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.
Employment lags but it doesn't lag by 4-8 years. More like a year. There was a very steep rise in unemployment at the end of the Bush years and a very, very slow decrease in it during the Obama years, but nowhere near restoration to the previous lows. It's hard to tell whether the long-term trend now is down or up.
If it were so easy for government policies to stop recessions, we would never have them, because no politician wants to be blamed for them. In fact we don't *really* know how to fix them. Stimuluses seem to help a little bit, and fiscal austerity seems to make things worse, but neither will cure or cause them. Huge world wars seem to fix them but at terrible cost. This recession wasn't caused by government policies, unless you count policies failing to prevent the housing bubble and bust and related financial crises (a global phenomenon btw just as this depression is global). Recessions kicked off by bubbles and financial crises are the hardest to get out of, especially if you aren't a 3rd world country that can be bailed out by the IMF. You gotta figure 10 years or so. I'm hoping to get through until 2018 solvent.
Wow! A thoughtful, even-handed post. Like finding a gold nugget in a cess pool. Thank you!!!!
Last edited by Fiddlehead; 09-06-2012 at 05:12 PM..
Do you not understand that the prosperity under Clinton was a result of changes REAGAN put into place?
Do you not understand that many of Reagan's policies contributed to the problems that we have today???
Quote:
The continuing fallout from Reagan's policies – the meltdown of the financial sector, widening income inequality, the emergence of lockdown America, the obscene inflation of CEO compensation, the end of locally owned media, market crashes, blackouts, drug-company scandals, rampant greed and materialism -- is all around us. As D.H. Lawrence once wrote in another context, "The cataclysm has happened, we are among the ruins."
The subprime mortgage crisis, the root of the chaos in the financial sector, is a case in point. Its antecedents clearly lay within the Reagan administration, beginning with an appearance by Donald T. Reagan, Reagan's first treasury secretary, before the Senate banking committee in early 1981, when he laid out a detailed vision for near-complete deregulation of the financial industry.
That is a legit complaint, but then when presented with the reality that 2 out of 3 jobs created in the last 52 years have been during Democratic presidents, one can't take the position that Presidents have nothing to do with private sector job creation and then still hold that President Obama needs to go because he is responsible for the lack of private sector job creation. Those two thoughts directly contradict one another. They cannot exist in a rational mind.
That's lovely that 2 out of 3 jobs were created by Democrats in the last 52 years. But it is hard to care about that when you did not live 52 years ago. All I see is a horrible case for America. And from what I heard last night at the DNC, this is not my parents Democratic party. If things were different, I would vote for obama. obama needs to go because he is bad for business. If he were my employee, he would have been gone a long time ago.
It was dismal under Carter and we remember it well. It was also dismal under Clinton until the GOP took back the house and senate. Only then did we see an uptick in jobs and wealth. It was a boom under Bush even with 9/11 and the stock market crash...gosh who could Bush blame for those events?
I had tops as a kid that didn't spin 1/1000th as much as you do
Try not to move the goalposts too much in your flawed arguments
If you manipulate things enough..... who knows you might even have a point
What moved goalposts? What flawed arguments? I didn't make a single argument. I didn't manipulate anything.
The reality is that 2 out of 3 private sector jobs have been created with a Democrat in the White house.
I only pointed out that this reality directly contradicts conservative claims that their economic policies will lead to a better economy or more private sector job creation.
The reality is that some conservatives are saying that Presidents aren't responsible for the creation of private sector jobs to explain away the glaring differences in the job creation numbers between Democrats and Republican Presidents.
The reality is that many conservatives are saying that President Obama has to go because he is responsible for the lack of private sector job creation.
My only point is that a rational mind can't hold those two directly contradictory positions.
That's lovely that 2 out of 3 jobs were created by Democrats in the last 52 years. But it is hard to care about that when you did not live 52 years ago. All I see is a horrible case for America. And from what I heard last night at the DNC, this is not my parents Democratic party. If things were different, I would vote for obama. obama needs to go because he is bad for business. If he were my employee, he would have been gone a long time ago.
I respected your parents democratic party and we were young democrats way back when. The party has been hijacked...it really has. The DNC used to sincerely represent the little guy until they realized if he moved too far up the ladder he would no longer need the DNC and they keep the poor down for the votes they exchange with empty promises. Explore Stalin. He hated the poor but knew how to use them to gain power....
That's lovely that 2 out of 3 jobs were created by Democrats in the last 52 years. But it is hard to care about that when you did not live 52 years ago. All I see is a horrible case for America. And from what I heard last night at the DNC, this is not my parents Democratic party. If things were different, I would vote for obama. obama needs to go because he is bad for business. If he were my employee, he would have been gone a long time ago.
It you are misunderstanding the numbers. It is 52 year ago from this year. Meaning they aren't just using job numbers from 52 years ago, but are counting numbers from this year.
President Obama isn't bad for business, there is not a stone's throw of difference between his economic team and the one Bill Clinton had when he was President.
You can't be for government jobs and anti-private sector and profit and grow an economy. As usual Clinton lied.
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.
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.
