• 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!

Current U-6 Unemployment Rate is 11.3%

As I said before, it is all in cycles. Republicans come into power, screw things up, then the Dems come in power and screw things up. Endless cycle and you GOP and Dem voters can't get that through your heads.




Hmmmmm GOP voted to increase spending as well. Oh wait, let me guess, that is all the Dems fault the GOP voted for increases as well right?



How about increased spending? Oh wait that MUST be the Dems fault because you don't hold the GOP accountable for ANYTHING even under the Bush years because of your partisan and can't blame the GOP for ANYTHING. Typical Con, always blaming the Dems for everything yet don't hold the GOP accountable for ANYTHING.

shrug...

I don't even know why you are talking about Republicans since the Democrats have been in control for 6 years. Oh...wait...I forgot. You don't want to ADMIT it when the Democrats are responsible. Just like Obama and his buddies.

"Let's blame the Republicans. That'll get us off the hook."
 
shrug...

I don't even know why you are talking about Republicans since the Democrats have been in control for 6 years. Oh...wait...I forgot. You don't want to ADMIT it when the Democrats are responsible. Just like Obama and his buddies.

"Let's blame the Republicans. That'll get us off the hook."

Sorry but again your comments are lies since I HAVE blamed the Dems AND the GOP, unlike you who only blame the Dems. Nice try, do your partisan one-hat trick on someone else
 
Your impressions are mere anecdotes. They are substantially irrelevant in an adult argument. They prove nothing and are not worth the cyberspace they take up. Find some emperical data to support your position or sit back and watch adults debate issues.

Yeah, empty mini-malls are "anecdotal" and the shrinking of our economy is "anecdotal."

Of course CBO and other government numbers trump reality right?
 
Yeah, empty mini-malls are "anecdotal" and the shrinking of our economy is "anecdotal."

Of course CBO and other government numbers trump reality right?

Malls have been closing even before Bush took office.
 
Malls have been closing even before Bush took office.

No ****, its called apprehension - do you actually believe for a second people didn't see the collapse coming YEARS in advance?

Clinton's CRA is what started everything and republicans were dumb enough to trade the CRA for DOMA...

This **** started when credit and mortgages became a "right."
 
You are satisfied with our anemic recovery...over a six year period? Because things were soooo bad? Damn! You are as bad as Obama when it comes to not taking responsibility.

I think faster recovery was possible, but was slowed by Congress' inability to actually do anything. Republicans love to blame Democrats for all this, but how much of their agenda did they actually accomplish? Republican obstructionism has been huge since the day obama took office. They straight up admitted, in the middle of the worst recession we'd seen in a long time, that their first priority was to stop Obama from being re-elected.

And then there's the government shutdown brinksmanship game from the tea party crowd. that does not make a stable environment for business to plan for the future.
 
I think faster recovery was possible, but was slowed by Congress' inability to actually do anything. Republicans love to blame Democrats for all this, but how much of their agenda did they actually accomplish? Republican obstructionism has been huge since the day obama took office. They straight up admitted, in the middle of the worst recession we'd seen in a long time, that their first priority was to stop Obama from being re-elected.

And then there's the government shutdown brinksmanship game from the tea party crowd. that does not make a stable environment for business to plan for the future.

1. The Republicans didn't think...and I agree with them...that any of the Democrat's proposals would do a thing to increase the speed of the recovery. Witness their crowning glory...the stimulus that didn't. No, the Democrats were more interested in checking off their agenda items. The Republicans were correct to obstruct that sort of thing.

2. While the Republicans were highly interested in making sure Obama wouldn't get re-elected, that wasn't the ONLY thing they were interested in. The House sent hundreds of bills to the Senate. They weren't ALL intended to stop Obama from being re-elected.
 
1. The Republicans didn't think...and I agree with them...that any of the Democrat's proposals would do a thing to increase the speed of the recovery. Witness their crowning glory...the stimulus that didn't. No, the Democrats were more interested in checking off their agenda items. The Republicans were correct to obstruct that sort of thing.

2. While the Republicans were highly interested in making sure Obama wouldn't get re-elected, that wasn't the ONLY thing they were interested in. The House sent hundreds of bills to the Senate. They weren't ALL intended to stop Obama from being re-elected.

"Highest priority" was their phrasing, not mine.

So, Republicans work based on honest belief about what's best for the country, and democrats are just interested in some sinister agenda. Got it. :roll:
 
"Highest priority" was their phrasing, not mine.

So, Republicans work based on honest belief about what's best for the country, and democrats are just interested in some sinister agenda. Got it. :roll:

shrug...

Liberal agenda items: Raise taxes on the wealthy. Expand entitlement programs. Increase government control across the board. Yep...I'd say just about everything the Democrats have done...or tried to do...in the last six years fit right in there.

Unfortunately for the country, economic recovery doesn't fit in there because economic recovery depends of more people having the freedom...and responsibility...to make their own decisions. That's pretty much the opposite of what the Democrats want.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Moved to appropriate location sinec unemploymentdata.com doesn't qualify as MSM
 
shrug...

Liberal agenda items: Raise taxes on the wealthy. Expand entitlement programs. Increase government control across the board. Yep...I'd say just about everything the Democrats have done...or tried to do...in the last six years fit right in there.

Unfortunately for the country, economic recovery doesn't fit in there because economic recovery depends of more people having the freedom...and responsibility...to make their own decisions. That's pretty much the opposite of what the Democrats want.
Empty platitudes, standard partisan talking points.
 
Sort of. Part time for economic reasons means that the respondent wanted and was available to work 35+ hours but worked less than 35 due to slow or slack business or unable to find full time work. Many of those part time for economic reasons usually work full time, but hurt a slow period.
What was the sort of for, exactly? Sorry I am confused. You seem to be restating exactly what I said.
 
What was the sort of for, exactly? Sorry I am confused. You seem to be restating exactly what I said.

Yours was incomplete. Part time for economic reasons also includes those who have a full time job, but whose hours were cut.
 
:roll: The same spiel every month. The U-6, which is not an unemployment rate, but a measure of underutilization, has declined by 6 percent since the end of the Recession and has mirrored the decline in the official rate to a nearly perfect degree. Those who latch onto this figure to the exclusion of all others do so for strictly political purposes.

How about the figure of over 90 million Americans not in the work force?
 
How about the figure of over 90 million Americans not in the work force?
What about it? The number of those not in the workforce has increased alongside the the population for the last 25 years without interruption. :shrug:
 
What about it? The number of those not in the workforce has increased alongside the the population for the last 25 years without interruption. :shrug:

It's quickly approaching a third of all Americans. Never been that high in my lifetime until Barack "Hussein" Obola came along.
 
It's quickly approaching a third of all Americans. Never been that high in my lifetime until Barack "Hussein" Obola came along.

I have. The current participation rate is higher than any time before 1978.
And it's been going down since 2000
 
I have. The current participation rate is higher than any time before 1978.
And it's been going down since 2000

Not as a percentage.
 
It's quickly approaching a third of all Americans. Never been that high in my lifetime until Barack "Hussein" Obola came along.

The Cons seem to love to throw this number around as if its some type of evil indictment on the economy. Once you understand the number, however, their argument falls flat.

97% of the NIWF number are people that should not be in the work in force (retired, students, disabled and stay-at-home moms)... to a great extent, the larger number is indicative of a healthy economy.

Unless, of course, you are telling us that grandma should get off her duff and get waitress job....
 
No ****, its called apprehension - do you actually believe for a second people didn't see the collapse coming YEARS in advance?

Clinton's CRA is what started everything and republicans were dumb enough to trade the CRA for DOMA...

This **** started when credit and mortgages became a "right."

You just can't make up that kind of comedy gold. :lamo:rofl
 
Not as a percentage.

image007.png
 
What about it? Surely you don't think everyone should be in the Labor Force?

Ofcourse not...but at the same time, I don't buy into the phony claims that the employment picture today is good.
 
Ofcourse not...but at the same time, I don't buy into the phony claims that the employment picture today is good.

Not many do that I've seen. It's BETTER than it was, but U-6 is what it is, and that's still a very high number. Even U-3 doesn't indicate anything other than a poor overall jobs market that is slowly getting better. No need to question the numbers to come to those conclusions.
 
Back
Top Bottom