Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 176

Thread: Jobless Rate Rises to 9.8 Percent, Highest Since April(edited)

  1. #81
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,302

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    There is no point having a discussion with someone who only see's what they want. Tax revenue increases with population growth, inflation, and economic growth. Tax revenue has increased since Obama stepped into office, must have been a result of his policy
    so we haven't had any population growth, inflation, and economic growth the last two years? Why did NBER report the end of the recession without economic growth?

  2. #82
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Which did absolutely nothing to stimulate and grow the economy thus creating jobs. I pointed out the facts regarding both the Obama and the Bush tax cuts and people today are still benefiting from the Bush tax cuts, at least those still working. Can you say the same thing about the Obama tax cuts?
    I really don't understand what you're so pissed off about, if you acknowledge that people are still benefiting from the Bush tax cuts. I mean, you believe that low taxes encourage growth, right? Well, taxes are the same or lower under Obama as they were under Bush, so if it were that simple than the economy should be great.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    Then since I am oblivious to the policies that Obama has actually enacted, please enlighten me and tell me what he has done to improve things. Results matter not rhetoric. Obama campaigned for the job, said he could fix it and hasn't so I anxiously await your list of Obama policies and accomplishments since the results don't show positive results.
    Sorry, I'm more interested in discussing which economic policies work best, than the various facets of why Obama is a big sucky meanie liar-face.

    As for what policies he has implemented, I already told you. Stimulus spending, low taxes, fiscal assistance to states, avoiding odious labor regulations, and reappointing a Fed chairman who has encouraged easy money.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    To show you how foolish your argument is.
    You showed me how foolish my argument was by asking me for a list of whose taxes Obama cut as though that was an absurd idea...and then providing exactly such a list? Yeah, you sure showed me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    Right, and you if you are working are still benefiting from the Bush tax cuts and want to know how you keeping more of what you earn is a cost to the Federal Govt? Can you explain to me how tax revenue went up after the Bush, Reagan, JFK tax cuts and still are going down after the Obama tax cuts?
    Bush tax cuts - Decreased tax revenue enormously, because Bush started from a relatively low base tax rate.
    Reagan tax cuts - Also decreased tax revenue significantly, albeit not as much as Bush because Reagan was starting from a much higher base tax rate than Bush.
    JFK tax cuts - Increased tax revenue slightly, because JFK was starting from a much higher base tax rate than either Bush or Reagan.

    Obama tax cuts - Decreased tax revenue for the same reason as the Bush tax cuts, albeit not as much because the cuts themselves were smaller.

    In any case, I'm more interested in getting the economy back on track than I am in balancing the budget. The US is not in any immediate danger of a debt crisis. There will be plenty of time to worry about the deficit once the economy recovers. In the mean time, the best policy is to encourage economic growth through high government spending and low taxes (i.e. a deficit).
    Last edited by Kandahar; 12-03-10 at 02:59 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #83
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,302

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Kandahar;1059136336]I really don't understand what you're so pissed off about, if you acknowledge that people are still benefiting from the Bush tax cuts. I mean, you believe that low taxes encourage growth, right? Well, taxes are the same or lower under Obama as they were under Bush, so if it were that simple than the economy should be great.
    Lower tax rates always encourage growth but business always is forward thinking not live for today like liberals. Forward looking there are uncertainties and rightly so.

    Sorry, I'm more interested in discussing which economic policies work best, than the various facets of why Obama is a big sucky meanie liar-face.
    I prefer results to rhetoric and not that my plan is better than yours or that your dad can beat up my dad. Results matter, not rhetoric. The results are what are sinking Obama as more and more people are questioning the rhetoric. I am a pro growth, pro private sector, pro personal responsibility individual and that worked well for me the past 64 years.


    You showed me how foolish my argument was by asking me for a list of whose taxes Obama cut as though that was an absurd idea...and then providing exactly such a list? Yeah, you sure showed me.
    Right, you made a big deal about the Obama tax cuts as being a big part of the stimulus when the reality is it was a tax cut with strings attached along with a rebate check that once spent was gone. I then gave you the Bush tax cuts and rightly told you that you are still benefiting from that tax cut thus because of having more spendable income need less of that so called govt. help.

    Bush tax cuts - Decreased tax revenue enormously, because Bush started from a relatively low base tax rate.
    Reagan tax cuts - Also decreased tax revenue significantly, albeit not as much as Bush because Reagan was starting from a much higher base tax rate than Bush.
    JFK tax cuts - Increased tax revenue slightly, because JFK was starting from a much higher base tax rate than either Bush or Reagan.
    Really? Have you told that to the checkbook of the U.S. the U.S. Treasury site?

    Current Report: Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government (Combined Statement): Publications & Guidance: Financial Management Service

    Year Total Rev Income tax
    2000 3,132 2202.8
    2001 3,118 2163.7
    2002 2,987 2002.1
    2003 3,043 2047.9
    2004 3,265 2213.2
    2005 3,659 2546.8
    2006 3,996 2807.4
    2007 4,197 2951.2
    2008 4,072 2790.3


    So not sure where you get your information but I prefer Treasury data which show your claims to be bogus if not downright lies.

    Obama tax cuts - Decreased tax revenue for the same reason as the Bush tax cuts, albeit not as much because the cuts themselves were smaller.
    Obama tax revenue is down because we have 4 million more unemployed paying less in taxes. He has done nothing to create an atmosphere to create jobs.

    In any case, I'm more interested in getting the economy back on track than I am on balancing the budget. The US is not in any immediate danger of a debt crisis. There will be plenty of time to worry about the deficit once the economy recovers. In the mean time, the best policy is to encourage economic growth through high government spending and low taxes (i.e. a deficit).

    It may take the 2012 elections to do that. Nothing Obama is doing is going to put the economy on track. If he does what Clinton did then maybe things will get better. We have and continue to try the high govt. spending but our economy isn't built on govt. spending,it is built on the private sector growth. Provide the private sector incentives to grow jobs and they will.
    Last edited by Conservative; 12-03-10 at 03:07 PM.

  4. #84
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,773

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Ah, but wait, Mr. Whovian. You left off important pieces of info from the portions of the article you quoted (your post #39). Allow me to correct you and then put some things into perspective:

    The administration says 79 percent of the increases in recent years are from departments related to the war on terrorism: Justice, Defense, Homeland Security, State and Veterans Affairs.

    After years of decline at the end of the Cold War, the Defense Department is restaffing. Mr. Obama estimated that the Pentagon will have 720,000 employees this year and 757,000 employees next year - up from a low of 649,000 in 2003.

    The data also show that the Department of Homeland Security will grow by 7,000 a year in 2010 and 2011, and the Veterans Affairs Department will grow by 12,000 in 2010 and an additional 4,000 in 2011.

    Peter R. Orszag, Mr. Obama's budget director, also said more people have been hired to oversee outside contracts.

    "Over the past eight or nine years, those contracts have doubled in size. The acquisition work force has stayed constant. It's not too hard to figure out that oversight of those contracts has not kept pace with what it should be," Mr. Orszag said.
    So, again, I say to all those who have this "Obama = BIG GOVERNMENT", I think you need to think again because clearly the government had it's largest increase under none other than....





    ....former President GEORGE W. BUSH!!!

    Now, let's put things in perspective...

    If you're an advocate of counterterrorism, then some of the civilian contractors are justified.

    If you're concerned for our servicemen and women receiving adequate care once they return from combat operations, then the increase in the VA staff is justified.

    If you want the cases against these terrorist in Gitmo to be iron clad and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and NOT be tried for "lessor inclusive offenses", i.e., we captured a suspected terrorist on the battle field, but he was only a chauffer for the Al Quaida mastermind, then the hiring of paralegals within the DOJ is justified becasue there are still several cases pending to be tried.

    And if you want to deter would-be terrorist from obtaining VISAs to come to the U.S., then new hires within the State Department is justified.

    But let's me be perfectly clear: I fully understand the turf-wars that go on with each new administration that comes to power. However, like most Conservatives who dread big government, inefficiency and waste, I also understand that with each new administration very few are willing to streamline the various agencies and "clean house", thereby bringing the various agencies together and cutting out those agencies that don't work or streamlining the process to make the viable agencies work more efficiently. The Obama administration appears to understand that for the here and now due to the enormity of the problems our nation is currently facing, i.e., the War in Afghanistan, the overall fight against terrorism, taking care of our wounded veterans, bringing captured terrorist to justice, and oversight of the many contract entities within Washington, DC, it makes sense to increase civilian staff numbers in order to meet the government's needs in the areas addressed. For as the article clearly indicates, gov't contract(ors) have doubled in size over the last 8-9 years and have largely gone un-supervised (oversight).

    So, let's tell it like it is instead of "telling it like you want it to be".

    'Nuff said.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 12-03-10 at 03:09 PM.

  5. #85
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    We are past the normal "lag" time. What we have now is the same crap that happened with FDR when he turned a recession into the Depression. Below is how a conservative does it compared to this socialist marxist idiot in the WH:



    Then this:

    Since 2008, the private work force hemorrhaged more than 8 million jobs, but Washington added more than 200,000 positions, taking the federal head count (excluding the military and Post Office workers) to more than 2 million.

    Federal pay has likewise been shielded from the recession. The average federal employee makes $123,000, including benefits worth $41,800 -- more than twice what average private-sector workers earn.

    Read more: First, roll back Bam's spending hikes - NYPOST.com
    Obama and the Democrats have taken steps which not only were exceedingly poor bang-for-the-buck, but which have now prolonged the economic morass. Conservatives said that his plans were a fail in the beginning, and Obama rammed them through with his Dem majorities anyway .......... and behold they are massive failures. Got a deeper hole though

  6. #86
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    750k x 24= 18 million; 18 million + 8.5 million = 26.5 million; 26.5 million/ 154 million = 17.2% The last time we had the unemployment rate over 11% was prior to 1939.
    Right... and during the Great Depression unemployment hit about 25% before it started to go down -- 37% if you want to talk about non-farm payroll. And I think the average for the whole decade is still over 18%.

    So yes, it would take over two years to get to the levels seen during the Great Depression.

    But the details aren't important, I was merely putting the claim into perspective. In the 30's, the unemployment rate shot up over 21%. We've gone less than 5%.

  7. #87
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Ah, but wait, Mr. Whovian...
    so, you're saying there are NOT more people working for the government under Obama than previously?

  8. #88
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Stimulus spending, low taxes, fiscal assistance to the states, and (not really an Obama policy as much as a Fed policy) easy access to capital. Additionally, he has not seriously pursued any policies that would hinder the labor market like card check, as many feared he would.
    With an increasing unemployment rate, you say stimulus spending has incented private sector job growth?

    Can you please link to something showing the fiscal assistance given to various states, and there corresponding job growth?

    Because he did not pursue something like 'card check', that equates to a policy that incented private sector job growth in your mind?

    wow.

  9. #89
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Last Seen
    03-18-13 @ 02:59 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,544

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    There is no need for the Dept. of Homeland Security and all this other stupid federal crap. Withdraw from the stupid middle east, and the stupid you know whos will leave us alone. Get rid of the stupid empire, and the stupid third worlders will start killing each other instead of us.

    Then we come home and cut the federal govt. down to size.

  10. #90
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Unemployment rate hits 9.8%. Hope and Change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Lower tax rates always encourage growth but business always is forward thinking not live for today like liberals. Forward looking there are uncertainties and rightly so.
    I'm in favor of resolving the debate on the extension of the Bush tax cuts too, but it really defies logic to think that the uncertainty over a POSSIBLE modest increase in taxes is responsible for such a huge differential in unemployment.

    If that isn't what you're talking about, you're going to need to be more specific what "uncertainties" you're talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    Right, you made a big deal about the Obama tax cuts as being a big part of the stimulus when the reality is it was a tax cut with strings attached along with a rebate check that once spent was gone. I then gave you the Bush tax cuts and rightly told you that you are still benefiting from that tax cut thus because of having more spendable income need less of that so called govt. help.
    Again, if you acknowledge that the Bush tax cuts are still in place and that taxes are the same or lower under Obama, I'm really not clear on what you're so pissed off about if you think that low taxes are all that's necessary to have a booming economy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    Really? Have you told that to the checkbook of the U.S. the U.S. Treasury site?

    Current Report: Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government (Combined Statement): Publications & Guidance: Financial Management Service

    Year Total Rev Income tax
    2000 3,132 2202.8
    2001 3,118 2163.7
    2002 2,987 2002.1
    2003 3,043 2047.9
    2004 3,265 2213.2
    2005 3,659 2546.8
    2006 3,996 2807.4
    2007 4,197 2951.2
    2008 4,072 2790.3
    Yep, that looks like a pretty substantial decrease to me. The tax cuts were implemented in 2001. It took three years to get back to the SAME revenue as we had in 2001. It took four years to get back to the same revenue and repay the revenue lost in the years between, assuming that the tax revenue would not have increased at ALL without the Bush tax cuts. Assuming a fairly realistic 3% increase without the tax cuts, it took EIGHT years. If you assume much more than 3%, it still hasn't happened and probably won't anytime soon.

    Now don't get me wrong, I don't hold Bush entirely responsible for that. Some of it was caused by the 2001 recession, to which the tax cuts were partially a RESPONSE. Yet you're going to hold Obama responsible for not generating revenue in the 21 months since the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act. Makes perfect sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    So not sure where you get your information but I prefer Treasury data which show your claims to be bogus if not downright lies.
    Only if you assume that the tax revenue would not have increased at all on its own without the Bush tax cuts over the span of eight years, which is quite a dubious assumption.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    Obama tax revenue is down because we have 4 million more unemployed paying less in taxes. He has done nothing to create an atmosphere to create jobs.
    Your brilliant and not at all simplistic economic theory:
    Low taxes = Good.
    Taxes under Bush: Low. Therefore, good.
    Taxes under Obama: Equally low, or even lower. Therefore, bad. He must be destroying jobs.

    What's the difference? Obama is a Democrat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative
    It may take the 2012 elections to do that. Nothing Obama is doing is going to put the economy on track. If he does what Clinton did then maybe things will get better. We have and continue to try the high govt. spending but our economy isn't built on govt. spending,it is built on the private sector growth. Provide the private sector incentives to grow jobs and they will.
    I really don't know what you're talking about, and you have quite an odd view of history if you think that Clinton reduced government spending.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... 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
  •