• 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!

U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%[W: 831]

Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

RabidAlpaca said:
I never called it one. Would you like to address what I did say now?
Click to expand...
You said it was a problem, I say it is not a short term problem, if you don't understand the difference, then this is pointless.



So you're disagreeing with the analogy, claiming that we should either cut funding drastically, ie: austerity, or blindly pump extra funding in, ie: stimulus? You don't see anything in the middle?

Or, you could answer the ****ing question, instead of trying to ignore it.
Click to expand...
I'm saying i don't accept either analogy nor do I accept your hyperbolic premise of what I did not say.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
Those economists were interpreting numbers - I was posting facts.

And my facts prove that the 1920/21 Depression was resolved in 3 1/2 years despite huge reductions in government spending.

Spin it all you wish - the fact remains the same.

Depression of 1920
Click to expand...
You can talk about facts all you want, we are arguing about YOUR interpretation of what solved it, I doubt you have many accolades associated with your economic analysis.

PS....where do think I got the previous quote from? Well it is from the link you just posted.
LOL.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

OpportunityCost said:
So you think we should engage in more spending and more taxing in an effort to bring about full employment?
Click to expand...
Start with a false premise.....and you get nowhere.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
You can talk about facts all you want, we are arguing about YOUR interpretation of what solved it, I doubt you have many accolades associated with your economic analysis.

PS....where do think I got the previous quote from? Well it is from the link you just posted.
LOL.
Click to expand...
Where exactly did I say that spending cuts solved the 1920/21 Depression?

The answer is - I did not.

I am saying that the 1920/21 depression in America was resolved despite massive spending cuts.

It goes towards evidence that recessions are not resolved due to increased government spending.


You typed 'Cutting govt spending in a time of lowered spending overall leads to MUCH SLOWER REBOUND.'

And I am showing you (and others) how history proves that is not true.


BTW - I know where your quote came from - I posted the link for others to read who are not familiar with the 1920/21 Depression... :rolleyes:.
 
Last edited:
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
This again is just one of your most basic errors that you constantly repeat even after being shown time and again that you are wrong. The spending for the wars was not fully shown in the budgets, nor did war spending suddenly end.

We are just NOW coming to terms with the costs of vet care from the Vietnam war, we won't see the full costs from AFPAK until 20 years from now. The scope of your vision is so small.


Not all, and again, most of the payouts were delayed until 2009BY.


You read it here folks.....tax cuts serve no purpose and are failures.
Click to expand...

This is really sad, so you believe something has to be on budget to be part of the deficit? Supplementals are never part of the budget but are always part of the yearly deficit. It really is a shame that liberalism has created this kind of ignorance.

Payouts for TARP were not delayed as 350 billion was spent by Bush and 350 billion left for Obama to spend. What part of loan and repayment do you not understand.

How much of a tax cut did you get out of the Obama tax cuts?

The basic problem we have today are people like you who cannot admit you are wrong and continue to stick to a failed ideology
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
You read it here folks.....tax cuts serve no purpose and are failures.
Click to expand...

And where is your link to unbiased, factual evidence of this?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
I did not say that it was solved because or not because of the spending cuts - please do not put words in my mouth.
Click to expand...
I did not say you said any such thing......what are you reading?

I am saying that the 1920/21 depression in America was resolved despite massive spending cuts.
Click to expand...
LOL....so....you are arguing that spending cuts are not needed to pull a country out of a depression? Because that IS my argument.

It goes towards evidence that recessions are not resolved due to increased government spending.
Click to expand...
No, that is the OPPOSITE of what you JUST SAID.


You typed 'Cutting govt spending in a time of lowered spending overall leads to MUCH SLOWER REBOUND.'

And I am showing you (and others) how history proves that is not true.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid your argument is confused on multiple levels.


BTW - I know where your quote came from - I posted the link for others to read who are not familiar with the 1920/21 Depression... :rolleyes:.
Click to expand...
Good for you! :rolleyes:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
And where is your link to unbiased, factual evidence of this?
Click to expand...
Uh? That is what he said.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Conservative said:
This is really sad, so you believe something has to be on budget to be part of the deficit?
Click to expand...
No, in fact I said they were not in the budget yet they DO show up in the deficit.

Supplementals are never part of the budget but are always part of the yearly deficit.
Click to expand...
That is what I'm saying.

It really is a shame that liberalism has created this kind of ignorance.
Click to expand...
I'm not ignoring it, you did until I brought it up.

Payouts for TARP were not delayed as 350 billion was spent by Bush and 350 billion left for Obama to spend
Click to expand...
OMG...this is too funny, you just confirmed what I said.


What part of loan and repayment do you not understand.
Click to expand...
Non sequitur.

How much of a tax cut did you get out of the Obama tax cuts?
Click to expand...
Some, but that wasn't the point, you said they are a failure, Mr. Supply side.

