• 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!

Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

Status
Not open for further replies.
Again, if people don't have the money to buy stuff, how in the hell do you increase demand and jobs?

So "your" President has been in office for 2 1/2 years and things are worse in terms of employment, unemployment, and under employment. Obama had a Democrat Congress for two years and has failed to generate positive results. Why would you want another term of this incompetence?
 
The "so what" is that it's obviously true. Even conservative Repubicans will admit it -- if they are out of office and don't have to sniff the teabaggers' behinds. Take ownerhip of your accomplishments! Your team forced the economy to the brink of collapse, dinged our credit rating for the first time, and crashed the markets. Actions have consequences. :shrug:

Keep diverting from the Obama record for that is all you have. No one can defend what he has accomplished in 2 1/2 years.
 
So "your" President has been in office for 2 1/2 years and things are worse in terms of employment, unemployment, and under employment. Obama had a Democrat Congress for two years and has failed to generate positive results. Why would you want another term of this incompetence?

And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.

You should want another Obama term because another Republican president would bring the economy crashing down just like the last one.
 
How do you "create" jobs when people don't have money in their pockets and their jobs have been sent overseas?

One of Obama's campaign promises was to address this. The Dems had the numbers for two years. They did nothing. Would we be in a better position today if they had as opposed to paying people who were going to buy a car anyway, buy cars?

You bet.

Would the Dems still have the number if they had made different choices?
 
Last edited:
:lamo Look up the word "net."


Ok you want to talk "net" jobs? Tell me in the weeks that make up August, how many Unemployment claims per week were there?? 300 to 400K? to me that looks like a net wash...

j-mac
 
Keep diverting from the Obama record for that is all you have. No one can defend what he has accomplished in 2 1/2 years.

Why do you want to ignore your party's accomplishments? They happened. Actions have consequences. You can't oppose every effort to fix the problem and then whine because the problem hasn't been fixed. At least not if you're honest about it.
 
And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.

You should want another Obama term because another Republican president would bring the economy crashing down just like the last one.

Still waiting for you to post the Bush/Obama record side by side. You seem to run from that challenge and only post a couple months as an indication of what Bush accomplished. The Obama record speaks for itself.

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.
 
Why do you want to ignore your party's accomplishments? They happened. Actions have consequences. You can't oppose every effort to fix the problem and then whine because the problem hasn't been fixed. At least not if you're honest about it.

"My" Party isn't in charge, "yours" has been for 4 years.
 
One of Obama's campaign promises was to address this. The Dems had the numbers for two years. They did nothing. Would we be in a better position today if they had as opposed to paying people who were going to buy a car anyway, buy cars?

You bet.
Where would GM and Chrysler be today without Obama? They are making profits, thank you very much Mr. Obama.
 
The "so what" is that it's obviously true. Even conservative Repubicans will admit it -- if they are out of office and don't have to sniff the teabaggers' behinds. Take ownerhip of your accomplishments! Your team forced the economy to the brink of collapse, dinged our credit rating for the first time, and crashed the markets. Actions have consequences. :shrug:


No, the "so what" is meant to denote that I could care less that you post one former Senators opinion and expect all repubs to fall in line because it agrees with your own rhetoric, and delusional thinking. Your constant use of pejorative, and smear to describe those that politically disagree with your thinking is childish, and naive.

All you do is bring talking point, platitude to any discussion you have, and therefore I really have little interest in talking with such Bull **** anymore. Unless you can discuss an issue without name calling, and smear type trolling we are done.


j-mac
 
"My" Party isn't in charge, "yours" has been for 4 years.

"Your" President was in charge when we saw the greatest downturn since the Great Republican Depression.
 
Still waiting for you to post the Bush/Obama record side by side. You seem to run from that challenge and only post a couple months as an indication of what Bush accomplished. The Obama record speaks for itself.

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.

The only thing you can judge Obama by is what he accomplished vis-a-vis what he inherited. I mean, it's not like he inherited a budget surplus and turned it into a multi-trillion-dollar deficit, right?
 
Where would GM and Chrysler be today without Obama? They are making profits, thank you very much Mr. Obama.

See, you really didn't want anyone to address your post. How did this address the jobs that went overseas? The payoff allowed people to buy Toyota's, Nissan's, Kia's etc. GM and Chrysler sold very few extra cars.
 
No, the "so what" is meant to denote that I could care less that you post one former Senators opinion and expect all repubs to fall in line because it agrees with your own rhetoric, and delusional thinking. Your constant use of pejorative, and smear to describe those that politically disagree with your thinking is childish, and naive.

All you do is bring talking point, platitude to any discussion you have, and therefore I really have little interest in talking with such Bull **** anymore. Unless you can discuss an issue without name calling, and smear type trolling we are done.


j-mac

You fall in line with every other wingnut talking point and follow the Limbaugh line like he's got a choke collar around your neck. :shrug:
 
"Your" President was in charge when we saw the greatest downturn since the Great Republican Depression.

Seems he had a lot of support with Obama and the Democrat Congress but somehow Bush was a King and Obama has no responsibility for what has happened the last 2 1/2 years. You sure seem to have such disdain for free enterprise and capitalism. Interesting
 
You fall in line with every other wingnut talking point and follow the Limbaugh line like he's got a choke collar around your neck. :shrug:

don't listen to Limbaugh....So you're wrong again....See how easy that is?


Wake up dude.

j-mac
 
Still waiting for you to post the Bush/Obama record side by side. You seem to run from that challenge and only post a couple months as an indication of what Bush accomplished. The Obama record speaks for itself.

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.
You've got to be kidding the economy lost 2 million jobs between election day and inauguration day.
 
The only thing you can judge Obama by is what he accomplished vis-a-vis what he inherited. I mean, it's not like he inherited a budget surplus and turned it into a multi-trillion-dollar deficit, right?

How do you inherit what you helped create? Civics tells you we have three equal branches of govt. Bush got a lot of help generating those numbers which of course you ignored just like you ignored the Obama promises to "fix" the economy. His hope and change message was different than the hope and change definition of most Americans. Still waiting for a side by side comparison between Obama and Bush results showing actual numbers, GDP, Debt, Employment, Unemployment, Misery Index. Let's see if you can be intellectually honest for a change?
 
Last edited:
You've got to be kidding the economy lost 2 million jobs between election day and inauguration day.

Yet Bush had a net job gain during his term and 2 1/2 years after inaugeration day Obama still has a net job loss even after having control of the Congress for two years. Get with Adam and come up with a side by side comparision of the Bush/Obama results.
 
Yet Bush had a net job gain during his term and 2 1/2 years after inaugeration day Obama still has a net job loss even after having control of the Congress for two years. Get with Adam and come up with a side by side comparision of the Bush/Obama results.

No sir, that won't happen because level playing fields are not in the lexicon of a liberal, only talking points, and lies....Mercer Tyson has this opinion of the great success of the Stimulus that Obama did to, ahem, I mean gave to us.......

In short, the stimulus was supposed to jump-start the economy and therefore fix it. It didn't. It bailed water out of the boat for a while, but didn't plug the hole.
An excellent parallel of the stimulus story is the heralded "Cash for Clunkers" program. According to Edmunds, only 125,000 of the 690,000 purchases would not have been made without the incentives, and with $3 billion spent, that works out to $24,000 per car. Additionally, the price of used cars increased significantly due to the drop in supply, thereby impacting anyone (especially poor people) who needed to buy a used car. Moreover, With reference to carbon dioxide emitted in the process of making a new car, William Chameides of Duke University said that in order to offset the carbon footprint of the new car from a clunker, the average driver would need to drive the car about five and a half years; with trucks, the figure jumps to eight or nine years of typical driving. And to top this off, Harvard economics professor Edward Glaeser argues that subsidizing fuel-efficient vehicles encourages more driving, as the marginal cost per mile driven is less, which causes total fuel consumption to decrease less than expected.
Yet the Cash for clunkers program was considered successful, much in the same way Bernstein and the others behind the stimulus think it was successful.
While we are at it, let's do the math with Bernstein's numbers. At $800,000,000,000 for 2,500,000 jobs, that's $320,000 per job. Wow. Most of that slipped through the cracks because, as we know, the government has lots of huge cracks.
So, if Bernstein and the other stimulus crafters believe the stimulus did what it was supposed to do, that means they intended to spend 800B taxpayer dollars to provide temporary jobs for 2,500,000 people at a cost of $320,000 per job.
Instead of stating that the stimulus worked, Bernstein should have provided excuses for its failure. Had he insisted that the stimulus would have worked if it weren't for Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, job-killing green energy policies, etc., some people might have believed him. Not me, but what do I know? After all, my knowledge of these things is limited to what's obvious.

Blog: The stimulus worked?

j-mac
 
Bush's averages don't mean jack. What matters is that he took us on a journey from budget surplus and relative prosperity to massive deficits and the worst recession in three generations.
 
Hmmm....So what do you think the AP is doing? Lying?

j-mac
No, just getting it wrong. It takes about 150,000 jobs to keep the rate the same. So clearly, there was a gain of jobs in August. Just not enough to lower the unemployment rate.
 
Yet Bush had a net job gain during his term and 2 1/2 years after inaugeration day Obama still has a net job loss even after having control of the Congress for two years. Get with Adam and come up with a side by side comparision of the Bush/Obama results.
You've been told this before, but whatever you can claim as a success for Bush was caused by the housing bubble, there is no way around that fact.
 
You've got to be kidding the economy lost 2 million jobs between election day and inauguration day.

Unemployment numbers by month. 2 Million? Hmmmm

2008 7628 7435 7793 7631 8397 8560 8895 9509 9569 10172 10617 11400
2009 11919 12714 13310 13816 14518 14721 14534 14993 15159 15612 15340 15267
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom