Biggest drop in income since 1959- Thanks Obama! (solutions, cost, economic)
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.
Your lying to yourself, and living in a Fox news fantasy land.
You know GW Bush turned Clinton's surpluses into huge deficits (with trickle down tax cuts and a unneeded Iraq war.)
{snip}
..which has zero to do with today. Clinton had no surplus, he increased the debt each year. however, he did control his spending. amazing ins't it, that a Republican president spends us into death, after a Democrat declares the era to big government is over.
I snipped out the remainder of your post because all it was, was neener-neener partisan politics. I thought you libs voted for change, and all you do is justify Obama's dreadful presidency, by saying he is just as bad as Bush. Psssst - Obama is worse then Bush, two or three times worse.
an average of 10,000 Baby boomers are retiring a day thats 3,650,000 people retiring each year.
13,000 people turn 18 every day ( we are assuming the rate is the same for 16 year olds or slightly higher)
Turning 16 does not equate to entering the work force as most high schoolers dont work.
My math sucks, so catch my errors from here on out
13,000 X 365 =4,745,000
of those who graduate high school, 68% go to college or some technical school/training program, of that 68%(3,226,600) 38% are looking to enter the work force working( 1,226,108)
even if we assume the entire other 32%(1,518,400) is looking for a job that is a total of 2,744,508 turning 18 that are entering the work force.
3,650,000 - 2,744,508 = 905,492
i have to also say that the average for Baby boomers starts at a very low end, something like 4,000 a month in 2009. So the average is misleading as even more people will be retiring on average in the following years.
So the work force is going to shrink for the next 12 years if population trends are right. Why is this a surprise to republicans ?
So it must also be Obama's fault so many corporations have had record profits and been sitting on record amounts of ca$h too, eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell
I'd say high profits and record ca$h reserves to a corporation, eh? Yet that part of economics has nothing to do with Obama, only the downside.
Sounds like biased BS to me and nothing else.
Yes.
Obama's policies are the reason corporations have been hoarding cash.
If you have to ask why a corporation would hold large cash reserves, then that would only serve to prove your understanding of Economics is Zero.
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell
What are you whining about? You righties worship corporations while looking down on the average working guy.
Corporations are Communist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell
The question is why is Obama to blame for every economic downturn and excluded from any credit for any upturn?
Is there a video on Useless Tube where Obama says, "I have no control over the economies and will not try to pretend that I do."
Because, you know, if there is, then post it, and I'll stop blaming Obama.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi
Dear Partisan Hack:
The article points to the increase in the payroll tax as the cause.
That is impossible.
As any real economist knows, it will take 90-120 days for the effects of the restored payroll tax to wend their way through the economy and produce results of any kind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
"His policies" have not done this.
Yes, they have. The fact that you refuse to admit it, doesn't alter the reality that they have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
American wages, ajusted for inflation, have not risen appreciably (if at all) over the past 30 years.
Why would wages rise?
The burden of proof is on you to explain why wages ought to rise over time. I'll save you the trouble of searching for an Economic Theory that wages should rise....there is none.
Wages are a function of the Supply & Demand of a given Skill-Set in a specific labor market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
However, the management class continues to see exponential gains in income.
That would be due to the specialization of the management class, resulting in fewer people with a given skill-set while demand for such people is high, causing wages/salary to rise.
I also noted your NAZI-style use of the word "income."
How very Göbbels of you. Wages and salaries are income, but not all income is wages or salaries.
No doubt it never occurred to you that income can rise, while wages/salaries have not risen. That would prove that not everyone is part of the Stupid Class who throw away their wealth on trivial things, and then have the audacity to whine that they don't have any wealth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Job creators will pay the bare minimum they can get away with.
Are you suggesting that the wages of all workers is the minimum wage?
I sure hope not, because that would be stupid, not to mention totally false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
There is no longer a sense of duty to one's employees, who are expendable cogs.
If you want loyalty, then buy yourself a dog.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules
And to blame the decline on a tax increase you first have to prove the tax decrease helped the economy. There is no evidence that the payroll tax decrease helped the economy. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Actually, there is, but as I predicted, it would be short-lived, and that over-all the payroll tax decrease along with the Stimulost were bad economic policies...I was right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamSmyth
The economy Reagan inherited was in much better shape than the economy Obama inherited, any comparisons between the recoveries are therefore problematic.
Obama had to deal with Real Inflation?
No, he did not, but Reagan did. It took Reagan and Volcker 5 years to wring out Real Inflation.
Funny how the libs claim Obama can't do anything good for the economy because of the republicans in Congress yet Clinton gets all the credit for the surplus and 90's economy even though there was a GOP controlled Congress in his second term.
It only defies logic if you don't understand basic Economics.
I've refuted your silly propaganda charts repeatedly, and will take great pleasure in doing so again.
1] Irrefutable fact: Private Employment (CEU0500000001) peaked at 116,649,000 in June 2007.
2] Irrefutable fact: Private Employment (CEU0500000001) was 109,156,000 on January 31, 2009.
3] Irrefutable fact: Private Employment (CEU0500000001) was 110,965,000 on January 31, 2013.
4] Irrefutable fact: In the four year period January 31, 2009 through January 31, 2013 Private Employment increased by only 1,809,000 jobs.
5] Irrefutable fact: The 1.809 Million jobs represents an average of 452,250 private sector jobs per year.
6] Irrefutable fact: The 1.809 Million jobs represents an average of 37,688 private sector jobs per month.
7] Irrefutable fact: There are 5.68 Million fewer private sector jobs than at peak (June 2007).
8] Irrefutable fact: Under "normal" economic conditions, private sector jobs should equal 122,658,000 (+/- 3%) as of January 31, 2013.
With respect to overall employment......
1] Irrefutable fact: Employment (LNU02000000) peaked at 147,315,000 in July 2007, including a peak of 123,219,000 Full-Time jobs.
2] Irrefutable fact: Employment (LNU02000000) was 140,436,000 on January 31, 2009.
3] Irrefutable fact: Employment (LNU02000000) was 141,614,000 on January 31, 2013.
4] Irrefutable fact: In the four year period January 31, 2009 through January 31, 2013 Employment increased by only 1,178,000 jobs.
5] Irrefutable fact: The 1.178 Million jobs represents an average of 294,500 jobs per year.
6] Irrefutable fact: The 1.809 Million jobs represents an average of 24,542 jobs per month.
7] Irrefutable fact: There are 5.70 Million fewer jobs than at peak (June 2007).
8] Irrefutable fact: Under "normal" economic conditions, jobs should equal 154,550,000 (+/- 3%) as of January 31, 2013.
Continuing to demolish your silly graphs....
116,214,000 Full-Time Employment August 2012
113,868,000 Full-Time Employment January 2013
------------
2,346,000 Full-Time Jobslost is positive job growth according to Obamabots.
Quite right.
On the contrary....the attack was warranted.
The charts were irrelevant, not to mention a complete distortion of the truth.
When people start claiming that the loss of 2,346,000 Full-Time Jobsis positive job growth, that's when people have "gone full potato."
No, what's interesting is the facts clearly show job losses, but pathetic people keep claiming that job losses equate to job growth.
Invalidating irrelevant propaganda charts.....
Mircea
Too bad I can't rep you for two consecutive posts. Words of common sense, reason, and objectivity will never appeal to liberals, as these are concepts which are foreign to them. Reactionary emotionalism rule liberal thought and dogma, thus their divergence from action and common sense.
A lib WILL NEVER respond or understand common sense, as they just don't think that way. I have come to understand that debating, or presenting rational arguments to a liberal, is a little like talking to my dog about certain things. While I, as a human with developed frontal lobes and parietal association cortices, fully understand what I am saying to my dog, she, as a dog, lacking this marked difference in neuroanatomy, is unable to understand most of what I am saying. We, as conservatives, assume that others are intelligent and able to process basic information and make logical deductions based on that information. Liberals, however, like dogs, are unable to process this information and make logical deductions, simply due to their under-developed neuroanatomy. I have come to accept and appreciate liberals more, now that I consider them to be simply unable to understand many logical and what we consider to be "common sense" issues, as they are akin to my dog.
I do not hate my dog. In fact, I really like my dog (as much as I like my cats, turkey, deer, bobcats, mountain lions, ect that live on my farm (second residence(). However, I really do not assume that my dog understands anything more than 'treats", urinating, pets, or defecating. This is about the same level of credence that I apply to most liberals. In that regard, I am rarely disappointed, as I assume that their reactions to complex issues will be analagous to that exhibited by my dog. Keep in mind, given that I am an optimist, I am suggesting that a liberal is more intelligent than a cat.
It only defies logic if you don't understand basic Economics.
I've refuted your silly propaganda charts repeatedly, and will take great pleasure in doing so again.
1] Irrefutable fact: Private Employment (CEU0500000001) peaked at 116,649,000 in June 2007.
2] Irrefutable fact: Private Employment (CEU0500000001) was 109,156,000 on January 31, 2009.
3] Irrefutable fact: Private Employment (CEU0500000001) was 110,965,000 on January 31, 2013.
4] Irrefutable fact: In the four year period January 31, 2009 through January 31, 2013 Private Employment increased by only 1,809,000 jobs.
5] Irrefutable fact: The 1.809 Million jobs represents an average of 452,250 private sector jobs per year.
6] Irrefutable fact: The 1.809 Million jobs represents an average of 37,688 private sector jobs per month.
7] Irrefutable fact: There are 5.68 Million fewer private sector jobs than at peak (June 2007).
8] Irrefutable fact: Under "normal" economic conditions, private sector jobs should equal 122,658,000 (+/- 3%) as of January 31, 2013.
With respect to overall employment......
1] Irrefutable fact: Employment (LNU02000000) peaked at 147,315,000 in July 2007, including a peak of 123,219,000 Full-Time jobs.
2] Irrefutable fact: Employment (LNU02000000) was 140,436,000 on January 31, 2009.
3] Irrefutable fact: Employment (LNU02000000) was 141,614,000 on January 31, 2013.
4] Irrefutable fact: In the four year period January 31, 2009 through January 31, 2013 Employment increased by only 1,178,000 jobs.
5] Irrefutable fact: The 1.178 Million jobs represents an average of 294,500 jobs per year.
6] Irrefutable fact: The 1.809 Million jobs represents an average of 24,542 jobs per month.
7] Irrefutable fact: There are 5.70 Million fewer jobs than at peak (June 2007).
8] Irrefutable fact: Under "normal" economic conditions, jobs should equal 154,550,000 (+/- 3%) as of January 31, 2013.
Continuing to demolish your silly graphs....
116,214,000 Full-Time Employment August 2012
113,868,000 Full-Time Employment January 2013
------------
2,346,000 Full-Time Jobslost is positive job growth according to Obamabots.
Quite right.
On the contrary....the attack was warranted.
The charts were irrelevant, not to mention a complete distortion of the truth.
When people start claiming that the loss of 2,346,000 Full-Time Jobsis positive job growth, that's when people have "gone full potato."
No, what's interesting is the facts clearly show job losses, but pathetic people keep claiming that job losses equate to job growth.
Invalidating irrelevant propaganda charts.....
Mircea
Too bad I can't rep you for two consecutive posts. Words of common sense, reason, and objectivity will never appeal to liberals, as these are concepts which are foreign to them. Reactionary emotionalism rule liberal thought and dogma, thus their divergence from action and common sense.
A lib WILL NEVER respond or understand common sense, as they just don't think that way. I have come to understand that debating, or presenting rational arguments to a liberal, is a little like talking to my dog about certain things. While I, as a human with developed frontal lobes and parietal association cortices, fully understand what I am saying to my dog, she, as a dog, lacking this marked difference in neuroanatomy, is unable to understand most of what I am saying. We, as conservatives, assume that others are intelligent and able to process basic information and make logical deductions based on that information. Liberals, however, like dogs, are unable to process this information and make logical deductions, simply due to their under-developed neuroanatomy. I have come to accept and appreciate liberals more, now that I consider them to be simply unable to understand many logical and what we consider to be "common sense" issues, as they are akin to my dog.
I do not hate my dog. In fact, I really like my dog (as much as I like my cats, turkey, deer, bobcats, mountain lions, ect that live on my farm (second residence(). However, I really do not assume that my dog understands anything more than 'treats", urinating, pets, or defecating. This is about the same level of credence that I apply to most liberals. In that regard, I am rarely disappointed, as I assume that their reactions to complex issues will be analagous to that exhibited by my dog. Keep in mind, given that I am an optimist, I am suggesting that a liberal is more intelligent than a cat.
I have more faith in my dog. He sits on command, indicating he can at least learn. He jumped up on the stove once and got singed. He avoids the stove now, indicating an ability to learn from his mistakes.
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.
```````````````
