• 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!

Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

Boo Radley said:
Data misreadand without accurate context is not better than a well reasoned opinion.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion apparently meaning that the only valid context is yours. The proper context is this, we are three years into the Obama Administration and economic growth is lower in 2011 than it was in 2010. We still have a net job loss and unemployment rate much higher than when Obama took office. Waiting for exactly what the right context then is
 
Conservative said:
You mean like it has been three years and the results for Obama continue to be worse than when he took office in the major areas of employment and unemployment? You mean like people dropping out of the labor force in a growing population? What you want to do is ignore that it has been three years since Obama took office and the results are worse this year than last?
Click to expand...

I mean like the lion's share of the damage was done in the first few months of Obama's presidency, before he had a chance to halt the slide. I mean like after those first few months the economy has been gradually but steadily improving.
 
Conservative said:
when working I employed over 1200 people thus have a much better idea of how the economy works than most here.
Click to expand...

I have a question .

What happened to the 1200 people you "had" working for you?

I'm sure most of the posters on this thread are well aware of how an economy works in a Capitalist nation.
America is a Capitalist nation is it not , so my guess is that the economy of America works on MONEY, and MONEY CIRCULATION to make profits.

Of course I might be wrong, please correct me if I am.:peace
 
AdamT said:
I mean like the lion's share of the damage was done in the first few months of Obama's presidency, before he had a chance to halt the slide. I mean like after those first few months the economy has been gradually but steadily improving.
Click to expand...

I know this is hard for an ideologue to understand but it has been three years, THREE YEARS!! Get it yet?
 
Conservative said:
That is your opinion apparently meaning that the only valid context is yours.
Click to expand...

An educated opinion I'll stand behind.


The proper context is this, we are three years into the Obama Administration and economic growth is lower in 2011 than it was in 2010. We still have a net job loss and unemployment rate much higher than when Obama took office. Waiting for exactly what the right context then is
Click to expand...

This only matters if government is the answer because they control the economy. Is that your position?
 
Conservative said:
That is your opinion apparently meaning that the only valid context is yours. The proper context is this, we are three years into the Obama Administration and economic growth is lower in 2011 than it was in 2010. We still have a net job loss and unemployment rate much higher than when Obama took office. Waiting for exactly what the right context then is
Click to expand...

Again, the context is that the economy was shedding more than half a million jobs a month when Obama took over. The entire financial sector was melting down. There was a very real possibility that we could slide into a full-on depression. That context.
 
presluc said:
I have a question .

What happened to the 1200 people you "had" working for you?

I'm sure most of the posters on this thread are well aware of how an economy works in a Capitalist nation.
America is a Capitalist nation is it not , so my guess is that the economy of America works on MONEY, and MONEY CIRCULATION to make profits.

Of course I might be wrong, please correct me if I am.:peace
Click to expand...

Everyone of the employees that worked for me created value and worth for themselves. Many were promoted, many went on to open their own businesses, and many still are working for the company.
 
AdamT said:
Again, the context is that the economy was shedding more than half a million jobs a month when Obama took over. The entire financial sector was melting down. There was a very real possibility that we could slide into a full-on depression. That context.
Click to expand...

They continued to shed jobs after his shovel ready stimulus plan was passed and continue to shed jobs today, 3 years later. How can there be less in the labor force today than three years ago? Don't we have a growing population?
 
Conservative said:
I know this is hard for an ideologue to understand but it has been three years, THREE YEARS!! Get it yet?
Click to expand...

You are the biggest idealogue on this board, and there's not even a close second.

If you thought we could recover from the Great Recession in three years then you were seriously deluded and phenomenally ignorant of economics.
 
AdamT said:
You are the biggest idealogue on this board, and there's not even a close second.

If you thought we could recover from the Great Recession in three years then you were seriously deluded and phenomenally ignorant of economics.
Click to expand...

You really don't have a clue and show it. In a private sector economy a leader would have gotten us out of the recession a lot quicker. That recession officially ended in June 2009 thus the economy was growing. There is less growth today than last year, fewer in the work force today, and a rising debt. Guess none of those things bother you
 
Conservative said:
You really don't have a clue and show it. In a private sector economy a leader would have gotten us out of the recession a lot quicker. That recession officially ended in June 2009 thus the economy was growing. There is less growth today than last year, fewer in the work force today, and a rising debt. Guess none of those things bother you
Click to expand...

You better get some windex; your crystal ball completely fogged.
 
Conservative said:
You really have a passion for the failures of this President which says a lot about you. That job gain isn't a NET job gain. Do you know th edifference between net and gross?
Click to expand...

It is a net job gain -- you're still lying and obviously desperate.
 
Conservative said:
You really don't have a clue and show it. In a private sector economy a leader would have gotten us out of the recession a lot quicker. That recession officially ended in June 2009 thus the economy was growing. There is less growth today than last year, fewer in the work force today, and a rising debt. Guess none of those things bother you
Click to expand...

Again, you argue government is the answer. I'm shocked by this.
 
Conservative said:
That is your opinion apparently meaning that the only valid context is yours. The proper context is this, we are three years into the Obama Administration and economic growth is lower in 2011 than it was in 2010. We still have a net job loss and unemployment rate much higher than when Obama took office. Waiting for exactly what the right context then is
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
They continued to shed jobs after his shovel ready stimulus plan was passed and continue to shed jobs today, 3 years later. How can there be less in the labor force today than three years ago? Don't we have a growing population?
Click to expand...

again, since when did Conservatives start worrying about unemployment? the more people that are employed, the less money corporations have to pay dividends. this is why the stock market used to ALWAYS go down when unemployment went down.
 
AdamT said:
Yes, it is a lie and you didn't post **** to counter it.
Click to expand...

BLS says you are wrong. Get with Goldenboy and contact BLS and tell them their data is wrong because you believe it to be so.

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
Original Data Value

Series Id: CES0500000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector: Total private
Industry: Total private
NAICS Code: -
Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 111634 111624 111555 111227 111146 110910 110737 110544 110276 109918 109575 109368
2002 109214 109054 108989 108892 108814 108824 108732 108671 108659 108772 108758 108595
2003 108640 108484 108286 108252 108274 108233 108231 108266 108421 108570 108611 108724
2004 108882 108913 109213 109437 109747 109841 109883 109984 110135 110465 110493 110624
2005 110718 110949 111095 111441 111583 111847 112122 112311 112392 112492 112796 112934
2006 113247 113533 113795 113961 113965 114049 114200 114347 114432 114438 114628 114803
2007 114993 115051 115251 115308 115419 115469 115486 115391 115396 115470 115568 115606
2008 115610 115482 115395 115209 114969 114752 114487 114170 113736 113245 112458 111822
2009 110981 110260 109473 108700 108374 107936 107649 107434 107221 106971 106937 106835
2010 106793 106772 106916 107145 107193 107258 107351 107461 107570 107713 107841 108008
2011 108102 108363 108582 108823 108922 108997 109170 109242 109462 109579 109719

Looks to me, and of course I could be wrong, but 110,981 sure looks like it is larger than 109,719.
 
Conservative said:
Everyone of the employees that worked for me created value and worth for themselves. Many were promoted, many went on to open their own businesses, and many still are working for the company.
Click to expand...

What of the rest, for you did not say all,
As far as that goes Enron could make the same claims about their past employees except no one would be working at Enron.

I couldn't help notice in a previous post you mention 3 YEARS.
Was it not 8 YEARS that started this economoc drain, 6 of which was with a Republican administration and a Republican Congress?

If the blame game is what you choose play it properly please.

As for me I care not about the mistakes of the past nor the mistakes of the present, if however America continues on this path , that effects the future of my country and myself, THAT I CARE ABOUT.:peace
 
presluc said:
What of the rest, for you did not say all,
As far as that goes Enron could make the same claims about their past employees except no one would be working at Enron.

I couldn't help notice in a previous post you mention 3 YEARS.
Was it not 8 YEARS that started this economoc drain, 6 of which was with a Republican administration and a Republican Congress?

If the blame game is what you choose play it properly please.

As for me I care not about the mistakes of the past nor the mistakes of the present, if however America continues on this path , that effects the future of my country and myself, THAT I CARE ABOUT.:peace
Click to expand...

Maybe this will help you understand the Bush years a little better and then you can confirm the numbers by going to bls.gov and bea.gov both non partisan agencies that provide actual data

Big Media Distorts Bush Economic Record - Capital Commerce (usnews.com)

2) "Economy Made Few Gains in Bush Years", declared the Washington Post earlier this week. And while the story grudgingly acknowledged the 52-straight months of job growth, it dismissed any economic gains as the ephemeral product of the housing bubble and wild-spending consumers. Except ... that worker productivity -- the most important long-term indicator of the core health and competitiveness of an economy -- has risen at a really impressive 2.6 annual rate during the Bush years vs. 2.0 percent for Clinton and 1.6 percent for Reagan. (That factoid from the Wall Street Journal.) This is important stuff. It's one big reason why the World Economic Forum says the U.S. has the most competitive economy in the world. The economic rebound after the pro-growth 2003 tax cuts was no mirage.
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
BLS says you are wrong. Get with Goldenboy and contact BLS and tell them their data is wrong because you believe it to be so.

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
Original Data Value

Series Id: CES0500000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector: Total private
Industry: Total private
NAICS Code: -
Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 111634 111624 111555 111227 111146 110910 110737 110544 110276 109918 109575 109368
2002 109214 109054 108989 108892 108814 108824 108732 108671 108659 108772 108758 108595
2003 108640 108484 108286 108252 108274 108233 108231 108266 108421 108570 108611 108724
2004 108882 108913 109213 109437 109747 109841 109883 109984 110135 110465 110493 110624
2005 110718 110949 111095 111441 111583 111847 112122 112311 112392 112492 112796 112934
2006 113247 113533 113795 113961 113965 114049 114200 114347 114432 114438 114628 114803
2007 114993 115051 115251 115308 115419 115469 115486 115391 115396 115470 115568 115606
2008 115610 115482 115395 115209 114969 114752 114487 114170 113736 113245 112458 111822
2009 110981 110260 109473 108700 108374 107936 107649 107434 107221 106971 106937 106835
2010 106793 106772 106916 107145 107193 107258 107351 107461 107570 107713 107841 108008
2011 108102 108363 108582 108823 108922 108997 109170 109242 109462 109579 109719

Looks to me, and of course I could be wrong, but 110,981 sure looks like it is larger than 109,719.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Adam to confuse you with actual data thus facts. Notice the number of months that Bush had private sector job growth? You don't want to talk about that, do you?
 
Conservative said:
Sorry, Adam to confuse you with actual data thus facts. Notice the number of months that Bush had private sector job growth? You don't want to talk about that, do you?
Click to expand...

You realize that the numbers your posting absolutely confirm what I wrote, and put the lie to what you wrote above? Like I said, private employment has increased for 14 consecutive months. Thanks for bitchslapping yourself with the data. :2rofll:
 
AdamT said:
You realize that the numbers your posting absolutely confirm what I wrote, and put the lie to what you wrote above? Like I said, private employment has increased for 14 consecutive months. Thanks for bitchslapping yourself with the data. :2rofll:
Click to expand...

Now that is funny, yes, it shows 14 months of job growth and a net private sector job loss. Is that really what you want to tout as a success?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom