Unemployment at a 4 year low...

Dixie said:
7.7% Unemployment is extremely high by historical standards. In fact, we are currently in the longest period of UE above 5% in the history of the nation. Even the Great Depression didn't last this long. We're now going on 6.5 years, with no real end in sight, and here you are, crowing proudly over an unemployment number higher than George W. Bush ever saw, and yet, he was the "worst president in history" and it was the "worst economy since the Great Depression."
Click to expand...

Bush may not go down as "the worst," but he'll certainly go down as "one of the worst." He is directly responsible for the mess we've been in for over 4 years now, as well as other national & international travesties.
 
Thing1 said:
That kind of stuff really is sad. I wish employers could remove that stigma for periods like the one we just experienced - even some of the best, most qualified people have had a hard time finding work, for lengthy periods of time.

I can't imagine the hopelessness that some of the long-term unemployed feel right now.
Click to expand...

Agreed... I would imagine they are feeling quite hopeless at this point. It isn't their fault the unemployment rate stuck so high for so long. After 3 months the stigma starts to hit... at six it is stuck on you. Those with over a year... they are going to need a really tight labor market.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
You'd think a SUPPOSEDLY bright guy like SF would get that...
Click to expand...

You would think you idiots would learn something about the topic before uttering stupidity... yet you don't.

The addition of jobs is only part of the reason. I asked Jarod that question because in his OP he tried to dismiss one of the other main drivers.
 
Thing1 said:
Bush may not go down as "the worst," but he'll certainly go down as "one of the worst." He is directly responsible for the mess we've been in for over 4 years now, as well as other national & international travesties.
Click to expand...

What Bush policy(or policies) is directly responsible for the mess we are in?
 
Thing1 said:
Bush may not go down as "the worst," but he'll certainly go down as "one of the worst." He is directly responsible for the mess we've been in for over 4 years now, as well as other national & international travesties.
Click to expand...

No, he's not responsible for Obama's mess. Sorry.

Again... UE under Bush, was nowhere near as high as it has been under Obama. You morons are celebrating 7.7% unemployment under Obama, but if his name were George Bush, and he had a (R) beside it, you'd all be having cows in the streets, telling us how the end of the world was here. It's yet another example of how liberal perspectives can turn on a dime, depending on who is in power. From Benghazi to the secret drone program, we hardly hear a peep out of you morons... Bush couldn't even freaking interrogate known terrorists without you raising hell. We're bombing civilian population centers in three other countries besides the two Bush was involved in, and we don't hear a word from you people about it. Apparently, we can have shitty anemic economic growth, high unemployment, no job creation, and spiraling debt, but only under a Democrat. If it happens under a Republican, the world comes to an end.
 
Superfreak said:
What Bush policy(or policies) is directly responsible for the mess we are in?
Click to expand...

Oh, I dunno - how about just presiding over 8 years of the most fiscally irresponsible governance we've seen in modern times? How about signing off on pork-laden energy & transportation bills that broke records for spending? How about starting a protracted, unnecessary war that cost over a trillion?

Or, how about that wonderful motto that summed up the admin's philosophy, that "deficit spending doesn't matter"

I know, I know - it's all Glass Steagull, all of the time with you. But households go broke when they spend recklessly, just as countries do. Bush deserves the lion's share of blame for this fiscal mess.
 
Dixie, you're a hopeless hack. Iraq - "the greatest military achievement in modern times" according to you - was a devastating blow to our economy. All of the other #'s you are talking about - deficits, unemployment #'s, etc. - are direct fallout from the gross incompetence & fiscal irresponsiblity of Bush.

Yes, Bush - your darling boy in blue jeans, who you trumpeted as bestest leader ever for a full 8 years. It has come home to roost, and now you're left with his legacy, which is that of someone who has led one of the greatest nations the planet has seen to the edge of ruin.
 
Thing1 said:
Oh, I dunno - how about just presiding over 8 years of the most fiscally irresponsible governance we've seen in modern times?
Click to expand...

Obama has been far worse when it comes to fiscal responsibility. While Bush was horrid, his deficits hardly led to the economic collapse.

How about signing off on pork-laden energy & transportation bills that broke records for spending?
Click to expand...

Did not have anything to do with the economic collapse.

How about starting a protracted, unnecessary war that cost over a trillion?
Click to expand...

True, but again it had nothing to do with the economic collapse.

Or, how about that wonderful motto that summed up the admin's philosophy, that "deficit spending doesn't matter"
Click to expand...

You mean the one that Obama has since quadrupled down on? The worst deficit under Bush was about $500B. Obama has crushed that every single year he has been in office. Again, the deficit spending is not what caused the economic collapse.

I know, I know - it's all Glass Steagull, all of the time with you. But households go broke when they spend recklessly, just as countries do. Bush deserves the lion's share of blame for this fiscal mess.
Click to expand...

Pure nonsense. He does not. Glass Steagall escalated the problem. The problem lies with both parties attempts to have more home owners than ever before while at the same time pushing for looser credit. That is what caused the financial collapse in conjunction with bullshit on Wall St. Both parties played the game. You just want to ignore that and blame it on Bush who was indeed inept, but his policies are not the reason for the collapse as you proclaimed.
 
That's great tunnel vision, SF - look up from the WSJ and take a look at reality. When an administration overspends and cuts taxes like Bush's did - for EIGHT YEARS - that isn't unrelated to an economic collapse that occurs at the end of those 8 years.

Are you telling me that if we had a President who maintained a budget, didn't spend beyond our means and who kept the nation in outstanding fiscal health for those 8 years, the collapse still would have happened & been as severe as it was? That's comedy. Pure comedy.
 
Thing1 said:
Dixie, you're a hopeless hack. Iraq - "the greatest military achievement in modern times" according to you - was a devastating blow to our economy. All of the other #'s you are talking about - deficits, unemployment #'s, etc. - are direct fallout from the gross incompetence & fiscal irresponsiblity of Bush.

Yes, Bush - your darling boy in blue jeans, who you trumpeted as bestest leader ever for a full 8 years. It has come home to roost, and now you're left with his legacy, which is that of someone who has led one of the greatest nations the planet has seen to the edge of ruin.
Click to expand...

The total cost for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are a mere drop in the bucket compared to Obama's deficits. Bush simply is not in control of Obama's budget, so he can't be blamed for Obama's deficits. I don't give a fuck how many times you want to try and make this stupidity stick, it won't ever stick, it's just factually not accurate.
 
Dixie said:
The total cost for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are a mere drop in the bucket compared to Obama's deficits. Bush simply is not in control of Obama's budget, so he can't be blamed for Obama's deficits. I don't give a fuck how many times you want to try and make this stupidity stick, it won't ever stick, it's just factually not accurate.
Click to expand...

You have a pretty warped interpretation of what "drop in the bucket" means. Or maybe you have no idea how much those wars cost.

As for Obama - weren't we talking about what caused the economic collapse? Why are you talking about Obama?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top