How The GOP May Change It's Tone, Due To An Improving Economy

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,746
17,401
136
That was your research that directly refuted what you claim it did and you call me dishonest? Damn son.

Actually it didn't refute my claim at all. Zorkist claimed government employees were the winners under Obama and I showed their numbers were declining and the data showed that. You complained, like the righty you are, that it's not really a drop because federal employment was so high (we call that moving the goal post, aka your number one play). I then show you a better article showing you the historical level of federal employment and you respond with
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,842
4,785
146
Yawn.

You mean like the double and triple dip recessions Righthadists kept screaming about these past few years? Which is legit, right? Because their cousin's neighbor's daughter's co-worker use to work with a guy that once lived in a city, where he had a friend that had a sister who was let go from their jerb in '10, '11, '12 & '13?

Yawn and stretch.

The Right has been wrong, many many many times. The Right is right in being wrong (which is pretty damn frequent).

Also, please toss out the anecdotal BS as well as the purported doom and gloom. I understand sensationalism crap is the Right's butter and bread (oh noes, teh Deth Panelz!!!shift+1!!, oh noes, teh economonies!!), but, it just makes you look defective.

Have your leadership come up with alternatives, like this article suggests. There is actually some good advice in there. However, it DOES mean your elected conservative leadership will actually have to work, instead of refuse to work (which is also in their dossier).

But, we all know how these next few years will pan out;
- dismissing & downplay anything good attributed to Barry, because it's not that important (saving lives with affordable healthcare,.. meh.)
- block any attempts by Barry, for anything, even if its on something past conservative leadership was keen on (i.e. immigration reform)
- vilify anything that he does (i.e. lawsuits and executive orders are illegal (which were proven they are not and even accepted; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/18/federalist-society-obama-immigration_n_6182350.html - what a joke, especially the herp a derps who threw a shit fit over this on these very forums))
- throw their hands up when asked to indeed provide alternatives and help (b-b-but we don't need big governments!!)


Wall street has little to do with Right or left numbskull. Why do you always have to bring in partisan politics into everything? The topic was a possible market crash in 2015. That was it. Nothing more. Nothing less. Your first train of thought is OMG ITS THE REPUBLICANS AND THEIR CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!1!11one!1!
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
Wall street has little to do with Right or left numbskull. Why do you always have to bring in partisan politics into everything? The topic was a possible market crash in 2015. That was it. Nothing more. Nothing less. Your first train of thought is OMG ITS THE REPUBLICANS AND THEIR CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!1!11one!1!

But Wall Street deregulation, which made possible the gambling that led to the crisis, is a partisan issue. To be sure, Wall Street money flows like a river into Democratic fundraising too, but deregulation is a Chamber of Commerce = Republican bug-a-boo. Republicans just stripped out post-crisis regulations of Wall Street through riders in the omnibus spending bill.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Actually it didn't refute my claim at all. Zorkist claimed government employees were the winners under Obama and I showed their numbers were declining and the data showed that. You complained, like the righty you are, that it's not really a drop because federal employment was so high (we call that moving the goal post, aka your number one play). I then show you a better article showing you the historical level of federal employment and you respond with

Wow dude, you are in Phokus denial territory here. It actually said "After a period of rapid growth during President Obama’s first term" and only showed a mild reduction in the last year. Going from 1,857 to 1,850 and that's less than 1%. Yes your second article showed a much more dramatic decline, but if you think that first one did you really need to get your eyes checked.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
36,466
10,747
136
Yawn and stretch.

The Right has been wrong, many many many times. The Right is right in being wrong (which is pretty damn frequent).

A solution to what? If the economy is fine then there's nothing to solve?

I find the stock market elevated due to the Fed's loans. I do not know how that can be carefully managed so as not to bust this bubble. We never should have bailed out the banks in the first place, and should have taken a fundamentally different approach for the Housing Crisis.

This is the part where you tell me there's nothing wrong in the market's value. Maybe you have some faith in the Federal Reserve. Every year is a test in that faith - and so far so good, but how long can the game be played? We shall see...
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
If it bursts again, republicans will be partially to blame for de-regulation and "fixing" the rules that wallstreet and the banks play by.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,746
17,401
136
Wow dude, you are in Phokus denial territory here. It actually said "After a period of rapid growth during President Obama’s first term" and only showed a mild reduction in the last year. Going from 1,857 to 1,850 and that's less than 1%. Yes your second article showed a much more dramatic decline, but if you think that first one did you really need to get your eyes checked.

Go ahead and tell the federal employees who are loosing their jobs, while all other sectors adds jobs, that they are the real benefactors from "Obamas America".

For you to miss the point the first time is not surprising, to then double down and continue to miss the point even after having it explained to you...well that's just retarded.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Go ahead and tell the federal employees who are loosing their jobs, while all other sectors adds jobs, that they are the real benefactors from "Obamas America".

For you to miss the point the first time is not surprising, to then double down and continue to miss the point even after having it explained to you...well that's just retarded.

Move over McOwned, you have company.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,746
17,401
136
@ Engineer thats an interesting article. He suggests that state governments cutting staff are the reason for the decrease in number of employees, which at least makes sense on an intuitive level. That said I wouldn't really believe anything that guy presumes beyond the pure data, being as he comes up with nonsense such as this lol

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/10/15/do-tax-cuts-increase-government-revenue/

Research I've seen is that the number of federal employees is on the decline while state and local government employment is on the rise and has been rising.

It would be interesting to see the reason for the latter.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Research I've seen is that the number of federal employees is on the decline while state and local government employment is on the rise and has been rising.

It would be interesting to see the reason for the latter.

State and local may be on the rise now but it's because states and local government cut like hell during the start and well into the recession. They had no choice.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
State and local may be on the rise now but it's because states and local government cut like hell during the start and well into the recession. They had no choice.

In truth, direct aid from the treasury to some states prevented it from being worse than it was.

Few people have any idea just how close we came to the kind of cascading financial collapse that occurred in the wake of the stock market crash of 1929. No idea at all.

Even with big govt as a stabilizer, our deregulated financial sector nearly screwed the pooch to death.
 

elitejp

Golden Member
Jan 2, 2010
1,080
20
81
I wish people could understand that the economy is based on much more than the man sitting in office.
agree completely.

But if you want to say Obabma was successful because a few months out of 8 years the economy got better than feel free to give him a pat on the back.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
agree completely.

But if you want to say Obabma was successful because a few months out of 8 years the economy got better than feel free to give him a pat on the back.

Oh, please. Obama, GWB, Congress & the FRB were successful in not letting the bottom fall out. Obama might have done better if not confronted by the Party of No! & their Cut! Cut! Cut! mentality. They sure as Hell didn't want to cut anything when they controlled both the executive & legislative branches for 4 years.
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,112
930
126
Oh, please. Obama, GWB, Congress & the FRB were successful in not letting the bottom fall out. Obama might have done better if not confronted by the Party of No! & their Cut! Cut! Cut! mentality. They sure as Hell didn't want to cut anything when they controlled both the executive & legislative branches for 4 years.

Why do you have to be such a blind dumb ass and not even bother including Harry Reid in your list of obstructionists? He's as bad as any of them, but you go, party boy! ;)
 

uclaLabrat

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2007
5,632
3,046
136
Oh, please. Obama, GWB, Congress & the FRB were successful in not letting the bottom fall out. Obama might have done better if not confronted by the Party of No! & their Cut! Cut! Cut! mentality. They sure as Hell didn't want to cut anything when they controlled both the executive & legislative branches for 4 years.
Not to mention the fact that the economy didn't just get "better" the last couple months, in the last couple months it finally got past the point where it was before the crash. It's been getting "better" since about Feb-March of 2009, so really Obama's admin has overseen economic improvement since almost the beginning. To say it got "better" the last couple months is either disingenuous or reflects a serious lack in analytical ability.

To be fair, I also don't give the Obama admin a whole lot of credit for the recovery, it was a group effort. But that group effort was successful precisely because they mitigated damage from economic policies of the right, which are pretty much disastrous.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
Why do you have to be such a blind dumb ass and not even bother including Harry Reid in your list of obstructionists? He's as bad as any of them, but you go, party boy! ;)

And which great pieces of economy boosting legislation did Reid obstruct?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I wish people could understand that the economy is based on much more than the man sitting in office.

While true that the economy is based upon more than the President (or Executive branch) "the man sitting in office" has been increasingly more important to our economy.

Estimates say that regulatory compliance costs our economy about $2 trillion per year. Certainly the numbers can be argued, but I don't think the federal govt's increasing influence over businesses can.
http://www.nam.org/Data-and-Reports...ions/Federal-Regulation-Executive-Summary.pdf

The amount of regulations issued each year is staggering. Some reports say 75,000 pages of new regulations were issued last year.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...posed-75-000-pages-of-new-regulations-in-2014

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Republicans have spent much of Obama’s presidency blaming him for a weak, job-killing economy. So what happens to the GOP playbook when those jobs come back?

Honest answer is that we'll have to wait and see.

Adding a bunch of part time and low paying service jobs is something only MSNBC and other Obama fans can celebrate.

People don't look at news paper articles and 'analysis' by so-called experts. They look at their own personal situation and what is happening around their community. By this yardstick we have deep problems in the economy and employment.

Fern