• 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!

U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%[W: 831]

Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

I guess you were happier under Bush when we lost 1.2 million jobs in a single month and the GDP was negative nine percent, huh?

We didn't lose 1.2 million under Obama because those people simply dropped out of the labor force and were no longer counted. You really need to get over your BDS as he has been out of office for over 4 years. I don't think most faced with the data are happy with the Obama record, only the biased partisan hacks like you
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Bush started with 4.2% -- Did not inherit a recession, but his average was still 1.1 point higher than when he started.

Obama started with 7.8% -- Inherit the worst economy in 80 years, and his average was also up 1.1 points higher than when he started.

Please tell me what economic plan Bush had in place when the recession of March 2001 began? Keep lying about the worst economy in 80 years because that is what you do best. Nothing ever is going to change the opinion of a leftwing ideologue
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

We didn't lose 1.2 million under Obama because those people simply dropped out of the labor force and were no longer counted. You really need to get over your BDS as he has been out of office for over 4 years. I don't think most faced with the data are happy with the Obama record, only the biased partisan hacks like you
The people you're counting as dropping out of the work force include retired people, people on disability, and people who died. None of whom even want to work.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Please tell me what economic plan Bush had in place when the recession of March 2001 began? Keep lying about the worst economy in 80 years because that is what you do best. Nothing ever is going to change the opinion of a leftwing ideologue
Clinton was no longer president in March of 2001. Makes it impossible for him to have handed Bush a recession.

Unlike in January, 2009 ....
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Oh, he likely does. But like all politicians he hopes the economic musical chairs will stop with him in he last chair. In other words, he hopes to get to take credit. He can only do that if he convinces you to think that way.

You can spin in any way you wish...my only point is that the man himself says that he takes responsibility for the economy (in essence).

Which is all several of us have been saying.

The principle responsibility for the economy doing well or badly is his.

We says it, he welcomes it and he agrees.

You can deny it all you wish, but he knows far more about his responsibilities then you (or I) do.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Please tell me what economic plan Bush had in place when the recession of March 2001 began? Keep lying about the worst economy in 80 years because that is what you do best. Nothing ever is going to change the opinion of a leftwing ideologue

GDP is the leading indicator of the economy.

No recession since the Great Depression lost more than the 4.7% in GDP that Bush's Great Recession lost. The next closest, which wasn't all that close, was Reagan's recession -- and that one lost only 1.5% of GDP.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

The people you're counting as dropping out of the work force include retired people, people on disability, and people who died. None of whom even want to work.

These are discouraged workers and under employed workers having nothing to do with retiree so you are wrong again. Keep trying to make Obama look better than he is. Your problem is you cannot put lipstick on a pig and make it something other than a pig. "Your" President is a disaster and if he were in the private sector he would have been fired long ago
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Bush started with 4.2% -- Did not inherit a recession, but his average was still 1.1 point higher than when he started.

Obama started with 7.8% -- Inherit the worst economy in 80 years, and his average was also up 1.1 points higher than when he started.

If Obama wasn't up to the task in regards to fixing the Economy then maybe he shouldn't have run, since he has absolutely NO EXPERIENCE. He has never even run a cash register at 7/11. You're acting like he only needs more time, more failed policies like his stimulus, ect. Meanwhile the Economy is stagnating under his "leadership"

Democrats are far more responsible for the recession than Bush anyways. Your entire premise is a strawman.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

GDP is the leading indicator of the economy.

No recession since the Great Depression lost more than the 4.7% in GDP that Bush's Great Recession lost. The next closest, which wasn't all that close, was Reagan's recession -- and that one lost only 1.5% of GDP.

That wasn't the question, what economic plan did Bush have in place that caused the recession that began in March 2001? The question is what did Obama implement that made things better and what economic prediction did Obama make that has been true? This is the worst recovery on record and the economic results are a disaster but the rhetoric flowery. You buy the rhetoric and ignore the substance. Doubt that will carry you very far in the private sector.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

If Obama wasn't up to the task in regards to fixing the Economy then maybe he shouldn't have run, since he has absolutely NO EXPERIENCE. He has never even run a cash register at 7/11. You're acting like he only needs more time, more failed policies like his stimulus, ect. Meanwhile the Economy is stagnating under his "leadership"

Democrats are far more responsible for the recession than Bush anyways. Your entire premise is a strawman.
Who could have fixed Bush's mess any faster?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

If Obama wasn't up to the task in regards to fixing the Economy then maybe he shouldn't have run, since he has absolutely NO EXPERIENCE. He has never even run a cash register at 7/11. You're acting like he only needs more time, more failed policies like his stimulus, ect. Meanwhile the Economy is stagnating under his "leadership"

Democrats are far more responsible for the recession than Bush anyways. Your entire premise is a strawman.
Prove the Democrats are more responsible for the recession than Bush.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Who could have fixed Bush's mess any faster?

It wasn't "Bush's mess". It was a financial collapse that happened for a number of reasons. It's childish and emotional to objectify it as "Bush's mess".

Democrats were the ones who blocked any GSE reform. Bush shares some blame, even though he warned of the potential problems 11 times, but it was Democrats who blocked GSE reform and said there was not a problem with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when there was. They actually attacked the regulator who was investigating the GSEs as racist against Franklin Raines.

You're all over the place in this thread. Somehow Bush had all this power to destroy the Economy but Obama has no power to fix it, even though Obama got everything he wanted initially which was supposed to be the cure. His stimulus was supposed to fix it remember? For some reason people like you never want to talk about the projections and promises Obama's own economic team made if we passed his stimulus. You're still blaming a guy that hasn't been President in more than 4 years. It's a useless distraction and waste of everyone's time.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

These are discouraged workers and under employed workers having nothing to do with retiree so you are wrong again.
Who knows what you think I'm wrong about now? I said your figure includes retired people, people on disability, and people who died. None of whom even want to work.

And it does and they don't.

The numbers you're citing ... discouraged workers, constitute only 69,000 gone from the labor force since Obama became president.

And your bizarre notion that underemployed are not counted in the laborforce defies all logic. Those are folks who are working.


Your problem is you cannot put lipstick on a pig and make it something other than a pig.
Let's leave Sarah Palin out of this, k?

"Your" President is a disaster and if he were in the private sector he would have been fired long ago
Nah, he would have been given a raise in the private sector -- the private sector is humming.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Prove the Democrats are more responsible for the recession than Bush.

We have the same debate every month when the Economic numbers come out, they suck, and then the sheep start bleeting 'Bush". I've talked about this many times in multiple threads. The root cause of the Financial Crisis was the CRA. There is no disputing this.

Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?

Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?

Yes, it did. We use exogenous variation in banks’ incentives to conform to the standards of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) around regulatory exam dates to trace out the effect of the CRA on lending activity. Our empirical strategy compares lending behavior of banks undergoing CRA exams within a given census tract in a given month to the behavior of banks operating in the same census tract-month that do not face these exams. We find that adherence to the act led to riskier lending by banks: in the six quarters surrounding the CRA exams lending is elevated on average by about 5 percent every quarter and loans in these quarters default by about 15 percent more often. These patterns are accentuated in CRA-eligible census tracts and are concentrated among large banks. The effects are strongest during the time period when the market for private securitization was booming.

Democrats blocked GSE reform in committee, questioned the regulator's motives as racist, and stated clearly they believed there were NO PROBLEMS with the GSEs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90X74V-hS7U

James Johnson, a powerful Democrat insider and initially on Obama's committee to pick a VP, ran Fannie Mae for years and turned it into the most massive lobbyist organization Washington has ever seen.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

It wasn't "Bush's mess". It was a financial collapse that happened for a number of reasons. It's childish and emotional to objectify it as "Bush's mess".

Democrats were the ones who blocked any GSE reform. Bush shares some blame, even though he warned of the potential problems 11 times, but it was Democrats who blocked GSE reform and said there was not a problem with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when there was. They actually attacked the regulator who was investigating the GSEs as racist against Franklin Raines.

