• 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!

White House Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires (Continued)

Looks like 52% of those surveyed got the same civics education as you
Hisses the poster who thinks Democrats were the majority party of the Senate from when Bush was sworn in. :roll:

Here's a free clue for ya, Con ... Google "Jim Jeffords" and learn why people on this forum laugh at you for claiming Democrats were in charge in March, 2001.

Oh, and I've warned you about swimming in the deep end when numbers are involved ... it's 65% who blame Bush, not 52%. Can't you get anything right?
 
Hisses the poster who thinks Democrats were the majority party of the Senate from when Bush was sworn in. :roll:

Here's a free clue for ya, Con ... Google "Jim Jeffords" and learn why people on this forum laugh at you for claiming Democrats were in charge in March, 2001.

Oh, and I've warned you about swimming in the deep end when numbers are involved ... it's 65% who blame Bush, not 52%. Can't you get anything right?

What does 2001 have to do with today? Make the case for the re-election of Barack Obama. Look forward to seeing that because it should provide for great entertainment. Let me help you as you can start by defending these numbers

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.
 
What does 2001 have to do with today? Make the case for the re-election of Barack Obama. Look forward to seeing that because it should provide for great entertainment. Let me help you as you can start by defending these numbers

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.

Sure beats defending a -9% GDP like you you do.
 
As was pointed out last night, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd should be in jail for what they did. Holder needs to join them for the "Fast and Furious" debacle and the DOE heads for Solyndra and Sun Power. Who is managing this Administration?
They were in the minority party and could not and did not block Republicans, who were in charge, of passing the much needed oversight.

Not top mention, it's hysterical watching you blame Barney Frank for not passing oversight when he was in the minority party but you fail to know that he passed legislation in 2007 when he was in the majority party and pushed it through the House.
 
What does 2001 have to do with today? Make the case for the re-election of Barack Obama. Look forward to seeing that because it should provide for great entertainment. Let me help you as you can start by defending these numbers

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.

Here you go:

And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.
 
Keep defending the empty suit in the WH, shows how little you know about leadership and management. Make your case to re-elect obama. Seems the Independents are running from Obama and the question is why? Pew Survey, 54-41 against Obama
Defend him from whom? A lightweight like you who has to post lies and nonsense in order to make a point?

:lamo:lamo:lamo

Case in point ... you keep claiming the main thing that determines the economy is the misery index ....

The misery index was higher during the first few months of 2009 than it was during most of 2004, 2005, and 2006, the years you claim were Bush's best economic years. According to your nonsense, the economy was better in 2009 than it was in the mid 2000's.
 
Here you go:

And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.
Bush lost 732 thousand to unemployment during January, 2001 ... but employment fell 1.1 million that month. During the 5 month period from Nov. 2008 to Mar. 2009, when Obama's stimulus went into effect, employment fell by 2.6 million. I doubt there has been a five month period that lost that many jobs since the Great Depression.
 
Here you go:

And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.

Since you want to judge Bush on his performance for a few months why aren't you judging Obama on his 2 1/2 years in office especially the results today vs when he took office? Again sure wish you would have taken a civics class.
 
Bush lost 732 thousand to unemployment during January, 2001 ... but employment fell 1.1 million that month. During the 5 month period from Nov. 2008 to Mar. 2009, when Obama's stimulus went into effect, employment fell by 2.6 million. I doubt there has been a five month period that lost that many jobs since the Great Depression.

Now isn't that something, today we have 25 million plus unemployed and under employed. Please point out when Bush ever had that high of unemployment or ever had 16.5% unemployment?
 
As was pointed out last night, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd should be in jail for what they did. Holder needs to join them for the "Fast and Furious" debacle and the DOE heads for Solyndra and Sun Power. Who is managing this Administration?

Yes, let's not worry about what is going on today so that we can continue to blame Bush for what is alleged in 2001-2003. Just sweep the corruption today under the rug just like supporters are ignoring the Obama record TODAY

Jon Stewart on Solyndra, the ‘Custom-Tailored Obama Scandal’ - ABC News
 
Apparently a Nobel Prize winner in Economics doesn't think of the Obama results either.

Critic of Obamanomics wins Nobel in Economics


And they have valid arguments you don't.

BTW here is an excerpt from a WSJ interview with Nobel Economic Prize Winner Peter Diamond:

On the wisdom of the Fed’s latest move, nicknamed “Operation Twist:”
–The economy needs stimulus, it needs fiscal stimulus, it needs monetary stimulus, and this was a good step.

Nobel Winner Diamond: I ‘Really Wanted to Go’ to the Fed; Austerity Measures ‘Perverse’ - Real Time Economics - WSJ
 
And they have valid arguments you don't.

BTW here is an excerpt from a WSJ interview with Nobel Economic Prize Winner Peter Diamond:

On the wisdom of the Fed’s latest move, nicknamed “Operation Twist:”
–The economy needs stimulus, it needs fiscal stimulus, it needs monetary stimulus, and this was a good step.

Nobel Winner Diamond: I ‘Really Wanted to Go’ to the Fed; Austerity Measures ‘Perverse’ - Real Time Economics - WSJ

A valid stimulus, yes, a bailout NO, that stimulated nothing.
 
A valid stimulus, yes, a bailout NO, that stimulated nothing.

Ah more of the interview with Peter Diamond:

On the nation’s unemployment problem and how infrastructure spending could help solve it:
–Most of [the 9.1% unemployment rate], more than half of it, is inadequate aggregate demand and what we need now, very badly, is more fiscal stimulus and the continuation by the Fed of rolling out monetary stimulus as it fits their projections of what’s going on.
–Right now we have idle labor, idle capital… [and] interest rates are low, so doing it sooner has that advantage compared to doing it later. And third we do get a Keynesian multiplier out of it. –The fact that infrastructure spending will be phased in slowly doesn’t seem to me a shortcoming right now, because all the forecasts we’ve seen say coming out of this [malaise] is going to be a slow process.


On the long-term problems that we may be worsening:
We need better education to get a better labor force, we need better worker training, we need a process to make us more productive, we need more [research and development] spending — the federal government has been cutting back on R&D spending as a percentage of GDP, so has industry, yet it’s technological advances that drive the growth of incomes in the economy…. To be cutting back on R&D support doesn’t augur well for the economy and we shouldn’t be doing that.
 
Ah more of the interview with Peter Diamond:

On the nation’s unemployment problem and how infrastructure spending could help solve it:
–Most of [the 9.1% unemployment rate], more than half of it, is inadequate aggregate demand and what we need now, very badly, is more fiscal stimulus and the continuation by the Fed of rolling out monetary stimulus as it fits their projections of what’s going on.
–Right now we have idle labor, idle capital… [and] interest rates are low, so doing it sooner has that advantage compared to doing it later. And third we do get a Keynesian multiplier out of it. –The fact that infrastructure spending will be phased in slowly doesn’t seem to me a shortcoming right now, because all the forecasts we’ve seen say coming out of this [malaise] is going to be a slow process.


On the long-term problems that we may be worsening:
We need better education to get a better labor force, we need better worker training, we need a process to make us more productive, we need more [research and development] spending — the federal government has been cutting back on R&D spending as a percentage of GDP, so has industry, yet it’s technological advances that drive the growth of incomes in the economy…. To be cutting back on R&D support doesn’t augur well for the economy and we shouldn’t be doing that.

Wasn't that Stimulus 1? Infrastructure spending?

More education? So the 25 million unemployed and under employed aren't educated?

Govt R&D Spending? Solyndra? Sun Power?
 
Wasn't that Stimulus 1? Infrastructure spending?

More education? So the 25 million unemployed and under employed aren't educated?

Govt R&D Spending? Solyndra? Sun Power?

Oh so now you disagree with one of the Nobel Prize Winners that is critical of Obama now that you have found out more about him.

Tell me which way is the wind blowing today in your neck of the world:lamo
 
Oh so now you disagree with one of the Nobel Prize Winners that is critical of Obama now that you have found out more about him.

Tell me which way is the wind blowing today in your neck of the world:lamo

I don't disagree with him in that stimulus was needed, not the Obama stimulus. Education is needed but not liberal indoctrination. Are you ever going to respond to actual facts and data? What was the purpose of the first stimulus program? When did Bush have 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans and a U-6 unemployment number of 16.5%
 
I don't disagree with him in that stimulus was needed, not the Obama stimulus. Education is needed but not liberal indoctrination.

Your partisanship is so obvious.

Are you ever going to respond to actual facts and data? What was the purpose of the first stimulus program? When did Bush have 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans and a U-6 unemployment number of 16.5%

That is your own little side argument you are having with yourself.
 
Since you want to judge Bush on his performance for a few months why aren't you judging Obama on his 2 1/2 years in office especially the results today vs when he took office? Again sure wish you would have taken a civics class.
Whoaaa ... that's exactly what you did with Bush. When I pointed out how bad the economy was in 2001, 2002, and much of 2003, you said you voted for him because he turned the economy around by 2004. So it's ok for you to vote for Bush based on his 4th year in office but it's not ok for others to do the same with Obama?

Just get the word, "hypocrite" tattooed on your forehead so you don't have to use a sharpie every day.
 
Last edited:
Whoaaa ... that's exactly what you did with Bush. When I pointed out how bad the economy was in 2001, 2002, and much of 2003, you said you voted for him because he turned the economy around be 2004. So it's ok for you to vote for Bush based on his 4th year in office but it's not ok for others to do the same with Obama?

Just get the word, "hypocrite" tattooed on your forehead so you don't have to use a sharpie every day.

How are you coming on make the case for the re-election of Obama? Using the Bush argument isn't going to fly as the Obama results will be on the ballot. How do those results compare to Bush's 2004 results?

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDPand 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americansin 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade ofthe U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. 38-41% JAR and wellover 50-55% disapproval ratings.
 
Back
Top Bottom