Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2013, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post

Then why has Obama just added $30 billion to the national debt and told the unemployed they get a whole year more of unemployment checks?
Last I knew, the president does not have the authority to add or withdraw.

I was surprised as anyone that no one seemed to go for a moderate clawback of unemployment benefits to anything less than 24 months. Is there something between the former 26 week benefit and 2 years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2013, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by SarasotaBound1 View Post

The Republicans talk BS and pass everything.
2 sides to the same coin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,605 posts, read 4,845,391 times
Reputation: 1438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz View Post
yup, as U3 goes down watch the U6 go UP
The trend line for the U6 shows that it is declining.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post

One correction though...that was Clinton who deregulated banks and specifically the toxic mortgage backed derivatives that were at the heart of the financial collapse.

Repealing portions of Glass-Steagall was a Greenspan initiative. Clinton did indeed put his weight behind it. And a Republican Congress was cool with it, too.

Prior to 2002, sub prime loans were rare. That CDOs containing sub prime mortgages were subsequently AAA rated is what brought the global house of card down, hard. The rating agencies blamed it on computer error.

No one is sitting in prison and absolutelyu nothing meaningful has been done to prevent another round of too big to fail. Romney wanted less Wall Street regulation and Obama has no interest. This is what happens when Wall Street owns Washington, regardless of who is sitting in the oval or who ho0lds the majority.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post

I noticed that you skipped past my earlier posts that stated that each time Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, unemployment declined and the budget deficit either declined or the budget was balanced.
Eisenhower presided over a balanced budget in 1956-7. Democrats held both chambers.
Johnson submitted a balanced budget in 1969. Democrats held both chambers.
( Despite the talk, Reagan never, not once submitted a balanced budget)
Clinton submitted balanced budgets in 1998-2001. Republicans held a majority of both chambers in 1994-2000.

There have been 5 instances of budget surpluses; 1969,1998,1999, 2000, 2001.

Unemployment declined during the Clinton years when Republicans controlled both chambers.
Unemployment also declined 1963-73 when Democarts controlled both chambers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 02:16 PM
 
510 posts, read 430,705 times
Reputation: 440
Oh fabulous we might get 7% after 5 years of 8%+...

Remember when the Progressives were wailing about Bush's horrific 5.6% unemployment rate?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 02:28 PM
 
11,186 posts, read 6,507,037 times
Reputation: 4622
Quote:
Originally Posted by boycewv View Post
This is great news, all signs are pointing in the right direction.

Fed's Plosser: U.S. unemployment to fall under 7 percent by end - 2013 | Fox Business

What will happen politically if we were to get back to less then 7% I'm thinking this will help the dems and Obama tremendously whether they deserve it or not. This will also help to balance the budget on the revenue side, we can end extended unemployment benefits and spend less on other benefits that are being used due to the recession.

Looking forward I'm hoping we can get close to or under 6% by the end of 2014.
Plosser's the guy who predicted in 2011 that we'd have a ur of 7-7.5% by the end of 2012. He'll be wrong again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,417,405 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by FabianS View Post
Oh fabulous we might get 7% after 5 years of 8%+...

Remember when the Progressives were wailing about Bush's horrific 5.6% unemployment rate?
Bush's economy? Might as well brag about Coolidge and Hoover's Roaring 20's. Both were nothing more than massive smokescreens for the inevitable disaster that was to come. Bush might actually be worse--the economy wasnt even roaring during his years in office, more like purring.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Inwood
552 posts, read 738,736 times
Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Rossi View Post
The lowest unemployment you'll have for the next 4 years is what we have now. Is is only going to go up from there, Delusions notwithstanding.
Sounds to me like the ur going down wouldn't fit into your agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 06:22 PM
 
1,148 posts, read 1,683,221 times
Reputation: 1327
Quote:
Originally Posted by boycewv View Post
Sounds to me like the ur going down wouldn't fit into your agenda.
Yeah, the ue rate going down would be great and all, but I know better than to listen to the media. Things are not good right now. I know way too many people who are taking jobs far below their skill level, several who have been out of work for over two years, and many college grads with so-called worthwhile degrees living with mom and dad. The stories are out there all you gotta do is look around. Americans have decided to accept mediocrity and a bad economy for more handouts.

The media will make things look great to save their god Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:55 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top