Trump's budget proves GOP deficit hawks are a dying breed

[jaeger19]

I am giving Obama total credit for the jobs numbers, the loss of jobs from 142 million down to 138 million after his stimulus and not getting back to pre recession levels of 146 million which is what he was hired to do until Mid 2014. I am giving Obama total credit for the millions of part time for economic reason jobs created most do to reduction in hours(over 8 million each month for his entire first term, double pre recession levels).

Then I am giving Trump credit for the 5 million jobs created since taking office and the drop in PTFER jobs back below pre recession levels at 4.3

I/QUOTE]


Yawn..Yep.. same old bullcrap from you Obama had a severe recession.. its called the great recession for a reason... and you don't think he got it going fast enough.

Trump continues the EXACT SAME TREND..that Obama had before Trump took office.. and trump is a miracle worker.

Sorry sir..but you are just not being logical and you are NOT using results .

 

[Kushinator]

If anyone wants to learn how to post a graph without context then you are the person.

Your opinions of other posters aren't up for debate. Nobody gives a **** about what you think of others.

If anyone wants to learn how to manipulate numbers to make a failure look like a success then you are the person

Objectivity is the enemy of partisan hacks like yourself.

If anyone wants to be a book smart street stupid individual then the training you offer would be the one they need.

Again, your opinions of intelligence and savy are not up for debate.

If anyone wants to ignore history, re-write it, post biased partisan data that is contrary to what the American people are seeing then you are definitely the one.

Here's what I will do... show you to be the dishonest, ignorant, hack we've all come to pity.

Fact, PTFER grew during the Obama term and made the employment look better than it really was or is a part time job for economic reason(people who wanted full time work but couldn't find it in the booming Obama economy) the kind of job you find desirable and positions you promote?

All it takes is a single set of visual data to prove your argument wrong:

As everyone can clearly see, PTFER peaked before the recession even ended... before the first stimulus expenditure was made, before job growth began.

 

[Conservative]

Your opinions of other posters aren't up for debate. Nobody gives a **** about what you think of others.



Objectivity is the enemy of partisan hacks like yourself.



Again, your opinions of intelligence and savy are not up for debate.



Here's what I will do... show you to be the dishonest, ignorant, hack we've all come to pity.



All it takes is a single set of visual data to prove your argument wrong:

As everyone can clearly see, PTFER peaked before the recession even ended... before the first stimulus expenditure was made, before job growth began.

Awesome chart that confirms exactly what I posted including the spreadsheet which obviously you ignored. you do nothing but show your total book smart arrogance and no understanding of human behavior at all. 5.7 million part time for economic reasons in January of 2017 and during the entire first term of Obama it was over 8 million each month with that stimulus program you claim that was so successful. It is 4.3 million as of February 2019

As usual you really don't care about part-time jobs you only care about the bottom line

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Kushinator]

5.7 million part time for economic reasons in January of 2017 and during the entire first term of Obama it was over 8 million each month with that stimulus program you claim that was so successful.

You've been entirety refuted and chose to double down on your partisan ignorance.

 

[Conservative]

You've been entirety refuted and chose to double down on your partisan ignorance.

No, sorry it is you that has a problem. Your lines are excellent and very pretty but they represent actual individual people.

The 4.8 million part time for economic reasons employees was January 2008 with a democratic Congress which Obama was part of it. There's also 146 million Americans employed in January of 2008 including those 4.8 million part-time employees for economic reasons.

In January 2017 that was 152 million Americans employed of which 5.7 million for part-time for economic reasons. So in your world apparently there has been no population growth as there were only six million jobs created since January of 2008.

That is your idea of a success? You are the one to be proven wrong when you claim that the Obama stimulus was a success and his administration a success. Obama's poll numbers in the latter part of his administration on the economy also reflects how badly the American electorate viewed the Obama economy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Kushinator]

No, sorry it is you that has a problem. Your lines are excellent and very pretty but they represent actual individual people.

You've been refuted. This poorly thought out and written response only serves as an example of how dishonest you are.

 

[Conservative]

You've been refuted. This poorly thought out and written response only serves as an example of how dishonest you are.

And you have proven that you are a legend in your own mind and that is the only place. Rather sad to see someone who believes going from 146 million to 152 million in 9 years and still having 5.7 million of those employed PTFER is good economic performance generated at a cost of 9.3 trillion added to the debt. You generate those kind of numbers in the private sector and you wouldn't have lasted 2 years let alone 8.

Yes, I know Obama wasn't President in January 2008 with 146 million employed but that is the standard, not the 142 million January 2009 and in fact Democrats controlled the legislative process and purse strings showing the country they cared more about the WH than putting people back to work. 9 years, 6 million jobs is a disaster and that wasn't what Obama was elected to do and why the Democrats lost in 2016 and will lose again in 2020

Trump has unleashed a roaring economy and that'''s really bad news for 2020 Democrats | Fox News

 

[Kushinator]

And you going from 146 million to 152 million in 9 years and still having 5.7 million of those employed PTFER is good economic performance generated at a cost of 9.3 trillion added to the debt. You generate those kind of numbers in the private sector and you wouldn't have lasted 2 years let alone 8.

Nobody gives a **** about this weak line of thought. The Great Recession has had a historical impact on the US and global economy. You can't hide behind a cherry picked/poorly articulated strawman.

Yes, I know Obama wasn't President in January 2008 with 146 million employed but that is the standard, not the 142 million January 2009 and in fact Democrats controlled the legislative process and purse strings showing the country they cared more about the WH than putting people back to work. 9 years, 6 million jobs is a disaster and that wasn't what Obama was elected to do and why the Democrats lost in 2016 and will lose again in 2020

See above.

 

[Conservative]

Nobody gives a **** about this weak line of thought. The Great Recession has had a historical impact on the US and global economy. You can't hide behind a cherry picked/poorly articulated strawman.



See above.

Unlike you I ran a business, Unlike you I was in the private sector, unlike you I am held responsible for results, and unlike you I had to meet a payroll and was judged on actual performance. I promoted more people than you have ever associated with and quite frankly don't give a damn about sentence structure but logic and common sense. If we have 146 million employed with the population in January 2008 and then 152 with the population and economy in January 2017, what happened in between shows nothing but poor economic policy and results at a very high cost, 9.3 trillion added to the debt.

There is nothing independent in anything you post as you are easily swayed by charts and pretty graphs that ignore context. People were hurt by the Obama economic polices and that is undeniable. Independents are objective, you aren't as you tout a line on a graph never putting actual faces on those lines

 

[Kushinator]

Unlike you I ran a business, Unlike you I was in the private sector, unlike you I am held responsible for results, and unlike you I had to meet a payroll and was judged on actual performance. I promoted more people than you have ever associated with and quite frankly don't give a damn about sentence structure but logic and common sense. If we have 146 million employed with the population in January 2008 and then 152 with the population and economy in January 2017, what happened in between shows nothing but poor economic policy and results at a very high cost, 9.3 trillion added to the debt.

There is nothing independent in anything you post as you are easily swayed by charts and pretty graphs that ignore context. People were hurt by the Obama economic polices and that is undeniable. Independents are objective, you aren't as you tout a line on a graph never putting actual faces on those lines

Nobody gives a single **** about what you claim to be, know, or whatever. Your inability to write clear and concise sentences is overshadowed by a complete lack of critical thinking skills.

I'll be here to highlight the unprecedented levels of partisan ignorance you bring to the discussion every time you post. Other members get to see what is like to make posts that are epic failures.

 

[Conservative]

Nobody gives a single **** about what you claim to be, know, or whatever. Your inability to write clear and concise sentences is overshadowed by a complete lack of critical thinking skills.

I'll be here to highlight the unprecedented levels of partisan ignorance you bring to the discussion every time you post. Other members get to see what is like to make posts that are epic failures.

"nobody" so your arrogance tells you that you know what everyone else thinks? tell you what, you are the nobody and I don't give a damn about what you think as you aren't worth it. Saw a lot of people like you during my working career and none of them survived. Bet they are part of the nobody as well.

 

[Media_Truth]

Obama was doing such a good job, moving the economy forward, and at the same time reducing the deficit spending. Republicans are playing with voodoo dolls. The economy is gradually slowing and yet they have skyrocketed the deficit.

 

[American]

Trump's budget proves GOP deficit hawks are a dying breed

Trump has again demanded yet another $8.6 billion for his vanity wall.

Illegals are being put out in parking lots because the CBP doesn't have the room to house them, and you crow about a VANITY wall. The Democrats are so full of **** and out of touch, they need to be removed from the political process.

 

[Media_Truth]

This is what Trump and his merry band of Republicans have accomplished:
1. A skyrocketing deficit.
2. Reduced buying power, as the wealthy hoard their tax-cut profits.
3. A president with a bankrupt morality that will infiltrate society like a plague.
4. Racism and White Supremacy.
5. Political division like never seen before.
6. Stripping of environmental regulations.
7. etc, etc...

 

[Nickyjo]

Really? show me the OFFICIAL Trump deficits of a trillion dollars?? Amazing how easily it is to indoctrinate good people. What is the role of the Federal Gov't? How about your state and local gov't? Stop buying projections and look at actual results. Less than 1/3 of the budget is discretionary spending with the rest entitlement spending. When are you and the radicals going to address those?

The problem is that conservatives cut taxes but dont or won’t cut spending. Entitlements exist because people want them to. Conservatives are obligated to give their donors tax breaks but are thus caught in a bind when it comes to cutting expenses. Hence deficits rise.

Historically, people have turned to the federal govt when states have been unresponsive. It is easier for advocates for the poor, for example, to push for federal help because they don’t have the power/ability that industries do to lobby in 50 states.

 

[Nickyjo]

Illegals are being put out in parkingotectuon lots because the CBP doesn't have the room to house them, and you crow about a VANITY wall. The Democrats are so full of **** and out of touch, they need to be removed from the political process.

The illegals are asylum seekers and they have a right to seek protection. We have a legal obligation towards them based on US law and a couple of ratified treaties. And a moral obligation due to our years of helping to screw up Central America. The wall is as irrelevant as Trump’s wedding vows were. It is indeed Trump’s vanity project.

 

[Conservative]

The problem is that conservatives cut taxes but dont or won’t cut spending. Entitlements exist because people want them to. Conservatives are obligated to give their donors tax breaks but are thus caught in a bind when it comes to cutting expenses. Hence deficits rise.

Historically, people have turned to the federal govt when states have been unresponsive. It is easier for advocates for the poor, for example, to push for federal help because they don’t have the power/ability that industries do to lobby in 50 states.

Oh, My, Conservatives are the only ones voting on legislation in Congress? States are unresponsive? Has nothing to do with high federal taxes and gov't usurping state power? States have term limits, you don't like your gov't change it. Federal bureaucrats create career jobs by buying votes, votes that require higher taxes to fund the programs the federal bureaucrats use to buy those votes

 

[Conservative]

The illegals are asylum seekers and they have a right to seek protection. We have a legal obligation towards them based on US law and a couple of ratified treaties. And a moral obligation due to our years of helping to screw up Central America. The wall is as irrelevant as Trump’s wedding vows were. It is indeed Trump’s vanity project.

Do Americans have a right to protect their own borders? Are there any costs associated with illegal immigration in your world? What treaty gives up the U.S. right to protect its own borders? Moral obligation isn't legal obligation and the human costs of illegal immigration is a foreign concept to people like you. Try this bull**** in other countries and see what happens?

 

[Nickyjo]

Oh, My, Conservatives are the only ones voting on legislation in Congress? States are unresponsive? Has nothing to do with high federal taxes and gov't usurping state power? States have term limits, you don't like your gov't change it. Federal bureaucrats create career jobs by buying votes, votes that require higher taxes to fund the programs the federal bureaucrats use to buy those votes

Don’t understand your first sentence. But my point was that for the past several generations, the relatively powerless have used what influence they have to pressure for federal solutions absent state action, when they are confronted by the relatively powerful. Local is probably always better, but from things like voting rights to working conditions, if I find my state government unjust, unresponsive to me but rolling over for corporate interests, I or my organization will look to DC because it is more practical.

 

[Conservative]

Don’t understand your first sentence. But my point was that for the past several generations, the relatively powerless have used what influence they have to pressure for federal solutions absent state action, when they are confronted by the relatively powerful. Local is probably always better, but from things like voting rights to working conditions, if I find my state government unjust, unresponsive to me but rolling over for corporate interests, I or my organization will look to DC because it is more practical.

You really give the people of the state so little credit for taking on their own personal responsibility issues, why is that? Do you understand what term limits mean?

You stated that conservatives have passed legislation apparently without Democratic/Liberal support? Can you name a social program that the left doesn't support?

You look to D.C. for the answer because obviously you believe the federal bureaucrats give a damn about the problems in your local communities and will provide the help you want? This is a bureaucratic group that created the 22 trillion dollar debt and people like you who have become dependent on the federal bureaucrats rather than working with your own state and local governments

 

[Nickyjo]

Do Americans have a right to protect their own borders? Are there any costs associated with illegal immigration in your world? What treaty gives up the U.S. right to protect its own borders? Moral obligation isn't legal obligation and the human costs of illegal immigration is a foreign concept to people like you. Try this bull**** in other countries and see what happens?

Of course the US has the right to protect its borders, a principle that is well established in modern times. What is not new is that people run when their lives are threatened, and the countries of the world decided to deal with that phenomenon through treaties. The US passed the Refugee Act of 1980 to bring US law into compliance with our treaty obligations. Thus two principles are in tension. In simple terms, the US is bound by law to examine asylum claims and not return people to countries where their lives or freedom would be in danger. Other countries have the same problem dealing with migration. Europe is confronting migrants from Africa who have left due to hunger, some of it brought about by climate change. Refugee law, tho honored in Europe, does not apply to economic migrants. The US has a more complex problem right now, dealing with Central Americans. The moral case is irrelevant legally, but like the Pottery Barn slogan, we did help break Central America, so we own it.

As to the costs of illegal immigration, I suppose I have to pay taxes to pay for dealing with it even as I benefit from the cheap labor it brings, a long-standing US addiction. But it is largely irrelevant to the current border crisis. If the president wanted to, he could deal with it under the law. It wouldn’t be easy, but a mature approach to the problem might unite the country behind him. But why start now? Straying from the truth while talking tough and bashing migrants keeps his base angry and happy. And Trump is not about reaching out.

 

[Nickyjo]

You really give the people of the state so little credit for taking on their own personal responsibility issues, why is that? Do you understand what term limits mean?

You stated that conservatives have passed legislation apparently without Democratic/Liberal support? Can you name a social program that the left doesn't support?

You look to D.C. for the answer because obviously you believe the federal bureaucrats give a damn about the problems in your local communities and will provide the help you want? This is a bureaucratic group that created the 22 trillion dollar debt and people like you who have become dependent on the federal bureaucrats rather than working with your own state and local governments

I repeat that local is always better. But let me give you the most stark examples of why people turned to Washington: anti-lynching laws in the 1930s and voting rights in the 1960s. The local and state governments in the South were unresponsive to murder and denial of the franchise, so people went federal. Fast forward to the Supreme Court recently saying parts of the voting rights act were no longer necessary. Then cue Gomer Pyle: “Surprahse, surprahase,” — voting restrictions followed in the southern states, and other conservative controlled states, with voter ID’s, fewer polling places, no Sunday voting, etc. Hence a move back to Washington where the power imbalance is less stark in order to change things. Local always better, except when it is not.

Less dramatic were worker safety laws, things like minimum wage, etc., a response to a problem that wasn’t handled locally. As to the left supporting social programs, they set up the programs, often with conservative support, often without. Conservatives are necessary to slow things down, lest we on the left get carried away, but the world decided long ago that capitalism wasn’t perfect, so governments in the developed world and often elsewhere file down its rough edges. Been happening for a hundred years.

 

[Conservative]

I repeat that local is always better. But let me give you the most stark examples of why people turned to Washington: anti-lynching laws in the 1930s and voting rights in the 1960s. The local and state governments in the South were unresponsive to murder and denial of the franchise, so people went federal. Fast forward to the Supreme Court recently saying parts of the voting rights act were no longer necessary. Then cue Gomer Pyle: “Surprahse, surprahase,” — voting restrictions followed in the southern states, and other conservative controlled states, with voter ID’s, fewer polling places, no Sunday voting, etc. Hence a move back to Washington where the power imbalance is less stark in order to change things. Local always better, except when it is not.

Less dramatic were worker safety laws, things like minimum wage, etc., a response to a problem that wasn’t handled locally. As to the left supporting social programs, they set up the programs, often with conservative support, often without. Conservatives are necessary to slow things down, lest we on the left get carried away, but the world decided long ago that capitalism wasn’t perfect, so governments in the developed world and often elsewhere file down its rough edges. Been happening for a hundred years.

In the 60's did you have term limits? In the 60's did we have an equal rights amendment which is the role of the federal gov't to prevent discrimination. Illegals entering this country are breaking the law, and breaking the law regardless of why is illegal. what part of illegal don't you understand? Why don't you visit southern TX and see for yourself what is happening there? How about southern Arizona?

Enough people have and say the same thing, this is a humanitarian crisis caused by people breaking the law. You seem to want the U.S. to change foreign governments that create these humanitarian violations like Venezuela and countries of Central America. I feel sorry for these people but laws prevent chaos, illegal immigration creates that chaos

 

[Media_Truth]

In the 60's did you have term limits? In the 60's did we have an equal rights amendment which is the role of the federal gov't to prevent discrimination. Illegals entering this country are breaking the law, and breaking the law regardless of why is illegal. what part of illegal don't you understand? Why don't you visit southern TX and see for yourself what is happening there? How about southern Arizona?

Enough people have and say the same thing, this is a humanitarian crisis caused by people breaking the law. You seem to want the U.S. to change foreign governments that create these humanitarian violations like Venezuela and countries of Central America. I feel sorry for these people but laws prevent chaos, illegal immigration creates that chaos

Obama deported a lot more illegal immigrants than Trump...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[Conservative]

Obama deported a lot more illegal immigrants than Trump...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

LOL, Trump has been in office two years, Obama 8