Obama +6 million jobs vs Bush -600,000 jobs

[Matt1970]

Not really, almost all previous recessions recovered with a huge increase in the public sector. Complaining about the estimate of the unemployment rate is not only an old played out republican talking point but it's also meaningless unless you have an oracle that has always predicted the unemployment rate. I suspect you don't have an oracle who has that ability, considering every republican has said the unemployment rate would be worse and we would never recover or we would lose more jobs.

But look who I'm talking to...silly me.

Who said we would never recover? Have we ever not recovered? Complaining about the estimate of the unemployment rate is not an old played out republican talking point. It gives you some insight into the cluelessness of the so-called experts and this administration as to what it takes to recover from a recession.

 

[Matt1970]

Can you explain why the US outperformed other countries that took a different policy route?

Because the US has a different economy than other countries.

 

[Northern Lawn]

Is there any chance that job statistics are based on lies? you know like almost every other statistic the government uses to make itself look credible. Are the independent?

 

[Matt1970]

There was a time when owning a business was something to be desired. You could sell things out of your garage if you really wanted to. Today, forget it. You'll get shut down and fined because you don't have some stupid license and the garage is not handicap accessible.

Yep, but everyone can revel in the fact that we have safe clean working environments while at the same time buying the cheapest imported crap they can get their hands on.

 

[Jaskalas]

Is there any chance that job statistics are based on lies? you know like almost every other statistic the government uses to make itself look credible. Are the independent?

Their two big problems are estimation, which often requires adjustment a month or two later, and misuse as the OP demonstrated.

 

[fskimospy]

Because the US has a different economy than other countries.

Interesting. Can you describe a situation where you would be willing to say that public policy contributed to or detracted from the economy?

 

[ivwshane]

Who said we would never recover? Have we ever not recovered? Complaining about the estimate of the unemployment rate is not an old played out republican talking point. It gives you some insight into the cluelessness of the so-called experts and this administration as to what it takes to recover from a recession.

Again, point me to any "expert" that has consistently and accurately predicted the unemployment rate. Your "cluelessness" is based on what comparable circumstances?



As for your other question, take your pick:
https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...dr:1,cd_min:01/01/2009,cd_max:01/01/2011&tbm=

https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...dr:1,cd_min:01/01/2009,cd_max:01/01/2011&tbm=

https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...dr:1,cd_min:01/01/2009,cd_max:01/01/2011&tbm=

 

[shortylickens]

Am so glad those illegals are being well cared-for.

 

[Engineer]

Am so glad those illegals are being well cared-for.

WTF does that have to do with this thread? Care to explain?

 

[Matt1970]

Again, point me to any "expert" that has consistently and accurately predicted the unemployment rate. Your "cluelessness" is based on what comparable circumstances?



As for your other question, take your pick:
https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...dr:1,cd_min:01/01/2009,cd_max:01/01/2011&tbm=

https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...dr:1,cd_min:01/01/2009,cd_max:01/01/2011&tbm=

https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...dr:1,cd_min:01/01/2009,cd_max:01/01/2011&tbm=

Those experts were accurate enough when it came time for stimulus. Sorry, I don't see where anyone said we wouldn't recover from the recession in your links. Pulling that much shit out of your ass on a regular basis you should really stop and smell your fingers once in a while.

 

[Engineer]

Nevermind.

 

[ivwshane]

Those experts were accurate enough when it came time for stimulus. Sorry, I don't see where anyone said we wouldn't recover from the recession in your links. Pulling that much shit out of your ass on a regular basis you should really stop and smell your fingers once in a while.

This is why I talk to you like the dishonest partisan hack you are. Reading comprehension, do you know how to? Not only did I use the word "or" in describing republicans positions, the point was to highlight their complete lack of understanding economics and their "predictions" certainly weren't better than Obamas.

So would you like to deflect or run away because I know answering the question of who has a consistent prediction of unemployment numbers isn't something you will even attempt to address to back up your claim of cluelessness.

 

[MongGrel]

Who said we would never recover? Have we ever not recovered? Complaining about the estimate of the unemployment rate is not an old played out republican talking point. It gives you some insight into the cluelessness of the so-called experts and this administration as to what it takes to recover from a recession.

In historical terms, the US is still a very young country if you think about it.

And technology is advancing at a faster pace than ever.

It's the people that have taken advantage of that and have off shored so much that will screw it in the long run atm.

You can't continue to run a country forever that outsources it's manufacturing and plans on staying independent.

Someday the manufacturing stops and you start back sliding, I think Putin might have a problem with that soon but we'll see, he has been making other agreements lately just in case I guess.

 

[Matt1970]

This is why I talk to you like the dishonest partisan hack you are. Reading comprehension, do you know how to? Not only did I use the word "or" in describing republicans positions, the point was to highlight their complete lack of understanding economics and their "predictions" certainly weren't better than Obamas.

So would you like to deflect or run away because I know answering the question of who has a consistent prediction of unemployment numbers isn't something you will even attempt to address to back up your claim of cluelessness.

I am not the one deflecting. You are trying to distract from the fact you said "every republican has said the unemployment rate would be worse and we would never recover or we would lose more jobs" Seeing as how we did lose more jobs and unemployment rose to 10%, that leaves "we would never recover". Produce me some repubs saying that or admit you were wrong to put that in there.

 

[Jhhnn]

You can't continue to run a country forever that outsources it's manufacturing and plans on staying independent.

I don't think that our multinational corporate/ financial overlords are following that plan.

It's like crying over lost money. Even though the financial elite needs fewer of us to work to build their empires, we still need to feed the kids & pay the bills. We had a codependent relationship wrt that, & now we don't. They dumped us. Just because we fucked up & let them take the jobs doesn't mean they get to take the money too.

Cue well indoctrinated libertopian delusions in 5..4..3..2...

 

[fskimospy]

I am not the one deflecting. You are trying to distract from the fact you said "every republican has said the unemployment rate would be worse and we would never recover or we would lose more jobs" Seeing as how we did lose more jobs and unemployment rose to 10%, that leaves "we would never recover". Produce me some repubs saying that or admit you were wrong to put that in there.

The main thing republicans were wrong about was fiscal multipliers on federal spending and inflation. They thought stimulus spending was counterproductive, and that turned out to be wrong. They thought large deficits and low interest rates would spark inflation, and this turned out to be wrong too.

Considering that those are the two main areas where government policy can affect the economy though, being wrong on both of those is pretty catastrophically bad

 

[DrPizza]

We've been in steady decline for at least 50+ years. During the great depression, any man without a job was considered unemployed. When they say unemployment was 20% back then, what they really mean is that labor participation was 80%. Right now we're hovering somewhere near 40% unemployment because only about 60% of working age men have jobs. We've seen almost no improvement since Obama took office.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-29/u-s-homeownership-rate-falls-to-the-lowest-since-1995.html

Are you being intentionally dishonest? Or is it an accident? To make it a fair apples to apples comparison, it would have been more like 50% unemployment, since the majority of women did not work back then.

Why were families able to live on one income just a few decades ago? On top of that, those families had very high savings rates. How did we fall from a 10% saving rate to a 0% saving rate?

Oh, I dunno. Could it be that families have 2, 3, or more cars these days? Could it be that every member of the house has a smart phone? Could it be a big screen television in every room in the house? Or could it be that back then, you got 2,4, and 7, if you were lucky, and now, everyone pays $100 per month for cable and Internet? Maybe it's the 3000 square foot McMansions that were unheard of back then. Maybe it's the toys for kids? Back then, you certainly didn't get toys that cost a week's pay at minimum wage. Now, practically every kid has a playstation or x-box (or both); accompanied by a pile of game CDs that make the toy work and each cost 7 hours of minimum wage pay.

 

[Matt1970]

The main thing republicans were wrong about was fiscal multipliers on federal spending and inflation. They thought stimulus spending was counterproductive, and that turned out to be wrong. They thought large deficits and low interest rates would spark inflation, and this turned out to be wrong too.

Considering that those are the two main areas where government policy can affect the economy though, being wrong on both of those is pretty catastrophically bad

That would have been bullshit showboating on their part. My problem wasn't with the amount of money but how long it took to get that money into the market. Trickling money into the economy is not the best way to stimulate it.

 

[Engineer]

Trickling money into the economy is not the best way to stimulate it.

That's pretty funny considering that the alternative proposed was tax cuts...aka...trickle down economics.

:biggrin:

 

[MongGrel]

Are you being intentionally dishonest? Or is it an accident? To make it a fair apples to apples comparison, it would have been more like 50% unemployment, since the majority of women did not work back then.


Oh, I dunno. Could it be that families have 2, 3, or more cars these days? Could it be that every member of the house has a smart phone? Could it be a big screen television in every room in the house? Or could it be that back then, you got 2,4, and 7, if you were lucky, and now, everyone pays $100 per month for cable and Internet? Maybe it's the 3000 square foot McMansions that were unheard of back then. Maybe it's the toys for kids? Back then, you certainly didn't get toys that cost a week's pay at minimum wage. Now, practically every kid has a playstation or x-box (or both); accompanied by a pile of game CDs that make the toy work and each cost 7 hours of minimum wage pay.

Pretty much this, and trips to Disneyland and Huge Weddings and variable things I just read here daily, and with no interest on regular banking accounts these days.

Once upon a time you could be young and put money in a bank in a savings account and get at least 5% interest on it, those days are long gone.

People use credit to do crazy things non stop rather than even bothering to try saving much, the banks seem to have made sure of that these days.

They whole economy is even weirder than it used to be, due to many things.

 

[MongGrel]

That's pretty funny considering that the alternative proposed was tax cuts...aka...trickle down economics.

:biggrin:

God I hope we don't get into that stupid Reagan trickle down crap again.

It never works.

Country would go deeper in the hole.

 

[cuafpr]

Well more Veterans would be employed now rather than an empty promise by Walmart to employ more down the road if Republicans would have passed an updated GI Bill as put forth by Obama and the Dems.

as a Vet that bill was crap... I (and most I know) don't want a job just b.c. we are vets, we want the best person regardless... . if I dont deserve the job the fact i'm a vet shouldn't get me the job.


The economy tanked and it wasn't soley bushes fault it goes back to Clinton policies, and beyond that.. NAFTA started it around here where i live... these "new" jobs are part time / min wage jobs that are not designed to support a person and if wages are forced to go up a living wage you will see some of these gains lost. I happen to know a few small business owners that are already making plans on who to cut if wages go up.

 

[Matt1970]

That's pretty funny considering that the alternative proposed was tax cuts...aka...trickle down economics.

:biggrin:

A good chunk of the stimulus was tax cuts.

 

[Engineer]

A good chunk of the stimulus was tax cuts.

Then that would explain the slow trickle that you mentioned. Maybe it should have been more spending and less tax cut, eh? You know...just to get the money into the economy more quickly and directly to those that needed it the most, no? :biggrin:

 

[Jaskalas]

1: You want to talk about trickle down economics, I present you the Wall Street bailout.

2: I thought inflation would be nuts by now. I was clearly wrong and do not fully understand inflationary dynamics. The Feds are obviously playing a very careful game of loaning out money.

3: Our economy is still going to hell. Its trends do not look good.