Page 70 of 136 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280120 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 700 of 1355

Thread: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

  1. #691
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Thanks, the numbers you posted confirm what I wrote: businesses ARE hiring. As your data points out, private employment has increased for 18 months running.
    The numbers I posted confirm that we have a net privare sector job loss in the first three years of the Obama Administration

  2. #692
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    The numbers I posted confirm that we have a net privare sector job loss in the first three years of the Obama Administration
    Yes, but that's not what I was addressing. I said that private employers ARE hiring, and that is undeniable. Private employment has increased for 18 months in a row.

  3. #693
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Yes, but that's not what I was addressing. I said that private employers ARE hiring, and that is undeniable. Private employment has increased for 18 months in a row.
    Private business will always hire just not enough to make a difference in the total which is the problem. You want to give him credit but never any blame for the actual results generated.

  4. #694
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Private business will always hire just not enough to make a difference in the total which is the problem. You want to give him credit but never any blame for the actual results generated.
    Obama should get neither. Presidents don't hire for private companies.

    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.

  5. #695
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    The numbers I posted confirm that we have a net privare sector job loss in the first three years of the Obama Administration
    And if a Republican were Prez do you think it would be any different?

  6. #696
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Obama should get neither. Presidents don't hire for private companies.
    You really don't know how private companies work. Economic policies affect company profits and the way companies operate. Since they cannot print money they have to do it the old fashion way, earn it. You really are naive if you believe the govt. doesn't affect hiring of the private sector. How do you think that small corner business is going to pay for the increased costs associated with Obamacare?

  7. #697
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    And if a Republican were Prez do you think it would be any different?
    We will find out in 2013

  8. #698
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,984

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    It depends on which plan we're talking about. I think that some have been back loaded on both cuts and tax hikes. In any case, I think it would be suicidal to immediately enact both spending cuts and revenue hikes when what the economy needs is additional stimulus. It makes perfect sense to back load the plan, preferably with triggers linked to unemployment and/or GDP growth.
    If both are equally backloaded I have less of an issue with it. If one is massively back loaded and the other isn't, that's a problem. From the plans I've seen, its typically the later not the former.

    That's a bit of semantics. It's a cut from current funding levels, whether it's inevitable or not.
    You call it semantics, I call it reasonable common sense. You don't bargain things that are already going to happen regardless of whether or not your bargained for deal happens and expect that to be considered a serious contribution. You asked why I think the Republicans refusal to go with that plan is reasonable...this is one such reason. The number is a bit of an illusion in regards to real cuts the plan itself would be causing as opposed to actual additional cuts that the plan itself is causing.

    The budget has increased every year, and it will continue to increase every year, simply as a function of population growth, inflation, and the cost of debt repayment. We don't need a literal reduction in spending. We just need to balance spending and revenue.
    Fine and dandy, but don't quote one portion of my post while ignoring the other point and then act like I should be condemning the Republicans for not taking a deal that doesn't equate to the one I stated if looked at in full.

    If they want to adjust for inflation, then I could accept that as the one type of increase. Inflation isn't 8% a year which is the typical increase of the budget. The average increase in inflation is 2.6% over the past 20 years. Our population growth rate is less than 1% a year. The budget itself increases by roughly 8% a year I believe.

    If you'd want to say adjust the current number for inflation, then cut...fine by me. But this "we'll only increase it by 4% instead of 8%" type of thing is not a "Cut" to me and if you're going to claim "semantics" on the other thing, I'd say claiming a reduction in the amount of increase is a "Cut" is playing semantics as well. If you get a 2% raise at work instead of an 8% raise the company is not "cutting" your pay. At best its "cutting" the amount of your normal raise.

    Unfortunately these kinds of triggers, whichever way they run, cannot be guaranteed short of a constitutional amendment. But that's not going to happen, so I think we have to proceed as best we can.
    Honestly not sure of the validity in this. I know sunsets are placed in laws routinely, I don't see how such a trigger would not be possible. Someone could also attempt to vote to remove/amend the trigger, or other such thing...but at least in that case it'd be a clear and obvious attempt of circumventing the original agreement.

  9. #699
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You really don't know how private companies work. Economic policies affect company profits and the way companies operate. Since they cannot print money they have to do it the old fashion way, earn it. You really are naive if you believe the govt. doesn't affect hiring of the private sector. How do you think that small corner business is going to pay for the increased costs associated with Obamacare?
    Not that much, no. I'm sorry that you government is the answer, but frankly business adjusts just fine and has managed to prosper even with high tax rates. History shows this.


    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.

  10. #700
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Private business will always hire just not enough to make a difference in the total which is the problem. You want to give him credit but never any blame for the actual results generated.
    There has been positive job growth in the private sector for 18 months, and of course it has made a difference. Unfortunately it has been offset in significant part by layoffs in the public sector, which is something your side applauds.

Posting Permissions

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