• 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 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

Help whom? Aw, yes, those poor workers with absolutely nothing invested in their job other than their own time. Stop ignoring what you do when you get to keep more of what you earn.

That attitude is exactly what I talking about. You clearly know little about how this works.
 
There was. But you know the study, look it up. You've been given a lot, with next to nothing in rebuttal. At least try.

No, there were no internals there at all. Post the internals and then tell me how it is a representative sample of the labor force to make your point.
 
The best I can do is to ignore you who are a waste of time with no solutions and being totally naïve about leadership and the qualities and responsibilities of a leader.

You mean you know you're wrong, but won't confess.
 
That attitude is exactly what I talking about. You clearly know little about how this works.

Yes, unlike you who understands the business world and expects someone else to solve all your problems for you and if they don't you blame others rather than your own leaders
 
Yes, unlike you who understands the business world and expects someone else to solve all your problems for you and if they don't you blame others rather than your own leaders

I solve my problems. We're talking about country and nit me personally. I'm doing fine thank you.
 
I solve my problems. We're talking about country and nit me personally. I'm doing fine thank you.

Oh, I forgot, you are so much smarter than everyone else thus are the only one that can solve their own problems without govt. bureaucratic help.
 
Oh, I forgot, you are so much smarter than everyone else thus are the only one that can solve their own problems without govt. bureaucratic help.

Another strawman on your part. I didn't say that either. Do remember, you're the one wanting the president to save you.
 
You said two years, I did not. You continue to make this about morality, ignoring that there 3 unemployed for every job. You don't want them to get UI, you don't want govt assistance for retraining, you think that deregulation will cure this.......sometime.

Many of the people not working today are not working because of the of the Bush tax cuts, especially those in the public sector. The tax rates established by President Clinton were working just fine.


one bad practice doesn't a bad employer make. i don't agree with not considering the long term unemployed. however, it's still possible that the employer treats its existing employees well. if one practice like that automatically makes an employer "bad," then there are probably no "good" employers.

In my opinion the government figures on unemployment are seriously misleading. First, they claim there are no more than 11 million people they consider unemployed, then dismiss about 7.5 million as "not really trying," "marginally attached," and "disgusted" and Voila! We only have 3.5 million truly unemployed.

Furthermore, the government creates a class of "not seeking work" containing over 80 million people, at least 40 million of which are able to work, old enough, and may actually be seeking work but have not been hired yet. This class is supposedly based on data garnered from some method of "asking," but they admit they don't ask everyone, and I don't know who they select to ask and how they go about doing it. The Census? A statistical "poll" sampling a few thousand people?

Does this mean the people in this "class" are totally unwilling to seek work; that the next day they didn't go out to seek work? That if the reason for their current inaction disappears (i.e. the primary breadwinner loses his job or gets paid less, or they graduate from school, etc.) they will remain unlikely to seek work?

I think government unemployment figures are pure propaganda with little relation to the reality of American unemployment.
 
Last edited:
Another strawman on your part. I didn't say that either. Do remember, you're the one wanting the president to save you.

You don't understand good leadership at all, that is obvious. Enough of your silly games, the only solution you offered was making unions stronger. This seems to be a game for you and I am not in the mood to play it. How do strong unions make things better and who pays their costs?
 
You don't understand good leadership at all, that is obvious. Enough of your silly games, the only solution you offered was making unions stronger. This seems to be a game for you and I am not in the mood to play it. How do strong unions make things better and who pays their costs?

So what is your solution?

And none of this ephemeral BS. Concrete proposals only as in A leads to B.
 
So what is your solution?

And none of this ephemeral BS. Concrete proposals only as in A leads to B.

For someone who is always stalking me get some help with comprehension of what I post. I have given my solutions many time and it serves no purpose repeating that to you, someone who couldn't care less what the proposed solutions are as you simply want attention.
 
You don't understand good leadership at all, that is obvious. Enough of your silly games, the only solution you offered was making unions stronger. This seems to be a game for you and I am not in the mood to play it. How do strong unions make things better and who pays their costs?

You realize our discussion wasn't about solutions. You were whining about taxes and regulations and started trying to redirect when you couldn't address the facts. I understand. But the truth will set you free.

:2dance::monkey:2dance::monkey
 
For someone who is always stalking me get some help with comprehension of what I post. I have given my solutions many time and it serves no purpose repeating that to you, someone who couldn't care less what the proposed solutions are as you simply want attention.

It would hae been much easier for you just to say "I know nothing and have no answers". But I guess the point was made with this post of yours as well. :lol:
 
If you cheerleaders wouldn't be spending so much time high fiving each other for idiotic posts you would know the answer to that question. The answer is very simple, you lead, you promote the private sector, you provide incentive to the American taxpayers by allowing them to keep more of what they earn, You unleash the American spirit and cheerlead when necessary promoting that "shining city on the hill", you wouldn't demonize any economic class for producing, you wouldn't micro manage personal responsibility issues like health care, and you don't take expensive vacations and play a lot of golf when so many people are suffering.

And your solution is what? Also how would implement it in the real world?
He offers nothing but platitudes.
 
You realize our discussion wasn't about solutions. You were whining about taxes and regulations and started trying to redirect when you couldn't address the facts. I understand. But the truth will set you free.

:2dance::monkey:2dance::monkey

The question was asked by one of those liberals here who high five everything that another liberal posts. I gave you the answers and then asked for your solutions. As usual you offered none which just goes to show how little you know about the private sector economy or even your own behavior when it comes to your own money
 
It would hae been much easier for you just to say "I know nothing and have no answers". But I guess the point was made with this post of yours as well. :lol:

Aw, another one just showed up. I have given that answer over and over again but like so many you don't want the answer, you want to bait and troll. Been in this forum a long time, almost 40,000 posts, educate yourself and find the answers. You can even go back just a few of my posts in this thread. Show that you aren't a typical liberal here who just wants to troll
 
He offers nothing but platitudes.

You can start with post 883. I would give you specifics but you haven't shown the ability to understand anything other than programs offered by the govt. Reagan provided a blueprint but liberals wanting more power and people dependent on them so as to keep their jobs.
 
You can start with post 883. I would give you specifics but you haven't shown the ability to understand anything other than programs offered by the govt. Reagan provided a blueprint but liberals wanting more power and people dependent on them so as to keep their jobs.
Again, back in the 80's there were plenty of manufacturing jobs in the US, today they are mostly all gone. Reagan spent money on weapons systems that generated jobs.
 
The question was asked by one of those liberals here who high five everything that another liberal posts. I gave you the answers and then asked for your solutions. As usual you offered none which just goes to show how little you know about the private sector economy or even your own behavior when it comes to your own money

We started by my correcting your tax claim. Then your regulation claim. Sorry.
 
Again, back in the 80's there were plenty of manufacturing jobs in the US, today they are mostly all gone. Reagan spent money on weapons systems that generated jobs.

You really are hung up on manufacturing and ignore the new industries that have cropped up since the 80's. Further you ignore that there were 146 million working Americans in December 2007 and we still have a labor force of over 155 million. Good leadership is needed, Reagan offered it in the 80's and Obama doesn't have a clue nor do most of his supporters. More people are dependent on the govt. today than ever before and liberals love that. You offer people over 2 years of unemployment benefits and there isn't a lot of incentive for some to find a job.
 
You can start with post 883. I would give you specifics but you haven't shown the ability to understand anything other than programs offered by the govt. Reagan provided a blueprint but liberals wanting more power and people dependent on them so as to keep their jobs.

You mean this:

If you cheerleaders wouldn't be spending so much time high fiving each other for idiotic posts you would know the answer to that question. The answer is very simple, you lead, you promote the private sector, you provide incentive to the American taxpayers by allowing them to keep more of what they earn, You unleash the American spirit and cheerlead when necessary promoting that "shining city on the hill", you wouldn't demonize any economic class for producing, you wouldn't micro manage personal responsibility issues like health care, and you don't take expensive vacations and play a lot of golf when so many people are suffering.

Wallmart can not even afford to pay their healthcare costs. It is a failure of the private sector.
 
We started by my correcting your tax claim. Then your regulation claim. Sorry.

You are all over the place showing how little you know about the private sector financial statements, profit demand, and debt service. Now you continue to show how little you know and understand about leadership and the role of a leader. Not sure why we ever elect a President in your view of the U.S. govt.
 
You mean this:



Wallmart can not even afford to pay their healthcare costs. It is a failure of the private sector.

Wal-Mart offers employees healthcare and like everything else in life expect people to pay some of those costs. People who get things free have no incentive to reduce costs since they have no skin in the game as Obama would say.
 
You are all over the place showing how little you know about the private sector financial statements, profit demand, and debt service. Now you continue to show how little you know and understand about leadership and the role of a leader. Not sure why we ever elect a President in your view of the U.S. govt.

Nice try (actually a weak effort). I've been very consistent. And we don't elect a president to run private business. If you want the president to be responsible, we have to become China.
 
Wal-Mart offers employees healthcare and like everything else in life expect people to pay some of those costs. People who get things free have no incentive to reduce costs since they have no skin in the game as Obama would say.

Working is not free. And if the private sector can not cover the costs of basic healthcare it is a failure of the private sector.
 
Back
Top Bottom