The basic problem we have today are people like you who cannot admit you are wrong and continue to stick to a failed ideology
Click to expand...
wow, a twofer! You can't see your own glaring errors as you write them.....too funny!
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
I did not say you said any such thing......what are you reading?
Click to expand...
You typed:

'we are arguing about YOUR interpretation of what solved it,'

I gave no interpretation of what solved it.

I merely said (in essence) there were massive spending cuts during the 1920/21 depression and that it was resolved in 3 1/2 years.




LOL....so....you are arguing that spending cuts are not needed to pull a country out of a depression? Because that IS my argument.

No, that is the OPPOSITE of what you JUST SAID.


You typed 'Cutting govt spending in a time of lowered spending overall leads to MUCH SLOWER REBOUND.'

I'm afraid your argument is confused on multiple levels.


Good for you! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

I said 'despite' OBVIOUSLY in regard to your inference that spending cuts were bad for a recovery.

I see you are (imo) trying to spin things...whatever.


The fact remains that you typed: ''Cutting govt spending in a time of lowered spending overall leads to MUCH SLOWER REBOUND.'

And the fact that spending was drastically cut during the 1920/21 depression shows that history does not back up your claim.


Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
Uh? That is what he said.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I did not read his remarks.

Do you believe tax cuts are bad for a recovering economy?

Yes or no, please?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth;1061660714]No, in fact I said they were not in the budget yet they DO show up in the deficit.
Click to expand...

So what matters the budget or the deficit? Do you realize that Obama hasn't submitted a budget but continues to spend at levels higher than Bush ever had even with the supplementals?

That is what I'm saying.
Click to expand...

Good because Obama has supplementals too especially since he has had no budget and everything was done by supplementals

I'm not ignoring it, you did until I brought it up.
Click to expand...

What do you call it when you ignore actual results and still buy rhetoric?

OMG...this is too funny, you just confirmed what I said.
Click to expand...

No, what I confirmed is you don't know the difference between a loan that was mostly repaid to an actual expense. further you don't seem to understand the fiscal year of the U.S.which is October to September. TARP wasn't fully spent but has mostly been repaid, where did that repayment show up as a reduction in deficit?

Non sequitur.
Click to expand...

Wrong, a question you don't seem to understand

Some, but that wasn't the point, you said they are a failure, Mr. Supply side.
Click to expand...

When you claim that most of the STimulus was tax cuts you are wrong. Tax cuts in the form or rebates serve no purpose for once they are gone they are gone, rate cuts go on until repealed. Quite telling how passionate you are for higher taxes and more govt. spending

wow, a twofer! You can't see your own glaring errors as you write them.....too funny!
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand that you keeping more of what you earn isn't an expense to the govt. as most liberals claim when they say tax cuts have to be paid for.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Conservative said:
That my friend is an absolute lie, all war expenses are part of the 10.6 trillion dollar debt that Obama inherited. TARP was a loan classified as an expense with most being repaid. ARRA was proposed by Obama and included targeted tax cuts requiring some kind of action before allowed, it served no purpose and was a failure except to the unions who were bailed out. You keep buying the leftwing lies. What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty
Click to expand...

Not only that, but there was also the Omnibus Spending Bill (Obama and the Democrats)

The "tax cuts" in Obama's failed Stimulus were also not "tax cuts". That's propaganda. They were actually "tax credits" which is Government Spending. An example of a "tax credit" is the failed cash for clunker program which also had the unintended consequence of also causing damage to the environment.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Bronson said:
Not only that, but there was also the Omnibus Spending Bill (Obama and the Democrats)

The "tax cuts" in Obama's failed Stimulus were also not "tax cuts". That's propaganda. They were actually "tax credits" which is Government Spending. An example of a "tax credit" is the failed cash for clunker program which also had the unintended consequence of also causing damage to the environment.
Click to expand...

Great point, thanks so much, but this like everything else factual will be ignored by those who want to believe the leftwing rhetoric.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

OpportunityCost said:
Government does not engage in effective resource allocation of the funds they have.

Engaging in the shell game of borrowing without end makes our economy dependent upon increased spending that is not generated through resources but artificially by printing money. Somehow, someway that must be paid for. Generally it results in inflation. Now, we have inflation numbers that argue that the CPI is not going up much. Ive got ask, if housing costs are dropping, and they are, would that not mask increases in other costs? Im not sure but I have to wonder, if the mortgage market has dropped somewhere around late 70s levels in some cases, how is it the CPI has not gone down to match this unless its being offset by increases in other costs? I realize also that healthcare may be a significant factor in CPI as well.

I know, I know: borrowing hasn't had a significant impact. If thats so, why not just engage in greater and greater borrowing until we get the growth we want? If your answer is inflation, that should be the same answer for why we shouldnt be borrowing so much right now. The other option is taxation. Which is where we are at now. Simply, I dont trust the government to use my money to make smart choices, they haven't shown much of a propensity for it so far.

The problem with using Keynesian theory to direct government spending is that government officials won't adhere to it the way they must and should to make the model work properly. Keep trying to do it just results in a spending model that puts us in the hole deeper and deeper.
Click to expand...

Now reply to the rest Gimme, Id like a discussion not one line non sequitors.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

OpportunityCost said:
Now reply to the rest Gimme, Id like a discussion not one line non sequitors.
Click to expand...

Don't hold your breath.

Judging by this thread - spinning is his specialty.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
You said it was a problem, I say it is not a short term problem, if you don't understand the difference, then this is pointless.
Click to expand...

Is English your second language? Because in the English language the word "Problem" does not imply a time reference. You're just avoiding the question. Kind of ****ing pathetic to be honest.



Gimmesometruth said:
I'm saying i don't accept either analogy nor do I accept your hyperbolic premise of what I did not say.
Click to expand...

So you're refusing to answer the question? Gotcha.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

RabidAlpaca said:
Is English your second language? Because in the English language the word "Problem" does not imply a time reference. You're just avoiding the question. Kind of ****ing pathetic to be honest.





So you're refusing to answer the question? Gotcha.
Click to expand...

See my post right above yours.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
See my post right above yours.
Click to expand...

It just ****ing pisses me off beyond belief when assholes run around here saying some pretty extreme things, yet refuse to actually engage in a debate with you.

I'll ask a SIMPLE question 4 or 5 times, sometimes even making the question 6 font, bold, and red, and they will still avoid it. I guess that's the difference, I'm here to debate. I even answer the questions I find uncomfortable, I don't run away like a ****ing coward like 'gimmesometruth'.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

RabidAlpaca said:
It just ****ing pisses me off beyond belief when assholes run around here saying some pretty extreme things, yet refuse to actually engage in a debate with you.

I'll ask a SIMPLE question 4 or 5 times, sometimes even making the question 6 font, bold, and red, and they will still avoid it. I guess that's the difference, I'm here to debate. I even answer the questions I find uncomfortable, I don't run away like a ****ing coward like 'gimmesometruth'.
Click to expand...

One thing I find that helps me when I am confronted with a situation like that is to remember that people HATE being proved wrong. And on chat forums (as you must have seen) - 98% of posters will NEVER admit they are wrong.

They will do anything, spin, insult, pick on some silly nothing to try and deflect...it's really quite childish.

People like that I just put on my ignore list...life is WAAY to short to waste it on people like that...imo.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
One thing I find that helps me when I am confronted with a situation like that is to remember that people HATE being proved wrong. And on chat forums (as you must have seen) - 98% of posters will NEVER admit they are wrong.

They will do anything, spin, insult, pick on some silly nothing to try and deflect...it's really quite childish.

People like that I just put on my ignore list...life is WAAY to short to waste it on people like that...imo.
Click to expand...

Well this is one of my hobbies, and I generally care about debating, especially in a proper, respectful way. I generally accept when someone refuses to reply as a "win". When someone replies with something completely outlandish, and refuses to answer my question after asking it 5 times, I have to assume he's just embarassed to believe what he does.

I for one hate being asked a question over and over again. I will always answer it.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

RabidAlpaca said:
Well this is one of my hobbies, and I generally care about debating, especially in a proper, respectful way. I generally accept when someone refuses to reply as a "win". When someone replies with something completely outlandish, and refuses to answer my question after asking it 5 times, I have to assume he's just embarassed to believe what he does.

I for one hate being asked a question over and over again. I will always answer it.
Click to expand...

Ditto.

If I read it - I will answer it (I say 'if' because I ignore so many people that they may ask me something that I am not aware of).
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
Ditto.

If I read it - I will answer it (I say 'if' because I ignore so many people that they may ask me something that I am not aware of).
Click to expand...

The only person I've ever had on my ignore list was Dr. Chuckles, and that was because he was running around false quoting me. He was actually using the quote function to make false statements that I never said. I still even unignored him.

Anyway, I don't expect to get an actual answer from gimmesometruth. He's one of the people who just likes to run around shouting things while refusing to back those statements up. *shrugs* I'd rather spend my time debating people who are here to debate.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

DA60 said:
I said major increase in expenditures.

Which of those was a major increase in expenditures that Obama was against?
Click to expand...

You asked which ones I opposed. I answered you. Neither Obama nor republicans opposed any if those enough.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

All of your points have to do with bad government decisions, which are the basis for my arguments on this thread....private industry doing a better job than the government can. If your point is that tax cuts aren't the sole solution for our problems, I agree. My initial statement on this thread regarding taxes included Gov. Snyder's cuts in income tax deductions and credits as well, like the cut in the EITC, which helps to ween people off of government aid to learn to be strong on their own. I think a lot of our high unemployment is due to people on welfare, almost endless unemployment, disability, and other government programs. If we didn't have these programs, I guarantee you our unemployment numbers would be much lower.


donsutherland1 said:
Detroit has suffered from a 25% population drop over the past decade (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/us/23detroit.html), a lack of diversified economic base, bad public policy, etc. The last element is part of the reason I believe that the State's emergency measures should also have included removing all of Detroit's elected officials. They have been part of the problem and they could well undermine the turnaround effort.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom