Page 148 of 149 FirstFirst ... 4898138146147148149 LastLast
Results 1,471 to 1,480 of 1482

Thread: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

  1. #1471
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:55 AM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    10,583

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Trade is one of the foundations of human existence and the world at large. As a result, the family and the community came after trade. This is all self evident if I'm not mistaken.
    You are mistaken
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  2. #1472
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    You are mistaken
    That isn't really an argument, but thanks for wasting my time with that.

  3. #1473
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by johnny_rebson View Post
    So why are we nominating the guy who created RomneyCare?
    It is too late for this discussion. I preferred different. It is what is is. Our only order of business at this point is to defeat the one term Marxist flexible president Barrack Hussein Obama. If we fail in this the US is over. It will be a different place from which there will be no return. We shall suffer the same fate as Europe.

  4. #1474
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    03-05-18 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,862

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Rising Sun View Post
    Except for the very poor and the very rich who can take advantage of numerous tax loopholes written into the code for them. This is why Romney pays 14% but most of Middle Class America pays 25-28%.
    But both ususally pay some somewhere along the line. I agree the working poor have the worst of it, but the point is we all contribute something.

    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. #1475
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 07:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post

    A valiant attempt at telling the truth, but you just couldn't get it done.

    You need to check your statistics. The labor force is smaller now than it was 3 years ago.
    Seriously, do numbers confuse you?

    I've already shown you the labor force numbers then and now and the labor for is higher now than it was then...


    07/2009: 154,538,000
    07/2012: 155,013,000

    BLS: Labor Force

    Do you see that? Do you understand it?? The labor force at 155,013,000 today is bigger than it was 3 years ago at 154,538,000.

    You're confusing the labor force with the labor force participation rate. They're not the same thing.

    Capiche?

  6. #1476
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    03-05-18 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,862

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnlaw View Post
    What is so hard to understand that government builds infrastructure, businesses use the infrastructure, and without the infrastructure business can not thrive. Not to mention that a stable and solvent government is also necessary for entrepreneurship to thrive. It's all true..
    What you don't want to understand, you won't. Sadly.

    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.

  7. #1477
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    11-08-13 @ 11:55 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Seriously, do numbers confuse you?

    I've already shown you the labor force numbers then and now and the labor for is higher now than it was then...


    07/2009: 154,538,000
    07/2012: 155,013,000

    BLS: Labor Force

    Do you see that? Do you understand it?? The labor force at 155,013,000 today is bigger than it was 3 years ago at 154,538,000.

    You're confusing the labor force with the labor force participation rate. They're not the same thing.

    Capiche?
    No, you are trying to say that labor participation rates aren't important, and that the size of labor force is all that matters. Answer this smart guy, if the labor force is larger, but the participation rate is lower, what does that mean? It means there are fewer jobs available than there were 3 years ago. I thought that was understood, but apparantly you aren't smart enough to understand the point that was being made.

    Let me be a little more clear for you, since you don't seem to be able to comprehend the implied points being made. There are FEWER people WORKING today than there were 3 years ago. Also, there are FEWER available jobs today than there were 3 years ago.

    Capiche?

    Under Obama, there has been NET LOSS of jobs in America. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. 7 million people have abandoned the labor market. Underemployment is above 13%. Real unemployment is about 11.5%. The government doesn't even factor in the people who have given up looking for work, or who have exceeded 99 weeks of unemployment. This man-child President is a disaster, and everyone knows it. Which is why he would rather talk about Ryan's budget plans, instead of his own failed record.

    Capiche?

  8. #1478
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:55 AM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    10,583

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post
    No, you are trying to say that labor participation rates aren't important, and that the size of labor force is all that matters. Answer this smart guy, if the labor force is larger, but the participation rate is lower, what does that mean? It means there are fewer jobs available than there were 3 years ago. I thought that was understood, but apparantly you aren't smart enough to understand the point that was being made.

    Let me be a little more clear for you, since you don't seem to be able to comprehend the implied points being made. There are FEWER people WORKING today than there were 3 years ago. Also, there are FEWER available jobs today than there were 3 years ago.

    Capiche?

    Under Obama, there has been NET LOSS of jobs in America. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. 7 million people have abandoned the labor market. Underemployment is above 13%. Real unemployment is about 11.5%. The government doesn't even factor in the people who have given up looking for work, or who have exceeded 99 weeks of unemployment. This man-child President is a disaster, and everyone knows it. Which is why he would rather talk about Ryan's budget plans, instead of his own failed record.

    Capiche?
    Enough with the personal attacks - they really don't work when the attacker is wrong on the basic facts.

    The low point for employment in the US was in late July, early August 2009 - 3 years ago - since that low point there has been a continual increase in the number of Americans working - despite the fact that during the same three years the number of people with government jobs has decreased, with the exception of the temporary increase for the period of the 2010 Census.

    The FACT that you bring up must use the January 2009 numbers, a period during which American job numbers were plummeting and during which the newly elected President had zero effect on the economy.

    Time and again the increase in employment graph has been posted, and yes it did look like a bikini for the period 2007 -2011.

    A more correct statement would be "During the Obama Administration, there has been a net loss of jobs in America" What's the difference? The President and his staff and his Cabinet do not control the economy, they can for the most part only make suggestions and attempt to push thru legislation they favour but it is the Congress that must pass those bills.

    When you have a Congress setting records in obstructionism, it is difficult to get anything done. Naturally, the instigators of the obstruction, the members of the Party of NO! place all of the blame upon the President. I can blame the President too but I blame him for not realising the depth of hatred and antipathy that is present in the modern Republican Party, I can blame him for using the "bully pulpit" to better inform the electorate of the deliberate actions of a party which are causing much of today's financial woes.

    It is almost 170 years since the American government has witnessed such an obstinate refusal to compromise and for one of the major parties to refuse to work with the other for the benefit of the nation. The result was not pretty then and it may not be 'pretty' in our near future.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  9. #1479
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    11-08-13 @ 11:55 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    Enough with the personal attacks - they really don't work when the attacker is wrong on the basic facts.

    The low point for employment in the US was in late July, early August 2009 - 3 years ago - since that low point there has been a continual increase in the number of Americans working - despite the fact that during the same three years the number of people with government jobs has decreased, with the exception of the temporary increase for the period of the 2010 Census.

    The FACT that you bring up must use the January 2009 numbers, a period during which American job numbers were plummeting and during which the newly elected President had zero effect on the economy.

    Time and again the increase in employment graph has been posted, and yes it did look like a bikini for the period 2007 -2011.

    A more correct statement would be "During the Obama Administration, there has been a net loss of jobs in America" What's the difference? The President and his staff and his Cabinet do not control the economy, they can for the most part only make suggestions and attempt to push thru legislation they favour but it is the Congress that must pass those bills.

    When you have a Congress setting records in obstructionism, it is difficult to get anything done. Naturally, the instigators of the obstruction, the members of the Party of NO! place all of the blame upon the President. I can blame the President too but I blame him for not realising the depth of hatred and antipathy that is present in the modern Republican Party, I can blame him for using the "bully pulpit" to better inform the electorate of the deliberate actions of a party which are causing much of today's financial woes.

    It is almost 170 years since the American government has witnessed such an obstinate refusal to compromise and for one of the major parties to refuse to work with the other for the benefit of the nation. The result was not pretty then and it may not be 'pretty' in our near future.
    If that's the case, then Obama needs to stop trying to take credit for creating 4.5 million new jobs. While 4.5 million new jobs have been created under his watch, more jobs have been lost over the same duration. Resulting in a NET LOSS of jobs in America. 7 million people have abandoned the labor market all together. They aren't even factored into the unemployment number. When you factor them back in, the unemployment rate is above 11%, WORSE than it was in January 2009 when it was 7.9%.

    So, Obama has presided over an economy for almost 4 years. When he took office, unemployment was 7.9%, it capped out at 10% in October 2009, and now stands at 8.3%. We are still above the unemployment number he came into office with. And I'm not factoring "real" unemployment, just reported unemployment. When you add 7 million people back in, who have either given up looking for work, or have fulfilled 99 weeks of unemployment, the unemployment rate stands at 11.5%.

    Now, if you wanna try to convince people that the labor market is better now than it was 3 years ago, you cant do it when you factor in the 7 million people who have abandoned the labor market all together. FEWER people are working today than they were 3 years ago. There has been a NET LOSS of jobs under Obama. You cannot dispute that. I can source the numbers straight from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    Time for him to fulfill his own words....."If I don't get this thing turned around in 3 years, I'm looking at a one term presidency". See ya....

  10. #1480
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 07:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post
    No, you are trying to say that labor participation rates aren't important, and that the size of labor force is all that matters.
    Holy shiznit! I didn't say that at all. Seriously?? That's what your brain translated my words into??



    I said you are wrong that the labor force dropped. It didn't and I posted the numbers to prove it. All I said about the labor force participation rate is that you don't know the difference between that and the labor force -- evidenced by your repeated [false] claim that the labor force has dropped over the last 3 years.

    Capiche?


    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post

    Answer this smart guy, if the labor force is larger, but the participation rate is lower, what does that mean? It means there are fewer jobs available than there were 3 years ago. I thought that was understood, but apparantly you aren't smart enough to understand the point that was being made.
    You thought that is understood?? It's wrong, how can anyone besides you understand it? It doesn't mean there are fewer jobs available; in fact there are more people employed now than there were 3 years ago. What it means is that job growth, while positive, did not keep up with population growth. Since you can't comprehend that, I have no doubt you can't comprehend besides people giving up looking for a job, there are other reasons which contribute to the participation rate dropping (which, by the way, it's been dropping since 2001), which is accelerated these days due to being in the age of retiring baby boomers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post
    Let me be a little more clear for you, since you don't seem to be able to comprehend the implied points being made. There are FEWER people WORKING today than there were 3 years ago. Also, there are FEWER available jobs today than there were 3 years ago.
    Dayam, you just don't git it, do ya???

    Three years ago, there were 154.5 million people working. As of the end of July, there were 155 million people working.

    How on Earth can you claim that 155 million is "fewer" than 154.5 million????


    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post
    Under Obama, there has been NET LOSS of jobs in America. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. 7 million people have abandoned the labor market.
    I don't know how many times you need to be taught, but again, there are 155 million people working now compared to 154.5 million, 3 years ago. That's a net gain.

    As far as your bogus talking point about 7 million people "abandoned the labor market," prove all 7 million did so because they wanted to work but couldn't find work; as opposed to retiring or going to school instead of working.


    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post

    Underemployment is above 13%.
    Umm, underemployment was over 14% when Bush left office.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post

    Capiche?

    Quote Originally Posted by Masada View Post

    Capiche?

    Capiche?
    Kewl, seems I struck a nerve.

Posting Permissions

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