.
 
AdamT said:
The fact is that Perry's Texas has rising unemployment, while unemployment is falling in most of the country. No way to spin out of that choke hold.
Click to expand...

Use that one in your support for Obama, should work well for you

Rick Perry, net job gain, increasing labor force, more jobs today than when Obama took office, and a two year balanced budget; Barack Obama net job loss, declining labor force, less people working, and 4 trillion ADDED to the debt.
 
btw, Conservative, if you have such a hard on for Perry, why are you supporting Flip Flopney?

Here's another gem from your spineless candidate. :lol:

"‘Mushy’ Mitt Romney Takes New Climate Stance: ‘I Don’t Know’ | “Do I think the world’s getting hotter? Yeah, I don’t know that but I think that it is,” Romney said at a New Hampshire town hall event last night, after being criticized by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) for being “mushy” on climate change. “I don’t know if it’s mostly caused by humans.” Copying a Rick Perry line, Romney concluded: “What I’m not willing to do is spend trillions of dollars on something I don’t know the answer to.” He also said, “I do not believe in putting a carbon cap” on polluters. Two months ago, Romney said, “I believe that humans contribute” to global warming, “so it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases.” A Romney aide told Reuters that “the candidate has not altered his position on climate change.”

‘Mushy’ Mitt Romney Takes New Climate Stance: ‘I Don’t Know’ | ThinkProgress
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom