Page 49 of 194 FirstFirst ... 3947484950515999149 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 490 of 1936

Thread: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

  1. #481
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Strawman! You may rephrase the question without the use of a fallacy.



    Strawman part II.



    It is not a personal attack to note that you lack the ability to produce relevant econometric analysis. I am simply judging by the context of your replies, to which your analysis is sub-par given the complexity of the subject.
    LOL, still no context for what you claim, maybe a little less textbook rhetoric and more logic, common sense, and review of the facts.

    Why is it that so many always want more spending instead of actually reviewing how the current revenue is being spent? Love the fact that you claim the stimulus was too small but ignore that State jobs were reported as being saved. Interesting that saving state jobs is now touted as an Obama positive when it is Obama that is trying to take over more state power, i.e. healthcare
    Last edited by Conservative; 09-05-11 at 01:45 PM.

  2. #482
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,257

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Got to love it, do you really want to compare this country's economy to China? How about this country's wages to China? Typical textbook rhetoric out of touch with reality.
    Another strawman. When did i compare this country's economy to China? When did i compare this country's wages with that of China?

    I asked a very logical question, have you ever created a job, created anything of value, promoted community growth? You call that a personal attack? Seeking clarification as to your qualifications as an expert on the economy.
    It is besides the point. If you want to destroy my credibility, you must do so in the context of our discussion; more specifically, by the content of my posts.

    How do you know the amount spent on the stimulus wasn't enough? Do you believe it was spent wisely? What did it do to promote the private sector?
    Okun's law, fiscal multipliers, the growth rate relative to the rate of stimulus spending, and the output gap.

    It really is a shame when China sets the standard for fiscal responsibility.
    WTF are you even talking about. Not sure what the Chinese current account has to do with the topic at hand.

    As for people taking home more take home pay, you are confusing the Obama tax cuts with the Bush tax cuts. Rebate checks aren't more take home pay. How is that consumer confidence today?
    Consumer confidence will continue to closely mirror the credit conditions of consumers, and the solvency of global financial systems. When put into the proper context, how is the credit condition of consumers and the solvency of the global financial system?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  3. #483
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,257

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    LOL, still no context for what you claim, maybe a little less textbook rhetoric and more logic, common sense, and review of the facts.
    My posts are filled with logic, common sense, and review of facts. Until you are comfortable with the theory that underpins our economic system, it will continue to be painfully troublesome for you to actually understand my arguments, much less provide a valid response.

    Why is it that so many always want more spending instead of actually reviewing how the current revenue is being spent?
    WE are in a liquidity trap. Fiscal policy combined with reformed immigration legislation is really the only way to circumvent such a reality.

    Love the fact that you claim the stimulus was too small but ignore that State jobs were reported as being saved.
    It was small in a both a relative sense and economic sense. But you actually have to have a strong understanding of the macroeconomy in order to put it together.

    Interesting that saving state jobs is now touted as an Obama positive when it is Obama that is trying to take over more state power, i.e. healthcare
    Holy strawman. WTF does saving state jobs have to do with the post which you replied to? If you want to talk about state jobs and what not, start a thread. It is bad form to consistently interject random issues on a whim.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #484
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    This above is what creates business uncertainty; lack of credit to consumers creates a heap of trouble. Small businesses that operate based on a "variable-cost" business model will find little rational to expand given a credit strapped consumer. It could take years for the largest banks in this country to cleanse their balance sheets to the point where they are willing to lend to consumers in a fashion that creates business certainty; a certainty that begins with a return of investment.

    With this in mind, how does anyone propose we take on a liquidity trap?
    I'll take a stab at it...

    A government infusion of capital accessible directly by the free market - to consumers and small businesses alike. For consumers that would mean reducing their tax liability. For small businesses, it would mean offerring low interest loans either directly from banks or via the SBA.

    Am I an track or not even close? Not worried about being wrong; it's a learning process for me. So, critique away.

  5. #485
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post

    Bush signs his tax cuts on June 7, 2001

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post

    no. Bush launched a series of tax credits in 2001 - the tax rate cuts came in 2003.
    WTF??

    Lay of the revisionist history and take a dose of reality ...

    2000: 15% 28% 31% 36% 39.6%
    2001: 15% 27.5% 30.5% 35.5% 39.1%

    There were tax rate cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003.


    The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2011

    And since Bush cut taxes in 2001, there were 5 million jobs added, not 8 million; and not nearly enough jobs to keep up with the workforce as unemployment skyrocketed from 4.5% to 7.8% during that period. And also during that period, unemployment increased by 6 million jobs and underemployment increased by 10 million.

  6. #486
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,257

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I'll take a stab at it...

    A government infusion of capital accessible directly by the free market - to consumers and small businesses alike. For consumers that would mean reducing their tax liability. For small businesses, it would mean offerring low interest loans either directly from banks or via the SBA.

    Am I an track or not even close? Not worried about being wrong; it's a learning process for me. So, critique away.
    I am all for payroll tax cuts, but they make little economic sense given the indebted state of the consumer. As referenced by Mark Zandi of Moody's Analytics, various tax cuts cost the government (or in this case, future taxpayers) more money than they generate economically. For example, assume a payroll tax is cut; in an indebted society (in terms of the average), consumers have a rational desire to pay down debt which has essentially the same effect of saving that tax cut money. While it is mostly correct that these savings will be lent out in some future time and thereby increase economic activity, we have no idea "when" this will take effect. What we do know is that in the short term, such tax cuts will not generate more economic activity than they cost future tax payers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Zandi
    In congressional testimony given in July 2008, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Economy.com, provided estimates of the one-year multiplier effect for several fiscal policy options. The multipliers showed that any form of increased government spending would have more of a multiplier effect than any form of tax cuts. The most effective policy, a temporary increase in food stamps, had an estimated multiplier of 1.73. The lowest multiplier for a spending increase was general aid to state governments, 1.36. Among tax cuts, multipliers ranged from 1.29 for a payroll tax holiday down to 0.27 for accelerated depreciation. Making the Bush tax cuts permanent had the second-lowest multiplier, 0.29. Refundable lump-sum tax rebates, the policy used in the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, had the second-largest multiplier for a tax cut, 1.26.
    Source

    Now i do like your idea of an infrastructure bank!
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #487
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post

    I was talking about the total results of the Bush Administration, not just the job creation since you only mentioned Wolffe not his jobs' chart, but I do thank the Democrat Congress for their help in 2007-2008. They were awesome in their efforts especially Frank, Dodd, Obama, and of course Geithner.
    Frank, Dodd, and Obama were all members of the minority party when the housing bubble was expanding to untenable levels. It was the Republicans who failed to install oversight during those critical years. You're blaming the bus driver for getting into an accident because his brakes fail and not the mechanic who failed to fix the brakes.

  8. #488
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post

    Is there really a point to looking backwards at someone who most acknowledge was a lousy President. Is your goal to prove that our lousy president is better than your lousy president.
    Yes, there really is a point. That point is that Bush played a major role of why were are where we are today. Those who don't look back are doom to repeating the failures in history.

  9. #489
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post

    I have looked above and nothing you have posted changes the results this President has generated which are contrary to what he promised.
    How do you know? You don't even know what he promised.

  10. #490
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post

    Then it should be a breeze to destroy. Instead what I seem to see is a lot of personal attack, and little fact coming from liberals, and quasi intellectuals aimed at Conservative. I am quite sure the he would move on if there were even a chance that the numbers he posts in many threads now, were debunked. Now can you do that? Or just continue to use pejorative and name call, thus losing the argument?


    j-mac
    Umm, perhaps you have missed it, but many of his numbers have been debunked. That doesn't even slow him down from repeating them as though they haven't been. He's even posted that he doesn't necessarily believe the numbers he posts, so why should others?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •