• 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.
Conservative said:
Obama was going to change the tone in Washington so tell me how that "Hope and Change" is working out for you? So let's cut the bs as you say, you don't give a damn about the poor and middle class for if you did you would be doing something about it.
Click to expand...

Tell me why oh annointed one that american companies would want to build in America and then tell me what the final cost will look like to American workers
 
Conservative said:
Not when the net is a 2 million job loss and a declining employment base. Official numbers come from the news release from BLS, you ought to read it. There are two sources that contribute to that number. You don't have a clue how BLS works
Click to expand...
Well then that means that 23 million jobs were created while Clinton was president.

Let's hear you say that ... G'head, tell the forum that 23 million jobs were created while Clinton was president. Let's hear you tell the forum that only 1 million jobs were created while Bush was president, of which almost 2 million were public sector jobs.

Nah, you'll never admit it -- you cry that is off-topic rather than admit that.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Here's a lesson for you in how our government operates ... no budget gets passed without the final approval by the president.

It's Bush's budget. He owns it. Deal with it. I've never seen anyone so desperate to pawn off a budget onto someone else as you are. Why on Earth did Bush approve such a budget if it was that horrible? Why did he pass the one a year earlier which also led to a trillion dollar deficit? Why did he approve the other six, 5 of which were over half a trillion and the sixth one was close to half a trillion?

Does Bush own any of those budgets?

Here are the deficits during Bush's 8 budgets ...

09/30/2002: 420,772,553,397
09/30/2003: 554,995,097,146
09/30/2004: 595,821,633,587
09/30/2005 :553,656,965,393
09/29/2006: 574,264,237,492
09/28/2007: 500,679,473,047
09/30/2008: 1,017,071,524,650
09/30/2009: 1,885,104,106,599

Please tell me which of those you think Bush owns?
Click to expand...

So continue to give Bush the 2009 deficits even though Obama spent the money in 2009, that is ok, I feel for you as you divert from the actual record of Obama. Didn't realize that the debt was the topic of this thread?

Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Well then that means that 23 million jobs were created while Clinton was president.

Let's hear you say that ... G'head, tell the forum that 23 million jobs were created while Clinton was president. Let's hear you tell the forum that only 1 million jobs were created while Bush was president, of which almost 2 million were public sector jobs.

Nah, you'll never admit it -- you cry that is off-topic rather than admit that.
Click to expand...

Hate to break it to you but Clinton isn't President now nor is GW Bush. This is entirely the Obama economy and results.

25 million unemployed and under Employed Americans says it all.
 
Conservative said:
So continue to give Bush the 2009 deficits even though Obama spent the money in 2009, that is ok, I feel for you as you divert from the actual record of Obama. Didn't realize that the debt was the topic of this thread?

Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged
Click to expand...

I guess that's a hell of a lot better than losing over 700,000 jobs in one month, which is what Bush handed Obama.
 
EarlzP said:
Tell me why oh annointed one that american companies would want to build in America and then tell me what the final cost will look like to American workers
Click to expand...

Amazing how little you know about the American economy, most of the jobs created in this country aren't created by the large corporations but instead the small businesses who are being hurt the most by liberalism and Obama. We have a working labor force today of about 140 million and 50 million work for large corporations meaning that 90 million work for small businesses. you have such disdain for those 50 million
 
Conservative said:
So continue to give Bush the 2009 deficits even though Obama spent the money in 2009, that is ok, I feel for you as you divert from the actual record of Obama. Didn't realize that the debt was the topic of this thread?
Click to expand...
Damn, I was actually hoping you'd answer the question.

Which of those budgets does Bush own?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Damn, I was actually hoping you'd answer the question.

Which of those budgets does Bush own?
Click to expand...

You really don't seem to understand budgets at all, they are guidelines not actual spending amounts. Bush was in office less than 4 months of fiscal year 2009, Obama was in office over 8 months. No way did Bush spend the 2009 budget in 4 months. Bush owned the budget, Obama was responsible for most of the spending but those facts escape you
 
AdamT said:
I guess that's a hell of a lot better than losing over 700,000 jobs in one month, which is what Bush handed Obama.
Click to expand...

yet amazingly Obama has 2 million more unemployed today than when he took office. You proud of those results?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
You never refer to payroll data, why are you doing so now? From that article...


Nonfarm payroll employment was unchanged (0) in August​
Click to expand...

Yep, too bad that there are still 2 million more unemployed today than when he took office and 25 million total unemployed and under employed along with a 16.2% U-6. Seems you don't understand where the unemployment numbers came from so I thought I would help you
 
Conservative said:
Amazing how little you know about the American economy, most of the jobs created in this country aren't created by the large corporations but instead the small businesses who are being hurt the most by liberalism and Obama. We have a working labor force today of about 140 million and 50 million work for large corporations meaning that 90 million work for small businesses. you have such disdain for those 50 million
Click to expand...

Nevermind the fact that the historical threat to the existence of the Small Business Administration, and its loan programs, have traditionally come from conservatives, right?
 
StillBallin75 said:
Nevermind the fact that the historical threat to the existence of the Small Business Administration, and its loan programs, have traditionally come from conservatives, right?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with who creates the jobs and the thread topic
 
Conservative said:
You really don't seem to understand budgets at all, they are guidelines not actual spending amounts. Bush was in office less than 4 months of fiscal year 2009, Obama was in office over 8 months. No way did Bush spend the 2009 budget in 4 months. Bush owned the budget, Obama was responsible for most of the spending but those facts escape you
Click to expand...
No matter how many times you make that fallacious claim, it will never be true. The Constitution does not permit an incoming president to tell the Congress how to spend the money budgeted by the previous administration and Congress.

He just can't do what you're blaming him of doing.

The budget is Bush's. He owns it.
 
Conservative said:
yet amazingly Obama has 2 million more unemployed today than when he took office. You proud of those results?
Click to expand...
By this time in his presidency, Bush had 3 million more unemployed. And that was in an economy he inherited that was far healthier than the one he left for Obama. Were you proud? You must have been, you voted for him at least 4 times and you'd vote for him again if he could run.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
No matter how many times you make that fallacious claim, it will never be true. The Constitution does not permit an incoming president to tell the Congress how to spend the money budgeted by the previous administration and Congress.

He just can't do what you're blaming him of doing.

The budget is Bush's. He owns it.
Click to expand...

It was indeed the Bush budget and the Obama spending of that budget. Bush and Congress own the budget and Obama along with the Congress own the spending. Although that is a fact it has nothing to do with the thread topic which is about no net change in jobs nor a recognition of the 25 million unemployed and under employed which is worse than when he took office 2 1/2 years earlier
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
By this time in his presidency, Bush had 3 million more unemployed. And that was in an economy he inherited that was far healthier than the one he left for Obama. Were you proud? You must have been, you voted for him at least 4 times and you'd vote for him again if he could run.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what Bush had only what Obama HAS. It will be the Obama record on the ballot in 2012. Still waiting for an answer as to what Bush did to you and your family that has created such hatred and almost every post of yours including something Bush did. It looks like most peope today would like to have Bush back instead of Obama.

2004 unemployment rate

2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Yep, too bad that there are still 2 million more unemployed today than when he took office and 25 million total unemployed and under employed along with a 16.2% U-6. Seems you don't understand where the unemployment numbers came from so I thought I would help you
Click to expand...
I understand exactly where those numbers come from since you insist on being a hypocrite.

Since you're running away from answering my challenge of admitting 23 million jobs were created under Clinton, I will have to pull up what you did say when you did answer that ...


Sheik Yerbuti: "Worked well for Clinton, 23 million jobs were gained during his 8 years."

Conservative: "Better clear up the number with BLS because they disagree. Employment January of each year. Don't see the 23 million" [in household survey data]

Sheik Yerbuti: "According to the BLS payroll data, there were 23 million additional people on payrolls during his 2 terms. Call them and complain."

Conservative: "So 132.5 million employed in January 2001? Don't you think you might be looking at the wrong chart? No, that couldn't be it."
Click to expand...


So why are you looking at the wrong chart now? How comne you now prefer payroll data ("the wrong chart") which shows zero net jobs gained over household survey data ("the right chart") which shows a net gain of 331,000 jobs?

Can you be any more dishonest, Con?
 
Conservative said:
It was indeed the Bush budget and the Obama spending of that budget. Bush and Congress own the budget and Obama along with the Congress own the spending. Although that is a fact it has nothing to do with the thread topic which is about no net change in jobs nor a recognition of the 25 million unemployed and under employed which is worse than when he took office 2 1/2 years earlier
Click to expand...
No matter how many times you make that fallacious claim, it will never be true. The Constitution does not permit an incoming president to tell the Congress how to spend the money budgeted by the previous administration and Congress.

He just can't do what you're blaming him of doing.

The budget is Bush's. He owns it.
 
Conservative said:
Doesn't matter what Bush had only what Obama HAS. It will be the Obama record on the ballot in 2012. Still waiting for an answer as to what Bush did to you and your family that has created such hatred and almost every post of yours including something Bush did. It looks like most peope today would like to have Bush back instead of Obama.
Click to expand...
Doubt that given most people still blame Bush for the current economic conditions.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Doubt that given most people still blame Bush for the current economic conditions.
Click to expand...

Only the brainwashed, braindead, and clueless. No one in their right mind can blame Bush for what is going on 2 1/2 years after Obama took office.
 
Conservative said:
Only the brainwashed, braindead, and clueless. No one in their right mind can blame Bush for what is going on 2 1/2 years after Obama took office.
Click to expand...

First of all, we have a House and a Senate w/ equal lawmaking powers as the President, so no one man can ever really be to blame for all of the woes a country may be facing when looking to our government.

Also, it's not by any means unreasonable to think that the economic policy decisions enacted 5, 10, or even 15+ years ago are still having a very poignant effect on on our current economy today.

The US economy is humongous and doesn't react to policy changes overnight; it can take years.
 
Last edited:
David D. said:
First of all, we have a House and a Senate w/ equal lawmaking powers as the President, so no one man can ever really be to blame for all of the woes a country may be facing when looking to our government.

Also, it's not by any means unreasonable to think that the economic policy decisions enacted 5, 10, or even 15+ years ago are still having a very poignant effect on on our current economy today.

The US economy is humongous and doesn't react to policy changes overnight; it can take years.
Click to expand...

Your response isn't going to make Sheik very happy or anyone else with BDS. Don't disagree with you but wonder how all those liberals who bought the Obama "Hope and Change" message feel today about the results. They are the ones that continue to blame Bush when the reality is there is plenty of blame to go around for both parties. Obama promised to change the tone in D.C. and with a Democrat Congress changed immediately and his economic plan got zero Republican support because of the leftwing agenda he proposed and implemented
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom