• 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!

Strongest jobs recovery in decades.

I lived and worked during the Reagan years, I was 34-42 during the era so I have a very good perspective of what happened and the attitude of the country. I watched the Unemployment climb and watched the Congress argue the Reagan tax cuts that didn't get passed until August 1981. the 10-10-5% cuts led to the cries of the Democrats about massive debt when the reality was they doubled the govt. revenue and led to a massive economic expansion. Think the Obama policies will do the same?

Obama economic plan went into effect Feb. 2, 2009 due to the Democrat Congress and here we are almost 2 years later with the claim of strongest job creation in decades. That is quite a stretch and distortion.



I really don't have a lot of use for your charts because they aren't supported by the only source credible when it comes to job creation and unemployment, the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I posted the results that shows employment down by over 3 million and unemployment up to almost 16 million. I don't call that a success story

the rest of your post has nothing to do with the thread topic even though it presents a distorted view of the Obama record. No business is going to hire with the uncertainty as to the costs of the Obama Agenda. We know what the cost of the Reagan and Bush agendas were for private business, nothing and that boosted incentive and job growth.

Businesses aren't going to hire and since payroll is the largest expense a business has their profits are going to be strong. For every dollar of expense cut that is a dollar of profit generated, for every dollar of revenue generated that is about about .05-35 cents in profit.

If you would ever follow links, you'd see that the source for both charts was...wait for it...BLS.gov! Wow! You've no use for the numbers you claim to believe in?
 
Jobs recovery is stronger than past recessions - Sep. 2, 2010

Also from the article:



Now I would like to ask the folks out there in the audience this question:

If a second stimulus is needed to avoid a secondary and possibly more severe recession, would you be in favour of it?

Although the question is irrelevent as the White House has said there will be no second stimulus.

I think many people out there seriously underestimate just how severe this recession is, and that there is no magic fix for it.

It's a complete and total lie. This administration is always extreme. Worse recession in the history of man, and then the strongest recovery in the history of the universe. It's bull****!!!
 
It's a complete and total lie. This administration is always extreme. Worse recession in the history of man, and then the strongest recovery in the history of the universe. It's bull****!!!

Well, it's agreed across-the-board that this was the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

And it wasn't the administration saying it's the "strongest recovery in history". It's a hyperbolic columnist.

But, when you're a hyperbolic partisan, it's hard to see that.
 
If you would ever follow links, you'd see that the source for both charts was...wait for it...BLS.gov! Wow! You've no use for the numbers you claim to believe in?

The only charts that matter are the number of unemployed and the number employed. What you posted shows the temporary govt. employees for the census. I cannot believe how gullible some people are! Our economy wasn't built on those Obama economic principles and that is why his poll numbers are so poor.
 
Well, it's agreed across-the-board that this was the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

And it wasn't the administration saying it's the "strongest recovery in history". It's a hyperbolic columnist.

But, when you're a hyperbolic partisan, it's hard to see that.

Try having a 17%+ mortgage interest rate and double digit inflation. You don't have a clue what a bad economy is.
 
The only charts that matter are the number of unemployed and the number employed. What you posted shows the temporary govt. employees for the census. I cannot believe how gullible some people are! Our economy wasn't built on those Obama economic principles and that is why his poll numbers are so poor.

So the only thing that matters is what you want to matter for your own reasons?
 
If you would ever follow links, you'd see that the source for both charts was...wait for it...BLS.gov! Wow! You've no use for the numbers you claim to believe in?

Looks to me like the link says it was U.S. Census numbers not BLS. It is amazing that after spending all that money on a stimulus program Obama supporters are touting this kind of job creation many of which were temporary jobs. If you or anyone else working for private industry spent this kind of money to generate these kind of results you would be fired.

In spite of all that spending there are still 16 million unemployed Americans according to BLS and 3 million less employed today than there were when Obama took office.
 
The only charts that matter are the number of unemployed and the number employed. What you posted shows the temporary govt. employees for the census. I cannot believe how gullible some people are! Our economy wasn't built on those Obama economic principles and that is why his poll numbers are so poor.

From the source for the charts: "The data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics wasn't good, but it was significantly better than everyone thought it would be."

And I posted two charts: one including census statistics and one just for private sector job growth.

And if you'll note the difference, the private sector job growth chart shows eight consecutive months of job creation. The overall chart, which I acknowledged is worse, shows the past three months show overall losses because of laid-off temporary census workers.

His poll numbers are poor. And there are fair criticisms to be made - as I made one myself earlier (if you managed to catch it or bothered to read it).

And yes (to address your post below), a 17% mortgage rate is terrible. But a 5% mortgage rate on a home that has lost 40% of its value isn't necessarily better.

And thanks for the debate. But I'm off to watch college football now.
 
From the source for the charts: "The data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics wasn't good, but it was significantly better than everyone thought it would be."

And I posted two charts: one including census statistics and one just for private sector job growth.

And if you'll note the difference, the private sector job growth chart shows eight consecutive months of job creation. The overall chart, which I acknowledged is worse, shows the past three months show overall losses because of laid-off temporary census workers.

His poll numbers are poor. And there are fair criticisms to be made - as I made one myself earlier (if you managed to catch it or bothered to read it).

And yes (to address your post below), a 17% mortgage rate is terrible. But a 5% mortgage rate on a home that has lost 40% of its value isn't necessarily better.

And thanks for the debate. But I'm off to watch college football now.

Film, enjoy the football games as am I.

Something you really need to think about is how much money was spent to generate this kind of job growth and ask if it was worth it since we still have 16 million unemployed and over 3 million less employed today than when he took office. That puts the job creation in proper perspective and indicates why the following is predicted.

59 Days to Decide: Evidence Mounts That Dems Are Facing Midterm Wipeout

Published September 04, 2010
 
Last edited:
Film, enjoy the football games as am I.

Something you really need to think about is how much money was spent to generate this kind of job growth and ask if it was worth it since we still have 16 million unemployed and over 3 million less employed today than when he took office. That puts the job creation in proper perspective and indicates why the following is predicted.

59 Days to Decide: Evidence Mounts That Dems Are Facing Midterm Wipeout

Published September 04, 2010

The link didn't work here and for once, you and I agree.

I do think the stimulus was sorely misused. It saved some jobs, but better spent, it may have saved more. And as I said earlier, I was very upset that Obama claimed that it would prevent unemployment from rising above 8%. That didn't happen for Reagan, and it wasn't going to happen for him.

I also think Dems are going to be severely damaged this fall. They deserve it. Just as Republicans deserved it in 2006.

I don't know if you read it earlier, but what I'd like to see is those of us who live in districts that have been gerrymandered into one-party submission sign a pact with our opposites across the party border to vote against the party of current standing.

I have and will accept a Republican control of Congress. But what I'd like to see is EVERY single district switch. Because then both parties will know that they can't continue their traditional shtick.

I think there are commonalities between people on both sides of the aisles. What I want is for us - as the 'common folk' - to put aside our differences for one election and tell the bastards that they can't continue ruling the way they're ruling.

But simply putting trust in Republicans isn't going to change anything. I mean, K-Street? The Cheney energy meetings? You can hate, Dems, dude. I'm fine with that. But shadiness isn't partisan - it's politician.

I know you and I disagree, but even aside from a love for college football (Jacksonville State? Really?), we do share this: I'm not a fan of our current system of government (I know you think I'm defending Obama, I'm really not - I'm just saying it's really not that much worse than it has been under others. I know you disagree, but that's okay - and I actually do like him more than I do Congressional Democrats and the only people I despise more than them are Congressional Republicans).

I think our current system has become so devoid of actual people governing that no one up there understands. If all you have are lawyers, doctors, and the descendants of wealth, they have no context with which to understand those of us who work 40-60 hour weeks to make a living and support our families.

If we can bury the hatchet, I just want our whole system changed. Not just the party in charge.
 
The link didn't work here and for once, you and I agree.

I do think the stimulus was sorely misused. It saved some jobs, but better spent, it may have saved more. And as I said earlier, I was very upset that Obama claimed that it would prevent unemployment from rising above 8%. That didn't happen for Reagan, and it wasn't going to happen for him.

I also think Dems are going to be severely damaged this fall. They deserve it. Just as Republicans deserved it in 2006.

I don't know if you read it earlier, but what I'd like to see is those of us who live in districts that have been gerrymandered into one-party submission sign a pact with our opposites across the party border to vote against the party of current standing.

I have and will accept a Republican control of Congress. But what I'd like to see is EVERY single district switch. Because then both parties will know that they can't continue their traditional shtick.

I think there are commonalities between people on both sides of the aisles. What I want is for us - as the 'common folk' - to put aside our differences for one election and tell the bastards that they can't continue ruling the way they're ruling.

But simply putting trust in Republicans isn't going to change anything. I mean, K-Street? The Cheney energy meetings? You can hate, Dems, dude. I'm fine with that. But shadiness isn't partisan - it's politician.

I know you and I disagree, but even aside from a love for college football (Jacksonville State? Really?), we do share this: I'm not a fan of our current system of government (I know you think I'm defending Obama, I'm really not - I'm just saying it's really not that much worse than it has been under others. I know you disagree, but that's okay - and I actually do like him more than I do Congressional Democrats and the only people I despise more than them are Congressional Republicans).

I think our current system has become so devoid of actual people governing that no one up there understands. If all you have are lawyers, doctors, and the descendants of wealth, they have no context with which to understand those of us who work 40-60 hour weeks to make a living and support our families.

If we can bury the hatchet, I just want our whole system changed. Not just the party in charge.

Film, thanks for the post and I recognized it. I think a lot of people confuse me for a Republican but I am not a Republican, I am a Conservative. I grew up a Democrat but the party left me because I was always a Conservative and there was no place in the Democrat Party for a Conservative as they has shifted way to the left. I saw all their social engineering and my tax dollars wasted. I always felt that social problems are best handled in the local communities and not by the bureaucrats in D.C, too many Administrative costs and not enough results.

If I had my way I would kick out about 80% of the Congress and basically start over. Career politicians have to go as they are more interested in keeping their job than they are in doing their job. It is all about bringing home the bacon instead of being fiscally responsible. There is absolutely no reason for a 3.8 trillion dollar budget as our govt. is way out of control. GW Bush spent way too much money but Obama has put that spending on steroids. He has been an incredible disappointment for many but not for me. I hired a lot of people in my career and was pretty good at reading resumes. He didn't have the resume for the job and his radical associations have carried over into this Administration. He doesn't have a clue how to lead nor does he have the experience how to manage anything. We are paying the price for his radical background and inexperience as a manager.

It really is hard not not to like Obama personally but one has to be objective in looking at his policies and his actions. He is good at telling people what they want to hear but results matter more than rhetoric. It is the policies that are being implemented that bother me and it is those policies that have led to every prediction he as made to be wrong and his supporters cannot see that.

Film, I spent 35 years in the business world. I am objective but compassionate. I believe in helping those truly in need and do so willingly through my church and local charities. I hate sending money for social spending to the bureaucrats in D.C. who waste it and then blame everyone else for their failures.

Things have to change and it has to start with changing the Congress. I can only hope that the Republicans do a better job this time than they did the last time but Pelosi, Reid, and Obama have to go.

Anyway, how about Jacksonville State? Incredible upset. Some good games today on a weekend normally reserved for the top 25 beating up on their opponents. I love college football and look forward to a great season. I grew up in the Midwest but now live in TX. Favorite team in Texas is the Texas Tech Red Raiders.
 
Jobs recovery is stronger than past recessions - Sep. 2, 2010

Also from the article:



Now I would like to ask the folks out there in the audience this question:

If a second stimulus is needed to avoid a secondary and possibly more severe recession, would you be in favour of it?

Although the question is irrelevent as the White House has said there will be no second stimulus.

I think many people out there seriously underestimate just how severe this recession is, and that there is no magic fix for it.

That's great!
I like that 2001 Dot-com bubble bust statistic, there . . . very juicy for my anti-clinton's-amazing-cause-he-had-a-surplus debates.

On the OP - that's actually good news, though I feel the article completely skimps on details that explain exactly why things are different.
 
Film, thanks for the post and I recognized it. I think a lot of people confuse me for a Republican but I am not a Republican, I am a Conservative. I grew up a Democrat but the party left me because I was always a Conservative and there was no place in the Democrat Party for a Conservative as they has shifted way to the left. I saw all their social engineering and my tax dollars wasted. I always felt that social problems are best handled in the local communities and not by the bureaucrats in D.C, too many Administrative costs and not enough results.

If I had my way I would kick out about 80% of the Congress and basically start over. Career politicians have to go as they are more interested in keeping their job than they are in doing their job. It is all about bringing home the bacon instead of being fiscally responsible. There is absolutely no reason for a 3.8 trillion dollar budget as our govt. is way out of control. GW Bush spent way too much money but Obama has put that spending on steroids. He has been an incredible disappointment for many but not for me. I hired a lot of people in my career and was pretty good at reading resumes. He didn't have the resume for the job and his radical associations have carried over into this Administration. He doesn't have a clue how to lead nor does he have the experience how to manage anything. We are paying the price for his radical background and inexperience as a manager.

It really is hard not not to like Obama personally but one has to be objective in looking at his policies and his actions. He is good at telling people what they want to hear but results matter more than rhetoric. It is the policies that are being implemented that bother me and it is those policies that have led to every prediction he as made to be wrong and his supporters cannot see that.

Film, I spent 35 years in the business world. I am objective but compassionate. I believe in helping those truly in need and do so willingly through my church and local charities. I hate sending money for social spending to the bureaucrats in D.C. who waste it and then blame everyone else for their failures.

Things have to change and it has to start with changing the Congress. I can only hope that the Republicans do a better job this time than they did the last time but Pelosi, Reid, and Obama have to go.

Anyway, how about Jacksonville State? Incredible upset. Some good games today on a weekend normally reserved for the top 25 beating up on their opponents. I love college football and look forward to a great season. I grew up in the Midwest but now live in TX. Favorite team in Texas is the Texas Tech Red Raiders.

Cool. And I understand why you're upset at the current people in power. I'm upset as well, because we were promised something different from what we had before. And we really got nothing but more of the same, just in a more eloquent package.

I just refuse to blame only them. With regards to Obama, I honestly kinda pity him. Because I believe that he sincerely thought he could change things, only to arrive in Washington and find a system (corrupted by both parties) that is implacable.

One thing, you gotta give the guy: the teachers' unions seem to hate him more than they hated Bush because he is supporting the value-added payment system. Tennessee was a recipient of a Race to the Top grant and the plan they're using with it is this: they are going to give successful teachers bonuses and then those teachers will hold professional improvement seminars to share their tactics with teachers judged as failing in weekend and after-hours workshops.

This, to me, is a good role for the Federal Government. It's not dictating policy; it's inspiring innovation. As Justice Brandeis said, the states are laboratories for democracy. Rather than dictating policy (as No Child did), it's trying to find the best ideas states propose and rewarding them. And given the spending craze (by both parties), this is at least a good idea and relatively inexpensive at $4 billion.

My parents were both entrepreneurs (my dad owned a construction company; my mother a catering company - the most successful one in Hendrick Cty, Indiana at the time), so I do understand the concerns of small business. My partner also owned his own company for twelve years. Oddly, in all cases, it wasn't taxes that drove them out of business eventually. It was health care costs. Not for their employees (my dad's company provided benefits; my mom's was a very small company; my partner's was only himself + a receptionist who was a veteran with her own good benefits), but for themselves and their families. So, maybe it's just that we come from similar backgrounds with different results.

But what I want for our system of government is to elect individuals - even those who disagree - who will sit down with one another and craft ideas together to improve our nation and our economy. I was most disappointed in the current administration because that didn't happen. But I don't really blame Obama for that. I blame Congressional Democrats and Republicans for it.

Good ideas aren't solely owned by one side of the aisle. For instance: welfare reform. It was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by a Democratic President. As a result, my now late cousin (so liberal, he makes me look like you) Eric Parker started a not-for-profit called the Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership. In the years since he started it, they've educated 1,900+ former welfare recipients, giving them contemporary skills that got them jobs that are much more secure than, say, fast food jobs. Those families now collect living wages and support themselves. This wasn't JUST from a conservative that it happened. It came from both sides of the aisle, and something wonderful happened. And yes, some of the funding for the program comes from both Federal and State government grants.

The sad part is, during the campaign, he had meetings with people high up in Obama's team to be hired as a consultant. Then, married for the first time at 45, he and his new wife went on honeymoon at the Barrier Islands in North Carolina and as he was unloading the luggage from the trunk of the car, he dropped dead suddenly from a massive heart attack. I think we lost a potentially brilliant leader who took conservative philosophy (teach a man to fish) to pursue his liberal goals (living wages). So, I give Obama a bit of a break even though I'm not his biggest fan, partially because when my cousin passed away, we all received a personal letter of condolence from him (his staff, yes, but still...)

When I post numbers opposing yours, they're really not in his defense. They're just pointing out that recoveries are always slow and always tough. My criticism of him is that he presented an overly-optimistic portrait of what the stimulus would do. I think he let the Congressional Democrats misuse it (much as Bush let his Republican Congress misuse funds quite frequently) and didn't lead as much as he should have. But, I criticize the Congressional Republicans because they're holding up the one bill that I think is the best bill that has been proposed so far (the small business loan and hiring bill). That's why I can't totally get behind handing it over to them.

Anyway, likely my last post for the night: There were some surprisingly good games today. I went to Indiana University, so I always have a love for the underdog, since my team is an underdog at least 8 or 9 games a year, so that was fun. I like Texas Tech, but I can never like Texas (unless they're playing Miami (FL))!

Anyway, take care and it's nice to find some common ground - even if we'll likely never vote for the same person. Understanding those we disagree with and treating them fairly is the only way we can make our nation stronger. I think you and I took a big step in that direction today. I wish you well.
 
Here's a chart about private-sector job growth since the Great Recession began:

Wow! That's amazing! The BLS is pretending the US is generating maybe 50,000 new jobs a month. At that rate the incredibly successful policies of the Messiah will replace the 10,000,000 jobs lost in the last couple of years in 200 months, or just a mere 17 years.

That'll make everyone happy.

Until the Messiah's tax increases cut in this January and job creation STALLS dead.
 
privatejobs_aug10.jpg
And what this chart really says is that the employment trend reversed in 2008 the first time, shifting from increasing job losses to decreasing losses eventually leading to net employment gains....and....this is key, under the Messiah, the trendline has reversed again, and the job creation rate is declining and may reasonably be expected to begin showing net private sector losses in the near future.

I define the "near future" as the period after the holiday bubble, if we're lucky, and before it, if we're not.
 
privatejobs_aug10.jpg
And what this chart really says is that the employment trend reversed in 2008 the first time, shifting from increasing job losses to decreasing losses eventually leading to net employment gains....and....this is key, under the Messiah, the trendline has reversed again, and the job creation rate is declining and may reasonably be expected to begin showing net private sector losses in the near future.

I define the "near future" as the period after the holiday bubble, if we're lucky, and before it, if we're not.

What far too many people are ignoring the costs of producing those so called improving results! If anyone here spent that kind of money to generate these kind of "results" they would be fired but liberals here claim that Democrats need to be re-elected. What is ignored is as stated, unemployment is more this year than last year, economic growth is down from the previous quarter and is a dismal 1.6%, and this Administration has added 3 trillion to the debt. Those are verifiable facts that the voter sees instead of buying the rhetoric of how bad things "could have been" without liberals screwing things up.

I remember well the cries of liberals back when Bush took office, "Where are the jobs?" yet today there is total silence when comparing the reality that we have over 3 million fewer employed people today than we had when Obama took office. So, claiming that this is the strongest jobs recovery in decades ignores the actual facts. No President in U.S. history has ever had this level of unemployment.
 
What far too many people are ignoring the costs of producing those so called improving results! If anyone here spent that kind of money to generate these kind of "results" they would be fired but liberals here claim that Democrats need to be re-elected. What is ignored is as stated, unemployment is more this year than last year, economic growth is down from the previous quarter and is a dismal 1.6%, and this Administration has added 3 trillion to the debt. Those are verifiable facts that the voter sees instead of buying the rhetoric of how bad things "could have been" without liberals screwing things up.

I remember well the cries of liberals back when Bush took office, "Where are the jobs?" yet today there is total silence when comparing the reality that we have over 3 million fewer employed people today than we had when Obama took office. So, claiming that this is the strongest jobs recovery in decades ignores the actual facts. No President in U.S. history has ever had this level of unemployment.

The recession was caused by Wall Street and the big banks which are the a-hole buddies of the GOP.
 
Last edited:
The recession was caused by Wall Street and the big banks which are the a-hole buddies of the GOP.

That is your opinion which you are entitled to. I am still waiting for you to give me one economic prediction by this President and his Administration that has been accurate?

how did Wall Street and the big banks which actually contributed more to Obama than Republicans create your double digit unemployment in Oregon?

When will you ever take personal responsibility for helping create this mess by voting for the most radical Administration in history?
 
Last edited:
The recession was caused by Wall Street and the big banks which are the a-hole buddies of the GOP.

Financial deregulation was a bipartisan endeavor. No political party has clean hands regarding the current state of the economy.
 
Financial deregulation was a bipartisan endeavor. No political party has clean hands regarding the current state of the economy.

That's true, Goldenboy, but some contributed more than others, especially in the housing market.

When loans began being made according to factors other than the ability to repay, then the rot began to settle in.

Here's what happened to Citibank and you can scroll down to see who was part of the class action suit that initiated these problems the US has today.

Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
 
Financial deregulation was a bipartisan endeavor. No political party has clean hands regarding the current state of the economy.

While that certainly true, it was three conservative Republicans that crafted the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which Clinton signed. I believe he has stated recently that signing it was wrong. President Clinton was a fiscal conservative.

Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act


There's more here and it all dates back to 1977 during the Carter Administration. Coincidentally, BHO has frequently been compared to Jimmy Carter in recent months.

It's also possible to scroll down and see the videos.

UPDATED: Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans | Media Circus
Mark Twain wrote much better fiction than this.
 
pbrauer;1058965096]While that certainly true, it was three conservative Republicans that crafted the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which Clinton signed. I believe he has stated recently that signing it was wrong. President Clinton was a fiscal conservative.

Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act

You really are outraged over the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Law, where is your outrage for all the Democrats that voted for the final bill which obviously you want to ignore

On November 4th, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8, and by the House 362-57. This legislation was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999
 
Ironic, since it was the lack of government that got you into the ****hole you are in now.. ahh the irony of American conservative economic thinking!
Ah... like clockwork - more partisan bigotry.
 
Back
Top Bottom