Page 139 of 197 FirstFirst ... 3989129137138139140141149189 ... LastLast
Results 1,381 to 1,390 of 1961

Thread: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

  1. #1381
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    This is a great meme if a liberal is speaking to the failures of the Obama administration, however, I find it amusing when in the same breath, many of the same libs that spout this when speaking of Obama, also blame Bush for the downfall of the economy that poor Obama took over.

    j-mac
    You should address individuals personally. Liberals, whoever they are, and not in universal lock step. Did OC make such a case? if not, your comment has no meaning to him. I personally said Bush could not control the economy. Back then I argued he could only effect the debt, something I thought conservatives opposed. Funny how I don't remember any threads by you or others who denounce Obama on Bush's debt back then. Neither has been good for the debt, but niether controls the economy. If they did, it would never, ever be bad. You only stay in power if it is good. And since you often state every action Obama and democrats make, oddly not republcians, is made for political reasons, they would make sure the economy was good if they could control it.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #1382
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    obvious Child;1059902476]Considering that you just wash rinse repeat your arguments, we've already turned your arguments into ground beef. Furthermore, we all know you cannot read data properly. I'm just telling people to stop wasting their time on someone who believes that the US population doubles monthly.
    Normally I don't respond to you but every once in a while I get bored and decide to do so. When did I say the U.S. Population doubles monthly? My is that ever a liberal projection. Maybe if you get someone to comprehend what is posted you wouldn't be looking so foolish.

    What results? That the economy is bad? When did I ever argue otherwise? (Hint: I didn't) What you ignore is that President has relatively little power over the economy. You want to blame him solely for the mess we're in.
    Translation Democrat Presidents have relatively little power over the economy but Republican Presidents have total control thus destroyed it. Isn't that what you are trying to say?

    And you are the problem.
    Project much? I don't have that power

    Considering you haven't won an argument here since you started, that's not really saying much. I already destroyed you countless times. I have nothing to prove to you. Especially after you couldn't figure out the BLS data was cumulative.
    BLS data ISN'T cumulative it is monthly and discouraged workers aren't counted as employed or unemployed but are counted monthly. From BLS

    Since 1994, questions on discouraged workers have been collected and tabulated from all eligible individuals on a monthly basis.
    Nothing cumulative there but it does distort the unemployment rate which has occurred since 1994. This is the Obama unemployment rate without discouraged workers and with discouraged workers.

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    2000 5708 5858 5733 5481 5758 5651 5747 5853 5625 5534 5639 5634
    2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
    2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
    2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
    2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
    2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
    2006 7059 7185 7075 7122 6977 6998 7154 7097 6853 6728 6883 6784
    2007 7085 6898 6725 6845 6765 6966 7113 7096 7200 7273 7284 7696
    2008 7628 7435 7793 7631 8397 8560 8895 9509 9569 10172 10617 11400
    2009 11919 12714 13310 13816 14518 14721 14534 14993 15159 15612 15340 15267
    2010 14837 14871 15005 15260 14973 14623 14599 14860 14767 14843 15119 14485
    2011 13863 13673 13542 13747 13914 14087 13931 13967 13992

    Discouraged workers
    2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
    2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
    2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318
    2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 1119 977 1037

    Unemployed + Discouraged
    2008 8095 7831 8194 8043 8797 8980 9356 9890 10036 10656 11225 12042
    2009 12653 13445 13995 14556 15310 15514 15330 15751 15865 16420 16201 16196
    2010 15902 16075 15999 16457 16056 15830 15784 15970 15976 16062 16401 15803
    2011 14856 14693 14463 14736 14736 15069 15050 14944 15029 0 0 0


    Labor Force 2011 153186 153246 153406 153421 153693 153421 153228 153594 154017

    UE Rate w/o DW 9.05% 8.92% 8.83% 8.96% 9.05% 9.18% 9.09% 9.09% 9.08%

    UE Rate with DW 9.70% 9.59% 9.43% 9.60% 9.59% 9.82% 9.82% 9.73% 9.76%


    After that fiasco, you are nothing but a clown to me.
    I am so worried about what you think of me and lose sleep every night.


    When did I ever argue the economy isn't bad? Oh wait. I didn't. You are as usual being dishonest. But as we all have pointed out, your arguments are based on a massive failure to understand basic data. The fact you don't get why you can't use nominal, real and chain interchangeably is a partially why I don't invest much time in discussing things with you.
    Since I seldom read fully what you post I don't know if you have or haven't however I do notice a lot of liberals here ignoring the lack of leadership of this President thus the very poor performance since the end of the recession. Obviously you have never run anything in your life for if you spent as much as Obama and generated the kind of results he has gotten, you would be fired and that is the point. Instead of blaming Bush for what is going on today you need to ask yourself why hasn't the "smartest person" ever to hold the office done a better job especially with total overwhelming control of the Congress his first two years?


    Considering I didn't vote for Obama (I told you this before you lying hack) you're way out of your league. Furthermore, Obama is little more than a Bush clone. A president you have a genetic inability to criticize. And it's amusing you consider Obama worse than the presidents who let 500,000 Americans die needlessly.
    Aw, gee, took you a little longer than usual,
    lying hack?
    but you are right, I am out of my league for you see I am in the big leagues and you still are in the minors. You and your ilk have no idea what leadership is or personal responsibility so keep playing your silly partisan game while ignoring the actual results.

  3. #1383
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    You should address individuals personally. Liberals, whoever they are
    Boo Radley
    Sage


    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 AM
    Gender

    Lean
    Liberal

    Posts
    15,332
    Liked
    2646 times


    and not in universal lock step.
    PUHLEEZE! Liberals are more prone to group think than any other group I have seen yet.

    Did OC make such a case? if not, your comment has no meaning to him.
    I don't know, should I spend time looking for a specific to satisfy you, or are we talking among friends here? And BTW, who are you that I need to clear your hurdles?

    I personally said Bush could not control the economy. Back then I argued he could only effect the debt, something I thought conservatives opposed.
    You have also argued that Obama inherited a mess that Bush left concerning the economy. Should I now have to search that as well? Let's be honest here Joe.

    Funny how I don't remember any threads by you or others who denounce Obama on Bush's debt back then. Neither has been good for the debt, but niether controls the economy. If they did, it would never, ever be bad. You only stay in power if it is good.
    Who gives a crap what you do or don't remember Joe? You have your opinion, I have mine. I guess we will see in Nov '12 who shares what with the majority of Americans won't we?

    And since you often state every action Obama and democrats make, oddly not republcians, is made for political reasons, they would make sure the economy was good if they could control it.
    OMG! Poor wittle demo's...No one is making their case for them....pfft! You want to convince anyone you'd better start making your case honestly, and drop the self pity party.

    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  4. #1384
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    It showed me that job real job loss began in Jan '08 to which it progressively got worse until Jan '09, at which time it trended upward until we finally began adding jobs in Apr '10. Since then, we have added jobs in every month since.

    What did you get out of it?
    Let's take a look at historical data and put it into context. By most standards the recession of December 2007-June 2009 is very similar to the Recession of July 1981 to Nov. 1982. Now I would contend that the 81-82 recession was worse for the American people than the current recession because of high inflation, high unemployment, and the much higher cost of living. Anyway here are the employment numbers. Please note the difference between Reagan leadership and Obama leadership thus the results two years after the end of the recession?

    Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
    Original Data Value
    Recession dates
    Series Id: LNS12000000 Dec-07 Jun-09
    Seasonally Adjusted Mar-01 Nov-01
    Series title: (Seas) Employment Level Jul-90 Mar-91
    Labor force status: Employed Jul-81 Nov-82
    Type of data: Number in thousands
    Age: 16 years and over
    Years: 1980 to 2010

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    1980 99879 99995 99713 99233 98945 98682 98796 98824 99077 99317 99545 99634
    1981 99955 100191 100571 101056 101048 100298 100693 100689 100064 100378 100207 99645
    1982 99692 99762 99672 99576 100116 99543 99493 99633 99504 99215 99112 99032
    1983 99161 99089 99179 99560 99642 100633 101208 101608 102016 102039 102729 102996

    1984 103201 103824 103967 104336 105193 105591 105435 105163 105490 105638 105972 106223
    1985 106302 106555 106989 106936 106932 106505 106807 107095 107657 107847 108007 108216
    1986 108887 108480 108837 108952 109089 109576 109810 110015 110085 110273 110475 110728
    1987 110953 111257 111408 111794 112434 112246 112634 113057 112909 113282 113505 113793
    1988 114016 114227 114037 114650 114292 114927 115060 115282 115356 115638 116100 116104
    1989 116708 116776 117022 117097 117099 117418 117472 117655 117354 117581 117912 117830

    2008 146421 146165 146173 146306 146023 145768 145515 145187 145021 144677 143907 143188
    2009 142221 141687 140854 140902 140438 140038 139817 139433 138768 138242 138381 137792
    2010 138333 138641 138905 139455 139420 139119 138960 139250 139391 139061 138888 139206
    2011 139323 139573 139864 139674 139779 139334 139296 139627

  5. #1385
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which I hope will educate liberal Obama supporters on data reported on BLS. Notice that it is not cumulative and that the method comparing unemployment and employment changed in 1994. What this shows is that the unemployment numbers today are much different than the unemployment prior to 1994 when discouraged workers were counted as unemployed. They aren't counted today and that distorts the real number.

    I sent a message to BLS and this is their response.
    The CPS has data readily available on discouraged workers dating back to 1970, tabulated separately, and classified as not in the labor force.

    The definition of discouraged workers however, changed with the 1994 redesign of the CPS, resulting in a complete break in the time series.

    Since 1994, discouraged workers are persons not in the labor force (not employed nor unemployed) who want a job and are available to work (with the exception of temporary illness), have searched for work sometime in the prior 12 months, but had not looked for work in the last 4 weeks because they are discouraged over their job prospects. (Specifically, they did not look for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey because they believed no jobs were available for them, they could not find work, they lack the necessary skills or training, or they face age or other discrimination by employers.)

    The pre-1994 questions on discouraged workers were asked of only one-quarter of the monthly sample and tabulated on a quarterly and annual basis. Since 1994, questions on discouraged workers have been collected and tabulated from all eligible individuals on a monthly basis.

    For more information on the 1994 CPS questionnaire redesign, here is a link to a 1993 Monthly Labor Review article by Anne Polivka and Jennifer M. Rothgeb:
    http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1993/09/art2full.pdf

    Published CPS levels are not cumulative, and the number of discouraged workers are displayed in thousands and are not seasonally adjusted
    .

  6. #1386
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Let's take a look at historical data and put it into context. By most standards the recession of December 2007-June 2009 is very similar to the Recession of July 1981 to Nov. 1982. Now I would contend that the 81-82 recession was worse for the American people than the current recession because of high inflation, high unemployment, and the much higher cost of living. Anyway here are the employment numbers. Please note the difference between Reagan leadership and Obama leadership thus the results two years after the end of the recession?

    Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
    Original Data Value
    Recession dates
    Series Id: LNS12000000 Dec-07 Jun-09
    Seasonally Adjusted Mar-01 Nov-01
    Series title: (Seas) Employment Level Jul-90 Mar-91
    Labor force status: Employed Jul-81 Nov-82
    Type of data: Number in thousands
    Age: 16 years and over
    Years: 1980 to 2010

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    1980 99879 99995 99713 99233 98945 98682 98796 98824 99077 99317 99545 99634
    1981 99955 100191 100571 101056 101048 100298 100693 100689 100064 100378 100207 99645
    1982 99692 99762 99672 99576 100116 99543 99493 99633 99504 99215 99112 99032
    1983 99161 99089 99179 99560 99642 100633 101208 101608 102016 102039 102729 102996

    1984 103201 103824 103967 104336 105193 105591 105435 105163 105490 105638 105972 106223
    1985 106302 106555 106989 106936 106932 106505 106807 107095 107657 107847 108007 108216
    1986 108887 108480 108837 108952 109089 109576 109810 110015 110085 110273 110475 110728
    1987 110953 111257 111408 111794 112434 112246 112634 113057 112909 113282 113505 113793
    1988 114016 114227 114037 114650 114292 114927 115060 115282 115356 115638 116100 116104
    1989 116708 116776 117022 117097 117099 117418 117472 117655 117354 117581 117912 117830

    2008 146421 146165 146173 146306 146023 145768 145515 145187 145021 144677 143907 143188
    2009 142221 141687 140854 140902 140438 140038 139817 139433 138768 138242 138381 137792
    2010 138333 138641 138905 139455 139420 139119 138960 139250 139391 139061 138888 139206
    2011 139323 139573 139864 139674 139779 139334 139296 139627
    You do realize that a significant amount of more people live in this country now, right? That statistic is useless unless taken as a percentage of the population.

  7. #1387
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Amazing isn't it, 1377 posts on this thread with almost every liberal blaming Bush for the economic recession and absolving Obama of any responsibility. When a liberal claims that the President has very little power over the economy they mean a liberal President, not a Republican President who is totally responsible for everything bad that happens. Forget Congress for they are just place holders.
    I, actually, have not seen that yet. I have seen you prancing around like a fairy with a bunch of numbers that you don't understand. But, I really don't think I have even seen someone blame Bush yet - maybe one or two? Compatibly to your asinine data, that's nothing. You have swamped this thread with uneducated drivel.

  8. #1388
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    You do realize that a significant amount of more people live in this country now, right? That statistic is useless unless taken as a percentage of the population.
    Yes, what does that have to do with the chart and difference between leadership styles? Notice that Reagan took office in January 1981 and had 99.9 million employed Americans. The economy at the time was crumbling due to high inflation, rising unemployment, high interest rates, and malaise on the part of the American people. The recession began in July 1981 and two years after the end of the recession, November 1984 there were 108.0 million employed Americans or almost 9 million more employed than when he took office.

    Compare that to Obama who took office with a 142.2 million employed and two years after the end of the recession, June 2011 there were 139.3 million or a 2.9 million DECREASE. There was no inflation, there was record low interest rates so what is the difference? IMO, it was leadership and the attitude of both President's. President Reagan promoted American exceptionalism and the private sector including individual wealth creation. What has Obama promoted?

  9. #1389
    Antichrist
    zgoldsmith23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TN
    Last Seen
    11-06-17 @ 12:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,692

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Amazing isn't it, 1377 posts on this thread with almost every liberal blaming Bush for the economic recession and absolving Obama of any responsibility. When a liberal claims that the President has very little power over the economy they mean a liberal President, not a Republican President who is totally responsible for everything bad that happens. Forget Congress for they are just place holders.
    Amazing isn't it, 23357 posts with almost every post blaming Obama for the economic recession and absolving any Conservative of any responsibility.

    See how this works, ****stick?
    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    I've never denied my own hackish tendencies
    Quote Originally Posted by Pin dÁr View Post
    scientific by itself isn't enough of course.
    Quote Originally Posted by blaxshep View Post
    Not all Nazis were bad people

  10. #1390
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Republicans block Obama jobs bill

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    I, actually, have not seen that yet. I have seen you prancing around like a fairy with a bunch of numbers that you don't understand. But, I really don't think I have even seen someone blame Bush yet - maybe one or two? Compatibly to your asinine data, that's nothing. You have swamped this thread with uneducated drivel.
    Right, ignore the content and attack me. I cannot help it if you don't understand the data posted. Obviously your youth and inexperience are showing here. You don't understand leadership at all nor do you understand that if you had a job and generated the results Obama has generated after spending the amount of money he has spent you would be fired. Reagan won a huge electoral landslide in 1984 because of that leadership and the results generated. The Obama results don't warrant re-election

Posting Permissions

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