Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree with most of Ron Paul's tax policies. But Ron Paul is honest, straightforward, doesn't kiss a--, and will stick his nose in anyones business. I would assume the powers that be in Washington (the same ones who control our media) would not allow a man like Ron Paul to be president.
Could you imagine if a man like Ron Paul was president? He would be sticking his nose in every congressional group, every government agency, and inside US military organizations.
Will the media treat him like they did his dad? I don't think so, Rand will go with the flow of Washington.
What exactly stinks with the economy? Job growth is on the rise and we have better job creation than any point during the recovery. I'm not an Obama supporter but I see this.
You can't say that without being called an "Obamabot". A closet "leftie". A naive believer in change! LOL
I disagree with most of Ron Paul's tax policies. But Ron Paul is honest, straightforward, doesn't kiss a--, and will stick his nose in anyones business. I would assume the powers that be in Washington (the same ones who control our media) would not allow a man like Ron Paul to be president.
Could you imagine if a man like Ron Paul was president? He would be sticking his nose in every congressional group, every government agency, and inside US military organizations.
Will the media treat him like they did his dad? I don't think so, Rand will go with the flow of Washington.
He is likely being ignored because he is seen as a disruptive influence and not in a positive way. I believe that if a Libertarian ever acheived the opportunity to apply their ideology, after the dust settled, they would be lynched and no Libertarian would ever get elected in the US again.
Libertarianism isn't anarchy, but it is the next thing on the political spectrum.
Rand Paul is one guy I don't want to ever see anywhere close to the White House!
I wouldn't think a die-hard Progressive socialist like yourself, would ever want a Conservative, to ruin your day of entitlement.
How's that Obama phone working for ya.
What exactly stinks with the economy? Job growth is on the rise and we have better job creation than any point during the recovery. I'm not an Obama supporter but I see this.
The lost jobs were replaced by those that pay 23 percent less. The avg weeks unemployed from 2000-2008 before the crash was 18-22 weeks, it's at 32 weeks now. The median family income is stagnant at best while prices are rising. Luckily gas prices are still down or it would be worse.
The lost jobs were replaced by those that pay 23 percent less. The avg weeks unemployed from 2000-2008 before the crash was 18-22 weeks, it's at 32 weeks now. The median family income is stagnant at best while prices are rising. Luckily gas prices are still down or it would be worse.
There is truth to the lower quality jobs argument. But, it is a pattern that has been underway for the last 15 years. It does not change the raft of economic indicators that have been rising steadily for 5 years. Now, I do not give Obama credit for that, but the economy is far better than 5 years ago by many measures. 5.5 unemployment with lower wages, is better than 9.5 unemployment with lower wages, no?
You sound like you want to find problems because there is a Democrat in the White House. I understand. I suspect the same numbers would be adequate if your candidate was in there.
The lost jobs were replaced by those that pay 23 percent less. The avg weeks unemployed from 2000-2008 before the crash was 18-22 weeks, it's at 32 weeks now. The median family income is stagnant at best while prices are rising. Luckily gas prices are still down or it would be worse.
That's the mean average, the median average is actually shorter at 13.1 weeks. Duration of Unemployment | Department of Numbers Only three weeks higher than most of the 2002-04 when there was a "jobless recovery" to the recession related to the dot.com bubble as Nancy Pelosi put it. The mean is highly swayed by people who cannot find work for year(s).
There is truth to the lower quality jobs argument. But, it is a pattern that has been underway for the last 15 years.
No it's not. During the government induced boom cycle it was the opposite until right before the crash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaker281
It does not change the raft of economic indicators that have been rising steadily for 5 years. Now, I do not give Obama credit for that, but the economy is far better than 5 years ago by many measures. 5.5 unemployment with lower wages, is better than 9.5 unemployment with lower wages, no?
IF prices were falling then it would definitely be better as well as good. Far better? How about not as catastrophic? Better and good don't enter into the mix. Those are positive indicators. Symantics? Maybe, but being robbed only once last week compared to twice the week before and saying things are looking up isn't the truth either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaker281
You sound like you want to find problems because there is a Democrat in the White House. I understand. I suspect the same numbers would be adequate if your candidate was in there.
That's your twisted agenda because you don't want it to be about the facts. So instead you make things up about the poster. The fact remains the economy isn't very good.
btw A Romney presidency wouldn't be that much different, just the hand picked winners and losers would change. That's what many don't get. I wonder if you do?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.