Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
No, it's idiotic because it was a dumb decision and because it was one of several dumb decisions that contributed to our current woes. We would not find ourselves in the dire straights that we're in if the previous administration had kept on the path of fiscal restraint that IT inherited from Clinton.

That is your opinion, many that served there disagree whereas others don't. How did the war in Iraq cause zero job growth in August, rising unemployment since he took office, declining labor force since he took office, rising misery index in 2011, and very poor economic growth in 2011?

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
Keep diverting, Sheik, and by all means keep showing your BDS while ignoring history. I am sure that the attack on 9/11 is why we have zero jobs created in August 2011 and why we have a net job loss since Obama took office, a declining labor force, rising misery index and very poor economic growth all in 2011.

Stop lying already. BLS data shows 331,000 jobs added last month.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

366,000 more jobs in the private sector...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

One would have hoped you knew that some 150,000 jobs or more a month are needed just to keep the unemployment rate level and that should have been your first clue that we gained jobs since the U3 rate remained level, but noooo, you're to <sarcasm>slick</sarcasm> to put 1 + 1 together.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
That is your opinion, many that served there disagree whereas others don't. How did the war in Iraq cause zero job growth in August, rising unemployment since he took office, declining labor force since he took office, rising misery index in 2011, and very poor economic growth in 2011?

It's not my opinion -- it's a fact. We would be in better shape if we had not added over one trillion dollars to the debt for no good reason. That's basic arithmetic.

On the opinion side, I think we would have a much more functional government if Bush hadn't split the country in half following 911, when the whole country came together. Bush claimed he was a uniter -- not a divider -- but nothing could have been farther from the truth.

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

The Barbarian said:
Those things really worked well wouldn't you say ? just 9 months after leaving office .. we were attacked ... One can only wonder with all that Clinton did to curb terrorism, that could happen. But I'm glad to see that you see failure .. . as a reason to brag ..

Translation: Al'Qaida failed to hijack 4 commercial jets and use them like kamazi's on Clinton's watch since he was actually doing something to counter terrorism but had no obstruction at all to pull of such an attack on Bush's watch since he was doing absolutely nothing at all to prevent such an attack.

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
It does appear to be the case, Obama has a net job since taking office, loss, higher unemployment since taking office, declining labor force since taking office, rising misery index in 2011, and .04 and 1% GDP in 2011. Is that the education you are talking about?

I specified the education I was talking about, didn't you understand it??

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Stop lying already. BLS data shows 331,000 jobs added last month.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

366,000 more jobs in the private sector...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

One would have hoped you knew that some 150,000 jobs or more a month are needed just to keep the unemployment rate level and that should have been your first clue that we gained jobs since the U3 rate remained level, but noooo, you're to <sarcasm>slick</sarcasm> to put 1 + 1 together.

Do you know the difference between Gross and net? So before claiming that somone is lying better learn definitions. NET JOB LOSS IN AUGUST is a FACT

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
I specified the education I was talking about, didn't you understand it??

Yes, I understand that the attack on 9/11 which wasn't prevented by GW Bush led to the net job numbers for August 2011 along with all the other results I have posted. Thanks for educating me.

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
It's not my opinion -- it's a fact. We would be in better shape if we had not added over one trillion dollars to the debt for no good reason. That's basic arithmetic.

On the opinion side, I think we would have a much more functional government if Bush hadn't split the country in half following 911, when the whole country came together. Bush claimed he was a uniter -- not a divider -- but nothing could have been farther from the truth.

I really love the way Obama is uniting the country, don't you?

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
No, it's idiotic because it was a dumb decision and because it was one of several dumb decisions that contributed to our current woes. We would not find ourselves in the dire straights that we're in if the previous administration had kept on the path of fiscal restraint that IT inherited from Clinton.

Funny part in that is how Bush said on his campaign trail how he was going to cut taxes to give the surplus back to Americans because the government "overcharged" them ...

... ask Conservative if there was a surplus or if Bush was lying when he said that.

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
Thanks for educating me.

You're welcome.

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Funny part in that is how Bush said on his campaign trail how he was going to cut taxes to give the surplus back to Americans because the government "overcharged" them ...

... ask Conservative if there was a surplus or if Bush was lying when he said that.

Again, thanks for educating me, all that evil that Bush did caused the Obama results in 2011 including the August employment numbers and second qtr 1% GDP growth. Yes, amazing how the Bush performance led to the current JAR of Obama and the 70% claiming that they have no confidence in Obama's handling of the economy.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Funny part in that is how Bush said on his campaign trail how he was going to cut taxes to give the surplus back to Americans because the government "overcharged" them ...

... ask Conservative if there was a surplus or if Bush was lying when he said that.

Yes, conservatives seem to forget that the justification for the Bush tax cuts was the Clinton surplus that was slated to rise over the next eight years. What on earth was the government going to do with all that excess revenue?!

Well, the Republicans solved that problem....

TheNextEra · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Translation: Al'Qaida failed to hijack 4 commercial jets and use them like kamazi's on Clinton's watch since he was actually doing something to counter terrorism but had no obstruction at all to pull of such an attack on Bush's watch since he was doing absolutely nothing at all to prevent such an attack.

I disagree with this statement. The 9-11 plot was YEARS in the making and I truly believe that had Gore been elected then the attacks STILL would have happened. I don't blame Clinton exclusively as the mentality of the time was varied on by previous presidents that something like that was unlikely. 9-11 was allowed to happened because of continued failed policies within the intelligence community.

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
Do you know the difference between Gross and net? So before claiming that somone is lying better learn definitions. NET JOB LOSS IN AUGUST is a FACT

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Umm, aside from that report not saying there was a net job loss, I'm eager to see your explanation of how the U3 unemplyment rate remained at 9.1% from the previous month if there was a net loss since it takes at least a net gain of about 150,000 just to keep the unemployment rate level.

G'head . . .

The Barbarian · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Translation: Al'Qaida failed to hijack 4 commercial jets and use them like kamazi's on Clinton's watch since he was actually doing something to counter terrorism but had no obstruction at all to pull of such an attack on Bush's watch since he was doing absolutely nothing at all to prevent such an attack.

Hmm wait .. wait .. I seem to remember something about 1993 ... what was it again .. the 1st bombing of the World Trade Center .. under who's watch was that again ?? Guess nothing was being done back then either

As to your translation, will you please explain to all the folks here .. what one of those things he put into place that was so effective .. did Bush over turn ??

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
Yes, conservatives seem to forget that the justification for the Bush tax cuts was the Clinton surplus that was slated to rise over the next eight years. What on earth was the government going to do with all that excess revenue?!

Well, the Republicans solved that problem....

I am sure that Bush was also responsible for the Chicago Fires, San Francisco Earthquakes, and famine in Africa.

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Umm, aside from that report not saying there was a net job loss, I'm eager to see your explanation of how the U3 unemplyment rate remained at 9.1% from the previous month if there was a net loss since it takes at least a net gain of about 150,000 just to keep the unemployment rate level.

G'head . . .

16.2% U-6 explains it well for you

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

The Barbarian said:
Hmm wait .. wait .. I seem to remember something about 1993 ... what was it again .. the 1st bombing of the World Trade Center .. under who's watch was that again ?? Guess nothing was being done back then either

That was Bush's fault too as he was running for Governor of TX and took his eye off the National security ball.

Sheik Yerbuti · Sep 7, 2011

TheNextEra said:
I disagree with this statement. The 9-11 plot was YEARS in the making and I truly believe that had Gore been elected then the attacks STILL would have happened. I don't blame Clinton exclusively as the mentality of the time was varied on by previous presidents that something like that was unlikely. 9-11 was allowed to happened because of continued failed policies within the intelligence community.

We'll never know if Gore would have prevented the attack or not although my personal belief is that he would have at least tried, just as Clinton had done 3 years earlier when he too was handed a PDB by the FBI warning him of a potential attack by Muslim extremists. That conjecture aside, I would hope most would agree that doing absolutely nothing in response to such a warning is almost a certain guarantee that the attack will not be thwarted.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
I am sure that Bush was also responsible for the Chicago Fires, San Francisco Earthquakes, and famine in Africa.

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

So Bush was lying when he said that the Clinton surplus justified his tax cuts. That's good to know.

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
So Bush was lying when he said that the Clinton surplus justified his tax cuts. That's good to know.

No more than the CBO was lying or anyone else was lying at the time, it was a projected surplus that didn't count on the Clinton recession and 9/11

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Sheik Yerbuti said:
We'll never know if Gore would have prevented the attack or not although my personal belief is that he would have at least tried, just as Clinton had done 3 years earlier when he too was handed a PDB by the FBI warning him of a potential attack by Muslim extremists. That conjecture aside, I would hope most would agree that doing absolutely nothing in response to such a warning is almost a certain guarantee that the attack will not be thwarted.

Of course we can only speculate, but there is no question that Bush was remiss in addressing the threat of al Qaeda during his first nine months. His own terrorism czar sent multiple requests, beginning in January of 2001, stating that a cabinet-level meeting was urgently needed to address the AQ threat. Bush ignored these requests for eight months. He finally responded ... several weeks before 9/11. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/clarke memo.pdf

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
No more than the CBO was lying or anyone else was lying at the time, it was a projected surplus that didn't count on the Clinton recession and 9/11

No one was lying except the people claiming there was no surplus. People who deny the surplus are either being intentionally deceptive, or they simply don't understand the difference between the debt held by the public and intergovernmental debt.

Conservative · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
Of course we can only speculate, but there is no question that Bush was remiss in addressing the threat of al Qaeda during his first nine months. His own terrorism czar sent multiple requests, beginning in January of 2001, stating that a cabinet-level meeting was urgently needed to address the AQ threat. Bush ignored these requests for eight months. He finally responded ... several weeks before 9/11. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/clarke memo.pdf

You haven't a clue what Bush did or didn't do, just an opinion that you want to believe. What does any of this have to do with the current results today and the fact that you cannot get over your BDS?

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Conservative said:
You haven't a clue what Bush did or didn't do, just an opinion that you want to believe. What does any of this have to do with the current results today and the fact that you cannot get over your BDS?

Of course I know what Bush didn't do. It was laid out in great detail by his own terrorism czar.