• 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!

US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

Status
Not open for further replies.
Prof. Peabody said:
Considering the Obama administration's record on Fast and Furious and Solyndra, I'll take Gallup's word over theirs.
Click to expand...

That Gallup poll shows even more job growth than the BLS.

Over the last year, the BLS shows the unemployment rate drop 0.8 points from 9.1% in January 2011 to 8.3% last month, a 9% decrease.

Compared to Gallup which show a 1.3 point drop over that same period from 9.9% to 8.6%, a 13% decrease.
 
apdst said:
If the governent would have gotten out of the way, they might have created 6 million, or maybe 8 million jobs since 2010.

Let's not celebrate sub-standard performance. Please?
Click to expand...

Since you're plucking numbers out of your ass, why stop at 8 milion? Why not 20 milion? 30 million? A big ass like that can certainly take any number you can make up.
 
apdst said:
CRA allowed the governement to force banks to make bad loans. How did all that government tampering with the private sector work out?
Click to expand...

Not so bad.
 
treedancer said:
Social Security is a pretty easy tweak, medicare is something else entirely.My thoughts would be a Nationwide healthcare system such as the VA has.
Click to expand...

That doesn't address the funding issue.

And SS is no easy tweak. Fixing the problem forever is possible, but it's also political suicide.

So what say you about my thoughts on the post that you quoted?
Click to expand...

You'll get no neoconservative outrage from me.
 
Dickieboy said:
Yeah, real effective:

View attachment 67122038
Click to expand...

Yes, it was...

m4mMW.jpg
 
QUOTE Neomalthusian

That doesn't address the funding issue.
Click to expand...

We pay it(the money the gov owes SS) with the money we saved by closing down the European bases.


And SS is no easy tweak.
Click to expand...

Sure it is, remove the cap from ALL INCOME,


Fixing the problem forever is possible, but it's also political suicide.
Click to expand...

Obama will be on his second term by then.:mrgreen:
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That Gallup poll shows even more job growth than the BLS.

Over the last year, the BLS shows the unemployment rate drop 0.8 points from 9.1% in January 2011 to 8.3% last month, a 9% decrease.

Compared to Gallup which show a 1.3 point drop over that same period from 9.9% to 8.6%, a 13% decrease.
Click to expand...

avk3babdkkms-aojvlgzsg.jpg

I don't think all the folks working part time jobs when they need full time really care. I need a full time job, but with unemployment in my county of California at 12%, part time is all most can get.
 
Last edited:
Sheik Yerbuti said:
It shows the trend reversing after ARRA went into effect.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. The trend stops and reverses right when Obama took office. The effects of ARRA, whatever they were, didn't happen until months later.
 
Deuce said:
Probably the same place they stashed war spending. :lamo
Click to expand...

Now that is a brilliant response as you have no clue what you are talking about. All war spending appears in the deficit. You are confused by the budget vs. actual spending.
 
misterman said:
You're trying to greatly simplify things, as usual. Congress and the President were doing nothing in 2007 too, and we got a financial collapse.

And it hasn't been do-nothing. There was that stimulus package, and that auto bailout - you noticed that the automakers are profitable again, not completely gone, right?
Click to expand...

Right, the stimulus package that as passed and signed in February 2009 that did absolutely nothing to stimulate the private sector. Now it is three years later and you want to take credit for the stimulus working? Seems you and other Obama supporters are the only ones claiming success for a three year old program designed for shovel ready jobs that didn't exist.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
BBC:

Good news for the country, good news for the Democrats, bad news for the Republicans. What do you think? Is the rise temporary? Does it even matter politically? What is causing it?
Click to expand...


Considering that 160K people enter the workforce every month, That is a net, 83K jobs...Although a positive for those people that actually got jobs, still not anywhere near a point where the administration could take credit for anything. The drop in percentage concerning unemployment is far more due to people dropping out of the work force, than it is added anything.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Considering that 160K people enter the workforce every month, That is a net, 83K jobs...Although a positive for those people that actually got jobs, still not anywhere near a point where the administration could take credit for anything. The drop in percentage concerning unemployment is far more due to people dropping out of the work force, than it is added anything.


j-mac
Click to expand...

... we're not going to have that "1.2 million people dropped from the work force" discussion again, are we?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
I have yet to see your proof of how much was spent and returned in FY2009.
Click to expand...

Different topic same lame rhetoric from you. If any of it was paid back in 2009 it should have gone against the 2009 deficit. the TARP website shows what was paid back in 2009 but of course you know that. Just more rhetoric on your part all in an attempt to divert from the tough question as to where the the TARP repayment shows up in reducing the deficit
 
misterman said:
Either Bush is responsible for 4.9 AND Obama is responsible for 4.6, or Bush is not responsible for 4.9 AND Obama is not responsible for 4.6. You can't cherry pick.
Click to expand...

I blame Bush for being in charge when 4.9 trillion was added to the debt in 8 years and Obama for being responsible for the 4.6 trillion in 3. That is the way it works, the Leader takes responsibility for what goes on during his leadership
 
j-mac said:
Considering that 160K people enter the workforce every month, That is a net, 83K jobs...Although a positive for those people that actually got jobs, still not anywhere near a point where the administration could take credit for anything. The drop in percentage concerning unemployment is far more due to people dropping out of the work force, than it is added anything.


j-mac
Click to expand...

:roll:

Only problem with that pearl of wisdom is that the workforce GREW last month by more than half a million jobs.
 
Conservative said:
Right, the stimulus package that as passed and signed in February 2009 that did absolutely nothing to stimulate the private sector. Now it is three years later and you want to take credit for the stimulus working? Seems you and other Obama supporters are the only ones claiming success for a three year old program designed for shovel ready jobs that didn't exist.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the GDP grew at a whopping 1.6% in 2011. Now that's something to write home to mother about....isn't it?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
WTF are you talking about now? The private sector has added 3.7 million jobs since 2010.
Click to expand...

Is that why the unemployment rate is higher than when he took office and why there were 1.2 million dropping out of the labor force in January? How many more have to drop out to get the unemployment rate down to what the Obama Administration claimed it would be two years after the stimulus was implemented?
 
Prof. Peabody said:
Don't forget the GDP grew at a whopping 1.6% in 2011. Now that's something to write home to mother about....isn't it?
Click to expand...

Exactly right, booming economic growth due to liberal economic policies. Liberals have such low standards that 1.6% probably exceeded their expectations.
 
Harshaw said:
No, it doesn't. The trend stops and reverses right when Obama took office. The effects of ARRA, whatever they were, didn't happen until months later.
Click to expand...

Nonesense, Obama didn't get sworn into office in March, 2009. That's when the trend began turning.
 
Conservative said:
Is that why the unemployment rate is higher than when he took office and why there were 1.2 million dropping out of the labor force in January? How many more have to drop out to get the unemployment rate down to what the Obama Administration claimed it would be two years after the stimulus was implemented?
Click to expand...

As usual, you demonstrate that you have no idea what you're talking about. For your edification, the "not in the workforce" figure plays no part in calculating the unemployment rate.

Now ya know.
 
Neomalthusian said:
I'm so god**** sick of talking about our debt as a partisan issue. "The Bush Years," Obama's spending, bla bla bla. Everyone is happy to blame Presidents when they don't like them, or Congress when they do. It's getting a wee bit obnoxious.

The issue is, should more federal money be spent on whatever-the-****, or should less?
Click to expand...

That's an understatement.

This silly blame game is due in part to people like Conservative, whose entire existence seems to depend on it, and on the fact that the nation elects people every few years and kinda has to go through a partisan blame game to make a decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom