But, what you're saying is not true. The graph is net jobs. The total number of jobs in the US. It was falling rapidly under Bush, as soon as Obama took over it started falling more and more slowly- he was stopping the bleeding- and then it started to rise. That means more people working, so the labor participation stuff isn't relevant. This isn't the unemployment rate, it is the number of jobs in the country. Secondly, it is not true that the number of jobs in the country is still negative at all. I think there have been a couple months where it was here and there, but overall it is most definitely going up. What you see is right wingers posting threads here and right wing pundits ranting on when there is a month or even a week where the number goes down, but then they're silent the substantial majority of months when it goes up... That you think it is consistently going down is just a product of the sources you choose to pay attention to being ludicrous. It went down in August. That's why you think it is "still" going down, but that was a major exception. It had gone up many months in a row before that.
BLS shows a net job loss for Obama and as I pointed out the Obama job approval rating reflects the American view of his performance, one that you want to ignore. I suggest you stop spouting liberal lines and get the facts.
Create your own chart and stop making a fool of yourself
Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
If the roles had been reversed -- Democrats controlling Congress during the first 6 years of the Bush administration, with the Republicans wresting control in the last 2 years, the deficit figures would be little changed (assuming the Dems had gone along with the Bush tax cuts, no foregone conclusion)... the economy still would have imploded at about the same time, but on the Republican congressional watch instead of the Democrats. Therefore your argument is purely circumstantial, and therefore invalid.
I will note that $3.7 trillion is somewhat high; with a $15 trillion GDP the historical norm (20%) would be $3.0 trillion govt. Would you settle for that?
Or will you again bandy about out-of-context numbers in an attempt to make a point via sheer unrelated size alone?
welfare queen" meme.
As far as socialism goes, the USA has been leaning decidedly in the social progressive camp for some 70 years; otherwise we would not have programs like Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, and a progressive income tax. I ROF and LMAO everytime I see some hysterical right wing pol claim this is a "center right" country
Last edited by Karl; 09-19-11 at 12:56 PM.
“I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.