• 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!

Gallup Finds U.S. Unemployment Hitting 10.3% in February

That so called tax cut for the rich was passed prior to the Republicans taking control of the House but then you never let facts get in the way of your rants.

"During a press conference moments ago, President Obama explained his decision to concede to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to those who make more than $250,000 by comparing congressional GOP to hostage-takers: "It's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed...The hostage was the American people."

Last week, Democratic senator Bob Menendez said that negotiating with Republicans on tax cuts is "almost" like negotiating with "terrorists." At the time, the harsh analogy--long favored by left-wing bloggers--seemed like it may have been an unbecoming slip-of-the tongue for the Democratic senator, but President Obama's remarks indicate that comparing Republicans to hostage-takers is now an official Democratic talking point."
Obama Compares Republicans to Hostage-Takers | The Weekly Standard



"The House of Representatives voted 234 to 188 Thursday to permanently extend the Bush tax cuts on incomes up to $250,000. Also included in the bill were a two-year delay of the Alternative Minimum Tax, an elimination of the marriage penalty tax, and permanent increases to the child tax credit and the earned-income tax credit.

Twenty Democrats voted against the bill, and three Republican supported it.

Although the bill passed, a vocal minority of Republicans objected to an earlier vote by House Democrats to prevent GOP members from offering their own bill to make the tax cuts permanent for all Americans, including the highest earners. "

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/02/house-passes-middle-class-tax-cuts-over-gop-objections/
 
"During a press conference moments ago, President Obama explained his decision to concede to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to those who make more than $250,000 by comparing congressional GOP to hostage-takers: "It's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed...The hostage was the American people."

Last week, Democratic senator Bob Menendez said that negotiating with Republicans on tax cuts is "almost" like negotiating with "terrorists." At the time, the harsh analogy--long favored by left-wing bloggers--seemed like it may have been an unbecoming slip-of-the tongue for the Democratic senator, but President Obama's remarks indicate that comparing Republicans to hostage-takers is now an official Democratic talking point."
Obama Compares Republicans to Hostage-Takers | The Weekly Standard



"The House of Representatives voted 234 to 188 Thursday to permanently extend the Bush tax cuts on incomes up to $250,000. Also included in the bill were a two-year delay of the Alternative Minimum Tax, an elimination of the marriage penalty tax, and permanent increases to the child tax credit and the earned-income tax credit.

Twenty Democrats voted against the bill, and three Republican supported it.

Although the bill passed, a vocal minority of Republicans objected to an earlier vote by House Democrats to prevent GOP members from offering their own bill to make the tax cuts permanent for all Americans, including the highest earners. "

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/02/house-passes-middle-class-tax-cuts-over-gop-objections/

Did you check the date when that tax cut was extended? You are good at posting links but not so good in checking the facts. It was passed during a lame duck sesson of Congress before the GOP took power in January 2011(2:48 PM, Dec 7, 2010)

Still waiting for the data supporting your claim that it was trillions in tax cuts?
 
Last edited:
Gallup says 10.3%
BLS says 9.7%
The Obama administration says 8.9% Gov. Report puts unemp rate at 8.9%

Dana pointed out that the Obama and the BLS data is identical (Obama is citing BLS). Furthermore, Gallup is merely a prediction based on a poll.

Employment Situation Summary

U6 stands at 15.9% seasonally adjusted.



Neither. Gallup is just an opinion poll.

Talk to us about the participation rate. My sense is you know that this has been lowered quite a bit by these statistics over the past two years.
 
Did you check the date when that tax cut was extended? You are good at posting links but not so good in checking the facts. It was passed during a lame duck sesson of Congress before the GOP took power in January 2011(2:48 PM, Dec 7, 2010)

Still waiting for the data supporting your claim that it was trillions in tax cuts?

I would advise not holding your breath while waiting. Unless he was to admit the fallacy of the statement.
 
I would advise not holding your breath while waiting. Unless he was to admit the fallacy of the statement.

Not expecting an answer as that is the normal procedure of far too many here that are confused by facts. Obama didn't need the Republicans to pass elimination of the Bush tax cuts as he had total control of the Congress. What he couldn't do is sell his own party the "benefits" of raising taxes in this economy.
 
Good question. But you won't find Obama Bashers willing to admit that he's in many ways, Bush III.

A lot of liberals won't admit it either, unfortunately. In many ways he is too much like Bush for comfort.
 
Last edited:
A lot of liberals won't admit it either, unfortunately. In many ways he is too much like Bush for comfort.

Obama is finding it easier to campaign than it is to govern and a lot harder to lead especially since he has never been in that position. I see no comparison between Bush and Obama as Obama has no core principles and values. Bush has more class than Obama will ever have and I will take the Bush 8 year results today over what we have in the office right now.
 
Obama is finding it easier to campaign than it is to govern and a lot harder to lead especially since he has never been in that position. I see no comparison between Bush and Obama as Obama has no core principles and values. Bush has more class than Obama will ever have and I will take the Bush 8 year results today over what we have in the office right now.

For someone who believes in the supremacy of the private sector you sure give government way too much credit, and expect way too much from government with respect to its abilities to influence the economy at large. At this point both monetary and fiscal policies are pretty much maxed out. Now its up to the private sector to start using the insane pile of cash it's sitting on.
 
For someone who believes in the supremacy of the private sector you sure give government way too much credit, and expect way too much from government with respect to its abilities to influence the economy at large. At this point both monetary and fiscal policies are pretty much maxed out. Now its up to the private sector to start using the insane pile of cash it's sitting on.

You think the Private sector created the 14.3 trillion dollar debt? The private sector is under no obligation to use the cash IT EARNED. Better be careful what you wish for as Cuba, Venezuela, and of course Russia aren't great booming successes.
 
You think the Private sector created the 14.3 trillion dollar debt? The private sector is under no obligation to use the cash IT EARNED. Better be careful what you wish for as Cuba, Venezuela, and of course Russia aren't great booming successes.

Do you make a habit out of creating straw men? I'm talking about the economy (as in GDP and unemployment), not the debt. No, the private sector is not obliged to use the cash per se, but in the interest of restoring a healthy economy that's what they should be doing, since nobody else really has the ability to restore the economy. You emphasize the importance of the private sector and its primacy in the economy, yet lay all the blame at the feet of Obama when the economy fails. Someone tell me that I'm not the only one who sees the inherent contradiction in this attitude.
 
Last edited:
Do you make a habit out of creating straw men? I'm talking about the economy (as in GDP and unemployment), not the debt. No, the private sector is not obliged to use the cash per se, but in the interest of restoring a healthy economy that's what they should be doing, since nobody else really has the ability to restore the economy.

Restoring a healthy economy is in the interest of private business whose sole purpose for being in business however is to make a profit. The only "business" not in business to make a profit is the govt. Today that govt. is 3.7 trillion dollars, name for me a private business that big? Too many people here focus on what the private sector does instead of focusing on what the public sector does. No private sector business is going to invest in employment without knowing what their costs are going to be and the Obama administration policies affect that cost.

I do agree with you however that it is going to be the private sector that turns the economy around. The first two years in office Obama created too much uncertainty in that sector and thus the pocketed the cash they EARNED and didn't hire. Obama has done a lot of harm with his agenda and until he starts repealing some of his agenda it is going to be a slow uphill climb back to a strong growing economy.
 
Bush has more class than Obama will ever have and I will take the Bush 8 year results today over what we have in the office right now.

After 8 years Bush doubled the debt, created a recession and left the country on the brink of another great depression. Only a complete moron would be happy with those results. Not even going to mention the worst attack on US soil in history occurred during those 8 years.
 
Last edited:
After 8 years Bush doubled the debt, created a recession and left the country on the brink of another great depression. Only a complete moron would be happy with those results.

That is your opinion not supported by economists or even basic civics. Economists say TARP prevented a depression and Obama used the crisis to expand the role of govt. and implement a far leftwing agenda which has added 3.5 trillion in 2+ years to that debt you are now concerned about. Obama at this rate will add more debt in three years than Bush added in 8 and Obama didn't have 9/11 which cost a trillion dollars or the Iraq War. "Never let a good crisis go to waste" is exactly what Obama has done and too many continue to buy the rhetoric.
 
Restoring a healthy economy is in the interest of private business whose sole purpose for being in business however is to make a profit. The only "business" not in business to make a profit is the govt.

Totally agree.

No private sector business is going to invest in employment without knowing what their costs are going to be and the Obama administration policies affect that cost. I do agree with you however that it is going to be the private sector that turns the economy around. The first two years in office Obama created too much uncertainty in that sector and thus the pocketed the cash they EARNED and didn't hire. Obama has done a lot of harm with his agenda and until he starts repealing some of his agenda it is going to be a slow uphill climb back to a strong growing economy.

I think at this point it's safe to assume that Obama isn't going to add much more to his economic policies since the public sector's ability to affect the economy is pretty much at the end of its rope. This should provide a degree of certainty and enable private businesses to plan for the future, and really it's now on the private sector moving forward.
 
Totally agree.



I think at this point it's safe to assume that Obama isn't going to add much more to his economic policies since the public sector's ability to affect the economy is pretty much at the end of its rope. This should provide a degree of certainty and enable private businesses to plan for the future, and really it's now on the private sector moving forward.

That is true plus the fact that he cannot get any expansion of his agenda through the Republican Controlled House. Wonder if Obama will take credit for any deficit reduction initiated by the GOP House?
 
That is true plus the fact that he cannot get any expansion of his agenda through the Republican Controlled House. Wonder if Obama will take credit for any deficit reduction initiated by the GOP House?

imho any deficit reduction would have to be a compromise. Right now I don't think the right issues are being addressed...politicians on both sides are addressing discretionary spending when the real elephant in the room that's adding to the debt/deficit are automatic increases within the entitlement programs. It strikes me that no one is talking about the finding and solutions brought out by the deficit reduction committees a few months ago.
 
Last edited:
Did you check the date when that tax cut was extended?

Did you bother to read his post?

You are good at posting links but not so good in checking the facts.

Said the guy who argued that discouraged workers increased by a million a month under Obama despite his own link saying that the monthly numbers were cumulative.

Said the guy who argued that the Democrats controlled Congress during all of Bush's years.

Said the guy who argued Texas has a surplus despite its own Republican Comptroller stating the state was in a deficit at the very moment.

Don't you even dare try to argue other people are not good at fact checking.

It was passed during a lame duck sesson of Congress before the GOP took power in January 2011(2:48 PM, Dec 7, 2010)

Which was explained in the post. Wow. Talk about childish behavior there.

Still waiting for the data supporting your claim that it was trillions in tax cuts?

It's called the internet:

Ezra Klein - Putting the $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts in context
 
Talk to us about the participation rate. My sense is you know that this has been lowered quite a bit by these statistics over the past two years.

Correction. It has been lowered over the past 30 years. Reagan started monkeying around with how unemployment was measured.
 
You think the Private sector created the 14.3 trillion dollar debt? The private sector is under no obligation to use the cash IT EARNED. Better be careful what you wish for as Cuba, Venezuela, and of course Russia aren't great booming successes.

Actually in a way it did. By pushing the bulk of retirement costs to the government, not to mention hundreds of billions if not a trillion in corporate welfare, the private sector did indeed play a role in that debt. And the private sector is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the debt. Sizable portions of the debt are directly caused by tax cuts, cuts that allow people to buy stuff and boost the bottom line.
 
Did you bother to read his post?



Said the guy who argued that discouraged workers increased by a million a month under Obama despite his own link saying that the monthly numbers were cumulative.

Said the guy who argued that the Democrats controlled Congress during all of Bush's years.

Said the guy who argued Texas has a surplus despite its own Republican Comptroller stating the state was in a deficit at the very moment.

Don't you even dare try to argue other people are not good at fact checking.



Which was explained in the post. Wow. Talk about childish behavior there.



It's called the internet:

Ezra Klein - Putting the $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts in context

Welcome back, Kid, the legend in her own mind is back!

So when a million people drop out of the unemployment roles because they are discouraged what does that do to the unemployment rate?

Democrats controlled Congress 2007-2008 when the economy tanked. Controlled the Senate in 2001-2002

Texas had a surplus when that statement was made, the deficit is PROJECTED for fiscal year 2012-13. Projected deficits will not turn into actual deficits because TX has to balance the budget

The trillions in debt was claimed as tax cuts for the rich and liberals always ignore economic growth. The article posted is typical liberal BS just like touting 10 projections from the CBO as being accurate.

Glad to see your typical arrogant attitude hasn't changed a bit. I suggest you stop with the childish comments and liberal arrogance.

By the way, what makes Klein's article accurate, because you believe it? There is only one ideology that doesn't care how much you make or pay in taxes. If you feel so committed to the govt. then write them a check monthly and designate it as a gift sending it to the IRS. They would love to take your money from you. Doubt that will ever happen as what you and other liberals want to do is spread your misery equally to everyone else.
 
Last edited:
Actually in a way it did. By pushing the bulk of retirement costs to the government, not to mention hundreds of billions if not a trillion in corporate welfare, the private sector did indeed play a role in that debt. And the private sector is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the debt. Sizable portions of the debt are directly caused by tax cuts, cuts that allow people to buy stuff and boost the bottom line.

It did? You mean people keeping more of what they earn along with businesses is an expense to the govt? Just like a typical liberal, let's attack the people who pay taxes and the businesses that employ people whil never addressing how money is spent. It was the govt. and liberal social engineering that caused the 14.3 trillion debt, not people keeping more of what they earned.
 
the terrorists did it

in the democrats' lame duck

LOL!

our poor president

he's SUCH a hostage

he's a CLOWN too

deal with it
 
Welcome back, Kid, the legend in her own mind is back!

Again, not a woman. But you must have had a bad experience with females if you call people who treat you badly as females automatically.

So when a million people drop out of the unemployment roles because they are discouraged what does that do to the unemployment rate?

Not relevant to my post.

It is merely an example of you entirely failing to fact check (or even properly read) your own data.

Texas had a surplus when that statement was made

No, it didn't. The Comptroller said at the moment Texas was operating at a deficit, and that unless there was a fix for the upcoming biannual fiscal year, the deficit would be $10 billion. So they were in a deficit in the current year, and projections for the upcoming were $10 billion. You did not bother to read what she said. At least 10 other people pointed this out to you.

the deficit is PROJECTED for fiscal year 2012-13. Projected deficits will not turn into actual deficits because TX has to balance the budget

That was the $10 billion. You failed to notice she said that the state was in a deficit at the moment. Meaning she was talking about TWO, read them TWO different deficits.

The trillions in debt was claimed as tax cuts for the rich and liberals always ignore economic growth. The article posted is typical liberal BS just like touting 10 projections from the CBO as being accurate.

So you don't actually have a rebuttal? Check.

Glad to see your typical arrogant attitude hasn't changed a bit. I suggest you stop with the childish comments and liberal arrogance.

You're the liberal remember.

You know, staying on topic is helpful. But if you did that, you'd lose even faster.
 
It did? You mean people keeping more of what they earn along with businesses is an expense to the govt? Just like a typical liberal, let's attack the people who pay taxes and the businesses that employ people whil never addressing how money is spent. It was the govt. and liberal social engineering that caused the 14.3 trillion debt, not people keeping more of what they earned.

Nothing you posted addressed a single thing I wrote.
 
Back
Top Bottom