- Joined
- Mar 14, 2012
- Messages
- 29,135
- Reaction score
- 1,520
- Location
- US, California - federalist
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
I believe it should be as simple as, if they aren't filing for unemployment they must be employed.
I believe it should be as simple as, if they aren't filing for unemployment they must be employed.
I believe firing Obama will create jobs...history is on my side..lowering tax rates will bring in more tax revenue and create more jobs then any social engineering by Obama to enslave us to the nanny state..
Obama is a fraud.. a lie that was sold to an uneducated mass...
there is only one legal way for obama to leave the presidency: impeachment. barring that
impeach it shall be...
then deport...
and republicans do not have enough votes to accomplish that.
impeachment requires 2/3s of the house and senete to charge and convict Obama.
I believe firing Obama will create jobs...history is on my side..lowering tax rates will bring in more tax revenue and create more jobs then any social engineering by Obama to enslave us to the nanny state..
Obama is a fraud.. a lie that was sold to an uneducated mass...
Why should that be a concern for any civil Person in our republic?
And you don't employ me, so we're even. I thought we were trying to compare importance of jobs. It'd be nice if you'd stick to one position instead of flip-flopping to whatever was most convenient.You dont "teach me"..??? (I will chalk that up is just more condescending sniping)... or my children... nor do you provide me with anything but bluster and nonsense along with agenda driven Lib talking points..
You don't hire or fire me. Because apparently that's important now?again.. I hire people.. I fire people
No, you see the economy you're directly tied into. Your personal anecdote is not a useful gauge for the economy as a whole.I look at the P & L all day...I aquire companies and competitors... I see the real economy
A claim without a source is pointless. I've already quoted how the economy has regained every private sector job lost in the recession. I can show you how we've had job growth every month for years. I can show you the growth of the stock market, growth in GDP and a shrinking national deficit.I know what lib policy does to the private sector and companies are not growing
No, you don't and you won't.I teach you.. and I may hire your children...
I do teach children, that's what I told you already. Do you even read to what you respond?God forbid you ever teach children...
It's called "intelligence" and "literacy".You may have fancy typing
Facts are not talking points and I'm not a liberal.but I see right through your liberal talking points
and who talks in absolutes like you with your " we made back every job"...laughable
The fact you find facts laughable says quite a bit.CNN said:After a winter slowdown, the job market hit a milestone in March as the private sector finally recovered all the jobs lost in the 2008 financial crisis.
No, it's a truth. I've quoted it twice in this thread.That is an absolute lie
I said private sector jobs, not all jobs. Government jobs have not been regained.the recession began in December 2007 and we had 146 million working Americans and today we have 145 million, hardly recovering all the lost jobs.
No, it's a truth. I've quoted it twice in this thread.
I said private sector jobs, not all jobs. Government jobs have not been regained.
One would assume that, if the unemployment rate is unchanged that the economy lost about 192000 jobs as well?
No, it's a truth. I've quoted it twice in this thread.
I said private sector jobs, not all jobs. Government jobs have not been regained.
A claim without a source is pointless. I've already quoted how the economy has regained every private sector job lost in the recession. I can show you how we've had job growth every month for years. I can show you the growth of the stock market, growth in GDP and a shrinking national deficit.
Then why would you criticize him for jobs?Obama has absolutely no control over private sector jobs and employment
You just said he has no control over private sector jobs and employment. You're contradicting yourself.but his economic policies have led to still 20 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers.
I didn't say anything about 2009, I simply noted how every private sector job lost has now been regained.The recession began in December 2007, not January 21, 2009.
Every PRIVATE sector job. I've said that every time in this thread and have sourced it twice. I really wish people would pay closer attention.We only recovered about half of what was lost during the Great Recession after 2008. The quality/pay of the new jobs is nowhere near the old jobs that were lost. All jobs were NOT regained.
Then why would you criticize him for jobs?
You just said he has no control over private sector jobs and employment. You're contradicting yourself.
Either his policies have led us to regain every private sector job lost since the recession began or he has nothing to do with private sector jobs. Which is it?
I didn't say anything about 2009, I simply noted how every private sector job lost has now been regained.
Every PRIVATE sector job. I've said that every time in this thread and have sourced it twice. I really wish people would pay closer attention.
And they've been hiring, to the point we've regained every private sector job lost. So his policies have worked.The point is he doesn't do the hiring or firing for companies but his policies affect company profitability which influences hiring and firing.
And they've been hiring, to the point we've regained every private sector job lost. So his policies have worked.
But Obama didn't take office in December of 2007, he took office in January of 2009. And his policies didn't begin to take affect until a few months after, while the effects of the recession were still climbing.We had 115.9 million private sector employees in December 2007 and you call it a success having 116.0 million private sector jobs today, almost 7 years later?
But Obama didn't take office in December of 2007, he took office in January of 2009. And his policies didn't begin to take affect until a few months after, while the effects of the recession were still climbing.
You're being very careless with your timetables. It's been roughly 4 years since the negative effects of the recession started to turn the other way and, in a country with a divided legislative branch and considering how many jobs were lost, I'd say under the circumstances 4 years isn't too bad, especially since it's still trending in the right direction.
He could if he expanded government jobs like Bush did. Are you wanting a bigger government?No, he was hired to return us to pre recession levels and hasn't done that.
But I didn't say the end of the recession, I specifically said "since the negative effects of the recession started to turn the other way". It's things like this which prove to me you're not interested in any real debate, just partisan responses.Your time table is wrong, the recession ended in June 2009
He could if he expanded government jobs like Bush did. Are you wanting a bigger government?
But I didn't say the end of the recession, I specifically said "since the negative effects of the recession started to turn the other way". It's things like this which prove to me you're not interested in any real debate, just partisan responses.
And if those government jobs returned under Obama, we'd have a lot more jobs. Are you saying you want more government jobs?With a booming economy, growing population you need more govt. jobs including jobs in the military after we were attacked.
Useless partisanship that ignores the reality of this country.The negative impacts of the recession were prolonged by having a President who lacked any leadership skills or the ability to get things done through others.
No, people like me understand the machine is bigger than any individual cog. We know money talks and if there's money in something, there will be a politician advocating it. For years, there was great money for Republicans to oppose Obama. There still is, though the strategy cost them in the 2012 elections. There's money in keeping an overinflated defense budget, but not as much money in government contracts to rebuild infrastructure. That's why we still have an incredibly large military and lagging infrastructure.Far too many like you don't seem to understand leadership or their roles.
And if those government jobs returned under Obama, we'd have a lot more jobs. Are you saying you want more government jobs?
The negative impacts of the recession were prolonged by having a President who lacked any leadership skills or the ability to get things done through others.Useless partisanship that ignores the reality of this country.
No, people like me understand the machine is bigger than any individual cog. We know money talks and if there's money in something, there will be a politician advocating it. For years, there was great money for Republicans to oppose Obama. There still is, though the strategy cost them in the 2012 elections. There's money in keeping an overinflated defense budget, but not as much money in government contracts to rebuild infrastructure. That's why we still have an incredibly large military and lagging infrastructure.
It has nothing to do with Obama. You could have put McCain or Kerry or Romney in the same position and very little would have changed, so long as there was a divided Congress and unlimited financial contributions. People like me know this. People like you probably know it as well, but that reality gets in the way of useless political attacks.
I want a smaller military payout, no wars and higher taxes. Different situations are different.No, I want the privates sector job growth we saw under Reagan after a worse recession, 15 million
But I do. You just won't accept it because you won't accept any narrative which doesn't paint the Democrat is a bad light. You're playing team politics.Sorry, but you have no concept as to the role of the govt.