• 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. economy bounces back sharply

Conservative said:
Republicans took the House in January 2011, interesting that the results are better now than they were when Obama controlled both houses. Doesn't appear we are on the same page at all.
Click to expand...

No correction. More s*** got done in those two years than after the republicans took the house. The numbers don't lie, this is the least productive congress EVER. Regardless how you feel about her, you can't deny that Pelosi is a far better house leader than Boehner.

Hell even Newt was a better leader than him....
 
Conservative said:
I pound sand daily in this forum with people whose minds you are never going to change even when posting data. Obama has a cult following and there was a time that you were part of that cult. Glad to see you come to your senses. Now stop making this personal, stick to the topic.
Click to expand...

Yet again, please show me where I have EVER said Obama could do no wrong or never did any wrong. YOU are the one making this personal with partisan lies about me. Either put up some evidence or admit you are posting lying comments. At least most posters I know admit their mistakes, you never do.

That is the problem with cons such as yourself. You just keep posting partisan lies.
 
rcart76 said:
No correction. More s*** got done in those two years than after the republicans took the house. The numbers don't lie, this is the least productive congress EVER. Regardless how you feel about her, you can't deny that Pelosi is a far better house leader than Boehner.

Hell even Newt was a better leader than him....
Click to expand...

You do realize that Congress is made up of the Senate and the House? Tell me how many pieces of legislation has the House passed that are sitting in Harry Reid's desk? Do you hold Democrats to the same standards as Republicans when you talk about stonewalling? Pelosi was the House Leader and what were the results? Be careful now, BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and the Treasury aren't going to be your friend.
 
Conservative said:
Getting where? Why did it take 7 years to get back to the employment numbers of December 2007? Why did it take 7 trillion added to the debt to get us there? What is it going to take for people like you to realize Obama has made a fool out of you?
Click to expand...

We'll see what happens in the 2016 election. I remain optimistic. Always have always will.
 
Carleen said:
We'll see what happens in the 2016 election. I remain optimistic. Always have always will.
Click to expand...

Optimistic about what? the crawl towards socialism? Why on earth would you support an Administration that has generated the numbers we see today?
 
Anthony60 said:
No, we are not "getting there", that's the problem. Things are getting worse, not better.
Click to expand...

Why are conservatives always so negative. We have problems and we always do. We'll see what happens in 2016. Time will tell.
 
Conservative said:
Here is what Reagan generated and what you ignore, 17 million jobs, doubling of GDP, recovery from a double dip, 60% increase in Federal Income tax revenue after cutting income taxes three years in a row, 1.7 trillion added to the debt. That is substance that you want to ignore. Compare that to Obama's results 5 years after the end of a recession? Obama had -2.1% GDP growth and then 4% GDP growth making the annual growth 1.9%. That a quality rebound in your world?
Click to expand...

Other things that Reagan did:

1) gave amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants
2) nearly tripled the federal budget deficit during his tenure
3) income inequality exploded
4) He grew the size of the federal government tremendously
 
Conservative said:
You do realize that Congress is made up of the Senate and the House? Tell me how many pieces of legislation has the House passed that are sitting in Harry Reid's desk? Do you hold Democrats to the same standards as Republicans when you talk about stonewalling? Pelosi was the House Leader and what were the results? Be careful now, BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and the Treasury aren't going to be your friend.
Click to expand...

Hey why don't you go and ask that a** clown Boehner to allow the house to vote on the bipartisan Immagration Reform bill that the Senate passed?
 
Conservative said:
Optimistic about what? the crawl towards socialism? Why on earth would you support an Administration that has generated the numbers we see today?
Click to expand...

Seems like you will remain negative. Will your opinion change should a repub be elected in 2016. Who would you like to be the next president?
 
rcart76 said:
Other things that Reagan did:

1) gave amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants
2) nearly tripled the federal budget deficit during his tenure
3) income inequality exploded
4) He grew the size of the federal government tremendously
Click to expand...

Yes, with the help of the Democrats, what was the vote on that bill and what did we learn from that legislation

Tripled the Federal debt that was 50% of GDP, what is that percentage today

Income equality didn't explode, all ships rose

That is a lie, I posted the numbers of Federal Employees yesterday and you ignored it.

Total Government Employment Since 1962

Stop buying what you are told and do some research. You have no idea what the 80's were like but buy what you are told, the reality is quite different.
 
Carleen said:
Seems like you will remain negative. Will your opinion change should a repub be elected in 2016. Who would you like to be the next president?
Click to expand...

Would love to be positive but with the lack of leadership and the Obama agenda that is hard to do. Good positive pro growth economic policies will lead to optimism
 
Carleen said:
Compared to where we were in 2008, we are getting there. I'm a half glass full person.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I wonder how that would go were we to make the glass analogous to unemployment.
 
Carleen said:
Why are conservatives always so negative. We have problems and we always do. We'll see what happens in 2016. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

It's not being negative to point out what a terrible job Obama and the democrats have done when in charge. It's almost as destructive to sit and do nothing as they try to fundamentally change our country. That's why I have a problem with many of the republicans also.

You better take a look at the democrats if you are talking about being negative. They say we are such a terrible country, the world hates us, we are horrible to the poor, we go at the world with a clenched fist, our military are terrorists, etc... it goes on and on. Makes the republicans look like they are riding unicorns and farting rainbows.
 
American said:
Yeah, I wonder how that would go were we to make the glass analogous to unemployment.
Click to expand...

Well, then we start switching the words around to something like a "full half-glass".
 
humbolt said:
Well, then we start switching the words around to something like a "full half-glass".
Click to expand...

Or maybe a workforce half employed.
 
Conservative said:
Yes, with the help of the Democrats, what was the vote on that bill and what did we learn from that legislation

Tripled the Federal debt that was 50% of GDP, what is that percentage today

Income equality didn't explode, all ships rose

That is a lie, I posted the numbers of Federal Employees yesterday and you ignored it.

Total Government Employment Since 1962

Stop buying what you are told and do some research. You have no idea what the 80's were like but buy what you are told, the reality is quite different.
Click to expand...


Income equality didn't explode, all ships rose
Click to expand...



Reagan disproportionately taxed the poor and middle class, but the economic growth of the 1980′s did little help them. Since 1980, median household income has risen only 30 percent, adjusted for inflation, while average incomes at the top have tripled or quadrupled


That is a lie, I posted the numbers of Federal Employees yesterday and you ignored it.
Click to expand...

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama? - Forbes

MW-AR658_spendi_20120521163312_ME11.jpg


On a side note, look who was the smallest government spender. Not that guy that republicans say is out of control with government spending !!!!!

Do your research on Department of Veterans Affairs

Department of Veterans Affairs Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Department of Veterans Affairs Act of 1988 (Pub.L. 100–527) changed the former Veterans Administration, an independent government agency established in 1930, primarily at that time to see to needs of World War I, into a Cabinet-level Department of Veterans Affairs. It was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on October 25, 1988, but actually came into effect under the term of his successor, George H. W. Bush, on March 15, 1989.

This bill passed into law over the objection of some of President Reagan's fellow Republicans, who were committed to preventing the U.S. federal government from expanding further. Many Republicans along with most Democrats ultimately supported it on the basis that it was really more of a reorganization than an expansion of government as the new department was in reality going to be doing very few things that the former Veterans Administration had not already been doing. There was the further consideration that military veterans constitute a large and powerful voting bloc and could easily be offended at the perceived slight that opposition to the bill might have implied.
Click to expand...

Today that department has a 90 billion dollar budget and over 300,000 employees. So much for that belief that government can't create jobs :D
 
Conservative said:
Would love to be positive but with the lack of leadership and the Obama agenda that is hard to do. Good positive pro growth economic policies will lead to optimism
Click to expand...

And who do you think can do that?
 
Anthony60 said:
It's not being negative to point out what a terrible job Obama and the democrats have done when in charge. It's almost as destructive to sit and do nothing as they try to fundamentally change our country. That's why I have a problem with many of the republicans also.

You better take a look at the democrats if you are talking about being negative. They say we are such a terrible country, the world hates us, we are horrible to the poor, we go at the world with a clenched fist, our military are terrorists, etc... it goes on and on. Makes the republicans look like they are riding unicorns and farting rainbows.
Click to expand...

I don't know who "they" are, but do you have any negativity towards congress The original post here was about continuous job growth since 2009. I remain optimistic that this. will continue. Make sure you get out there in 2016 and vote.
 
Carleen said:
I don't know who "they" are, but do you have any negativity towards congress The original post here was about continuous job growth since 2009. I remain optimistic that this. will continue. Make sure you get out there in 2016 and vote.
Click to expand...
Not in 2014?
 
rcart76 said:
Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama? - Forbes

MW-AR658_spendi_20120521163312_ME11.jpg


On a side note, look who was the smallest government spender. Not that guy that republicans say is out of control with government spending !!!!!
Do your research on Department of Veterans Affairs
Today that department has a 90 billion dollar budget and over 300,000 employees. So much for that belief that government can't create jobs :D
Click to expand...
This is for the really, really, low information voter. The absolute moron voter.
First, it's rate of increase, not actual spending. Bloated, disgusting, spending. You would think Obama is really putting on the brakes, and keeping spending down. But no. Prior to Obama, the biggest deficits were around $400 billion, Odummy has been deficit spending over $1TRILLION per year.

And jobs? We don't want government jobs. We want private sector jobs. Government jobs suck for the economy, literally. The government makes no money, it sucks money out of our pockets. Bigger government, more government jobs, more money it sucks out of our pockets. So yeah, great job taking our money. More low information stuff.
 
Carleen said:
I don't know who "they" are, but do you have any negativity towards congress The original post here was about continuous job growth since 2009. I remain optimistic that this. will continue. Make sure you get out there in 2016 and vote.
Click to expand...

You don't remember who said that they want to fundamentally change this country? Well, it wasn't the Germans in WWII, it wasn't Al Qaeda, not even Iran.
And really, having job growth is an absolute given. That is doing nothing. That's like someone dropping a crumb on your plate and saying they fed you today. It's a really low bar.
 
Anthony60 said:
...
First, it's rate of increase, not actual spending....
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that we are spending too much, but the fact that the rate of increase of spending under Obama are smaller, still indicates that it is untrue that he is worse than other presidents about overspending.

If you want less government spending, then why in the world would you complain that the rate of spending increases under Obama is lower than Reagan, either Bush, or Clinton? Seems to me that you may have a legitimate grip against Obama, but a much bigger gripe against those other presidents.

And why in the world would we prefer to elect another republican, when spending under republican presidents has historically increased faster than under democrats? If you really care about restraining federal spending, then you should vote republican for congress, and democrat for POTUS as historically that has been the combination that has resulted in the lowest rate of spending increases.
 
Unfortunately, the ENTIRE point to this thread is semi-useless since the 4.0% number that came out last week is obviously not the actual GDP increase.

And judging by the government's track record, that number will bear little resemblance to the final number when it is released in a few months.

We will not know how sharply the bounce back will be for many weeks to come.

It clearly did 'bounce back'...but considering the last GDP numbers started at +0.1% and ended(?) at -2.1%...how much the 'bounce' is is anyone's guess...literally.


All of high leads me to ask...

...why not wait until the final number is known before you release it?
 
DA60 said:
...
All of high leads me to ask...

...why not wait until the final number is known before you release it?
Click to expand...

Probably political pressure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom