• 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!

The weakest recovery in modern times.

KLATTU

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
19,259
Reaction score
6,899
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office," Obama told Jon Stewart during his last appearance on "The Daily Show.

LaughingOutLoud_zpse99270d6.jpg

Even Liberal Politifact was buying that BS.

"Our ruling

Obama said, "The economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office."

That claim is too sweeping. Certain measures of wages and income, the poverty rate and the duration of unemployment are all worse now than they were when Obama "came into office."

The statement contains an element of truth but ignores facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly False.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-tells-jon-stewart-economy-every-metri/

Six million more Americans live in poverty today than when Obama was elected. Median household income (in real dollars) was no higher at the end of 2015 than at the end of 2007. The labor force participation rate — the share of working-age Americans who have a job or are looking for one — has sunk to 62.5 percent, a level not seen since the Carter administration. Since the recession ended, the economy has grown at an annual rate of just 2.2 percent. That is way below average for post-recession recoveries. Indeed, this has been the weakest economic recovery in modern times......
Far from anticipating the limping slog of the last seven years, the White House confidently forecast an economic recovery that would feature robust GDP growth of 4 percent or more. It never came close.

More Americans would be working, paychecks would be larger, and public confidence would be sturdier if the economy had bounced back as vigorously as expected. Obama thought he had a better way to fix a recession. Turns out he had a worse way. Live and learn, voters.



The Weakest Economic Recovery in Modern Times - Jeff Jacoby - Page 2
 
The economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office," Obama told Jon Stewart during his last appearance on "The Daily Show.

View attachment 67195287

Even Liberal Politifact was buying that BS.

"Our ruling

Obama said, "The economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office."

That claim is too sweeping. Certain measures of wages and income, the poverty rate and the duration of unemployment are all worse now than they were when Obama "came into office."

The statement contains an element of truth but ignores facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly False.
Barack Obama tells Jon Stewart the economy, 'by every metric, is better' than when he took office | PolitiFact

Six million more Americans live in poverty today than when Obama was elected. Median household income (in real dollars) was no higher at the end of 2015 than at the end of 2007. The labor force participation rate — the share of working-age Americans who have a job or are looking for one — has sunk to 62.5 percent, a level not seen since the Carter administration. Since the recession ended, the economy has grown at an annual rate of just 2.2 percent. That is way below average for post-recession recoveries. Indeed, this has been the weakest economic recovery in modern times......
Far from anticipating the limping slog of the last seven years, the White House confidently forecast an economic recovery that would feature robust GDP growth of 4 percent or more. It never came close.

More Americans would be working, paychecks would be larger, and public confidence would be sturdier if the economy had bounced back as vigorously as expected. Obama thought he had a better way to fix a recession. Turns out he had a worse way. Live and learn, voters.



The Weakest Economic Recovery in Modern Times - Jeff Jacoby - Page 2

Don't believe we will ever see the Booming Economy we had in the past, far too many factors will not allow for it. That said while we have improved from what we had 7 years ago it is not all that much better and the improvement rate is at a snails pace, we seem to be stuck in low gear and mediocrity and I would sadly say that no matter who takes power next year we will still never get back to the Good Old Days, those are history. Good article, more should read it, a little touch of reality never hurt anyone.
 
As long as most of the improvement in GDP goes to the wealthiest 1% , the economy will never fully recover.
 
On the basis of every metric, since he entered office, is mostly false. That is not to say we are anywhere near the lows of 2008, 2009 and 2010.
 
As long as most of the improvement in GDP goes to the wealthiest 1% , the economy will never fully recover.

Yet Obama, being in that 1% and not having further elected public service in mind, really cares. ;)
 
than at the end of 2007.
I'm not sure which is worse, posters who use false starting points in their arguments.....or those that are blind to the fact that the only lever the POTUS has had to effect the economy has been the FED/monetary policy, the fiscal lever has been controlled by the GOP Congress.

If you don't like the recovery, blame the GOP, this is exactly the recovery they wanted.
 
Yet Obama, being in that 1% and not having further elected public service in mind, really cares. ;)

Yeah, his interest is focused on the 1%. Funny that they have seen the largest rate of tax increases since 2012.

123115krugman1-tmagArticle.png
 
Without them....there would be no recovery or much of an economy
Thank gawd we have you looking out for their interests. Are they paying you well?
 
This isn't the same as the 30's depression. This is the beginning of the end of the consumer, middle class era. The wealth is being re-sequestered by the aristocracy again, on a global scale. The cash cow period has ended. The face of the sequestration may have changed along with the players involved (corporations instead of nobility and monarchs), but the result is the same.

Wealth distribution is how democracies remain salient. Absorb the money and they turn back to aristocracies, plutocracies and oligarchies. Civilizations tend to revert to closed power structures when economies fail. Expansion, contraction, peace, revolution... it's all cyclical and part of human social evolution.

We aren't meant to recover. The economy can't keep growing indefinitely, it's bound to stagnate, even if it means reaching the boundaries of this planet. It was never meant to last and all it takes is an awareness of finite resources to understand that.
 
I think we need to bring back low skill manufacturing jobs. At least for people who don't do well in the service industry
 
Yet Obama, being in that 1% and not having further elected public service in mind, really cares. ;)

What does that matter? Obama can't change it anyway. He's not a dictator, and doesn't run the economy.
 
Yes they do. Without profits, they wouldn't be.
False, your wage does come out of their profit, your labor created their profit. Your median wage has lost ground while their profits grew, you have been shorted, cheated, because you have no power to effect your wage.
 
False, your wage does come out of their profit, your labor created their profit. Your median wage has lost ground while their profits grew, you have been shorted, cheated, because you have no power to effect your wage.

Well folks, there you you liberal economic ignorance all summed up in one post!
You have 'no poer' to effect your wage. Yease seriously, he said that-read it for yourself.

You know what naturally follows, right?
Only the GOVERNMENT can help you .
For example , by forcing companies to pay you more for no production( ie minimum wage laws)
 
I think we need to bring back low skill manufacturing jobs. At least for people who don't do well in the service industry

Literally impossible unless we usher in some truly ludicrous policies and stop trading with places such as china that have sucked up low skill manufacturing, which is to be expected, given they are a massive, growing country with hundreds of millions of people/laborers. We're a service based economy now, and unfortunately, this seems to bring with it some consequences. The best way to help the people who don't do well in the service industry could be the state providing employment... or we let them sit back because, hell, the world is doing better and better, and with automation...
 
Well folks, there you you liberal economic ignorance all summed up in one post!
You have 'no poer' to effect your wage. Yease seriously, he said that-read it for yourself.

You know what naturally follows, right?
Only the GOVERNMENT can help you .
For example , by forcing companies to pay you more for no production( ie minimum wage laws)

because you have no power to effect your wage.
This is true for many workers, it's a problem in retail/fast food, where workers do not have unions in many cases even though many want to form them.
 
This is true for many workers, it's a problem in retail/fast food, where workers do not have unions in many cases even though many want to form them.

Oh?
They can't work harder to advance to management?
They can't educate themselves to get a better job?
 
Well folks, there you you liberal economic ignorance all summed up in one post!
You have 'no poer' to effect your wage. Yease seriously, he said that-read it for yourself.

You know what naturally follows, right?
Only the GOVERNMENT can help you .
For example , by forcing companies to pay you more for no production( ie minimum wage laws)
cough.....wrong....cough

ch1_20140317_1.png
 
cough.....wrong....cough

ch1_20140317_1.png
That chart shows the productiviuty of minimum wage workers?
{ Rhetorical: No it doesn't, so it's worthless to my point)

Minimum wage laws for DUMMIES>

Worker A is producing at X output and making Y.

The Goverment wants to change the equation so that worker A still is producing at X, but now should be paid Y + 10.

The +10 is pay for doing nothing
 
That chart shows the productiviuty of minimum wage workers?
{ Rhetorical: No it doesn't, so it's worthless to my point)

Minimum wage laws for DUMMIES>

Worker A is producing at X output and making Y.

The Goverment wants to change the equation so that worker A still is producing at X, but now should be paid Y + 10.

The +10 is pay for doing nothing

And for those who aren't dummies: Y+10 is enough incentive for more people to enter the labor market for those salaries and the employers can be more selective in hiring. So quality, and productivity, of workers improves, and because there would be a greater loss of wage, fewer people take sick days or other time off, increasing productivity.

Reality is somewhere in between our two scenarios most of the time.
 
The economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office," Obama told Jon Stewart during his last appearance on "The Daily Show.


Even Liberal Politifact was buying that BS.

"Our ruling

Obama said, "The economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office."

That claim is too sweeping. Certain measures of wages and income, the poverty rate and the duration of unemployment are all worse now than they were when Obama "came into office."

The statement contains an element of truth but ignores facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly False.
Barack Obama tells Jon Stewart the economy, 'by every metric, is better' than when he took office | PolitiFact

Six million more Americans live in poverty today than when Obama was elected. Median household income (in real dollars) was no higher at the end of 2015 than at the end of 2007. The labor force participation rate — the share of working-age Americans who have a job or are looking for one — has sunk to 62.5 percent, a level not seen since the Carter administration. Since the recession ended, the economy has grown at an annual rate of just 2.2 percent. That is way below average for post-recession recoveries. Indeed, this has been the weakest economic recovery in modern times......
Far from anticipating the limping slog of the last seven years, the White House confidently forecast an economic recovery that would feature robust GDP growth of 4 percent or more. It never came close.

More Americans would be working, paychecks would be larger, and public confidence would be sturdier if the economy had bounced back as vigorously as expected. Obama thought he had a better way to fix a recession. Turns out he had a worse way. Live and learn, voters.



The Weakest Economic Recovery in Modern Times - Jeff Jacoby - Page 2

No question that we have a continued problem with wealth disparity and how the economic pie in America is divided up. That is not something that originated on Obama's watch, its seems to have originated on Reagan's watch (likely by cutting highest marginal tax rate under 50%) and/or decline in manufacturing and unions. It did not get corrected under Obama's watch and will continue to be problem until we restructure the tax code for effect a more equatable system of American workers sharing in the prosperityObamasNumbers-2015-Q3_1.jpgWealth Disparity - changeinincomeinequality_0.jpgWealth Disparity - Weath Gap.jpg
 
Last edited:
And for those who aren't dummies: Y+10 is enough incentive for more people to enter the labor market for those salaries and the employers can be more selective in hiring. So quality, and productivity, of workers improves, and because there would be a greater loss of wage, fewer people take sick days or other time off, increasing productivity.

Reality is somewhere in between our two scenarios most of the time.
If they pay more, they can attract better workers.and they's be better becuase people would take less time off.
Fascinating.

Wonder why the company didn't think of that in the first place.
See, the central planners DO know better . I stand corrected.
 
If they pay more, they can attract better workers.and they's be better becuase people would take less time off.
Fascinating.

Wonder why the company didn't think of that in the first place.

Henry Ford did.

But apparantly my point went over your head.....There is no predicting exactly what an increase in the minimum wage will do to unemployment. It could go up, down, or stay the same.
 
No question that we have a continued problem with wealth disparity and how the economic pie in America is divided up. That is not something that originated on Obama's watch, its seems to have originated on Reagan's watch (likely by cutting highest marginal tax rate under 50%) and/or decline in manufacturing and unions. It did not get corrected under Obama's watch and will continue to be problem until we restructure the tax code for effect a more equatable system of American workers sharing in the prosperity
Equitable?
That's BS-our tax system is not designed to be equitable. It's progressive, so that rich pay more. And that's what happens. Somewhere around 40 % of taxpayers pay no income tax. Can't get much more progressive than that.
If you want ( and what liberal doesn't ? ) high eraners to pay more, just says so, stop lying and pretend it's because you want it mor 'equitable' And PLEASE spare us the dopey, cherry picked stats about how the rich don't pay their 'fair share' .
They don't. They pay more . PERIOD.
 
Back
Top Bottom