You're all over the place in this thread. Somehow Bush had all this power to destroy the Economy but Obama has no power to fix it, even though Obama got everything he wanted initially which was supposed to be the cure. His stimulus was supposed to fix it remember? For some reason people like you never want to talk about the projections and promises Obama's own economic team made if we passed his stimulus. You're still blaming a guy that hasn't been President in more than 4 years. It's a useless distraction and waste of everyone's time.
The Democrats lost the House in Jan 1995 and didn't get it back until Jan 2007, so how did the Democrats block anything? Oh there is this:

 
Last edited:
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

That wasn't the question, what economic plan did Bush have in place that caused the recession that began in March 2001? The question is what did Obama implement that made things better and what economic prediction did Obama make that has been true? This is the worst recovery on record and the economic results are a disaster but the rhetoric flowery. You buy the rhetoric and ignore the substance. Doubt that will carry you very far in the private sector.
I already answered your question. Pointing out that no recession since the Great Depression came even close to Bush's Great Recession losing 4.7% of GDP was in response to your nonsensical claim that calling Bush's Great Depression the worst economy since the Great Depression, a "lie."
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

It wasn't "Bush's mess". It was a financial collapse that happened for a number of reasons. It's childish and emotional to objectify it as "Bush's mess".
Then why did Bush take credit for it?

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high." ~ George Bush, 9.2.2004, RNC acceptance speech

He took the credit for the boom -- he gets the blame for the bust.

Democrats were the ones who blocked any GSE reform.
Bullxit. And the reason I know it's bullxit? Is because you can't cite a single bill regarding GSE reform that Democrats blocked.

Not one.

On the flip side, as soon as Democrats took over in 2007, Barney Frank pushed a bill through the House. And though it died in the Senate, it was later picked up in another bill which Bush signed into law. Meanwhile, in all the years Republicans were in charge, they couldn't even get a bill to Bush for him to sign; and it had nothing to do with Democrats, who were in the minority party.


You're all over the place in this thread. Somehow Bush had all this power to destroy the Economy but Obama has no power to fix it, even though Obama got everything he wanted initially which was supposed to be the cure. His stimulus was supposed to fix it remember? For some reason people like you never want to talk about the projections and promises Obama's own economic team made if we passed his stimulus. You're still blaming a guy that hasn't been President in more than 4 years. It's a useless distraction and waste of everyone's time.
The stimulous was never intended to be a cure. It was intended to be a patch through 2010 until the private sector picked up the slack. It worked as designed.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

It worked as designed.

It was designed to not impact unemployment as advertised?
It was designed to line the pockets of green energy projects that were not profitable on their own?
It was designed to suck?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

We have the same debate every month when the Economic numbers come out, they suck, and then the sheep start bleeting 'Bush". I've talked about this many times in multiple threads. The root cause of the Financial Crisis was the CRA. There is no disputing this.

Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?
Did it contribute to it? Yes. A trivial 6%. CRA had little to do with the collapse.

"Putting together these facts provides a striking result: Only 6 percent of all the higher-priced loans were extended by CRA-covered lenders to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods in their CRA assessment areas, the local geographies that are the primary focus for CRA evaluation purposes. This result undermines the assertion by critics of the potential for a substantial role for the CRA in the subprime crisis. In other words, the very small share of all higher-priced loan originations that can reasonably be attributed to the CRA makes it hard to imagine how this law could have contributed in any meaningful way to the current subprime crisis." ~ member of Bush's economic team

FRB: Speech--Kroszner, The Community Reinvestment Act and the Recent Mortgage Crisis--December 3, 2008

Democrats blocked GSE reform in committee, questioned the regulator's motives as racist, and stated clearly they believed there were NO PROBLEMS with the GSEs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90X74V-hS7U

James Johnson, a powerful Democrat insider and initially on Obama's committee to pick a VP, ran Fannie Mae for years and turned it into the most massive lobbyist organization Washington has ever seen.
Again, that's bullxit. The video you linked was of Democrats who were against GSE reform, but they did not block any legislation.

They didn't need to block any legislation becuase Republicans never even put it to a full vote in the Senate.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

It was designed to not impact unemployment as advertised?
It was designed to line the pockets of green energy projects that were not profitable on their own?
It was designed to suck?
It was advertised as a two-year patch to get is out of the recession and keep the economy going until the private sector could get back on it's feet. By the end of 2010, the stimulus was complete.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

The Democrats lost the House in Jan 1995 and didn't get it back until Jan 2007, so how did the Democrats block anything? Oh there is this:


Democrats didn't block xit.

There were only 2 bills even submitted by Republicans ... S. 1508: Federal Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2003 and S. 190: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005.

And as anyone can see by clicking on those bills, neither one was blocked by Democrats. They both died in the Republican-led Senate because Senate leadership refused to send them to the Senate floor for a full vote.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Why does this discussion always boil back to what President caused the recession? As if there was only one interpretation of statistics and events that everyone could agree on, lol. Anyway, what good does it do debating how we got here? Wouldn't it be more productive to debate the specific area of the economy that struggling the most, and what the best approach to correcting course is? I always thought that was the point of these reports. Identify the weak points and address the problem to the best of your ability.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

The Democrats lost the House in Jan 1995 and didn't get it back until Jan 2007, so how did the Democrats block anything? Oh there is this:



New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - NYTimes.com

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

If you don't understand how the Democrats blocked GSE reform then there is simply nothing more to discuss. Do you understand how the Senate works? How lobbying works ect? Congress is usually referred to as The House. Not the Senate. The Senate Banking Committee passed a bill that would have stopped the crisis. Democrats opposed it with a party line vote in committee. It never reached the Senate floor for a full vote because of this.

Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe

All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices. A manual issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston advised mortgage lenders to disregard financial common sense. "Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.

This was the problem with the GSES. Profit was privatized but risk was Socialized. They could lure in investors by blaming any losses would be covered by the Federal Government. Their lobbying efforts put them in a financial situation that other companies in the private sector couldn't compete with without increasing their own risks. The Senate banking committee bill would have put a stop to Fannie and Freddie's behavior. Watch the video again of Barney Frank and Maxine Waters opposing this bill and then come back and tell everyone it's "Bush's fault" so we can all laugh at you.

Even when the Democrats had total control they still refuse to reform the GSEs

Fannie mae and Chris Dodd - WSJ.com

President Obama blocked GSE reform when he was a Senator

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett - Bloomberg

Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.

Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.

Paid off handsomely by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for blocking reforms. To claim the Financial Crisis was all Bush's fault, and somehow Democrats were these innocent bystanders who were powerless to act is laughable. Here we have an economic report more than 4+ years into Obama's Presidency that is a disaster. A stagnant economy as Obama and his cronies party it up in WA (did you watch that Justin Timberlake concert last night:lol:) and the Obama cult followers are STILL blaming Bush. Honestly it's just embarrassing and silly at this point. A useless distraction.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Democrats didn't block xit.

There were only 2 bills even submitted by Republicans ... S. 1508: Federal Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2003 and S. 190: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005.

And as anyone can see by clicking on those bills, neither one was blocked by Democrats. They both died in the Republican-led Senate because Senate leadership refused to send them to the Senate floor for a full vote.

Now you're just purposely lying and pushing propaganda

Wallison: Fannie and Freddie Amnesia - WSJ.com

One chapter in this story took place in July 2005, when the Senate Banking Committee, then controlled by the Republicans, adopted tough regulatory legislation for the GSEs on a party-line vote—all Republicans in favor, all Democrats opposed. The bill would have established a new regulator for Fannie and Freddie and given it authority to ensure that they maintained adequate capital, properly managed their interest rate risk, had adequate liquidity and reserves, and controlled their asset and investment portfolio growth.

Why was there no action in the full Senate?
As most Americans know today, it takes 60 votes to cut off debate in the Senate, and the Republicans had only 55. To close debate and proceed to the enactment of the committee-passed bill, the Republicans needed five Democrats to vote with them.

But in a 45 member Democratic caucus that included Barack Obama and the current Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), these votes could not be found.

:2wave:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

You can spin in any way you wish...my only point is that the man himself says that he takes responsibility for the economy (in essence).

Which is all several of us have been saying.

The principle responsibility for the economy doing well or badly is his.

We says it, he welcomes it and he agrees.

You can deny it all you wish, but he knows far more about his responsibilities then you (or I) do.

If anyone is spinning, it is you. Politicians say all kinds of things. Do you believe them every time? This is not about rhetoric, but what is factually true. I've linked support on this as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom