Devout Hillary Supporters[W:634]

[Slyfox696]

You are really focused on those 700,000 jobs lost in November December and January

No, I'm really focused on you admitting you were wrong when you compared Bush's last three months with Obama's whole presidency and his first term.

Are you going to admit you were wrong?

 

[Conservative]

No, I'm really focused on you admitting you were wrong when you compared Bush's last three months with Obama's whole presidency and his first term.

Are you going to admit you were wrong?

Nope the totals are what counts. Total unemployment lower under Bush than the end of Obama's first term

 

[Slyfox696]

Nope the totals are what counts.

You didn't say totals, you said the last three months. So you admit you were wrong then?

 

[Conservative]

You didn't say totals, you said the last three months. So you admit you were wrong then?

Yes, the last three months TOTAL!! Why would anyone look purely at the monthly job losses and not the TOTAL?

 

[Slyfox696]

Yes, the last three months TOTAL!!

The last three months of Bush combined lost over 2 million jobs. That most definitely is not better than Obama's full presidency, which has seen the growth of over 10 million jobs, nor Obama's first term which saw the creation of 1.2 million jobs (Source from BLS).

So are you ready to admit you were wrong?

 

[Conservative]

The last three months of Bush combined lost over 2 million jobs. That most definitely is not better than Obama's full presidency, which has seen the growth of over 10 million jobs, nor Obama's first term which saw the creation of 1.2 million jobs (Source from BLS).

So are you ready to admit you were wrong?

The total unemployment was 12 million and the end of the Obama first term it was 12.2 million and that is with the 842 billion dollar stimulus for shovel ready jobs. Debt when Obama took office was 10.6 trillion and it is 19.2 trillion today. great return on that stimulus wasn't it?

 

[Slyfox696]

The total unemployment was 12 million

We are talking about job losses. You claimed Bush's last three months were better than Obama's full presidency and first term. In no honest person's world is losing 2 million jobs over three months better than gaining 1.2 or 10 million jobs (first and full terms respectively).

So are you going to admit you are wrong or not?

 

[Conservative]

We are talking about job losses. You claimed Bush's last three months were better than Obama's full presidency and first term. In no honest person's world is losing 2 million jobs better than gaining 1.2 or 10 million jobs.

So are you going to admit you are wrong or not?

So someone that is unemployed didn't lose a job? Interesting

 

[Conservative]

We are talking about job losses. You claimed Bush's last three months were better than Obama's full presidency and first term. In no honest person's world is losing 2 million jobs over three months better than gaining 1.2 or 10 million jobs (first and full terms respectively).

So are you going to admit you are wrong or not?

I am having trouble seeing those jobs created as they certainly didn't reduce the unemployment. Keep buying the leftwing rhetoric and ignoring the results. You are exactly what the left wants

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 2006 to 2016

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006 7064 7184 7072 7120 6980 7001 7175 7091 6847 6727 6872 6762
2007 7116 6927 6731 6850 6766 6979 7149 7067 7170 7237 7240 7645
2008 7685 7497 7822 7637 8395 8575 8937 9438 9494 10074 10538 11286
2009 12058 12898 13426 13853 14499 14707 14601 14814 15009 15352 15219 15098
2010 15046 15113 15202 15325 14849 14474 14512 14648 14579 14516 15081 14348
2011 14013 13820 13737 13957 13855 13962 13763 13818 13948 13594 13302 13093
2012 12755 12818 12718 12641 12655 12697 12662 12475 12140 12135 12011 12299

 

[Slyfox696]

So someone that is unemployed didn't lose a job? Interesting

You are conflating multiple things. First of all, pinqy and I have both already explained to you that being unemployed doesn't mean you lost a job. The fact you're still asking the question indicates poor ability to learn or dishonesty. Second of all, we are comparing what happened in Bush's last three months with Obama's full term and first term. And the fact is you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better.

At this point, you can either admit you were wrong or show yourself to not be honest or interested in reality. If you don't admit you were wrong, as the facts have clearly shown, then I will consider that to be an acquiescence of your lack of interest in honesty.

I am having trouble seeing those jobs created as they certainly didn't reduce the unemployment.

Why would you post this when you've already been educated on how jobs and unemployment are different things? It appears you're trying to be dishonest because I know both pinqy and I have already educated you on the difference.

 

[Conservative]

You are conflating multiple things. First of all, pinqy and I have both already explained to you that being unemployed doesn't mean you lost a job. The fact you're still asking the question indicates poor ability to learn or dishonesty. Second of all, we are comparing what happened in Bush's last three months with Obama's full term and first term. And the fact is you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better.

At this point, you can either admit you were wrong or show yourself to not be honest or interested in reality. If you don't admit you were wrong, as the facts have clearly shown, then I will consider that to be an acquiescence of your lack of interest in honesty.
Why would you post this when you've already been educated on how jobs and unemployment are different things? It appears you're trying to be dishonest because I know both pinqy and I have already educated you on the difference.

Sorry, but unemployed people don't pay taxes and it is unemployment that causes economic problems, an unemployed person has indeed lost their job. As for jobs created how many of those are part time for economic reasons or does that even matter to you? You have been indoctrinated well

I posted the actual chart, show me the actual job loss chart

 

[Slyfox696]

Sorry, but unemployed people don't pay taxes

You're trying to change the subject. You're not smart enough to trick me.

Since you have not admitted you were wrong, I have no choice but to assume your acquiescence.

I posted the actual chart, show me the actual job loss chart

I did, three posts of mine ago.

 

[Conservative]

You're trying to change the subject. You're not smart enough to trick me.

Since you have not admitted you were wrong, I have no choice but to assume your acquiescence.

I did, three posts of mine ago.

Noticed that you didn't talk about the jobs lost after the shovel ready job stimulus of Obama's

2009 -791 -703 -823 -686 -351 -470 -329 -212 -219 -200 -7 -279

But that's ok, keep carrying Obama's water telling us that you aren't an Obama supporter Guess in your world 3 million jobs lost February-July don't count in your world

I will stick with unemployment numbers and the total numbers for the Obama and Bush term not just three months

 

[Vern]

What I claim and continue to contend that you failed basic civics. Please let me know what economic policies the democratic-controlled Congress initiated from January 1st 2007 to the end of the year that help prevent the recession. It does seem that you believe Bush was King and had total control and yet those Democrats that control Congress sat on their asses allowing him to do what you claim he did

The recession was a joint effort between bush and the democrat congress and the worst recovery in history was totally Obama's

er uh Con, after your usual and automatic deflections, you seem to be trying to spread the blame around for the Great Bush Recession. We weren't discussing your excuses for who's to blame, we were simply trying to get you to admit that the economy was destroyed when bush left office. So, do you finally admit the economy was destroyed when bush left office?

and on a side note, did any of the civic courses you took ( you did take some civics courses right?) deal with the rudeness of not acknowledging simple and undeniable facts?

 

[Conservative]

You're trying to change the subject. You're not smart enough to trick me.

Since you have not admitted you were wrong, I have no choice but to assume your acquiescence.

I did, three posts of mine ago.

Only a liberal would look at the bottomline and ignore the context and what makes up those jobs gained.

How can anyone be happy with these numbers and give Obama credit for gaining jobs?

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12032194
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level - Part-Time for Economic Reasons, All Industries
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Hours at work: 1 to 34 hours
Reasons work not as scheduled: Economic reasons
Worker status/schedules: At work part time
Years: 2006 to 2016

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 8046 8796 9145 8908 9113 9024 8891 9029 8847 8979 9114 9098
2010 8530 8936 9233 9178 8845 8577 8500 8800 9246 8837 8873 8935
2011 8470 8464 8645 8652 8576 8427 8281 8788 9166 8657 8447 8171
2012 8267 8214 7793 7907 8123 8081 8092 7998 8667 8229 8150 7922
2013 8030 8089 7682 7924 7901 8104 8093 7837 8008 8028 7708 7763
2014 7250 7230 7428 7452 7219 7473 7440 7213 7124 7065 6844 6786
2015 6784 6630 6673 6549 6600 6465 6300 6481 6034 5761 6085 6022
2016 5988 5988 6123 5962 6430 5843

 

[Conservative]

er uh Con, after your usual and automatic deflections, you seem to be trying to spread the blame around for the Great Bush Recession. We weren't discussing your excuses for who's to blame, we were simply trying to get you to admit that the economy was destroyed when bush left office. So, do you finally admit the economy was destroyed when bush left office?

and on a side note, did any of the civic courses you took ( you did take some civics courses right?) deal with the rudeness of not acknowledging simple and undeniable facts?

I did indeed learn that but you have offered no undeniable facts only leftwing talking points that ignore the fact that Congress is an equal branch of the govt. and I am waiting for the legislation that Bush vetoed that the Democrat Congress presented that would have prevented the recession since they controlled the legislative process as well as the purse strings. Until you take civics I wouldn't be talking about undeniable facts.

Further I am waiting for which party benefited from the financial crisis and housing bubble, Republicans or Democrats??

 

[Vern]

I did indeed learn that but you have offered no undeniable facts only leftwing talking points that ignore the fact that Congress is an equal branch of the govt. and I am waiting for the legislation that Bush vetoed that the Democrat Congress presented that would have prevented the recession since they controlled the legislative process as well as the purse strings. Until you take civics I wouldn't be talking about undeniable facts.

Further I am waiting for which party benefited from the financial crisis and housing bubble, Republicans or Democrats??

mmm, that's odd, you again ignore that we were not discussing who you conveniently try to blame for the Great Bush Recession, we discussing whether or not you can admit that the economy was destroyed when Bush left office. You seem to acknowledge in a vague con sorta way that the economy was destroyed when bush left office but you've previously tried to deny that simple and undeniable fact. For someone who whines incessantly about "civics classes" you would think they wouldn't be as dishonest and deflecting as you. But then again, you are a con Con.

 

[Slyfox696]

Only a liberal would look at the bottomline and ignore the context and what makes up those jobs gained.

:lol:
So you're saying only a liberal would be happier with the country gaining millions of jobs rather than losing millions of jobs?

I believe you have that backwards. Only a partisan conservative could think that losing 2 million jobs over three months is better than gaining 10 million jobs over 7+ years. So are you going to admit you're wrong?

 

[Conservative]

:lol:
So you're saying only a liberal would be happier with the country gaining millions of jobs rather than losing millions of jobs?

I believe you have that backwards. Only a partisan conservative could think that losing 2 million jobs over three months is better than gaining 10 million jobs over 7+ years. So are you going to admit you're wrong?

Again, ignoring the numbers inside the numbers is what you do. It was an 842 BILLION dollar stimulus plan to create shovel ready jobs that took employment from 142 million to 139 million two years AFTER it was signed into law. It was a spending program that created 1.3 million discouraged workers and then promoted the creation of part time jobs for economic reasons. Anyone who thinks those numbers are good and a credit to Obama is truly a misguided liberal who has been indoctrinated well but wrong.

 

[Slyfox696]

Again, ignoring the numbers inside the numbers is what you do.

Surely you realize by now your usual tactics of red herrings do not work with me, correct? I'm well aware of how you want to wiggle out of the falsehoods you post by posting more falsehoods, so I only go along when I choose. And I do not yet choose to go along. So answer the question.

It's really simple. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

 

[Conservative]

Surely you realize by now your usual tactics of red herrings do not work with me, correct? I'm well aware of how you want to wiggle out of the falsehoods you post by posting more falsehoods, so I only go along when I choose. And I do not yet choose to go along. So answer the question.

It's really simple. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

I cannot admit what is not true, the statement stands because unlike you I look at the totals not a particular category. It is total unemployment that matters, it is total debt that matters, it is total gdp growth that matters. What you want to ignore is the 842 BILLION dollar stimulus in February 2009 which did absolutely nothing to reverse the job losses.

 

[Slyfox696]

I cannot admit what is not true, the statement stands because unlike you I look at the totals

We are talking about jobs. Other stats are reflective of many other complex and long-term issues. Job gains/losses are an indicator of an economy's strength for a given month. Try again.

It's really simple. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

 

[Conservative]

We are talking about jobs. Other stats are reflective of many other complex and long-term issues. Job gains/losses are about as good of an easy indicator of an economy's strength for a given month. Try again.

It's really simple. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

Bush's performance the last three months were better than Obama's first term performance and the Bush results for his Presidency are better than Obama's with the exception of total jobs. that is reality and BLS.gov, BEA.gov, and Treasury support my statement

 

[Slyfox696]

Bush's performance the last three months were better than Obama's first term performance

So you're saying losing 2 million jobs is better than gaining 1.2 million jobs? Really?

and the Bush results for his Presidency are better than Obama's with the exception of total jobs.

I'll be happy to discuss that with you as soon as you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months was better than Obama's first term and full presidency.

 

[Conservative]

So you're saying losing 2 million jobs is better than gaining 1.2 million jobs? Really?

I'll be happy to discuss that with you as soon as you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months was better than Obama's first term and full presidency.

Even losing 2 million jobs the Bush performance in total for those three months was either better or equal to Obama's first term results and that is reality

Bush has 144 million, 143 million and 142 million employed November, December, and January, Obama's was 143 million at the end of his first term so with the exception of January the performance in November was better, the performance in December was equal, and the employment in January was worse. The average is the same. In addition of those 143 million employed at the end of his first term 7.9 million were part time for economic reasons. Does that tell you anything about the Obama economic policies and results? Probably not