• 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!

Jobs recovery suffers setback in March

It's both, I'm afraid and it's not going to get any better. Even if gas prices go down, they're not going to go down that much and while they may go down, inflation will continue to rise.
 
It's still failed.

So instead of blaiming the person who was pres while the economy failed and passed it on to the other guy we should blame the guy that inherited it.. I gotcha...
 
It's pathetic how "patriots" will rush to talk their country down at every opportunity because they hate a black man so much.

the-race-card-e1299002876174.jpg


So instead of blaiming the person who was pres while the economy failed and passed it on to the other guy we should blame the guy that inherited it.. I gotcha...

Uh, Bush inherited a failing economy too, but unlike Obumnut, he actually turned it around, holding unemployment below 5% for a good long while. A number Odumber hasn't come close to touching. Bush failed at many things, including spending being under control, making a war effort that actually succeeded, but as far as jobs, he managed to do good with that.
 
Last edited:
Uh, Bush inherited a failing economy too, but unlike Obumnut, he actually turned it around, holding unemployment below 5% for a good long while. A number Odumber hasn't come close to touching.

Bush inherited a failed economy from Clinton.... Hmmm.... Interesting analysis. I wonder houw you figured that one...
 
So instead of blaiming the person who was pres while the economy failed and passed it on to the other guy we should blame the guy that inherited it.. I gotcha...

You can blame whoever you want, but it is still failed.
 
So let's take a look at these pronouncements one by one if we can...

Yes, let's do!

First - "What we have is 24 straight months (or is it 25 now?) of jobs growth"

According to even the most sycophantic to Obama, Monthly job creation has to be maintained at the 150K rate according to the NYTimes article in June of 2011. And in an interesting take by the Business Insider we need far more than that to see real gains Preventing A Higher Unemployment Rate Will Take New More Jobs Than You Think - Business Insider


Fortunately we've seen months will over 200,000 jobs growth. As to what number is really required to bring down unemployment ... well, unemployment is falling. Not as quickly as anyone would like, but it is falling.

Now if you or Adam want to think that it is a success to manipulate numbers, and spew talking point pablum to keep the restless masses calm, then have at it, but it is BS!
Yes, it is a standard partisan hack fare to cite bad numbers and attack the methodology behind good numbers (it's a conspiiiiiracy!!).

Second - "strong corporate profits"

Corporations are holding on to many of what they would normally expend in expansion, and hiring due to uncertainty, and outright attack of business by this thug in the WH.

True to some extent, but WTF does that have to do with their profits? Hint: nothing. Corporations are always going to maintain the smallest possible payroll necessary to maximize profits.

Third - "strong markets"

pfft! Yeah, markets propped up by fiat, digitized money that is far from real. Ask anyone in the know, and they will tell you that our stock market should be at about 8K right now if the truth were being told.

A purely idiotic statement, demonstrating your ignorance of the markets and the economy. The Dow wasn't much below 8,000 even at the nadir of the recession when there was a very real possibility that the banking system would collapse and we could wind up in a full-blown depression. Since that time financial markets have stabilized, corporate profits have taken off, the economy has grown, and the recession has ended. You do realize that markets are primarily driven by corporate profits, right? :roll:

Fourth - "falling unemployment"

Yeah, do more to people dropping off the roles of those actively looking...You can't claim things are getting better when the workforce is shrinking due to the horrid conditions in finding a job.

Another bogus wingnut talking point. The U-6 unemployment number, which includes discouraged workers, has actually improved somewhat more than the official U-3 unemployment number.

Fifth - "rising consumer confidence"

What? Who are we kidding here? People are not buying anything they don't absolutely have to buy...This is a joke.

Yes, who do you think you are trying to kid? Consumer confidence is an economic benchmark and it has been rising significantly.

"Consumer confidence climbed last week to the highest level in four years and unemployment claims fell, pointing to a brighter job market that may invigorate the U.S. economy.

The Bloomberg Consumer Comfort Index (COMFCOMF) rose to minus 31.4 in the period ended April 1, the best reading since March 2008, from minus 34.7 the prior week. Filings for jobless benefits dropped by 6,000 to 357,000 in the week ended March 31, the fewest since April 2008, the Labor Department said." Consumer Confidence Climbs as U.S. Job Market Improves: Economy - Bloomberg

Sixth - "expanding manufacturing...."

Where? in solor panels that the government props up with our half Billion dollars right before they fail?

Seriously, can you be this ignorant about the economy? Manufacturing has been the strongest part of the recovery for at least three years.

durable.jpg

And lastly - "So I'd that things are clearly improving..."

Only in a liberal bubble can one claim that anything is improving!!! Gas priced at $4, Home energy bills through the roof, Grocery prices up 30%, America divided thanks to Barry, and his rhetoric, and all the while no real jobs. What a success story....NOT!

Only someone who is completely out of touch with reality and/or a complete partisan hack would deny that the economy is improving -- full stop.
 
Hussein Obama told us when he was running in 2007 that he would cut the deficit in half by the ned of his term or he would not run for a second......well the deficit had doubled since he was elected so keep your lying word and not run.......
 
There it is...I swear, it could be 2015 with Obama the liar in his second term, and you Obama sheeple would still be blaming Bush like busted children. Face it, Obama is a fake, a fraud, a failure.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

Oh Look. J-mac thinks he can discuss the economy without any understanding at all of what a liquidity crisis can cause. Not to mention a near financial collapse. Furthermore, J-mac has never shown even the slightest rudimentary grasp of historical knowledge regarding financial crisises and how long it took other nations to dig themselves out. Yet he thinks he can talk about this subject.

It's like asking someone who has no concept of the atom to discuss nuclear power.
 
Uh, Bush inherited a failing economy too, but unlike Obumnut, he actually turned it around, holding unemployment below 5% for a good long while

Short memory dude. Bush inherited the bubble crash and 9/11 to which he responded with massive spending and tax cuts which lead to a year of jobless recovery. Remember it was the 2001 recovery that was largely deemed the first "jobless recovery." Furthermore, remember it's many of the reckless debt financed spending that kept unemployment below 5% for a long time not to mention massive kenysian defense spending policies which blew the US military budget to record heights. Bush proved that corporate defense trickle down works.

A number Odumber hasn't come close to touching. Bush failed at many things, including spending being under control, making a war effort that actually succeeded, but as far as jobs, he managed to do good with that.

Until you account for the job losses at the end.
 
Hussein Obama told us when he was running in 2007 that he would cut the deficit in half by the ned of his term or he would not run for a second......well the deficit had doubled since he was elected so keep your lying word and not run.......

Who is this Hussein Obama guy you keep crying about?
 
The funny thing is People like you think it would be different under a republocrat president. Regardless of who was in office, the recovery eras going to be anemic because it was caused by a debt cycle collapse.

Indeed. Those who think that McCain would have let GM go under, watch GDP go off a cliff and cut unemployment benefits are pretty much off their rockers. Furthermore, we all know that if Obama had done exactly as his detractors wanted, not bailout anyone, watch GDP go off the cliff, let states cut services to nothing and no more unemployment benefits, they'd be calling for impeachment. And let's not forget that McCain's mortgage plan was quite literally Communist.

But I do have to state that Xpiher, that there are a large number of people here, such as J-mac who have literally no idea whatsoever in any way shape or form what a liquidity crisis is. They have no knowledge at all of how long it takes countries to claw back the losses suffered. I've asked these people repetitively to explain why they think that tools used to fight a simply demand recession will work against a full blown financial liquidity recession: Every single person I asked fled the thread never to return.
To analogize, we have people here who have no concept of the atom yet think they can discuss nuclear power intelligently.
 
Bush inherited a failed economy from Clinton.... Hmmm.... Interesting analysis. I wonder houw you figured that one...

Contact your buddy obvious child, even he admits Bush inherited the dot-com bubble:

Bush inherited the bubble crash

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble

The collapse of the bubble took place during 2000-2001. By 2001 the bubble was deflating at full speed. A majority of the dot-coms ceased trading after burning through their venture capital, many having never made a ″net″ profit. Investors often referred to these failed dot-coms as "dot-bombs.

Bush took office Jan 20, 2001. Kinda looks like he was handed a crashing economy. So there is your answer to how I came up with it. I actually DID RESEARCH.

I know you don't want to admit Clinton handed Bush a crashed (crashing) economy that he turned around with record job numbers, but he did, all the while fighting 2 wars, one pretty good, one he could have definitely done better with.

But all in all, except at the very end when he lost control of congress and couldn't get anything done, he did pretty damn good with the crap he was handed.

Edit:

To obviouschild:
You say "he inherited the .com bust and 9/11" like he was handed a piece of cheese and he turned it into mold. Those were HUGE things that he managed to get through. I surely hope we aren't attacked again like we were on 9-11 because our idiot-n-thief wouldn't know what the hell to do, and he'd be calling Biden and telling Biden its a big ****ing deal.
 
Last edited:
Contact your buddy obvious child, even he admits Bush inherited the dot-com bubble:

I wouldn't call it "failed," recession definitely, but not failed. Interestingly enough, the crash of the dot coms lead to the crash in housing.

And I have no problem saying that Bush inherited the dot com crash economy. That's a basic fact of the time line. In fact, one thing I hold against Bush that makes my job unpleasant is how he went about responding to the recession. I ****ING HATE bonus depreciation. Or more appropriately, I hate the constant tweaking with it and uneven state conformity/non conformity.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't call it "failed," recession definitely, but not failed. Interestingly enough, the crash of the dot coms lead to the crash in housing.

And I have no problem saying that Bush inherited the dot com crash economy. That's a basic fact of the time line. In fact, one thing I hold against Bush that makes my job unpleasant is how he went about responding to the recession. I ****ING HATE bonus depreciation. Or more appropriately, I hate the constant tweaking with it and uneven state conformity/non conformity.

My entire reply was directed at demsocialist with your quote only being in there because I was pointing him to someone else who said Clinton handed Bush a ****ed up economy. It should be pretty obvious who I was addressing when I said "there is your answer to how I came up with it." As it wasn't you who asked me, it was him. I even quoted him asking me.

I went back and edited it for clarity. Sorry about that. It's late and I'm tired and I got 100 things going through my head right now LOL
 
Last edited:
My entire reply was directed at demsocialist with your quote only being in there because I was pointing him to someone else who said Clinton handed Bush a ****ed up economy. It should be pretty obvious who I was addressing when I said "there is your answer to how I came up with it." As it wasn't you who asked me, it was him. I even quoted him asking me.

I went back and edited it for clarity. Sorry about that. It's late and I'm tired and I got 100 things going through my head right now LOL

Bush inherited a MUCH smaller recession. The unemployment rate was 4.2% when he took office and it stayed within .2% of that number for six months. Of course Bush also inherited a budget surplus and no wars.
 
Contact your buddy obvious child,
We are only the bestest of friends...

even he admits Bush inherited the dot-com bubble:



Dot-com bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Bush took office Jan 20, 2001. Kinda looks like he was handed a crashing economy. So there is your answer to how I came up with it. I actually DID RESEARCH.

Dot Com bubble is no where near what happened during financial collapse of 2008. Total failure of banks and the housing bubble is no where near the dot com bubble. The total failure of the banks and housing bubble was WAY more catastrophic than the dot com bubble.

I know you don't want to admit Clinton handed Bush a crashed (crashing) economy that he turned around with record job numbers, but he did, all the while fighting 2 wars, one pretty good, one he could have definitely done better with.
"Crashing"? "Crashing" are you ****ing kidding me?

But all in all, except at the very end when he lost control of congress and couldn't get anything done, he did pretty damn good with the crap he was handed.
What? A surplus?
As state earlier which i was going to say: "..was 4.2% when he took office and it stayed within .2% of that number for six months. Of course Bush also inherited a budget surplus and no wars."
Yea Bush did a "real great job" he really kept that economy around... See late 2007
Bush also has one of the worst job records on record only creating 3 million jobs throughout his whole eight years...



Wait and what are these awesome policies Bush brought to save this "horrible economy he was handed by Clinton"?
 
We are only the bestest of friends.

Speak for yourself dude.

Dot Com bubble is no where near what happened during financial collapse of 2008. Total failure of banks and the housing bubble is no where near the dot com bubble. The total failure of the banks and housing bubble was WAY more catastrophic than the dot com bubble.

I'd have to agree here. We haven't seen something this dramatic since the Great Depression, or quite possibly the damage done to South Korea's economy. Honestly, IMO that's the most comparable example in recent history in the context of a serious liquidity crunch. The dot com more or less annihilated trillions in paper wealth where as the financial near collapse erased entire banks. That said, arguing that Bush had it easy is dishonest when you look at the sheer amount of wealth that was lost at the time. Follow that up with 9/11 and Bush had a pretty awful economy on his hands. My biggest peeve with Bush is that he kept debt financed spending going after the recession really ended and employment bounced back. That's a betrayal of all responsible economic theories.
 
What would a thread be without a liberal pulling the race card...

Does lying to prop up a failed president ever get old for you?

Did I say that he was hated because he was black? No, that association is in your head, and those of your particular cardplaying ilk, not mine.
 
Wait a minute... Conservatives want to blame Obama for poor job creation? I thought tax breaks for the rich, and the free market created jobs (so say conservatives) not the President... :confused:

Can't say that I'm surprised. If you break a shoe-lace... blame obama. If you run out of toothpaste... blame obama. Hell, if your finger breaks through the toilet paper... blame obama.
 
Last edited:
The funny thing is People like you think it would be different under a republocrat president. Regardless of who was in office, the recovery eras going to be anemic because it was caused by a debt cycle collapse.

First of all, there are NO "People like me". I'm one of a kind.

Second of all, without Obama and his Democratic-controlled government we would already be much better off than we are right now because we wouldn't have the economy-depressing spectre of Obamacare hanging over our heads.
 
Back
Top Bottom