• 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.
Why are wen even looking at very short-term (oft manipulated) employment stats and trends in the first place?
 
Conservative said:
Exactly right, booming economic growth due to liberal economic policies. Liberals have such low standards that 1.6% probably exceeded their expectations.
Click to expand...

Better than you probably predicted.
 
Neomalthusian said:
Why are wen even looking at very short-term (oft manipulated) employment stats and trends in the first place?
Click to expand...

There's an election in a few months. It's all we have.
 
Neomalthusian said:
What do you mean?
Click to expand...

We talk about short-term results because we're struggling to find relevance to an election that happens in the short term.

He had it right.
Click to expand...

Now there are TWO people who think the President is inaugurated in March, not January? Wow.

Did you last read the Constitution in 1932 or something?
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
It's actually closer to $30/week for an individual, or $240/month for a couple. Economists say that it boosts GDP by about a full percentage point, which is quite significant.

It's amazing how Republicans will beg and plead for tax cuts, and then whine when they actually get a tax cut. It's the ultimate hyperpartisan bull****.
Click to expand...
I would love to see some real tax cuts. I like these because it highlights that social security is just one more welfare program.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
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.
Click to expand...

Of course they don't since you determine what the unemployment rate is based up a S.W.A.G, strategic wild ass guess. Those dropping out of the labor force aren't counted period in the U-3 number and apparently in your world don't matter. Those dropping out of the labor force are captured in the u-6 number but apparently you are hoping for more of them since they aren't unemployed, aren't counted, the unemployment number looks better.
 
misterman said:
We talk about short-term results because we're struggling to find relevance to an election that happens in the short term.



Now there are TWO people who think the President is inaugurated in March, not January? Wow.

Did you last read the Constitution in 1932 or something?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Nobody here said the president is inaugurated in March.
 
Misterveritis said:
I would love to see some real tax cuts. I like these because it highlights that social security is just one more welfare program.
Click to expand...

So you think cutting SS and Medicare funding is a tax cut? SS and Medicare aren't long term obligations for the govt? They are an expense and cutting their funding means those IOU's have to be repaid with borrowed or printed dollars.
 
misterman said:
We talk about short-term results because we're struggling to find relevance to an election that happens in the short term.
Click to expand...

You're struggling to find relevance?

So it all revolves around the BS elections?
 
Conservative said:
So you think cutting SS and Medicare funding is a tax cut?
Click to expand...
Well, that is where I find the large numbers that tell me how much the government has taken from me.

SS and Medicare aren't long term obligations for the govt? They are an expense and cutting their funding means those IOU's have to be repaid with borrowed or printed dollars.
Click to expand...
And this directly leads to my point. The government is going to print or borrow rather than receive funds from the people expecting to receive a benefit. This Administration is decoupling how we pay for those two programs. Can means testing be far behind? Once that happens we have two more welfare programs.

Then maybe we can reform them out of existence.
 
Misterveritis said:
Well, that is where I find the large numbers that tell me how much the government has taken from me.


And this directly leads to my point. The government is going to print or borrow rather than receive funds from the people expecting to receive a benefit. This Administration is decoupling how we pay for those two programs. Can means testing be far behind? Once that happens we have two more welfare programs.

Then maybe we can reform them out of existence.
Click to expand...

Apparently what many people who support Obama and the payroll tax cut don't seem to understand is that SS and Medicare are funded by the Payroll taxes and either they aren't working and paying payroll taxes or they don't understand that reality. Rather frustrating dealing with liberals these days. Nothing changes their mind including actual facts.
 
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...
Old propaganda. Man, that propaganda is so old -- how old is it? -- that it's got mold on it. Bo-ring [yawn]

One year after the stimulus, several independent macroeconomic firms, including Moody's and IHS Global Insight, estimated that the stimulus saved or created 1.6 to 1.8 million jobs and forecast a total impact of 2.5 million jobs saved by the time the stimulus is completed.[77] The Congressional Budget Office considered these estimates conservative.[78] The CBO estimated according to its model 2.1 million jobs saved in the last quarter of 2009, boosting the economy by up to 3.5 percent and lowering the unemployment rate by up to 2.1 percent.[79] The CBO projected that the package would have an even greater impact in 2010.[79] The CBO also said, "It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package."[80] The CBO's report on the first quarter of 2010 showed a continued positive effect, with an employment gain in that quarter of up to 2.8 million and a GDP boost of up to 4.2 percent.[81]

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
Then tell the Wall Street Journal got it wrong. Please show me a verifiable site that counts saved jobs?
Click to expand...
The Wall Street Journal admits that it got it wrong. Perhaps you should vet your own sources:

The authors are careful to note that such anecdotes do not mean that all of the stimulus was a waste, and they did find some success stories.
Click to expand...

A list of anecdotes -- which is what the WSJ article is -- does not a study make.

As to your so-called "verifiable sites", I gave you three in my prior post, which you apparently did not read -- Moody's, Global Insight, and the CBO (which your Wall Street Journal article discredits as, apparently, worthless).

So -- your WSJ source claims that they are right, and everyone else is wrong. This can be equated to the person that says they are sane, it is everyone else that is crazy. Perhaps. But not likely.

And for whatever it's worth, the source of your WSJ article -- the Mercatus Center -- is reported to be closely affiliated with the infamous Koch Brothers . . . . .

The Mercatus Center was founded by Rich Fink, who has worked closely with the Koch family foundations and political activities.[2] As of August 2010 he headed Koch Industries’ lobbying operation in Washington DC[2] and is former president of the Koch Family Foundations, which funds a network of market-oriented think tanks and advocacy groups.

Mercatus Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
 
Karl said:
The Wall Street Journal admits that it got it wrong. Perhaps you should vet your own sources:



A list of anecdotes -- which is what the WSJ article is -- does not a study make.

As to your so-called "verifiable sites", I gave you three in my prior post, which you apparently did not read -- Moody's, Global Insight, and the CBO (which your Wall Street Journal article discredits as, apparently, worthless).

So -- your WSJ source claims that they are right, and everyone else is wrong. This can be equated to the person that says they are sane, it is everyone else that is crazy. Perhaps. But not likely.

And for whatever it's worth, the source of your WSJ article -- the Mercatus Center -- is reported to be closely affiliated with the infamous Koch Brothers . . . . .
Click to expand...

What proves it was a waste are the costs and the results generated, 4.6 trillion added to the debt and the employment is worse than it was before the spending. What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty? I find it amazing that people like you do not seem to comprehend cost benefit analysis. Your share of the Obama debt is going to be massive when inflation kicks in.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Nonesense, Obama didn't get sworn into office in March, 2009. That's when the trend began turning.
Click to expand...

The chart shows bottoming out in Dec-Feb and then it goes on the upswing. The trend was already reversing.
 
Conservative said:
What proves it was a waste are the costs and the results generated, 4.6 trillion added to the debt and the employment is worse than it was before the spending. [...]
Click to expand...
$4.6 trillion added to the debt proves that the stimulus was a waste, hmm?

The only thing proven here is the incoherency of your argument.
 
Harshaw said:
The chart shows bottoming out in Dec-Feb and then it goes on the upswing. The trend was already reversing.
Click to expand...

Then we're in agreement -- the trend reversed in March, after the stimulus went into effect.
 
Conservative said:
What proves it was a waste are the costs and the results generated, 4.6 trillion added to the debt and the employment is worse than it was before the spending. What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty? I find it amazing that people like you do not seem to comprehend cost benefit analysis. Your share of the Obama debt is going to be massive when inflation kicks in.
Click to expand...

What a pity you can't refrain from absurdities, but suffice it to say, the stimulus did not add $4.6 trillion in debt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom