• 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. Economy Added 162,000 Jobs in March, Most in 3 Years

Taylor said:
Where do you get 1/20? The difference in slope is more like ~5 or 6 vs ~-20.
Click to expand...

You cannot have a proper derivative without the proper scale. So until you provide it, your graph is nothing more than a skewed representation of the data.

Total employed labor force and the respective months associated with the data is a necessary. Why half ass it?
 
Taylor said:
To answer the other question it can be either/or, the graph would look exactly the same.
Click to expand...

It would look the same if it started at zero vs. above? Hardly.
 
Redress said:
I take great joy in some of those on the right revealing themselves. "Good news? OH NO! We can't have good news with democrats in power. However can we spin this into something bad? We must have bad news so we can win more in November."
Click to expand...

Whatever, November is already in the bag.

There is no joy, just solemn resolution. The sad thing is that Democrats are taking most of the brunt of Obama's bad decisions so far, but they're too dumb to realize it.
 
Erod said:
Whatever, November is already in the bag.

There is no joy, just solemn resolution. The sad thing is that Democrats are taking most of the brunt of Obama's bad decisions so far, but they're too dumb to realize it.
Click to expand...

You really are not a good one to be calling others dumb.
 
Redress said:
Yes you certainly are spinning. We went from losing 663k jobs 1 year ago, to gaining over 100k jobs(not counting the temp jobs). Close to an 800k difference. You don't miraculously go from bleeding 250k + jobs a month to gaining big numbers of jobs a month overnight, but the trend has been for the losses to slow, and now starting to gain jobs. That is good news.
Click to expand...
We lost 4.74 million jobs last year and just gained .16

Yes, the job losses have stopped, but that's been true for many months. Have we "started gaining jobs"? The jury is out and you won't see me celebrating until we demonstrate a reliable trend.
Redress said:
To focus simply on the negative is pure spin, trying to control the message for political reasons.
Click to expand...
I'm not focusing on the negative - I'm being indifferent. If I were focusing on the negative, I'd be talking about how this was considerably lower than expectations, how it still represents a slight increase in the overall unemployment rate, etc.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
You cannot have a proper derivative without the proper scale. So until you provide it, your graph is nothing more than a skewed representation of the data.

Total employed labor force and the respective months associated with the data is a necessary. Why half ass it?
Click to expand...
The graph perfectly makes the point for which it was intended, and I made the data available to you. If you wish to make a point (god, that would be nice!) feel free to make your own graph to illustrate it.

Unless or until that happens, I'll continue to believe you have nothing of interest to add to the discussion.
 
Redress said:
You really are not a good one to be calling others dumb.
Click to expand...

Wasn't calling you dumb. But a HUGE number of Obama supporters are entirely clueless about anything on this planet, the least of which is governmental policy, economics, or the implications of one on the other.
 
4.5 million foreclosures in 2010 is not spin

it's way too many to be spin

way too big, serious, important

on the other hand, to overlook 4.5 million foreclosures...

now, that'd be spin

a trillion dollars per year in interest alone is not spin

it's way too expensive to be spin

too big, too important

to try to ignore a tril per year...

that'd be spin

the spreading of the cancer to commercial real estate...

the reluctance of our partners to continue to carry us...

the status of STATE budgets in sacto, albany, lansing...

these observations aren't politics, not spin

they're way too impending

to overlook, in contrast, the extra billion dollars it's costing at&t and verizon just to remain in operation...

for anyone to try to look past that...

in times like these...

now, that'd be spin
 
VanceMack said:
Hell yes I was...thats PRECISELY why I am a libertarian. Left the party in 2003. I am CONSISTENTLY critical of BOTH parties. Or have you missed that? My first posts on this thread pointed to 4 years of foolish spending with regard to the housing crisis. I dont CARE about the parties...I care that we keep spending ourselves into oblivion and eventually it will destroy us.
Click to expand...

Good. I missed that part.
 
The Prof said:
4.5 million foreclosures in 2010 is not spin

it's way too many to be spin

way too big, serious, important

on the other hand, to overlook 4.5 million foreclosures...

now, that'd be spin

a trillion dollars per year in interest alone is not spin

it's way too expensive to be spin

too big, too important

to try to ignore a tril per year...

that'd be spin

the spreading of the cancer to commercial real estate...

the reluctance of our partners to continue to carry us...

the status of STATE budgets in sacto, albany, lansing...

these observations aren't politics, not spin

they're way too impending

to overlook, in contrast, the extra billion dollars it's costing at&t and verizon just to remain in operation...

for anyone to try to look past that...

in times like these...

now, that'd be spin
Click to expand...
We are screwed. Thanks GWB.
 
you're right, we're screwed

obama failed to fix it

too bad
 
The Prof said:
you're right, we're screwed

obama failed to fix it

too bad
Click to expand...
You really expect a lot. It took a decade to ruin the economy, yet you expected Obama to fix it in a year?
Could anyone have fixed it?
What could have been done to fix the housing sector?
What could have been done to prevent all those job losses?
Bush and Co. tried zero percent interest rates and tax cuts. That just made things worse. What could have Obama done differently to fix the economy in his first year?
 
i don't expect squat, i don't figure, i don't signify

AMERICA expects solutions

that's why he ran

and he better HURRY UP

he's way late, already

mom's cold and the baby's got the croop...
 
The Prof said:
i don't expect squat, i don't figure, i don't signify

AMERICA expects solutions

that's why he ran

and he better HURRY UP

he's way late, already

mom's cold and the baby's got the croop...
Click to expand...

What should he do?
 
the exact opposite of what he's done
 
he should have got us out of this mess

he's president, bottom line
 
USA-1 said:
You really expect a lot. It took a decade to ruin the economy, yet you expected Obama to fix it in a year?
Could anyone have fixed it?
What could have been done to fix the housing sector?
What could have been done to prevent all those job losses?
Bush and Co. tried zero percent interest rates and tax cuts. That just made things worse. What could have Obama done differently to fix the economy in his first year?
Click to expand...

We've been screwed ever since the New Deal started a malignant increase in government and the number of people who are dependent upon it

Bush's fault wasn't tax cuts. The Taxes in this country are way too high on the top 10% and way too low on the bottom 90%

its the spending where he was deficient and much of that spending can be tied to the destruction of the tenth amendment engineered by FDR
 
cbo elmendorf, this morning: the path we're on is "unsustainable"

Elmendorf noted a recent CBO report that pegged an increase in the public debt from $7.5 trillion at the end of 2009 to $20.3 trillion at the end of 2020 if President Barack Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget were to be implemented as written. As a percentage of gross domestic product, the debt would rise from 53 percent to 90 percent, CBO forecasted.
Click to expand...

CBO chief says debt 'unsustainable' - Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com

is that spin?

bernanke and volcker said things similar

you folks really need to wake up, it's bad out there

and pretty much everyone who is anyone (not currently working for this administration, that is) knows it

you really need to quit dodging and own up

it's all yours
 
The Prof said:
cbo elmendorf, this morning: the path we're on is "unsustainable"



CBO chief says debt 'unsustainable' - Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com

is that spin?

bernanke and volcker said things similar

you folks really need to wake up, it's bad out there

and pretty much everyone who is anyone (not currently working for this administration, that is) knows it

you really need to quit dodging and own up

it's all yours
Click to expand...

And despite this...BarryCo imposed yet another massively underfunded entitlement program on us...
 
liblady said:
most jobs added in three years is good news.
Click to expand...

Its false good news when they are either temp jobs or government jobs. Much of this is both.

I would be much happier if most of these jobs were actually doing something valuable or actually creating or sustaining a product. Creating or sustaining bigger government only draws resources away from the private sector which hurts us all in the long run.
 
The Prof said:
cbo elmendorf, this morning: the path we're on is "unsustainable"
Click to expand...

Elmendorf was talking about the nation's long-term fiscal outlook, a matter that is separate from the current cyclical recovery that is now underway. That the economy is now recovering from the severe recession and the job market may be in the early stages of resuming growth does not change the grim reality of the long-term fiscal challenges facing the U.S.

The U.S. cannot grow its way out of its structural budget deficits. Discretionary spending reductions, mandatory spending reform (with fundamental health care reform that addresses the excessive cost growth issue), and some tax hikes will all be necessary if the U.S. is to address its fiscal challenges. The sooner a credible fiscal consolidation strategy is developed, the better. Once the recovery is sustained, the nation should begin to implement a fiscal consolidation strategy. 2011 might mark a feasible starting point. By all reasonable measures, the absence of such a strategy within the next year should warrant the U.S. being given a negative outlook by the major ratings agencies.

Unfortunately, I expect ideologues to try to hinder progress even if their rigidity is largely about perpetuating a failing fiscal approach at the expense of future opportunities and generations. On one side, some political leaders will resist the possibility of meaningful spending reductions (discretionary and mandatory). On the other, some political leaders will resist the possibility of tax hikes. Yet, the magnitude of the fiscal challenges is such that there can be no sacred ideological cows. Tough choices will need to be made if the transition to fiscal sustainability is to be relatively smooth and the nation is to avert a long-term debt crisis.
 
Last edited:
donsutherland1 said:
Elmendorf was talking about the nation's long-term fiscal outlook, a matter that is separate from the current cyclical recovery that is now underway. That the economy is now recovering from the severe recession and the job market may be in the early stages of resuming growth does not change the grim reality of the long-term fiscal challenges facing the U.S.

The U.S. cannot grow its way out of its structural budget deficits. Discretionary spending reductions, mandatory spending reform (with fundamental health care reform that addresses the excessive cost growth issue), and some tax hikes will all be necessary if the U.S. is to address its fiscal challenges. The sooner a credible fiscal consolidation strategy is developed, the better. Once the recovery is sustained, the nation should begin to implement a fiscal consolidation strategy. 2011 might mark a feasible starting point. By all reasonable definitions, the absence of such a strategy within the next year should warrant the U.S. being given a negative outlook by the major ratings agencies.

Unfortunately, I expect ideologues to try to hinder progress even if their rigidity is largely about perpetuating a failing fiscal approach at the expense of future opportunities and generations. On one side, some political leaders will resist the possibility of meaningful spending reductions (discretionary and mandatory). On the other, some political leaders will resist the possibility of tax hikes. Yet, the magnitude of the fiscal challenges is such that there can be no sacred ideological cows. Tough choices will need to be made if the transition to fiscal sustainability is to be relatively smooth and the nation is to avert a long-term debt crisis.
Click to expand...

Sincerely,
George W. "I gots a Social Security Knife still in my back Bush"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom