- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 1,510
- Reaction score
- 707
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Notice i am not calling for raising taxes or cutting spending (now).
So you are adopting the "wait and see" approach?
Notice i am not calling for raising taxes or cutting spending (now).
So you are adopting the "wait and see" approach?
No, not really. We as Americans have been dealt the "wait and see" approach. I would prefer infrastructure stimulus in the tune of at least $1 trillion per year for the next 2 years, but that's not going to happen.
You finally got something right.
Your right, the bush tax cuts sure didn't.
Once the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented, July 2003, they sure did, until Democrats took control of Congress
2001 137778
2002 135701
2003 137417
2004 138472
2005 140245
2006 143150
2007 146033
2008 146407
Looks to me like 9 million jobs created between January 1, 2003 and January 1, 2008. Compare that to Obama's job performance
2009 142221
2010 138333
2011 139323
Nov 11 140590
That would be a net loss of 1.6 million
Actually, we gained 339,000 jobs last month but 219,000 of them were due to the holiday/winter season
You believe that folks are going to vote for the Dems next year, because they got a tax cut that amounts to 10 bucks a week?
Bush had a low rate of 4.5%. How do you explain that?
It really depends on how the tax cuts are framed doesn’t it? For instance, the reps want the bush tax cuts kept in place, which help the wealthiest, while blocking the tax cut that helps the middle class more.Hhmm...Lottsa fodder their for move on.:thumbs:
Then we have the rep clown show running for President into.kinda looks like the dems have a pretty good shot of taking the house back as well.
You must be wondering what that's like?
You conveniently leave out the massive reduction in public saving. Federal spending increase from about $2 trillion/year in 2002 to about $3 trillion/year in 2008; an increase of 50% in 6 years.
You can't have it both ways.
It really depends on how the tax cuts are framed doesn’t it? For instance, the reps want the bush tax cuts kept in place, which help the wealthiest, while blocking the tax cut that helps the middle class more.Hhmm...Lottsa fodder their for move on.:thumbs:
Then we have the rep clown show running for President into.kinda looks like the dems have a pretty good shot of taking the house back as well.
That was caused by Clinton, don't you know that? Anything good happens during a republican presidency and it's the democrats who are responsible. Anything bad happen during a democratic presidency and it's the republicans who are responsible. When will you ever learn?
The Bush tax cuts allowed 47% of the income earning households to drop off the tax roles and pay zero in Federal Income Taxes so tell me how that didn't help those people?
WTH does this post have to do with the post of mine that you quoted?:roll:
the reps want the bush tax cuts kept in place, which help the wealthiest, while blocking the tax cut that helps the middle class more.
How dare me leaving out savings in reporting job creation! Looks to me like the Bush tax cuts did exactly what they were supposed to do, increase spending and demand.
What is seasonal adjustment?Seasonal adjustment is a statistical technique that attempts to measure and remove the influences of predictable seasonal patterns to reveal how employment and unemployment change from month to month.
Over the course of a year, the size of the labor force, the levels of employment and unemployment, and other measures of labor market activity undergo fluctuations due to seasonal events including changes in weather, harvests, major holidays, and school schedules. Because these seasonal events follow a more or less regular pattern each year, their influence on statistical trends can be eliminated by seasonally adjusting the statistics from month to month. These seasonal adjustments make it easier to observe the cyclical, underlying trend, and other nonseasonal movements in the series.
As a general rule, the monthly employment and unemployment numbers reported in the news are seasonally adjusted data. Seasonally adjusted data are useful when comparing several months of data. Annual average estimates are calculated from the not seasonally adjusted data series.
The unemployment rate is seasonally adjusted. Therefore, the claim that the drop in the unemployment rate is attributed to the increased hiring of holiday workers is a misnomer.
What is seasonal adjustment?
Like others, I have my reservations about this "unexpected" drop. Let's give a few month and see where we stand in the Spring.
Did you not post the following?
Wouldn't you say 47% of income earning households not paying Federal income taxes were helped by the Bush tax cuts?
Whoop te do...WOW what are they going to do with all that dough.:roll:
America’s top earners will get an average tax cut of $66,384 in 2011, while the bottom 20 percent will get an average cut of $107.
In translation: you have nothing important to add to the discussion.
You call yourself "slightly liberal?" That total lack of logic and common sense makes you totally liberal.
How did I confuse you?
The meaning of the topic is clear...... 315,000 fewer people are now looking for jobs, which resulted in the drop in the unemployment rate. There are now 487,000 fewer people in the workforce than there was in October.
Of the private sector jobs, 50,000 of them were retail, obviously temporary holiday work. Manufacturing gained only 2,000 new jobs, while construction lost 12,000.
If it makes you feel good to gloat about these pathetic numbers, feel free.