Page 37 of 128 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 1274

Thread: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

  1. #361
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,274

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    So, why complain only when the least wealthy may receive some benefit?
    That would be your false narrative, and a misreading of what I believe. See, as most conservatives, I feel that the assistance programs are in place, and what we need to do for those of us who genuinely need to tap them for tough times in between jobs that support themselves, and families. NOT, for generational use to either avoid work, or as progressive, liberal demos have used the program, to keep those people dependent on government handouts, and in a voting block that they embrace, under threat of losing their benefits. That IMHO, is truly the modern day plantation, and modern day slavery, and demo's own it.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #362
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    Why should I when I'm right?

    Which not only was wrong, it was also not what we were talking about. We were talking about how Social Security works, not how it was originally intended. You were wrong. You've been wrong. You seem to insist on remaining wrong.

    And I gave you a direct quote from the official Social Security website which says the way the Social Security Trust Fund has worked more or less the same way since it was first introduced.

    The fact you're now arguing with the official source is just laughable. Or, as you would put it, "indicative of a conservative who can't stand the truth".

    Luckily for real conservatives, I don't use one person to judge all others.

    Who gives a damn? Completely irrelevant information. What WAS relevant was your clear lack of understanding of how Social Security works, as I already pointed out.

    No, no you do not. That was proven multiple times throughout this thread. You can continue to repeat this lie all you want, but we both know it is still a lie.

    No, I gave YOU the information on the budget projections, which was a $1.2 trillion deficit before Obama stepped into office. Once more, you are engaging in blatant lies. This is beneath you.

    Because you can't handle being proven wrong over and over again? I've given you official sources from the Social Security website, from the CBO and the GPO. You're essentially sticking your fingers in your ears and regurgitating the same falsehoods which were already disproven.

    At this point, we both know you've lost. It doesn't matter what is in the CBO projections because it won't change what we're talking about. Once more you're trying to avoid admitting how wrong you've been the entire time by saying useless things.

    Yes, for the total fiscal year, which started in October 2008. As I've already explained and sourced for you.

    I literally linked you directly to the bill George W. Bush signed. Why are you so scared of admitting you were wrong that you are blatantly lying?

    Of which only roughly $200 billion went against the deficit (since it wasn't all in one year), and which I noted before. Once more, you're trying to distract from how wrong you are.

    Blah, blah, blah. You're trying to distract again. It was $1.2 trillion deficit before Obama. Fiscal year 2009 officially ended with a $1.4 trillion deficit. That deficit (both the original and the final) have now been cut roughly in half.

    You should be on your knees kissing Obama's feet, given how much you seem to care about these things. You won't, but we both know why and it has nothing to do with the truth.

    You just posted numerous known lies to protect your political party...you have no right to call anyone partisan.
    I know this is what you want to believe especially that the CBO Projection which was made on January 7, 2009 was the actual results for 2009 but the facts simply don't support you. Projections are made upon based assumptions given them and the assumptions were that we had a budget which we didn't, the assumptions were that Obama would live by those assumptions which he didn't, the assumptions were that changes would be required should those assumptions not be accurate which they were.

    You see, your partisanship is controlling your thought process here and you want to believe the Projections were reality ignoring the Obama contributions to the 2009 deficit including the fact that he signed the budget in March 2009 after making changes, stimulus, GM/Chrysler, Freddie and Fannie, Afghanistan supplemental spending, shovels not getting to those shovel ready jobs.

    Apparently he knew that people like you would blame Bush for the deficit in 2009 and the people like you would ignore the deficits in 2010-2011-2012 and then tout cutting those record deficits in half as a significant accomplishment. Only a liberal would buy the fact that Obama's proposed budgets which requested record spending would cut the deficit in half.

    I assure you that if we had those 20 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers on the job full time we wouldn't have the deficits Obama has generated. 192,000 jobs created almost 5 years after the end of a recession that still left 20 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged is a disaster and shows exactly how incompetent Obama is and how poorly informed supporters are.

  3. #363
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    That would be your false narrative, and a misreading of what I believe. See, as most conservatives, I feel that the assistance programs are in place, and what we need to do for those of us who genuinely need to tap them for tough times in between jobs that support themselves, and families. NOT, for generational use to either avoid work, or as progressive, liberal demos have used the program, to keep those people dependent on government handouts, and in a voting block that they embrace, under threat of losing their benefits. That IMHO, is truly the modern day plantation, and modern day slavery, and demo's own it.
    So, if you really feel that way, why not actually solve our social dilemmas instead of merely wage perpetual war on them?

  4. #364
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,982

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I know this is what you want to believe especially that the CBO Projection which was made on January 7, 2009 was the actual results for 2009 but the facts simply don't support you.
    I already said the final results for FY2009 were $1.4 trillion. Why must you continue to lie?

    Projections are made upon based assumptions given them
    And those assumptions were based on the spending bill Bush had signed in September of 2008 for FY2009, as well as the hit in tax revenue we were going to take because of the recession. They even noted any stimulus passed would drive deficit up more.

    Do you understand anything about what you are talking in this thread? You don't understand budgets, you don't understand Social Security, you don't understand a President's policies don't go into effect a year before he takes office...what do you understand?

    and the assumptions were that we had a budget which we didn't, the assumptions were that Obama would live by those assumptions which he didn't, the assumptions were that changes would be required should those assumptions not be accurate which they were.
    You're trying to distract again. See my response above.

    You see, your partisanship is controlling your thought process here
    You have done nothing more than lie and show a total lack of understanding of some of the basic concepts of what we're discussing. I've sourced from official government websites, and you still continue with your lies even after they've been proven to be wrong. At this point, we both know you're wrong and we both know you're having to resort to lies. Why is it so hard for you to admit you've been wrong?

    and you want to believe the Projections were reality ignoring the Obama contributions to the 2009 deficit
    How could the projections made before Obama took office take into account Obama contributions to the 2009 deficit when Obama wasn't even in office? Once more, you're saying ridiculous things which have no basis in fact.

    including the fact that he signed the budget in March 2009 after making changes
    And those changes amounted to about $200 billion dollars more added to the deficit, which I've said three times now. Seriously, could you present an honest argument just once?

    Apparently he knew that people like you would blame Bush for the deficit in 2009
    The fact Bush signed the spending bill in September 2008 and the CBO projected a $1.2 trillion deficit before Obama even took office might have something to do with that.

    and the people like you would ignore the deficits in 2010-2011-2012
    You mean the deficits which basically declined every year (except for one, which remained relatively flat) until they are now roughly half of what Obama inherited?

    You should thank Obama's policies.

    and then tout cutting those record deficits in half as a significant accomplishment.
    Because it is? Our previous President took a relatively balanced budget and by the time he was done, had racked up $1.2 trillion in deficit. Our current President took $1.2 trillion in deficit and has now cut it to $679 billion (FY 2013). When our current President leaves office, the expected deficit will be $413 billion. Since you seem to care about deficits, you should be thanking your lucky stars we finally got a Democrat back in office.

    Only a liberal would buy the fact that Obama's proposed budgets which requested record spending would cut the deficit in half.
    Only you would not understand the difference between spending and deficit.

    I assure you that if we had those 20 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers on the job full time we wouldn't have the deficits Obama has generated.
    Then maybe Bush shouldn't have fired them all. After all, we were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs when Bush was in office, and it wasn't until Obama and his policies that we finally turned things around.

    You should be mad at Bush and praise Obama. Go ahead, say what you really want to say, "Oh, hail, King Obama". I know that's what you want to say. After all, once more the Democrat had to come clean up the mess the Republican left.

    how poorly informed supporters are.
    Says the person who doesn't understand how Social Security or budgets work.

    I'll come back to what I always come back to, and what you simply cannot deny. The fact is, under Obama, we've cut the deficit in half, recovered every private sector job lost from the effects of the recession, grown GDP and have a booming stock market. No amount of partisan comments will change those facts.


    But, I think I've grown tired of educating you. I might be back, I might not. At this point, we both know I taught you how Social Security works and we both know you have nothing left but distractions to avoid admitting the truths.

  5. #365
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Slyfox696;1063144497]I already said the final results for FY2009 were $1.4 trillion. Why must you continue to lie?
    You continue to ignore Obama's contribution to that deficit and blame it all on Bush. You think that from October 1, 2008 to January 21, 2009 that GW Bush without a budget created a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit and that the stimulus, GM/Chrysler takeover, Freddie and Fannie, Afghanistan supplemental spending didn't add to the deficit and the failure to get shovels to those shovel ready jobs didn't impact revenue? Do you understand that the continuing resolutions Bush signed did not fund the govt. for a year but rather for only a specific period of time? Obama signed the 2009 budget in March 2009, you seem to not understand that reality

    And those assumptions were based on the spending bill Bush had signed in September of 2008 for FY2009, as well as the hit in tax revenue we were going to take because of the recession. They even noted any stimulus passed would drive deficit up more.
    Continuing resolutions fund the govt. for a specific period of time and are normally at previous year's levels. You see Bush never had a trillion dollar deficit, Obama had them in 2009-2010-2011-2012
    '
    Do you understand anything about what you are talking in this thread? You don't understand budgets, you don't understand Social Security, you don't understand a President's policies don't go into effect a year before he takes office...what do you understand?
    LOL, I am allowing you to make a total fool of yourself. I guess the stimulus didn't happen, the takeover of GM/Chrysler didn't happen, repayment of most of TARP didn't happen, Freddie and Fannie didn't happen, the Afghanistan supplemental spending didn't happen, shovels weren't available to spend. Yes, your Bush Derangement Syndrome is on full display as is your ignorance of what Obama did.

    You're trying to distract again. See my response above.
    No, see my response above. Show me the Bush budget that was passed and signed that led to the 2009 deficit?


    You have done nothing more than lie and show a total lack of understanding of some of the basic concepts of what we're discussing. I've sourced from official government websites, and you still continue with your lies even after they've been proven to be wrong. At this point, we both know you're wrong and we both know you're having to resort to lies. Why is it so hard for you to admit you've been wrong?
    That is what you do when confused by facts, call someone else a liar. You sited govt.websites and ignored govt. policies. SS was put on budget during the LBJ Administration, that is a fact

    How could the projections made before Obama took office take into account Obama contributions to the 2009 deficit when Obama wasn't even in office? Once more, you're saying ridiculous things which have no basis in fact.
    You need to learn how CBO operates and where the assumptions come from. I am waiting for you to post the budget that Bush created and was approved that gave us the 2009 deficit. You obviously have no idea what a continuing resolution is and why one is required for every quarter.

    And those changes amounted to about $200 billion dollars more added to the deficit, which I've said three times now. Seriously, could you present an honest argument just once?
    Since the CBO didn't score Obama spending you have no idea what you are talking about. Over 200 billion alone was Afghanistan supplemental spending bills for the surge

    The fact Bush signed the spending bill in September 2008 and the CBO projected a $1.2 trillion deficit before Obama even took office might have something to do with that.
    Great, then show me the supplementals that Bush signed giving us that deficit?

    You mean the deficits which basically declined every year (except for one, which remained relatively flat) until they are now roughly half of what Obama inherited?

    You should thank Obama's policies.
    Why would I thank any President for increasing the debt with deficits? You want badly to give Obama credit for deficit reduction so please tell me exactly what Obama did to lower those deficits? What were the Obama budgets during that period of time?

    Because it is? Our previous President took a relatively balanced budget and by the time he was done, had racked up $1.2 trillion in deficit. Our current President took $1.2 trillion in deficit and has now cut it to $679 billion (FY 2013). When our current President leaves office, the expected deficit will be $413 billion. Since you seem to care about deficits, you should be thanking your lucky stars we finally got a Democrat back in office.
    I find it quite telling that the U.S. Treasury doesn't show those balanced budgets because what you want to do is ignore intergovt. holdings when considering the budget. There was no surplus because money was taken from SS and Medicare and put on budget leaving a shortfall in those categories. something you don't seem to understand or want to address. Clinton took office with a 4.4 trillion dollar debt and left it at 5.7 trillion dollars. If he had a balanced budget or any surplus the debt would have been reduced.


    Only you would not understand the difference between spending and deficit.
    LOL, spending causes deficits, don't spend and what kind of deficit do you have?

    Then maybe Bush shouldn't have fired them all. After all, we were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs when Bush was in office, and it wasn't until Obama and his policies that we finally turned things around.
    We were losing jobs officially when Bush took office, after Obama took office we were losing them unofficially in the form of discouraged workers. Please cite for any month in 2009-2010 that Obam had less unemployed PLUS Discouraged workers than Bush had in the same two categories? A discouraged worker is a subjective number and is an unemployed worker

    You should be mad at Bush and praise Obama. Go ahead, say what you really want to say, "Oh, hail, King Obama". I know that's what you want to say. After all, once more the Democrat had to come clean up the mess the Republican left.
    Why would I praise Obama for the high debt, high unemployment, low economic growth, that seems to be the new liberal normal

    Says the person who doesn't understand how Social Security or budgets work.
    You have yet to prove that but then again you seem to have a high opinion of yourself

    I'll come back to what I always come back to, and what you simply cannot deny. The fact is, under Obama, we've cut the deficit in half, recovered every private sector job lost from the effects of the recession, grown GDP and have a booming stock market. No amount of partisan comments will change those facts.
    Congratulations we have cut the deficit in half and added 6.7 trillion to the debt, great job. How about posting the deficits per year to show us how great Obama has done and then post his budgets which led to those deficit reductions?


    But, I think I've grown tired of educating you. I might be back, I might not. At this point, we both know I taught you how Social Security works and we both know you have nothing left but distractions to avoid admitting the truths.
    I couldn't care less whether you come back or not.

  6. #366
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,982

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You continue to ignore Obama's contribution to that deficit and blame it all on Bush. You think that from October 1, 2008 to January 21, 2009 that GW Bush without a budget created a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit and that the stimulus, GM/Chrysler takeover, Freddie and Fannie, Afghanistan supplemental spending didn't add to the deficit and the failure to get shovels to those shovel ready jobs didn't impact revenue? Do you understand that the continuing resolutions Bush signed did not fund the govt. for a year but rather for only a specific period of time? Obama signed the 2009 budget in March 2009, you seem to not understand that reality
    I didn't even read the rest of your post. I wanted to give you one last chance, and when I saw you pulling the same nonsense, not quoting me properly and lying about what's already been proven (the CBO projection), I figured it proved all I needed to know. The sad thing is I think you really do understand, you just won't allow yourself to admit you were wrong.

    Have a good day. Peddle your nonsense to someone else for a while.
    Last edited by Slyfox696; 04-12-14 at 12:27 PM.

  7. #367
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    I didn't even read the rest of your post. I wanted to give you one last chance, and when I saw you pulling the same nonsense, not quoting me properly and lying about what's already been proven (the CBO projection), I figured it proved all I needed to know. The sad thing is I think you really do understand, you just won't allow yourself to admit you were wrong.

    Have a good day. Peddle your nonsense to someone else for a while.
    LOL, you cannot even get the 2009 deficit right

    Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

  8. #368
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,274

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    So, if you really feel that way, why not actually solve our social dilemmas instead of merely wage perpetual war on them?
    I my part. I vote against the demo, progressive, socialist slave masters.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #369
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    I didn't even read the rest of your post. I wanted to give you one last chance, and when I saw you pulling the same nonsense, not quoting me properly and lying about what's already been proven (the CBO projection), I figured it proved all I needed to know. The sad thing is I think you really do understand, you just won't allow yourself to admit you were wrong.

    Have a good day. Peddle your nonsense to someone else for a while.
    Let's see if you can answer the following question, who said the following"

    “Every dollar released from taxation that is spared or invested will help create a new job and a new salary.”

  10. #370
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    So, if you really feel that way, why not actually solve our social dilemmas instead of merely wage perpetual war on them?
    Fox Butterfield, Is That You?

Page 37 of 128 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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