• 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!

Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jryan said:
What purpose do you think the caucus serves? This should be good...
Click to expand...

LOL, apparently you don't know what a caucus is. Still waiting for a retraction on your statement that Republicans control the Senate?
 
Conservative said:
LOL, apparently you don't know what a caucus is. Still waiting for a retraction on your statement that Republicans control the Senate?
Click to expand...

A congressional caucus is a group of members of the United States Congress that meets to pursue common legislative objectives.

Apparently you don't know.

I'm not going to insult myself by explaining VERY simple logic to you.

If I did say the Republicans own the senate, sorry.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
and increasing the national debt by what percent?
Click to expand...

1.7 trillion dollars over 8 years. Obama has increased it 4.3 trillion over 3 years. debt service on 1.7 trillion vs. debt service on 4.2 trillion? Hmmm, wonder which one is less cost to the taxpayers?
 
Jryan said:
A congressional caucus is a group of members of the United States Congress that meets to pursue common legislative objectives.

Apparently you don't know.

I'm not going to insult myself by explaining VERY simple logic to you.
Click to expand...

Right and 60 votes were in that caucus so Obama couldn't sell them on his policies. There was nothing in the Obama economic policy that any conservative can support. You have already embarrassed yourself by claiming that Republicans control Congress
 
Conservative said:
Right and 60 votes were in that caucus so Obama couldn't sell them on his policies. There was nothing in the Obama economic policy that any conservative can support. You have already embarrassed yourself by claiming that Republicans control Congress
Click to expand...

Republicans are controlling congress by filibustering, JESUS TAP DANCING CHRIST!!!!
 
Conservative said:
Right and 60 votes were in that caucus so Obama couldn't sell them on his policies. There was nothing in the Obama economic policy that any conservative can support. You have already embarrassed yourself by claiming that Republicans control Congress
Click to expand...

Also, the caucus is only there to discuss what they want to push.
 
Thunder said:
and that was an increase of what percent?[/QUOTE

About 200%, so do we pay debt service on the percentage change or the actual debt? 1.7 trillion vs. 4.2 trillion, which one has the higher debt service?
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
It is lower because of Bush tax cuts and govt. revenue grew until Democrats helped tank the economy in 2008
Click to expand...

How does that factor in? You said Reagan lowered taxes and that's what fixed the recession. The tax rate is already lower than that, so... what the hell is your point? And again, I'll do your work for you. If you want to compare Reagan to Obama, first you need to compare the recessions. Politifact does this for us:

Politifact: Comparing Recessions
Length of the recession
VERDICT: Call it a wash -- for now.

Economic growth or contraction
VERDICT: They're close, but the current recession will likely end up somewhat worse.

Peak unemployment
VERDICT: Worse under Reagan.

Rise in unemployment
VERDICT: Worse under Obama

Long-term unemployment
VERDICT: Much worse under Obama.

Industrial production
Industrial production

The stock market
VERDICT: Worse under Obama.

Foreclosures
VERDICT: Much worse under Obama.

Bank failures
VERDICT: It's a wash so far, but things could get worse in the current recession before they get better.
Click to expand...

Now, I know you're going to start drooling to blame Obama, but keep in mind, this is a nonpartisan organization so they are only comparing the recessions - this has nothing to do with who did a better job.

So back to Palin's claim that Reagan's recession was more severe. The barometers we examined aren't necessarily equal measurements of the magnitude, but collectively they paint a picture that the current recession -- so far -- is worse than the one under Reagan. Even if we had decided to include inflation as a factor, the measurements would still indicate the current recession is worse. So we find Palin's claim to be False.
Click to expand...

Either way, you can see some major differences between these two recessions. While Reagan struggled with unemployment, long-term unemployment has been decidedly worse in this recession. Also, the housing market, stock market, industrial production, personal income, and foreclosures are also much worse. Reagan, however, had to deal with skyrocketing inflation. So, clearly, these recessions are two totally different beasts. Knowing this, and knowing that taxes are already far lower than in Reagan's Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, what did Reagan do that Obama should have done? I am really trying to have a discussion here, so if you could give an actual answer, that would be fantastic.
 
Moderator's Warning:
OK. I have infracted several of you for personal attacks. The next one gets booted from the thread.
 
About 200%, so do we pay debt service on the percentage change or the actual debt? 1.7 trillion vs. 4.2 trillion, which one has the higher debt service?
Click to expand...

so Reagan increased our national debt by 200%, and Obama has increased it by less than 100%.

Nevermind that when you factor in inflation, Reagan's increase in our debt is even greater. Clearly, Reagan was not the amazing Conservative success story that folks make him out to be.
 
Thunder said:
so Reagan increased our national debt by 200%, and Obama has increased it by less than 100%.

Nevermind that when you factor in inflation, Reagan's increase in our debt is even greater. Clearly, Reagan was not the amazing Conservative success story that folks make him out to be.
Click to expand...

Yes, Reagan increased the debt by 1.7 trillion dollars and Obama increased the debt in 3 years by 4.2 trillion dollars. Inflation has nothing to do with the debt service. It is paid year on debt at that time.
 
whysoserious said:
How does that factor in? You said Reagan lowered taxes and that's what fixed the recession. The tax rate is already lower than that, so... what the hell is your point? And again, I'll do your work for you. If you want to compare Reagan to Obama, first you need to compare the recessions. Politifact does this for us:

Politifact: Comparing Recessions


Now, I know you're going to start drooling to blame Obama, but keep in mind, this is a nonpartisan organization so they are only comparing the recessions - this has nothing to do with who did a better job.



Either way, you can see some major differences between these two recessions. While Reagan struggled with unemployment, long-term unemployment has been decidedly worse in this recession. Also, the housing market, stock market, industrial production, personal income, and foreclosures are also much worse. Reagan, however, had to deal with skyrocketing inflation. So, clearly, these recessions are two totally different beasts. Knowing this, and knowing that taxes are already far lower than in Reagan's Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, what did Reagan do that Obama should have done? I am really trying to have a discussion here, so if you could give an actual answer, that would be fantastic.
Click to expand...

What matters in determiing the severity of the recession is the affect on the people and the cost of living was much higher in the 81-82 recession than it was during the 2007-2009 recession. That is what matters, not an evaluation from a bunch of economists. How would you feel paying 17.5% for a home and having double digit inflation affect the products that you buy and need?
 
Thunder said:
so Reagan increased our national debt by 200%, and Obama has increased it by less than 100%.

Nevermind that when you factor in inflation, Reagan's increase in our debt is even greater. Clearly, Reagan was not the amazing Conservative success story that folks make him out to be.
Click to expand...

Yes, actually, by the numbers, Reagan grew the Gross National Debt by a larger percentage than Obama:

National Debt By Year
(In millions)
Gross Federal Debt 1981: 994,828
Gross Federal Debt 1983: 1,371,660

(1,371,660-994,828)/1,371,660 = 27.47269732%

(In millions)
Gross Federal Debt 2009: 11,875,851
Gross Federal Debt 2011 (projected): 15,476,243

(15,476,243 - 11,875,851)/15,476,243 = 23.26399243%

Obama has grown Gross Federal Debt by just over 4 percentage points less than Ronald Reagan in each of their first 3 years.
 
Conservative said:
What matters in determiing the severity of the recession is the affect on the people and the cost of living was much higher in the 81-82 recession than it was during the 2007-2009 recession. That is what matters, not an evaluation from a bunch of economists. How would you feel paying 17.5% for a home and having double digit inflation affect the products that you buy and need?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't know why I thought I should listen to economists about the economy. Hey Conservative, do you know what the weather will be like in Charlotte tomorrow? I'd tune into a meteorologist, but why bother when I have you, right?

I am glad I spent time putting all of that together for you to just give another canned response. So, Conservative, besides raising taxes to 1981's level and then slowly lowering them like Reagan, what could Obama have done that Reagan did?
 
whysoserious said:
Yes, actually, by the numbers, Reagan grew the Gross National Debt by a larger percentage than Obama:

National Debt By Year
(In millions)
Gross Federal Debt 1981: 994,828
Gross Federal Debt 1983: 1,371,660

(1,371,660-994,828)/1,371,660 = 27.47269732%

(In millions)
Gross Federal Debt 2009: 11,875,851
Gross Federal Debt 2011 (projected): 15,476,243

(15,476,243 - 11,875,851)/15,476,243 = 23.26399243%

Obama has grown Gross Federal Debt by just over 4 percentage points less than Ronald Reagan in each of their first 3 years.
Click to expand...

LOL, so we pay debt service on the percentage change or the actual dollars? Interesting
 
whysoserious said:
Yeah, I don't know why I thought I should listen to economists about the economy. Hey Conservative, do you know what the weather will be like in Charlotte tomorrow? I'd tune into a meteorologist, but why bother when I have you, right?

I am glad I spent time putting all of that together for you to just give another canned response. So, Conservative, besides raising taxes to 1981's level and then slowly lowering them like Reagan, what could Obama have done that Reagan did?
Click to expand...

I know this is the Obama record, how about interpreting that record for me?

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
whysoserious said:
Yeah, I don't know why I thought I should listen to economists about the economy.
Click to expand...

If you actually listened to economists, then you would realize that their views differ by a wide margin. However, Obama's economists promised us an unemployment rate of under 8% if we spent close to a trillion dollars.

How'd that work out?
 
Conservative said:
I know this is the Obama record, how about interpreting that record for me?

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

Not bad compared to this:


Bush and Reagan were terrible presidents by the numbers
Reagan GDP Changes of -3.2%, -4.9%, and -6.4%.
Bush GDP Changes of 1.8%, 1.3%, -3.7% and -8.9%
Misery Index Under Reagan in 1981: 19.33
Misery Index Under Bush in August 2008: 11.47
Unemployment under Reagan 1982: 9.7%
Unemployment under Bush (beginning 2009): 9.3%
Number of unemployed under Bush rose 22,000,000 from 2000-2008
From 1981-1982, 1,126,000 jobs were lost by Reagan.
In 1983, after losing over 1 million jobs, having over 9% unemployment, and posting losses in GDP, Reagan's approval rating was 40%.
In 2008, after starting multiple wars, driving up the deficit, and seeing the recession begin to start, president George W. Bush's approval rating was under 30%.
President Bush racked up 2.779 trillion in debt in 2 years as president.
 
Antiderivative said:
If you actually listened to economists, then you would realize that their views differ by a wide margin. However, Obama's economists promised us an unemployment rate of under 8% if we spent close to a trillion dollars.

How'd that work out?
Click to expand...

No he didn't and if you actually read the news you'd know that.

PolitiFact | Cantor and other Republicans say Obama promised stimulus would keep unemployment rates below 8 percent
We think it's a big stretch to call an economic projection a "promise." The administration never characterized it that way and included plenty of disclaimers saying the predictions had "significant margins of error" and a higher degree of uncertainty due to a recession that is "unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity." And so we rule the statement by Cantor — and other Republicans who have said the same thing — Barely True.

Editor's note: This statement was rated Barely True when it was published. On July 27, 2011, we changed the name for the rating to Mostly False.
Click to expand...

--------------------------------------------

Also, question, what is it about the economists that I quoted that you disagree with?
 
whysoserious said:
Not bad compared to this:


Bush and Reagan were terrible presidents by the numbers
Reagan GDP Changes of -3.2%, -4.9%, and -6.4%.
Bush GDP Changes of 1.8%, 1.3%, -3.7% and -8.9%
Misery Index Under Reagan in 1981: 19.33
Misery Index Under Bush in August 2008: 11.47
Unemployment under Reagan 1982: 9.7%
Unemployment under Bush (beginning 2009): 9.3%
Number of unemployed under Bush rose 22,000,000 from 2000-2008
From 1981-1982, 1,126,000 jobs were lost by Reagan.
In 1983, after losing over 1 million jobs, having over 9% unemployment, and posting losses in GDP, Reagan's approval rating was 40%.
In 2008, after starting multiple wars, driving up the deficit, and seeing the recession begin to start, president George W. Bush's approval rating was under 30%.
President Bush racked up 2.779 trillion in debt in 2 years as president.
Click to expand...

Bush and Reagan aren't on the ballot, your problem is Obama and his record

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom