Page 159 of 215 FirstFirst ... 59109149157158159160161169209 ... LastLast
Results 1,581 to 1,590 of 2145

Thread: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

  1. #1581
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    upsideguy;1062098483]Classic Con: deflect the issue that he can not handle with a new, silly issue. I was not debating leadership and personal responsibility. I was debating who is responsible for the economic mess. Stick to the subject!



    There you go again.... again, Bush started with essentially a balanced budget and then ran up huge deficits.... well before the Dems took control of congress. Again, the fact that the Dems had nominal control of congress in 2007 was moot, as 1) the damage substantially was already done (again --- why must I repeat this? --- with tax cuts designed to eliminate surplus, plus two very, very expensive wars/occupations). The Dems did not have a veto proof congress, so there wasn't much they could have done to change things.... other than do what the current Reps do, which is pass the same meaningless, shallow legislation over and over and over and over and over and over and over... and over again.



    I am not debating the Clinton surplus. I am telling you the Bush screwed up the economy and we are still digging out. Again, you can't stick to the subject because its an argument lost to you and you know it. Bush made a mess out of the economy.



    Facts are something that elude you, pal. First, you have presented NONE in this argument. You continue to offer only your impressions and try to pass them off as facts. I never said tax cuts were an expense to the government. I did say that tax cuts causes deficits. I backed up my statement with numerous articles on the subject... I never offered my personal impressions on this (despite, having a CPA background, I would actually have some expertise on the subject)... but, let me go ahead: deficits can be created by increasing expenditure OR by decreasing revenue. Tax cuts decreased revenue (the tables document this is what happened and the basic premise was for this to happen because they were designed to be surplus
    You want badly to believe your ideology is a winning one. You want badly to believe Bush is responsible for the economic results today. What you show is just how little you understand about leadership as well as economic policies. [/QUOTE]

    You want badly to believe your ideology is a winning one. Well, the ideology of Bush told us how they were going to reduce the surplus and pay off the debt with their tax reform. The result was the biggest forecast bust in the history of human civilization-- THE BIGGEST!

    The Heritage Foundation told us the tax cuts would REDUCE revenue by $1.2T (a little higher, but at least they admitted it was going to cut revenue... which means reduce surplus/increase deficit by more than $1T) AND create a $1.8T surplus at the end of Bush's term. Of course, the actual debt at the end of Bush's term was $10.626. (Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)).. for a total budget bust / ERROR of $12.2T. Never, in the history of the world, as anyone been so wrong! Now, I probably shouldn't mention here about the Iraq/Afghanistan wars/occupations, the former of which was to pay for itself, yet cost us $4-6T.

    This is the "leadership" was so wrong about so much. It's easy to lay the sins of the US financial plight on their feet; its almost impossible to defend them and preserve your integrity.... but, go ahead, Con, give it a shot. Its nearly an impossible task... which is why you never do it, you just deflect. Not with me. I see through it. You can't defend Bush... and you know it. Its time to admit the sin. The truth and forgiveness will set you free.

    The Economic Impact of President Bush's Tax Relief Plan



    Again, this is a different discussion. I appreciate that your only place to hide is with obfuscation. The proposition that I am asking you to either acknowledge or debate is whether the GW Bush administration 1) started with a balanced budget and delivered running large deficits and thus 2) pretty much screwed up the US economy as we know it.

    Go ahead, address that issue without the distraction of changing the subject. I know you are not capable of that, so perhaps you should take the easy road and embrace the truth. It will set you free to discuss whether Obama has failed to fix the problem or is capable of fixing the problem. Though that is a different discussion, I am happy to have that with you. You just might find, on that subject, you and I are much closer to agreement.

    Stay on subject.
    Let me know what you do with more money in your paycheck and if that has any effect on economic activity? Do you think you keeping more of what you earn is an expense to the govt?

    Now we can continue this but for what purpose? Bush isn't in office, Obama could have ended the Bush tax cuts in 2009 but didn't. Obama has trillion dollar deficit every year in office. Consumer spending is the number one component of GDP so tell me how tax cuts affect consumer spending?

    You seem to buy what you are told but not one of those studies addresses economic activity and that effect on jobs and tax revenue

    Further back in September 2001 we had quite a shock to the economy of this country and the cries that would never forget. Here we are over a decade later and you have forgotten just like you forgot Bush inherited a recession that began official in March 2001 both of which affected employment, govt. tax revenue, and the deficit. GAO claims 9/11 cost over a trillion dollars which is part of that Bush debt.
    Last edited by Conservative; 07-24-13 at 09:42 AM.

  2. #1582
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    Thank you for your emotional, factless response. I laid out specifics; you laid an egg. Sorry, I built a case against Bush with facts and articles; you gave us nothing but wasted cyberspace.... In fact, your retort was so empty, I am not sure why it warrants my attention. I guess I just see a guy with 90 posts and think, just maybe, he has some potential to be a good poster and future debating adversary. "...maybe the kid's got some potential..."

    As to the bolded area above, not only do you not bring facts to support your arguments, you ignore facts already presented that specifically refute your argument. I posted Table 1.1 of from the actual US Budget. This table shows ACTUAL receipts and expenditures. If you took the time to look at it, you would the deficits not only slowed; they reversed and become modest surpluses in 1999 and 2000 (on-budget) and 1997 to 2000 (on and off budget combined). These surpluses were acknowledged by the Heritage Foundation (see prior post of mine) and the Bush Administration... they were real, albeit modest. Even if you don't want to acknowledge the surplus, you have to acknowledge that the budget was pretty much balanced when GW pulled up to 1600 Pennsylvania and unpacked his stuff.

    Bush Defends Size of Surplus And Tax Cuts - NYTimes.com
    Bush 1999: "It's Important to Cut the Taxes" - YouTube

    If what you mean is asking why the rate of increase in debt did not slow (confusing deficits and debts is a common rookie mistake).... well, the rate of increase in debt slowed to almost nothing. Total debt rose by about $18B between 1999 and 2001 ($5.641 to $5.659B); while debt to public actually dropped (from $3.8T in 1997 to $3.3T in 2001).

    http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...bt_ann2001.pdf

    Sorry, Bush essentially started with a clean slate and produced huge deficits... there is no denying it, no matter how much emotion you wish to levy.

    I laid out my supported argument. Granted, I have a huge advantage in this as the facts are on my side. Its pretty easy to call up articles to support what I am saying. You have a much tougher challenge; defending the guilty is a tough road.... but, surely you can do better than this. Let's see facts, graphs and supporting articles (from something besides a political porn site). Perhaps you could start by explaining your proposition that Obamacare is a budget buster. That is a new one. The CBO actually has scored it as saving money in the long-run. So, produce the goods (supported arguments).. otherwise sit down, watch and learn, rook.

    (hey, at least one guy liked your posts... after all, you jumped in to help him defend the indefensible... unfortunately, you used his strategy of confusing your impressions with good argument and not supporting his position with verifiable facts.)


    Lets play your game, this time with Clinton. The first budget Bush was responsible for began 1 Oct 2001. So for the first nine months of 2001 it's on Clinton but we have to use it all against him according to the rules you use with Obama. The deficit in 2001 was 133.29 billion dollars. The defiict in 1999 was 130.08 billion dollars. Doesn't seem like it slowed much to me. In fact if based against 2000 its on a big upswing. So once again, just where was this "surplus"? Good thing you think very highly of yourself and your phony liberal ideas because people capable of thought won't.

    Bring some real facts to the table next time junior. Not just numbers being twisted to gather support from people incapable of thought.
    Last edited by ItAin'tFree; 07-24-13 at 11:57 AM.

  3. #1583
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by ItAin'tFree View Post
    So once again, just where was this "surplus"?
    ds.jpg

    Bring some real facts to the table next time junior. Not just numbers being twisted to gather support from people incapable of thought.
    Perhaps you should do the same.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #1584
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    ds.jpg



    Perhaps you should do the same.
    So let me see if I have this right, you believe that when you put your money into SS and because more money went in than out because of fewer retirees, it is a surplus? Is that liberal math or what? Your money going into SS is an obligation owed to you in the future, the fact that it was spent on something other than you is a debt to the govt. that has to be repaid at some time. There was no Clinton surplus due to intergovt. holding obligations in the future

    Simple question, in 2000, 480.6 million dollars went into SS and only 330.8 million came out. Isn't that 480.6 a future obligation? How can a liberal claim there was a surplus when the receipts are owed in the future?
    Last edited by Conservative; 07-24-13 at 02:07 PM.

  5. #1585
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    So let me see if I have this right, you believe that when you put your money into SS and because more money went in than out because of fewer retirees, it is a surplus?
    Um, there were not fewer retirees, outlays continued to increase. By law, surpluses went back into the SSTF, hence REVENUE exceeded OUTLAYS.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  6. #1586
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Um, there were not fewer retirees, outlays continued to increase. By law, surpluses went back into the SSTF, hence REVENUE exceeded OUTLAYS.
    By law the so called surpluses were used on budget to fund anything other than current social security obligations. Pretty simple question, when you give your money to the govt. for SS isn't that an obligation the govt. owes you when you retire? If so why would you allow it to be spent on something other than your retirement? Sounds like the classic definition of a Ponzi Scheme

    By the way, those surpluses didn't go back into the SSTF, IOU's did

    I want to be around when the light bulb goes off in your head. You have made claims that the surplus went back into the SSTF which is a lie. You have made claims that the Bush budget led to the 1.2 trillion dollar deficit in 2009 which is another lie. Don't you get tired of allowing the left to make a fool out of you?
    Last edited by Conservative; 07-24-13 at 02:13 PM.

  7. #1587
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    By law the so called surpluses were used on budget to fund anything other than current social security obligations.
    Wrong, try again. The surpluses were used to pay back previous SSTF borrowing.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  8. #1588
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Wrong, try again. The surpluses were used to pay back previous SSTF borrowing.
    So we have a Ponzi Scheme, thanks for playing. the problem is that Ponzi scheme is worse because there are more people retiring than working to pay for those retirees. Your money was spent long, long ago and you aren't concerned about it. Says a lot about liberalism

  9. #1589
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Even WAPO admits that the only reason the unemployment rate is going down is because of the LFPR

    The depressing reality of ‘the recovery’: Americans aren’t getting jobs. They’re retiring.

    2 food stamp recipients for every job created in Obama's Economy.

    Two Americans Added to Food Stamp Rolls for Every Job Administration Says It Created | CNS News

    What's Obama doing? Campaigning and having the country talk about Trayvon Martin. Oh and blaming Bush still.

  10. #1590
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    So we have a Ponzi Scheme, thanks for playing. the problem is that Ponzi scheme is worse because there are more people retiring than working to pay for those retirees. Your money was spent long, long ago and you aren't concerned about it. Says a lot about liberalism
    You prove over and over that you don't understand ponzi's or the SS system or the laws concerning surpluses in regard to past SSTF transfers. You believe that by tossing out the old "ponzi" canard that you make a point, not understanding that you are just doubling down on dumb statements. This is to distract away from your losing argument about surpluses.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

Posting Permissions

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