zappasguitar
Well-known member
That's right...just ignore the fact that Obama HALTED the rise of unemployment and is now bringing the number back down.
Nice to see you showing everyone what "integrity" looks like!
Gingrich wins S.C.!
- Thread starter icedancer2theend
- Start date
That's right...just ignore the fact that Obama HALTED the rise of unemployment and is now bringing the number back down.
Nice to see you showing everyone what "integrity" looks like!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Perhaps, since you have so much integrity, you can tell us what Obama has done to halt the rise of unemployment?
And while we're talking about this supposed halting of the rise... remember when Bush was president and there were small declines in unemployment, it was because of the people who had given up trying to find a job... or their unemployment ran out and they dropped off the rolls? I remember Bush would get a jobs report showing 250k new jobs, and you all told us that this was actually a LOSS because of all the new people entering the workforce... but then, you have integrity and we don't, maybe that's the difference, huh?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
It seems to me that all these comparisons with previous recessions fail to factor in China and the other BRIC countries. Unless the US and Europe are willing to pay far more for consumer goods then there is little chance of jobs returning in the numbers in previous times.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
if he halted it...how did it continue to rise? and what specifically has he done to halt it?
zappasguitar
Well-known member
When Obama entered office, unemployment was already skyrocketing. It continued to rise until it reached it's peak of 10.1%, at which time, policies implemented by Obama corrected the mistakes of the past administration and the number of unemployed began to come down.
Specifically?
TARP helped, as did his bailout of the Auto industry, returning a semblance of stability to the economy, which in turn eased the fears of many small business owners. They saw signs of economic recovery and that encouraged some business owners to begin hiring once again.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
As far as I am aware, we signed a trade agreement with China back in 1972, and I don't recall an Obama initiative to dramatically increase trade with China, so I have to assume our trade with China is not much different than it was in 2008, or 2000 for that matter. This being said, factoring in China cancels itself out, because it is virtually the same as it has been since at least the early 80s.
Let's be clear (and honest) about why we aren't creating new jobs... this administration has done everything in their power to hobble capitalism, which is the driving force behind all new hiring and jobs. The constant droning threat of new taxes, the continual demonizing of "the wealthy," all of this factors in, and far more than our trade with China.
Simple-minded twits will often look at this and jump on the idiot wagon with this thing about Chinese trade, and I can't understand how you can be so stupid as to not grasp this. It's really simple... trade agreements mean we agree to sell them things and they agree to sell us things, it is what makes it "trade" .....So, if we stop buying things from China, they will stop buying things from us. China is a big country, and we sell a lot of things to China, so if we stop trading with China, the people who work here in the US to make the products we sell to China, will have to be laid off, since we are no longer selling stuff to China. Now, I suppose some of these workers could displace the lost Chinese workers in producing the stuff we no longer buy from China, but this would basically mean, things we once bought cheaply from China, would cost 10x more because we made it here with union workers. So.... thousands of high-tech jobs making things that Chinese people buy from us, would be gone forever... while relatively cheap novelties we are accustomed to, would cost 10x more if we could find them. Sounds like a wonderful future, doesn't it? ...Hey, but we created new jobs making bamboo drink umbrellas and such!
But the numbers show that some jobs are being created, when Bush was last president we we were losing a dramatic number of jobs.... So what gives....?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
did you not just post the other the day that a president doesn't have that much control over the economy/jobs? i thanked that post. now, here you are seemingly blaming bush.
tell me, what do you think bush (specifically) did to cause the economy and jobs to falter?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
lmao....TARP was bush, not obama.....
truly hilarious how you and evince always give obama credit for that, despite that it happened before he took office.
the bailout....bush also bailed out the auto industry. you've given two examples and both were accomplished by bush. how is it you give only obama the credit?
zappasguitar
Well-known member
What a surprise...I attempt reasonable debate and it's (once again) met with taunts and derisive laughter.
Thanks for ANOTHER display of what you consider "debate" Yurt!
Why do I even bother?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
what? you didn't counter a single point i made. you just insulted. you ignord TARP and the bailout.
when are you ever going to debate? we can have debate with insults, no problem. how about you actually address my debate points instead of just insulting?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Jobs are created and lost everyday... New young workers enter the workforce and old people retire... everyday. As people hit the end of the unemployment benefits they are entitled to, they are no longer counted as "unemployed" ...even though they are in fact, unemployed... still!
In the worst days of the Bush years, the jobs report routinely showed small increases in number of jobs, but pinheads argued it was actually a LOSS of jobs, because the increase in number wasn't enough to offset the increase in workforce during the same time. With Obama, this anomaly must no longer exist, because we never hear a pinhead mention it... month after month, we get jobs reports showing slight increases, even slighter than the Bush years, but these numbers are apparently rolled in to some mythical number of jobs which were supposedly "saved" by Obama, and we hear how great and wonderful the good times are, now that Obama has everyone going back to work again!
You can moan and complain about Bush all you like, the fact is, things are not better under Obama, and they aren't really getting better, or at least not at a rate that exudes confidence. It takes too much spin and hype to make Obama's numbers look good, and people are getting pretty keen to spin and hype these days, believe it or not. But, when that is all you have, I guess you gotta go with it, huh?
zappasguitar
Well-known member
No, it's apparent you CAN'T have a debate without insults or taunts.
I tried once again and all I got in return was more derisive laughter and taunts...
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
are you ever honest? pick the topic you want and i will start a THREAD in which you and i will debate with no insults.
pick the topic, other than your one post answer about UE rates. come on zappa, you and i disagree on topics, pick one, we can debate....put up or shut up.
edit: note that zappa still has not countered my points. just more whining and insults.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Riiiiiiight...I just made an attempt at reasonable debate and it was met with the standard Yurt taunts and derision...I'm still waiting for you to prove you can go even ONE POST without your standard whining and name calling.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Like I said...I'm not wasting one minute in a "debate" with you until you prove you can go one single post without the same old taunts and derision.
So far, you have yet to do so.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
make your first post in that thread. no insults. just debate. you have my word.
Lowaicue
英語在香港
What the hell does it matter? If Clinton, Obama, Bush.... no, not bush... Reagan spent their leisure time shagging silly young ladies, does it follow that they are necessarily bad presidents? Kennedy was Ok, wasn't he? and he couldn't go 3 days (so they say) without dipping his pen in someone else's inkwell. You people need to get your priorities right. Some ... I dare say most leaders of industry, governments or even the local shop have shagged someone other than the missus. That energy, that adventurism is one of the character traits voters admire, so one gets it from screwing and another gets it from bungie jumping.
