• 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!

Jobless rate rises to 8.3 percent, hiring picks up but still falling short

I guess I'll point out again that some of the worst presidents we've ever had were very successful businessmen.
 
pbrauer said:
gee, John McCain didn't work in the private sector. Did you guys screwup or something?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Obama record, 15% U-6
23000 plus unemployed/under employed Americans
100 million Americans on some sort of govt. dependence
Record number of people on food stamps
1.5% GDP Growth
5.4 trillion added to the debt in less than 4 years.

For the first time in his life he has a record that he has to defend. Keep running from it
 
AdamT said:
I guess I'll point out again that some of the worst presidents we've ever had were very successful businessmen.
Click to expand...

Any one in the private sector that had the results Obama has after being on the job the same amount of time as Obama would be fired.
 
Conservative said:
Obama record, 15% U-6
23000 plus unemployed/under employed Americans
100 million Americans on some sort of govt. dependence
Record number of people on food stamps
1.5% GDP Growth
5.4 trillion added to the debt in less than 4 years.

For the first time in his life he has a record that he has to defend. Keep running from it
Click to expand...
Mean while you didn't answer my question about John McCain and the fact he didn't work in the private sector... Yet the Republican party nominated him anyway.
 
Conservative said:
Any one in the private sector that had the results Obama has after being on the job the same amount of time as Obama would be fired.
Click to expand...

Not true. They'd be called a turnaround specialist and given an eight-figure salary.
 
pbrauer said:
Mean while you didn't answer my question about John McCain and the fact he didn't work in the private sector... Yet the Republican party nominated him anyway.
Click to expand...

John McCain isn't on the ballot but John McCain had a military background and the discipline and leadership that goes with it. Obama lacks both. McCain isn't on the ballot in November but the Obama record will be
 
Conservative said:
John McCain isn't on the ballot but John McCain had a military background and the discipline and leadership that goes with it. Obama lacks both. McCain isn't on the ballot in November but the Obama record will be
Click to expand...

He also demostrated poor judgement in selecting Palin.
 
Conservative said:
Aw, yes, let's relive the Reagan years and its 16 million net job growth, doubling of GDP, 60% growth of govt. revenue and the destruction of the Soviet Union giving Clinton a peace dividend all in a thread about the unemployment rate rising to 8.3. Typical Jay Walking attempt to divert from the Obama record of a labor force less than before the recession, a net job loss, more unemployed, more discouraged workers, 5.4 trillion added to the debt, 1.5% GDP growth. I can see why that is so important to you. Anyone that supports Obama doesn't have a lot of credibility and newbie that includes you
Click to expand...

Of course, the key ingredient of the "Reagan years" was not Reagan, but the Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Andy Groves, Scott McNealy and other warriors of the computer revolution. I know you have this fantasy that somehow Reagan 'created' this grand economy and lead the charge of economic growth by simply tweaking the tax code; sorry, but that is really little more than a romantic fantasy. The prosperity of the 1980's (and 1990's) was not created by something as trivial as a tax code change. It was far more substantive than that.

Our 20 years of prosperity (1980 to 2000) was substantially tied to the advent of the personal computer and the rapid deployment of enterprise solutions in all business, large to small, was one of the great economic transformations of all time. A technology revolution. Reagan was merely fortunate enough to be president at the beginning of it, so people want to give his leadership credit, but the reality is he was pretty much a bystander with benefits. Since the revolution went from about 1980 to 2000, Bush I and Clinton were also beneficiaries. It wasn't so much their great leadership, but their ability to get out of the way and not screw anything up.

Unfortunately, we are pretty much post-computer/Internet revolution so we lack the accelerant for a good economic fire. In fact, to a great extent we are dealing with the blacklash of this technology revolution in that many jobs have been eliminated by technology and people have yet to adapt.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
Of course, the key ingredient of the "Reagan years" was not Reagan, but the Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Andy Groves, Scott McNealy and other warriors of the computer revolution. I know you have this fantasy that somehow Reagan 'created' this grand economy and lead the charge of economic growth by simply tweaking the tax code; sorry, but that is really little more than a romantic fantasy. The prosperity of the 1980's (and 1990's) was not created by something as trivial as a tax code change. It was far more substantive than that.

Our 20 years of prosperity (1980 to 2000) was substantially tied to the advent of the personal computer and the rapid deployment of enterprise solutions in all business, large to small, was one of the great economic transformations of all time. A technology revolution. Reagan was merely fortunate enough to be president at the beginning of it, so people want to give his leadership credit, but the reality is he was pretty much a bystander with benefits. Since the revolution went from about 1980 to 2000, Bush I and Clinton were also beneficiaries. It wasn't so much their great leadership, but their ability to get out of the way and not screw anything up.

Unfortunately, we are pretty much post-computer/Internet revolution so we lack the accelerant for a good economic fire. In fact, to a great extent we are dealing with the blacklash of this technology revolution in that many jobs have been eliminated by technology and people have yet to adapt.
Click to expand...

My fantasy? No, my understanding of leadership which obviously you don't. Reagan unleashed the American entreprenuerial spirit which obviously you don't understand. How many millionaires did Zuckerberg create today? It really is a shame to see people like you support someone who destroys incentive and the private sector growth all because of your lack of understanding of the principles that made this country great.
 
Boo Radley said:
He also demostrated poor judgement in selecting Palin.
Click to expand...

:shrug: which remained better judgement than slightly more than half of the democrat party in selecting obama over hillary.
 
Conservative said:
My fantasy? No, my understanding of leadership which obviously you don't. Reagan unleashed the American entreprenuerial spirit which obviously you don't understand. How many millionaires did Zuckerberg create today? It really is a shame to see people like you support someone who destroys incentive and the private sector growth all because of your lack of understanding of the principles that made this country great.
Click to expand...

Sorry to crush your fantasy, but unless you can find cites in the memoirs of Gates/Groves/Jobs or other major innovator of the 1980's, etc., that they were inspired by "his great leadership", I am afraid there is no basis for your claim other than you wish it to be so. I am not saying Reagan was completely incidental to what happened, but you and many Regressives give him way, way too much credit. All we can credit him with is not getting in the way.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
Sorry to crush your fantasy, but unless you can find cites in the memoirs of Gates/Groves/Jobs or other major innovator of the 1980's, etc., that they were inspired by "his great leadership", I am afraid there is no basis for your claim other than you wish it to be so. I am not saying Reagan was completely incidental to what happened, but you and many Regressives give him way, way too much credit. All we can credit him with is not getting in the way.
Click to expand...

Ok, if you buy the fact that Reagan didn't get in the way then why can't you see that is exactly what Obama is doing, getting in the way? That is a major difference thus the entirely different results
 
Conservative said:
Ok, if you buy the fact that Reagan didn't get in the way then why can't you see that is exactly what Obama is doing, getting in the way? That is a major difference thus the entirely different results
Click to expand...

Reagan raised corporate taxes and made the capital gains tax the same rate as ordinary income.



Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Ok, if you buy the fact that Reagan didn't get in the way then why can't you see that is exactly what Obama is doing, getting in the way? That is a major difference thus the entirely different results
Click to expand...
Gotten in the way? He has allowed thousands of local and state worker to become available for private employment!
 
pbrauer said:
Reagan raised corporate taxes and made the capital gains tax the same rate as ordinary income.



Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

And created 16 million new taxpayers thus growing FIT revenue even with a three year tax cut
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Gotten in the way? He has allowed thousands of local and state worker to become available for private employment!
Click to expand...

Again, nice use of my quote, state and local employees aren't employees that Obama controls.
 
Conservative said:
Again, nice use of my quote, state and local employees aren't employees that Obama controls.
Click to expand...

Oh, but he has and did get funding to retain their employment....but that ended....which you should be happy about!
Less spending, less employment, less GDP.....the Regressive way!

Yeah!
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Oh, but he has and did get funding to retain their employment....but that ended....which you should be happy about!
Less spending, less employment, less GDP.....the Regressive way!

Yeah!
Click to expand...

It isn't the Federal government's role to fund state and local public employees
 
Conservative said:
It isn't the Federal government's role to fund state and local public employees
Click to expand...
LOL....you are a funny guy!

You can stick to your ancient ideology, but the nation has moved on.

Have fun with the Paulites, cya.


:2wave:
 
He's correct. It is the State and Local governments jobs to fun themselves. That's why they are given taxing authority.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
LOL....you are a funny guy!

You can stick to your ancient ideology, but the nation has moved on.

Have fun with the Paulites, cya.


:2wave:
Click to expand...

Yes, keep supporting that massive central govt. run by bureaucrats that created the current 16 trillion dollar debt and don't have to be fiscally responsible like state constitution's require. amazing what bureaucrats can do for being fiscally irresponsible and that fiscal irresponsibility is passed on to many states living above their means all to provide "compassionate" spending that never generates compassionate results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom