• 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!

Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

Status
Not open for further replies.
TX has among the higest growth in the nation many legals and illegals that are counted in studies. Low taxes, lower reguations, greater growth opportunities abound in TX. Best move I ever made 19 years ago. Keep reading your reports and I will keep living reality.
You didn't answer the question ... how does one escape poverty in a state where poverty is rampant?
 
And that has led Texas to rank 6th highest in poverty.

You voted for Obama so what has he done to solve the problems of poverty? Unemployment 16.2%, spending up with his record budgets, debt up due to his spending, and we have low economic growth nationally. This thread topic is about job creation. TX has a net job growth and nationally there is a net job loss since Obama took office. Those are the results, get over your BDS and anti Republican spin.
 
You didn't answer the question ... how does one escape poverty in a state where poverty is rampant?

By actually getting a job since there are jobs in TX. One doesn't escape poverty by relying on liberalism.
 
What is it about liberalism that creates such loyalty? You will always try and defend the indefensible.

You have an amazing ability not to see that you are exactly what you describe.
 
Do mayors govern states?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? In response to entitlements, you gave a list of the poorest U.S. cities and pointed out most have Democrat mayors. I'm just trying to get you to explain the correlation since mayors aren't responsible for entitlements.
 
This thread topic is about job creation. TX has a net job growth and nationally there is a net job loss since Obama took office.
You raised the issue of poverty. Why are you constantly complaining that other are off-topic for discussing the off-topic issues you raise?
 
By actually getting a job since there are jobs in TX. One doesn't escape poverty by relying on liberalism.
And despite that, Texas still has the 6th highest poverty rate. You're not making sense. On one hand, you're saying Texas leads the nation in job growth and your saying saying because of that, Texas offers the best opportunity to escape poverty ...

... But given that, Texas still ranks at #6 among the states with the highest poverty rates.
 
Whether you like it or not Republicans didn't spend 3.6 trillion dollars and although Republicans spent too much they were powerless from 2007-2011. The Obama "Hope and Change" message meant something entirely different to the majority in this country vs what Obama meant and that is obvious today. Obama is and always will be a Community Organizer, not a President.

Now he is getting a lot of help from others who have managed or lead nothing with over the top rhetoric. Think a true leader would condone the following?

No squirrel moments please.

Both have spent, and spent a lot. There is nothing legimate that you can do to dispute that, which is why you leap around so much I think.
 
You have an amazing ability not to see that you are exactly what you describe.

You definitely have a problem and obviously don't pay any attention to previous posts. Results matter,not rhetoric, but you continue to buy the rhetoric thus the lies. Doesn't matter what Obama inherited, only matters what he has done, and that record has been posted over and over again. You are part of a declining number of supporters who still hold on to the "Hope and Change" message ignoring that there is a disconnect between your definition and Obama's
 
And despite that, Texas still has the 6th highest poverty rate. You're not making sense. On one hand, you're saying Texas leads the nation in job growth and your saying saying because of that, Texas offers the best opportunity to escape poverty ...

... But given that, Texas still ranks at #6 among the states with the highest poverty rates.

Again, I live in reality, you read articles. Still people keep moving to TX, jobs are still created in TX, and taxes remain low in TX.
 
No squirrel moments please.

Both have spent, and spent a lot. There is nothing legimate that you can do to dispute that, which is why you leap around so much I think.

Yep, Bush and the Congress spent a lot and Obama plus the Congress put that spending on steroids. Obama has created more debt in 2 1/2 years than any other President in U.S. history and we have terrible results to show for it.
 
Again, I live in reality, you read articles. Still people keep moving to TX, jobs are still created in TX, and taxes remain low in TX.
Not articles ... census data.

Despite everything you're saying, Texas still has the 6th highest poverty among the all of the states in the U.S.
 
Not articles ... census data.

Despite everything you're saying, Texas still has the 6th highest poverty among the all of the states in the U.S.

Amazing, isn't it, that the state still votes conservative? Wonder why that is? Looks to me that the people of TX aren't concerned about that ranking and certainly aren't as concerned about it as you appear to be.
 
Yep, Bush and the Congress spent a lot and Obama plus the Congress put that spending on steroids. Obama has created more debt in 2 1/2 years than any other President in U.S. history and we have terrible results to show for it.

We've been down this road before. To reach that conclusion, you add Bush's numbers to Obama's. Sorry, but that still doesn't fly. Try something new.

:coffeepap

For the record, the debt nearly doubled under President George W. Bush. Only in that sense could Obama accurately be accused of proposing to double the debt "again."

Obama’s ‘Bumbles’ | FactCheck.org
 
Amazing, isn't it, that the state still votes conservative? Wonder why that is?
Why? I don't know, what is it about Conservatism that creates such loyalty? :cool:

Looks to me that the people of TX aren't concerned about that ranking and certainly aren't as concerned about it as you appear to be.
No question Texans as blind to poverty in Texas as you, aren't.
 
As it was common knowledge and I do know where it went ... or a great portion ... its inconsequential. It was a stimulus to the banks and businesses recovery from losses. Its a search away on google ... and I've already debated the issue. Foreign and national interests were helped. That's what matters. If you like this stuff ... do a search on Q2 600 billion going to foreign banks through their American subsidiaries. So much for credit being available here in the US. Our little contribution to the PIIGS 's problems.

A loan is not a bailout.... The Fed is expected to be the lender of last resort.

You made a statement that $16 billion in secret loans were given to banks, as though the Fed was doing something wrong. Consider this statment:

Add 16 trillion in secret loans to derivative gamblers ... now there a bailout.

Primary dealer credit facility (PDCF) loans were certainly not secret, and were a function of either the discount window or Fed funds overnight market. The manner in which they are being described is intellectually dishonest. Let's go directly to the source:

GAO said:
Table 8 aggregates total dollar transaction amounts by adding the total dollar amount of all loans but does not adjust these amounts to reflect differences across programs in the term over which loans were outstanding. For example, an overnight PDCF loan of $10 billion that was renewed daily at the same level for 30 business days would result in an aggregate amount borrowed of $300 billion although the institution, in effect, borrowed only $10 billion over 30 days. In contrast, a TAF loan of $10 billion extended over a 1-month period would appear as $10 billion. As a result, the total transaction amounts shown in table 8 for PDCF are not directly comparable to the total transaction amounts shown for TAF and other programs that made loans for periods longer than overnight.

Source

Which is why posting "$16 trillion in loans" is not technically correct because it does not make a distinction between time frames. You may admit your error, there is no shame.
 
We've been down this road before. To reach that conclusion, you add Bush's numbers to Obama's. Sorry, but that still doesn't fly. Try something new.

:coffeepap

For the record, the debt nearly doubled under President George W. Bush. Only in that sense could Obama accurately be accused of proposing to double the debt "again."

Obama’s ‘Bumbles’ | FactCheck.org


Yep, debt grew from 5.7 trillion to 10.7trillion or 5 trillion added to the debt. Obama debt today is 14.7 trillion so obviously the 4 trillion added to the debt since 2009 is much, much better than 5 trillion added in 8 years. Got it!
 
We've been down this road before. To reach that conclusion, you add Bush's numbers to Obama's. Sorry, but that still doesn't fly. Try something new.

:coffeepap

For the record, the debt nearly doubled under President George W. Bush. Only in that sense could Obama accurately be accused of proposing to double the debt "again."

Obama’s ‘Bumbles’ | FactCheck.org
He's also been shown many times that Obama first budget led to a decrease in spending after Bush's last budget, but he pretends like he doesn't know that and instead, repeats his rightwing talking point that Obama's spending is Bush's on steroids. :roll:
 
Again, I live in reality, you read articles. Still people keep moving to TX, jobs are still created in TX, and taxes remain low in TX.


Well not if you are poor:

[h=1]Paul Krugman says poorest 40 percent of Texans pay more in Texas than national average[/h]
rulings%2Ftom-true.gif


http://www.politifact.com/texas/sta...rugman-says-poorest-40-percent-texans-pay-mo/
 
Yep, debt grew from 5.7 trillion to 10.7trillion or 5 trillion added to the debt. Obama debt today is 14.7 trillion so obviously the 4 trillion added to the debt since 2009 is much, much better than 5 trillion added in 8 years. Got it!
Bush's final budget ran through September, 2009, at which point the budget deficit was almost $2 trillion.
 
He's also been shown many times that Obama first budget led to a decrease in spending after Bush's last budget, but he pretends like he doesn't know that and instead, repeats his rightwing talking point that Obama's spending is Bush's on steroids. :roll:

Gee, imagine that, the 2010 budget was less than the 2009 budget which had TARP and the stimulus as supplementals to that budget. Talk about intellectual dishonesty. You are good at that. I wonder why exactly all that stimulus spending has still led to a net job loss, no net jobs created in August, and terrible economic growth. That is a liberal success story
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom