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.
Care to tell me how many terrorist attacks were prevented by Clinton's so called counter terrorism programs?
No, because it's still your turn. You have not put anything behind your "spin, spin, spin" dismissal of the earlier points. Bush-41 left no counter-terrorism program in place. Clinton's missiles are as close as anyone has gotten to bin Laden. Bush and Cheney did just walk away from the USS Cole report.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
If Bush inherited Clinton's military, by the same token he inherited Clinton's counter-terrorism programs.
Yes, and he back-burnered all of them and stuck poor Richard Clarke off in a corner to play by himself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Tell me this, after 9/11, how many terrorists have successfully hit us at home? In contrast, how many terrorists have been successfully apprehended before they could carry out their plot?
Is this another one of those Except for Katrina, the Bush administration dealt with hurricanes really well theories?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Perhaps, but I did not see the Taliban cooperating after the US invasion or in the prelude to invasion. The Northern Alliance on the hand was at least helpful. I often wonder how much more difficult our job would have been in Afghanistan if we had not forged links with those same leaders during Operation Cyclone.
You've fast-forwarded by six years. Very different circumstances by that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
The fact remains that since 1995, stock market indexes, including the Dow, have been more and more erratic and unstable. Previously it had been on a clean, reliable, and stable growth pattern. After 1995, it was taking huge swings (up or down) by as much as several hundred points in a short period of time.
Stock market crash of 1987? What you meant to say perhaps is that after the Recession of 1990-91 under Bush-41, markets tended to rise smoothly and steadly until the Recession of 2001 under Bush-43. Nothing changed in 1995.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
You deny the bubble, yet the performance of the stock market worked wonders for consumer sentiment, especially after 1996, that kept our economy moving.
I deny the bubble because there is a burden of proof on those who suggest that there was one, and that burden hasn't been met. In the wake of deregulation, crooks cheated, swindled, and defrauded people and shysters fudged the books on scales not seen before -- even in the S&L debacle -- but that doesn't define a dot-com bubble. It's bascially just a cutesy term with not a whole lot in the way of relevance behind it. Otherwise, both people and equity markets tend to respond favorably to prosperity, and we had more or less continuous prosperity in between the two Bushs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
"Managed capitalism" has been the norm for nearly a century now.
Except for the last 30 years of it. The first 70 were a great success story as people who can still remember what a thriving middle class looked like could tell you.
Yes, I'm familar with all of the series, as you might imagine. The question however is over the total number actually employed. Why muck around in the subdetail?
Series Id: LNU02000000
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Jan 2001: 136,181
Jan 2005: 138,682 (4 years = +2,501)
Jan 2009: 140,436 (4 years = +1,754)
Jan 2010: 136,809
Nov 2010: 139,415 (10 months = +2,606)
Why use a non-seasonally adjusted data set? I realize it is the one dataset that makes Democrats look the best (hence why you prefer it over accepted measures), but still you should know better. You should also know that set includes military personnel and is not limited to the civilian workforce.
In reality, neither payrolls or civilian employment has risen more than 555k or 955k as previously cited.
Quote:
The best five quarters Bush ever had kind of should have been five consecutive quarters, not just five pulled from any old place at all. Comparability and all?
There, 8 consecutive quarters and not a single one below 2.8%, aside from the following 2.9%, the remaining 6 quarters are above average.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
No, because it's still your turn. You have not put anything behind your "spin, spin, spin" dismissal of the earlier points. Bush-41 left no counter-terrorism program in place. Clinton's missiles are as close as anyone has gotten to bin Laden. Bush and Cheney did just walk away from the USS Cole report.
Ok, I guess I will play this game too. There were dozens of JTTF's formed throughout the 80s to combat terrorism. There are at least 100 today. Or the Counterterrorism Center of the CIA created in 1986, which is what 90s era counter terrorism programs were based out of. The fact is, Clinton and his predecessor's counter terrorism programs were clearly ineffective. Only after post-9/11 reforms did we start catching terrorists before they could carry out their acts.
Quote:
Stock market crash of 1987? What you meant to say perhaps is that after the Recession of 1990-91 under Bush-41, markets tended to rise smoothly and steadly until the Recession of 2001 under Bush-43. Nothing changed in 1995.
Please, I beg you, stop lying to me. You know I will verify any statistics and claims you make. We had a clear, steady trend line until 1995 in the Dow. There was nothing "smooth" at any point after that year.
There's your bubble by the way.
Quote:
I deny the bubble because there is a burden of proof on those who suggest that there was one, and that burden hasn't been met. In the wake of deregulation, crooks cheated, swindled, and defrauded people and shysters fudged the books on scales not seen before -- even in the S&L debacle -- but that doesn't define a dot-com bubble. It's bascially just a cutesy term with not a whole lot in the way of relevance behind it. Otherwise, both people and equity markets tend to respond favorably to prosperity, and we had more or less continuous prosperity in between the two Bushs.
See above.
Quote:
Except for the last 30 years of it. The first 70 were a great success story as people who can still remember what a thriving middle class looked like could tell you.
On the contrary, in the 30 years prior to the recession in 1982, there were 6 recessions. In the 30 years since, there have been only 3.
Why use a non-seasonally adjusted data set? I realize it is the one dataset that makes Democrats look the best (hence why you prefer it over accepted measures), but still you should know better. You should also know that set includes military personnel and is not limited to the civilian workforce.
Give me a break. The NSA series report the ACTUAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE ACTUALLY EMPLOYED. Seasonally adjusted data are great when you are working with trends because seasonality will mask the trend. When you are working with counts, SA data merely create people who don't exist and erase people who do. Why do you think BLS publishes the NSA data anyway? By the way, even though they call it a volunteer force, everyone in the military is EMPLOYED.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
In reality, neither payrolls or civilian employment has risen more than 555k or 955k as previously cited.
But the number of people who themselves believe that they are EMPLOYED and so get up each day and go to work at their JOB has nevertheless gone up by 2,606K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Ok, fine.
2Q 2003: 3.2%
3Q 2003: 6.9%
4Q 2003: 3.6%
1Q 2004: 2.8%
2Q 2004: 2.9%
3Q 2004: 3.5%
4Q 2004: 3.5%
1Q 2005: 4.1%
There, 8 consecutive quarters and not a single one below 2.8%, aside from the following 2.9%, the remaining 6 quarters are above average.
Last five: 1.6 -- 5.0 -- 3.7 -- 1.7 -- 2.6. On par with the best five Bush ever had, and done under the shadow of the worst economic collapse in decades.
Bush, in 32 tries:
Quarters with GDP above 3.5% = 4
Quarters with GDP below 1.5% = 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Ok, I guess I will play this game too. There were dozens of JTTF's formed throughout the 80s to combat terrorism. There are at least 100 today.
The original JTTF's were formed by local police forces to share information while investigating such things as bank robberies, wire fraud, and identity theft. Post-9/11 the number grew to over a hundred and the focus of many changed significantly, but Clinton didn't inherit any of those from Bush-41 in 1993.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Or the Counterterrorism Center of the CIA created in 1986, which is what 90s era counter terrorism programs were based out of.
The CTC was a small division-level group running under the DDO. In the 1980's they were basically playing Central American Death Squad. In the 90's they were worried about the Japanese Red Army and watching Palestinans on behalf of Israel. Aside from a half dozen people tracking "Islamists" in general, there was no function related to what the word "terrorism" means today until after the first WTC attack, and nobody working on al Qaeda or bin Laden until 1996. Kind of after Bush-41. Kind of what Clinton had to build on the fly after having inherited nothing, one might say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
The fact is, Clinton and his predecessor's counter terrorism programs were clearly ineffective. Only after post-9/11 reforms did we start catching terrorists before they could carry out their acts.
Why has no one heard of the Diwali Bombing in Toronto? What happened to Ramzi Yousef's Pacific airplane bombing scheme? How many different Millenium bomb plots were foiled in advance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Please, I beg you, stop lying to me. You know I will verify any statistics and claims you make. We had a clear, steady trend line until 1995 in the Dow. There was nothing "smooth" at any point after that year.
Not at all what it shows here. Maybe this graph is for some different DJIA.
On the contrary, in the 30 years prior to the recession in 1982, there were 6 recessions. In the 30 years since, there have been only 3.
Yes, and nine of those ten recessions coming under Republican Presidents, one might add. Meanwhile, if you think 1910 to 1980 did nothing for the middle class, you missed a great deal of history. Of course there really wasn't much of a middle class back then at all. Looks like our modern Republicans would like to see that kind of day come again.
Lincoln did what he did to hold the country together. I'd blame the previous three presidents for not addressing the slavery issue when it could have been resolved responsibly and ethically.
Well, yes, but why was it worth killing a large portion of the country's men to do that? Screw the South.
And how does Jackson not make the list over, say, a man who made it only for having bad health?
Give me a break. The NSA series report the ACTUAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE ACTUALLY EMPLOYED. Seasonally adjusted data are great when you are working with trends because seasonality will mask the trend. When you are working with counts, SA data merely create people who don't exist and erase people who do. Why do you think BLS publishes the NSA data anyway? By the way, even though they call it a volunteer force, everyone in the military is EMPLOYED.
Interesting, because using your dataset, 13 million more people were employed in 2007 than in 2002. Not too shabby. However, using that same data, we are only 233k higher than we were a year ago. Between November 2009 and January 2010 more than 2.3 million were no longer employed. In fact employment dropped between November and January every year for the past decade. It also dropped every year between July and August.
We can expect another couple million to be out of work between now and February. Must be that stimulus hard at work.
You see why non-seasonally adjusted data is not at all helpful? If I want to measure the health of the job market, temporary blips are not at all useful when I prepare reports.
Quote:
But the number of people who themselves believe that they are EMPLOYED and so get up each day and go to work at their JOB has nevertheless gone up by 2,606K.
And another 2 million will most likely drop off the employed figure by January, what is your point?
Quote:
Last five: 1.6 -- 5.0 -- 3.7 -- 1.7 -- 2.6. On par with the best five Bush ever had, and done under the shadow of the worst economic collapse in decades.
Bush, in 32 tries:
Quarters with GDP above 3.5% = 4
Quarters with GDP below 1.5% = 11
Not even close to being on par. I already cited the numbers. During the 8 quarter streak growth was at the average or above average.
The fact remains that GDP growth during this recovery has averaged 2.9%. Relative to the downturn it is the weakest on record.
Quote:
The original JTTF's were formed by local police forces to share information while investigating such things as bank robberies, wire fraud, and identity theft. Post-9/11 the number grew to over a hundred and the focus of many changed significantly, but Clinton didn't inherit any of those from Bush-41 in 1993.
The CTC was a small division-level group running under the DDO. In the 1980's they were basically playing Central American Death Squad. In the 90's they were worried about the Japanese Red Army and watching Palestinans on behalf of Israel. Aside from a half dozen people tracking "Islamists" in general, there was no function related to what the word "terrorism" means today until after the first WTC attack, and nobody working on al Qaeda or bin Laden until 1996. Kind of after Bush-41. Kind of what Clinton had to build on the fly after having inherited nothing, one might say.
The CTC is where modern counter terrorism traces its roots. That is where it all started. Clinton was clearly inadequate, the US was repeatedly hit at home and especially broad during the 90s.
Quote:
Why has no one heard of the Diwali Bombing in Toronto? What happened to Ramzi Yousef's Pacific airplane bombing scheme? How many different Millenium bomb plots were foiled in advance?
What about Ramzi Yousef's 1993 WTC, since such a wonderful job was done foiling that plot. Never mind OKC, the 1998 embassy bombings, USS Cole, or even Khobar?
Quote:
Not at all what it shows here. Maybe this graph is for some different DJIA.
Looks the same to me, only this link shows a compressed version. The same trend is seen, a take off and destabilization beginning in 1995. All I see from the 12 years or so prior is a recovery from the flat line in the 70s.
Quote:
Yes, and nine of those ten recessions coming under Republican Presidents, one might add.
Seven of which caused by tight monetary policy by the Fed, three caused (or made worse) by oil shocks, one caused by recession in Europe and Asia, and one as the result of a collapsing housing bubble. Two were influenced by the end of a war.
Most of those recessions were inherited by Republican presidents who had to clean up the mess left behind by their Democratic predecessors. Besides, recessions are a natural part of any industrial or post-industrial economy. Even the socialists experienced regular economic downturns throughout the period 1920-1991.
Roosevelt, Johnson, and Carter. Thank them for the $100 trillion+ in unfunded liabilities and the most incompetent "elites" who, somehow, still refer to "managed" Capitalism (Fascism) as some sort of means to the end. They don't really seem to understand the human spirit and the only way they can manage to deal with that human spirit is to think they can regulate or suppress it as if they'll always have the answer. They'll totally dismiss what the whole human spirit means by thinking they somehow have the answer for everything as if one human can come up with the perfect solution that another can't overcome.
On the other hand, they sure knew how not to let any crisis go to waste.
Roosevelt, Johnson, and Carter. Thank them for the $100 trillion+ in unfunded liabilities and the most incompetent "elites" who, somehow, still refer to "managed" Capitalism (Fascism) as some sort of means to the end. They don't really seem to understand the human spirit and the only way they can manage to deal with that human spirit is to think they can regulate or suppress it as if they'll always have the answer. They'll totally dismiss what the whole human spirit means by thinking they somehow have the answer for everything as if one human can come up with the perfect solution that another can't overcome.
On the other hand, they sure knew how not to let any crisis go to waste.
sounds about right
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.