• 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!

Private sector sheds 39,000 jobs in September

So you deny the truth. Stimulus went to Chicago road work and the union went on strike for more money. $35 was not enough

Not the only place it went, and road work is part of rebuilding infastructure. You're doing partisan gymnastics and that makes you not someone to take seriously.
 
You deny facts. I guess in your eyes Obama will never be wrong

Again you're incorrect. I have criticized him for Afghanistan for example. But your partisan misrepresntation simply carries no weight.
 
Then explain why the stimulus. Obama can do things to encourage expanding business like tax breaks

98 percent earning under $250,000, are already set to get tax breaks, and the remaining 2 percent with businesses can't be forced to to hire anyone. As for business expansion, first you need more buyers...

In other words, more money for the 98 percent means more spending. More spending means more products, more products means more hiring.

So simple even a caveman can do it.

Ricksfolly
 
Again you're incorrect. I have criticized him for Afghanistan for example. But your partisan misrepresntation simply carries no weight.

Yet you support all his failed domestic policies. You deny Stein's facts and support Obama's lies
 
98 percent earning under $250,000, are already set to get tax breaks, and the remaining 2 percent with businesses can't be forced to to hire anyone. As for business expansion, first you need more buyers...

In other words, more money for the 98 percent means more spending. More spending means more products, more products means more hiring.

So simple even a caveman can do it.

Ricksfolly

None of which will come close to the increase cost to business by Obamacare
 
Yet you support all his failed domestic policies. You deny Stein's facts and support Obama's lies

Have they failed? In 18 months? I personally know teachers who kept jobs because of his efforts. I also know no president controls the economy. He has rightly tried to tackle healthcare reform, and for the first time, something got passed. While far from perfect it beats the hell out of the weak and meangingless republican efforts. So, I don't see it as you do, and I'm not as easliy manipulated as the tea party. ;)

And if Stien had facts, and not conclusions absent enough evidence, you might have a point. And it would be found in multiple sources and not just among those wanting to spin it this way. Your lack of critical thinking and willing suspension of disbelief is your problem and not mind.
 
Last edited:
Have they failed? In 18 months? I personally know teachers who kept jobs because of his efforts. I also know no president controls the economy. He has rightly tried to tackle healthcare reform, and for the first time, something got passed. While far from perfect it beats the hell out of the weak and meangingless republican efforts. So, I don't see it as you do, and I'm not as easliy manipulated as the tea party. ;)

And if Stien had facts, and not conclusions absent enough evidence, you might have a point. And it would be found in multiple sources and not just among those wanting to spin it this way. Your lack of critical thinking and willing suspension of disbelief is your problem and not mind.

Teachers? How much of that money was meant for unions? Nice spin but Obama did not bail out auto companies he bailed out the unions and gave them control of the companies. Name another industry where the union is a share holder
 
Teachers? How much of that money was meant for unions? Nice spin but Obama did not bail out auto companies he bailed out the unions and gave them control of the companies. Name another industry where the union is a share holder

Ther is plenty of Teamster Conferences that have shares in Fright Lines,the Central States Pension fund has lots of Railroad stock,UPS stock and a few loosing quid in the airlines.:2wave:
 
Ther is plenty of Teamster Conferences that have shares in Fright Lines,the Central States Pension fund has lots of Railroad stock,UPS stock and a few loosing quid in the airlines.:2wave:

That is different then the stock in GM Obama gave them. This is a major stock holding not buying of shares
 
Teachers? How much of that money was meant for unions? Nice spin but Obama did not bail out auto companies he bailed out the unions and gave them control of the companies. Name another industry where the union is a share holder

You worry too much about unions, especially teacher unions. But the fact is teachers here kept jobs, and I don't any who belong to any union.
 
You worry too much about unions, especially teacher unions. But the fact is teachers here kept jobs, and I don't any who belong to any union.

Nice spin but much of what Obama does has to do with unions. The teachers union is a arm of the democrats
 
Nice spin but much of what Obama does has to do with unions. The teachers union is a arm of the democrats

That's your skewed opinion. Not to be confused with fact. Teachers have a concern to the country outside of unions, for example. if we accept your logic, anything that helps teachers must be because of the union, even if the teachers belong to no union. That's silly on its face.
 
That's your skewed opinion. Not to be confused with fact. Teachers have a concern to the country outside of unions, for example. if we accept your logic, anything that helps teachers must be because of the union, even if the teachers belong to no union. That's silly on its face.

If we accept your logic everything needs to be controlled at the Federal level as apparently in your world education along with everything else is a national issue. It is that kind of attitude that has generated an almost 14 trillion dollar Federal Deficit. Education along with all social issues including healthcare belong in the states but liberals who cannot advance their agenda in the states has to get the Federal Govt. involved to divert attention from their own failures.
 
If we accept your logic everything needs to be controlled at the Federal level as apparently in your world education along with everything else is a national issue. It is that kind of attitude that has generated an almost 14 trillion dollar Federal Deficit. Education along with all social issues including healthcare belong in the states but liberals who cannot advance their agenda in the states has to get the Federal Govt. involved to divert attention from their own failures.

I've made no such argument, and that is not my logic at all. Sorry. ;)
 
No. To keep teachers working. Your skewed spin is simply inaccurate.

Again is that a Federal or State responsibility? How do you know that the states wouldn't have come up with the money? You continue to buy Obama rhetoric even the lies.
 
Again is that a Federal or State responsibility? How do you know that the states wouldn't have come up with the money? You continue to buy Obama rhetoric even the lies.

Stay focues. regardless of whose responsibility it was, the money saved those jobs, and when that money was gone, so were some of the jobs. It has nothing to do with buying anything but the facts.
 
Back
Top Bottom