• 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!

US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

Status
Not open for further replies.
It would help if you were a little less caustic in your response and stop with the baiting. I do believe that i do know what would have happened without TARP, union contracts wouldn't have been bailed out, states would have had to come up with their own funding, some businesses would have failed and others would have taken them over and none of that would have been on the taxpayer dime. The fact that the largest banks were forced into TARP is quite telling

Documents Reveal How Paulson Forced Banks To Take TARP Cash - Business Insider
why don't you read your own post, #714, and apply the whole 'caustic and baiting ' thing to yourself......
 
Now, if Obama could just get EVERYBODY to stop looking for a job, we could get the unemployment rate down to 0 percent!

People dropping out of the workforce altogether isn't the solution, folks.
 
Now, if Obama could just get EVERYBODY to stop looking for a job, we could get the unemployment rate down to 0 percent!

People dropping out of the workforce altogether isn't the solution, folks.

Gee, thanks for that cogent analysis.
 
Otherwise known as the truth.

I don't dispute it. It's just pointless and obvious, that's all.

You should try it.

I never lie and I try to make sure my statements of fact are accurate before I post them. You?
 
Otherwise known as the truth. You should try it.

While there are problems with these unemployment numbers in full context, you lecturing someone on the "truth" is like Al-Assad lecturing someone on Human Rights Abuses.
 
Now, if Obama could just get EVERYBODY to stop looking for a job, we could get the unemployment rate down to 0 percent!

People dropping out of the workforce altogether isn't the solution, folks.

Umm ... the work force grew by over half a million last month.
 
What a surprise that you left out the final statement

Either you are lying again or you're blind as a bat, I didn't leave out the final statement.

By the way, your guy Mitt Romney took it on the chin last night. Little Ricky Santorum beat the pants off him. Romney is supposed to be the most electable? :lamo
 
Either you are lying again or you're blind as a bat, I didn't leave out the final statement.

By the way, your guy Mitt Romney took it on the chin last night. Little Ricky Santorum beat the pants off him. Romney is supposed to be the most electable? :lamo

Obama is a diaster, we will see when the GOP process is over but anyone that votes for Obama is an idiot and simply buys the rhetoric ignoring the results.
 
There were 257K private sector jobs created in January, you'll have to go back to March 2006 to see that many jobs created in one month.

LNS14000000_105583_1328741805718.gif


That's cause we didn't need to create that many jobs years ago.
 
LNS14000000_105583_1328741805718.gif


That's cause we didn't need to create that many jobs years ago.
That makes no sense at all.

Private Sector Jobs:

YearJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2002-151-159-65-96-8012-95-56-12108-14-170
200357-157-199-3419-39-23216114337108
200417032299223310944110215232727133
2005952311453461432612801878496304140
2006315285258165780158145865189166
2007229571724612161-4-7320617547
200841-136-112-215-216-231-259-294-425-480-797-658
2009-839-725-787-802-312-426-296-219-184-232-42-120
2010-40-27141193849292128115196134140
201111925726126410810217552216139178220(P)
2012257(P)
P : preliminary
 
That makes no sense at all.

Private Sector Jobs:

YearJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2002-151-159-65-96-8012-95-56-12108-14-170
200357-157-199-3419-39-23216114337108
200417032299223310944110215232727133
2005952311453461432612801878496304140
2006315285258165780158145865189166
2007229571724612161-4-7320617547
200841-136-112-215-216-231-259-294-425-480-797-658
2009-839-725-787-802-312-426-296-219-184-232-42-120
2010-40-27141193849292128115196134140
201111925726126410810217552216139178220(P)
2012257(P)
P : preliminary

If you spent the amount of money Obama spent and had these results you would be fired. They are still less than promised and less than when he started. Cost/benefits analysis means nothing to you nor the 24 million unemployed/under employed Americans which is still higher than anything Bush ever had
 
GM doesn't employ three million people but what Obama did was give money to the states so they could bailout union contracts without going to the people of the state to get the money. in other words it was nothing more than a union bailout and there is no proof that any jobs were saved by TARP that couldn't have been saved by the states themselves. Obama knew that the states wouldn't do it because those union jobs were on the line and if the states had to explain that to the electorate those unions would have been forced to take major cuts


Gm had 68,500 employees, plus 5,860 G M dealerships in the U.S. on September 20, 2009,about. Chrysler Employees, 51623,plus 3,181 dealers. Each dealer has around 200 employees.

9041 total dealers combined. =1,808,200 total employees of the dealers + Gm 68,500 employees+ Chrysler 51623Employees.for a grand total of=1,928,323.

Are you telling me I couldn’t come up with a mill and change, from ALL OF THE SUPPLIERS of both of these United States car companies? :2wave:
 
Gm had 68,500 employees, plus 5,860 G M dealerships in the U.S. on September 20, 2009,about. Chrysler Employees, 51623,plus 3,181 dealers. Each dealer has around 200 employees.

9041 total dealers combined. =1,808,200 total employees of the dealers + Gm 68,500 employees+ Chrysler 51623Employees.for a grand total of=1,928,323.

Are you telling me I couldn’t come up with a mill and change, from ALL OF THE SUPPLIERS of both of these United States car companies? :2wave:

Did you subtract the dealerships that Obama put out of business and those employees? Did you figure out how many of those saved jobs were state jobs which are state, not federal taxpayer responsibilities? What is it about Obama that creates this kind of loyalty that causes good people like you to forget how to think?
 
Gm had 68,500 employees, plus 5,860 G M dealerships in the U.S. on September 20, 2009,about. Chrysler Employees, 51623,plus 3,181 dealers. Each dealer has around 200 employees.

9041 total dealers combined. =1,808,200 total employees of the dealers + Gm 68,500 employees+ Chrysler 51623Employees.for a grand total of=1,928,323.

Are you telling me I couldn’t come up with a mill and change, from ALL OF THE SUPPLIERS of both of these United States car companies? :2wave:

DANG! That's a bunch of folks. Sure am glad BHO continued on the good idea GWB had...again...seems you are too? :mrgreen:
 
That makes no sense at all. Private Sector Jobs:
YearJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2002-151-159-65-96-8012-95-56-12108-14-170
200357-157-199-3419-39-23216114337108
200417032299223310944110215232727133
2005952311453461432612801878496304140
2006315285258165780158145865189166
2007229571724612161-4-7320617547
200841-136-112-215-216-231-259-294-425-480-797-658
2009-839-725-787-802-312-426-296-219-184-232-42-120
2010-40-27141193849292128115196134140
201111925726126410810217552216139178220(P)
2012257(P)
P : preliminary
Where is the link to your information?
 
Yet more bad news for righties today as first time unemployment benefits fell again as the economy continues to grow.

Good news for America is bad news for Conservatives.
 
Yet more bad news for righties today as first time unemployment benefits fell again as the economy continues to grow.

Good news for America is bad news for Conservatives.

What you don't seem to understand is that "Your" president has done nothing to generate these numbers yet you take credit for them. It is sad to see someone as smart as you believe that it is the role of the Federal Govt. to grant you rights. This Progressive movement is killing us and when you finally realize it, it will be too late
 
What you don't seem to understand is that "Your" president has done nothing to generate these numbers yet you take credit for them. It is sad to see someone as smart as you believe that it is the role of the Federal Govt. to grant you rights. This Progressive movement is killing us and when you finally realize it, it will be too late

I think it's cute how in your world, a Republican president isn't to blame when unemployment rises but a Democrat president is; and how a Republican president gets the credit when jobs are gained but a Democrat president doesn't. Fortunately, I'm confidnt that most folks here see right through your partisan disconnect.

By the way, how is Progressivism killing you?
 
I think it's cute how in your world, a Republican president isn't to blame when unemployment rises but a Democrat president is; and how a Republican president gets the credit when jobs are gained but a Democrat president doesn't. Fortunately, I'm confidnt that most folks here see right through your partisan disconnect.

By the way, how is Progressivism killing you?

Progressivism is trying to create a strong central govt. contrary to the Founders vision of a SMALL central govt. where the power is vested in the states. Telling the Church what they have to do, requiring individuals to buy healthcare, social engineering and granting individual rights aren't the role of the Federal Govt. "Your" President is putting into place the European model. One of these days you are going to realize that you don't have all the answers nor does the Central Govt.
 
Your question wasn't directed at me.

Answer: If the economy collapsed this year, will you admit that it's Obama's fault?

Here's an answer the wingnuts won't like....."It depends on what actually happens"
 
Here's an answer the wingnuts won't like....."It depends on what actually happens"

Actually it depends on the actual role of the Federal Govt. vs state and individual responsibility. Remember a govt. big enough to provide you all that you want is also big enough to take it all away or have you thought beyond the moment and your own individual desires?
 
Progressivism is trying to create a strong central govt. contrary to the Founders vision of a SMALL central govt. where the power is vested in the states. Telling the Church what they have to do, requiring individuals to buy healthcare, social engineering and granting individual rights aren't the role of the Federal Govt. "Your" President is putting into place the European model. One of these days you are going to realize that you don't have all the answers nor does the Central Govt.
How is that killing you?

By the way, you're already paying for other peoples' healthcare, even though you don't want to. And as far as national healthcare, Obama told voters that's what he wanted to pass and he was overwhelmingly elected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom