• 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.
And it is reported by NBER that the recession ended in June 2009 so tell me why the economy isn't creating enough jobs to get back to even when Obama took office?

Recession isn't a magical word. It's a technical description relating to GDP growth. Obviously you aren't going to have a booming economy just because you exit negative GDP growth. You still have to get to robust GDP growth, which we have yet to do. The reasons for it are manifold: depressed real estate prices, large unemployment in construction/real estate/finance, weak consumer demand, restrictive lending, European debt crisis, political gridlock, etc.
 
Stop lying, Con. I never said the Congress caused the recession. I asked jmac why he was only looking at a 3 month window when Republicans controlled the Senate, when in fact, they had controlled it for more than 6 years by that point.

When do your lies and insults stop?

Then why did you bring up control of the Senate and blame Bush for the recession that started in March 2001? I know that the dotcom bubble bursting caused the 2001 recession that was compounded by 9/11 but why the 2001 recession is even an issue today is your typical liberal diversion from the disaster that you helped put into the WH. You voted for Obama now accept responsibility for that poor choice.
 
And it is reported by NBER that the recession ended in June 2009 so tell me why the economy isn't creating enough jobs to get back to even when Obama took office?
Because we lost 8 million jobs during Bush's Great Recession; we lost 12 million to underemployment.

Overcoming that ain't a cakewalk.
 
Recession isn't a magical word. It's a technical description relating to GDP growth. Obviously you aren't going to have a booming economy just because you exit negative GDP growth. You still have to get to robust GDP growth, which we have yet to do. The reasons for it are manifold: depressed real estate prices, large unemployment in construction/real estate/finance, weak consumer demand, restrictive lending, European debt crisis, political gridlock, etc.

We had a decent economy the first part of 2010 and that economy has been dropping since, why? Stop blaming everyone else and accept responsibility for the failure of liberalism and Obama
 
I don't care what supposed definitions you are going by, these are different times than at any time in the past. Take a look around you, people are hurting in this country. So go tell them that things are better.

j-mac

Been hurting for a long while, even before Obama. But definitions matter. Oddly, we seem to only care when the other party is in charge.

It seems you won't answer me, but you do seem to believe government is the answer.
 
Then why did you bring up control of the Senate and blame Bush for the recession that started in March 2001? I know that the dotcom bubble bursting caused the 2001 recession that was compounded by 9/11 but why the 2001 recession is even an issue today is your typical liberal diversion from the disaster that you helped put into the WH. You voted for Obama now accept responsibility for that poor choice.

He only addressed it because YOU were trying to pin it on the Democrats. You can't make this sh*t up! :lol:
 
Because we lost 8 million jobs during Bush's Great Recession; we lost 12 million to underemployment.

Overcoming that ain't a cakewalk.

With a Democrat Congress which you obviously want to ignore and the fact that there is a net job loss today 2 1/2 years later and 25 million unemployed or under employed 16.2%. It only cost trillions for those results.
 
Stop lying, Con. I never said the Congress caused the recession. I asked jmac why he was only looking at a 3 month window when Republicans controlled the Senate, when in fact, they had controlled it for more than 6 years by that point.

When do your lies and insults stop?

did you or did you not say:

The 2001 recession began in March while Republicans controlled the Senate and Democrats didn't take control of the Senate until June, three months later.

What else happened in September of 2001 that might have had an impact on the recession that Bush was starting to address which he inherited?

Hmmmmm....Let's think real hard now.

j-mac
 
He only addressed it because YOU were trying to pin it on the Democrats. You can't make this sh*t up! :lol:

What happened in 2001 is irrelevant today and just another diversion from the Obama record today.The fact remains Congress and the President are responsible for the economy. Clinton had a Republican controlled Congress and Bush had a Democrat controlled Congress. Blaming Bush or Clinton alone serves no purpose nor does it address the Obama record today
 
We had a decent economy the first part of 2010 and that economy has been dropping since, why? Stop blaming everyone else and accept responsibility for the failure of liberalism and Obama

The stimulus bill was the main reason we were doing better in the first part of 2010 relative to how we're doing now, though unemployment was obviously still a big problem then. Now that the stimulus is winding down, and the EU debt crisis is worsening ... *miracle!* ... the economy is slipping backwards.
 
What happened in 2001 is irrelevant today and just another diversion from the Obama record today.The fact remains Congress and the President are responsible for the economy. Clinton had a Republican controlled Congress and Bush had a Democrat controlled Congress. Blaming Bush or Clinton alone serves no purpose nor does it address the Obama record today

Why did you bring it up if you think it's irrelevant?
 
The stimulus bill was the main reason we were doing better in the first part of 2010 relative to how we're doing now, though unemployment was obviously still a big problem then. Now that the stimulus is winding down, and the EU debt crisis is worsening ... *miracle!* ... the economy is slipping backwards.

Don't you think spending a trillion dollars shouldn't generate positive results? The problem is like all stimulus programs they are short term and nothing Obama has done has promoted long term growth. The consumer and business have no confidence in this President and aren't going to spend money or hire people until Obama loses his job.
 
Arghhhhhh! How frustrating...YOU laid out this three month period, so now just answer the damned question will you?

j-mac
I posit your frustration is self-inflicted based on your own confusion.

Case in point, I did not lay out any three month period. Conservative did. Pbrauer asked if he claims Bush inherited a recession and he said yes, but then pointed out how Bush started with a Democrat-led Senate in January of 2001.

All I did was highlight his ignorance for claiming Democrats controlled the Senate when in fact, it was Republicans who controlled it. So whatever he was insinuating Democrats were to blame for, is actually upon Republicans. I never blamed the Republican-led Senate for the recession.
 
Don't you think spending a trillion dollars shouldn't generate positive results? The problem is like all stimulus programs they are short term and nothing Obama has done has promoted long term growth. The consumer and business have no confidence in this President and aren't going to spend money or hire people until Obama loses his job.

The stimulus did generate positive results, as you just acknowledged. But it was too small to generate sufficient momentum. The recession -- big as it was -- was caused by a short-term real estate bubble. It wasn't caused by any long-term flaw that needs to be addressed right away.
 
Then why did you bring up control of the Senate ...
Stop the **** lying already, Con. Enough already.

YOU brought up control of the Senate, no me....

pbrauer: "Aren't you the one that claims that Bush inherited a recession from Clinton?"

Conservative: "He did, March 2001 according to NBER so unless you can tell me what Bush implemented on January 21, 2001 with a Democrat Controlled Senate that created a recession that started in March it was an inherited recession?"

Sheik Yerbuti:
"WTF?? Are you saying the 2001 recession began while Democrats controlled the Senate? Face reality, Con .... the 2001 recession began while Republicans controlled the Senate, the House, and the executive branch."

Conservative: "Really? So Daschle stole the title of Senate Majority Leader in 2001? Wow, your ignorance has no bounds."

Seriously Con, can you post without lying and without insulting others?
 
The stimulus did generate positive results, as you just acknowledged. But it was too small to generate sufficient momentum. The recession -- big as it was -- was caused by a short-term real estate bubble. It wasn't caused by any long-term flaw that needs to be addressed right away.

You really don't understand how our economy works. Short term stimulus was enough but did nothing to generate private sector growth thus was spent poorly so like all liberals you buy the rhetoric and double down on the request for raising taxes. If you want to pay more taxes and reward politicians, then reject your Bush tax cut and send in more money to the govt. Put your money where your mouth is
 
I know that the dotcom bubble bursting caused the 2001 recession that was compounded by 9/11 but why the 2001
Mind explaining how 9.11 compounded the 2001 recession since the recession ended just 2 months later?
 
You really don't understand how our economy works. Short term stimulus was enough but did nothing to generate private sector growth thus was spent poorly so like all liberals you buy the rhetoric and double down on the request for raising taxes. If you want to pay more taxes and reward politicians, then reject your Bush tax cut and send in more money to the govt. Put your money where your mouth is

That's simply not true. Private sector job growth and manufacturing were both strong. They just weren't strong enough to be self-sustaining. Now the gains are being eroded mostly by weakness in PUBLIC sector employment.
 
That's simply not true. Private sector job growth and manufacturing were both strong. They just weren't strong enough to be self-sustaining. Now the gains are being eroded mostly by weakness in PUBLIC sector employment.

Look, Adam, Obama is responsible for the results today and don't know where you live or what you are looking at but the Obama approval rating on handling the economy says it all. 25 million plus million unemployed and under employed today and that is reality.
 
And it is reported by NBER that the recession ended in June 2009 so tell me why the economy isn't creating enough jobs to get back to even when Obama took office?

The consumer continues to deleverage, and the producers in this country are unwilling to expand until the consumer regains confidence.
 
With a Democrat Congress which you obviously want to ignore and the fact that there is a net job loss today 2 1/2 years later and 25 million unemployed or under employed 16.2%. It only cost trillions for those results.
Umm, we've been through this 4,000 times ... The 2007 Demcorat-led Congress did not create Bush's Great Recession which also began 11 months later. How do you blame Democrats for a recession while Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and executive branch from 2003 through 2006?
 
Look, Adam, Obama is responsible for the results today and don't know where you live or what you are looking at but the Obama approval rating on handling the economy says it all. 25 million plus million unemployed and under employed today and that is reality.

I wouldn't put too much faith in those numbers. The truth is that most people aren't economists. If the economy is bad they're going to say they like the economy is being handled, regardless of how it's actually being handled. They blamed Democrats in '10 and voted in a bunch of Republicans. Now the Republicans get even lower ratings than the Democrats.
 
did you or did you not say:

The 2001 recession began in March while Republicans controlled the Senate and Democrats didn't take control of the Senate until June, three months later.
I did.

What else happened in September of 2001 that might have had an impact on the recession that Bush was starting to address which he inherited?

Hmmmmm....Let's think real hard now.

j-mac
WTF??? The recession started in March, 6 months before 9.11.

... and it ended just 2 months after.
 
Last edited:
That's simply not true. Private sector job growth and manufacturing were both strong. They just weren't strong enough to be self-sustaining. Now the gains are being eroded mostly by weakness in PUBLIC sector employment.

Here are the numbers so the entire Obama economic plan

Unemployed 14.7 million unemployed when the recession ended in June 2009 and 13.9 million unemployed today so for a trillion dollars we had a reduction in unemployment of 800 thousand in reported numbers

2009 11919 12714 13310 13816 14518 14721 14534 14993 15159 15612 15340 15267
2010 14837 14871 15005 15260 14973 14623 14599 14860 14767 14843 15119 14485
2011 13863 13673 13542 13747 13914 14087 13931 13967

Discouraged workers in June 2009 was 793,000 and today that is 977 thousand or more discouraged workers than when the recession ended thus reducing that 800K gain by 184K to 616K.

Discouraged workers
2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318
2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 977

At the end of the recession in June 2009 there were 15.5 million unemployed and under employed Americans and today that is 14.9 showing that 600,000 gain since the endof the recession at a cost of a trillion dollars. These are terrible results and show why the public is not buying the Obama rhetoric

Unemployed + Discouraged
2008 8095 7831 8194 8043 8797 8980 9356 9890 10036 10656 11225 12042
2009 12653 13445 13995 14556 15310 15514 15330 15751 15865 16420 16201 16196
2010 15902 16075 15999 16457 16056 15830 15784 15970 15976 16062 16401 15803
2011 14856 14693 14463 14736 14736 15069 15050 14944 0 0 0 0
 
Here are the numbers so the entire Obama economic plan

Unemployed 14.7 million unemployed when the recession ended in June 2009 and 13.9 million unemployed today so for a trillion dollars we had a reduction in unemployment of 800 thousand in reported numbers

2009 11919 12714 13310 13816 14518 14721 14534 14993 15159 15612 15340 15267
2010 14837 14871 15005 15260 14973 14623 14599 14860 14767 14843 15119 14485
2011 13863 13673 13542 13747 13914 14087 13931 13967

Discouraged workers in June 2009 was 793,000 and today that is 977 thousand or more discouraged workers than when the recession ended thus reducing that 800K gain by 184K to 616K.

Discouraged workers
2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318
2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 977

At the end of the recession in June 2009 there were 15.5 million unemployed and under employed Americans and today that is 14.9 showing that 600,000 gain since the endof the recession at a cost of a trillion dollars. These are terrible results and show why the public is not buying the Obama rhetoric

Unemployed + Discouraged
2008 8095 7831 8194 8043 8797 8980 9356 9890 10036 10656 11225 12042
2009 12653 13445 13995 14556 15310 15514 15330 15751 15865 16420 16201 16196
2010 15902 16075 15999 16457 16056 15830 15784 15970 15976 16062 16401 15803
2011 14856 14693 14463 14736 14736 15069 15050 14944 0 0 0 0
Since the end of the recession, there has been a net gain of 639,000 jobs according to payroll data.

June, 2009: 130,493,000
Aug: 2011: 131,132,000


Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom